Physics Predictions/Thoughts (8 Viewers)

[Arnav_2007]

www.tiktok.com/@SydneyMorningHerald/video/7570163379705335060

Reporter: so how was the hsc physics exam? history girls: it was alright, but some questions threw me off (most likely the projectile motion and circular motion questions)

This genuinely pisses me off.

Don't fucking tell me you're referencing the projectile motion question and circular motion questions
These are legit surface level questions anyone with rudimentary physics knowledge should be able to answer. If you can't do them you don't deserve a band 6. Knowing how bullshit the majority of this exam is, you could fucking get a band 6, despite being a fucking moron (legit all fucking history regurgitation essays, akin to English).

At least it was impossible to fucking yap your way through for most of the theory questions in the 2024 paper, most notably that very nice "model A vs model B" gravitation question.

This paper legit has no fucking novel questions at all besides the very last one.

This exam is a complete fucking joke. NESA needs a reality check. People didn't fucking choose physics to write mother fucking essays (1/4 of section II).

In all seriousness though, how do you think they mark the longer responses? Easy 5/8 or 4/6 with basic understanding + use of key terminology and then each mark gets progressively harder? Or just like following a criteria and ticking boxes?

 

[coolcat6778]

In all seriousness though, how do you think they mark the longer responses? Easy 5/8 or 4/6 with basic understanding + use of key terminology and then each mark gets progressively harder? Or just like following a criteria and ticking boxes?

If you mention all the key details and experiments, you could get atleast 5/8 (like I did in the 2024). Then it's just based on fucking structure lol, legit.

But since there are like 3 fucking essays (31, 32, 33) you're gonna be losing so many marks cause of this. 2024 had some nice theory questions I could answer and score full marks in (question number 30s) to make up for the large losses in the history and essay questions, though I would've preferred a 2023 style exam (which I likely would've band 6ed). 2025's dogshit pile of a physics exam made me realise how lucky I was to not wait a year to do physics.

 

[Arnav_2007]

If you mention all the key details and experiments, you could get atleast 5/8 (like I did in the 2024). Then it's just based on fucking structure lol, legit.

But since there are like 3 fucking essays (31, 32, 33) you're gonna be losing so many marks cause of this. 2024 had some nice theory questions I could answer and score full marks in (question number 30s)

Damn ok, so it’s pretty must subjective after you hit like the 6/8 barrier.

Kinda worried as if I lose like at least 2 marks on each of those longer responses I’m getting low 80s which is prob not band 6 .

 

[coolcat6778]

Damn ok, so it’s pretty must subjective after you hit like the 6/8 barrier.

Kinda worried as if I lose like at least 2 marks on each of those longer responses I’m getting low 80s which is prob not band 6 .

yup, there's genuinely no reason this should be in a physics examination. It's genuinely word play and garbage regurgitation crap.

 

[C2H6O]

coolcat lad I usually complain with you on this but it really wasn’t as bad as I could’ve been I’m thankful

 

[coolcat6778]

coolcat lad I usually complain with you on this but it really wasn’t as bad as I could’ve been I’m thankful

bruh how, its 19 marks of pure essay regurgitation (31, 32, 33). You said that 2019 was too much writing, but the 2019 writing was mostly theory application, rather than historical experiments essays. 2025 is the MOST essay style response heavy paper

This paper wont even scale/align particularly good, since it's all regurgitation (NESA has some sense to understand regurgitation doesn't mean difficult). MCQ didn't look particularly interesting either

Personally, I feel the 2024 paper is much much easier than 2025. More application based theory questions, rather than memory tests and essay writing questions which heavily disadvantage you if your (petal style) structure isn't to their standard

 

[svad]

It's genuinely word play and garbage regurgitation crap.

in one question i said 'scattering' rather than 'Deep inelastic scattering' i KNOW im losing marks for that even if they know damn well what i meant

 

[lolcti]

This paper wont even scale/align particularly good, since it's all regurgitation (NESA has some sense to understand regurgitation doesn't mean difficult). MCQ didn't look particularly interesting either

this is why it’s not going to count towards my atar lol

 

[AAArated]

Damn ok, so it’s pretty must subjective after you hit like the 6/8 barrier.

Kinda worried as if I lose like at least 2 marks on each of those longer responses I’m getting low 80s which is prob not band 6 .

do NOT listen to this retard please he does not know how anything is marked or done

 

[AAArated]

If you mention all the key details and experiments, you could get atleast 5/8 (like I did in the 2024). Then it's just based on fucking structure lol, legit.

But since there are like 3 fucking essays (31, 32, 33) you're gonna be losing so many marks cause of this. 2024 had some nice theory questions I could answer and score full marks in (question number 30s) to make up for the large losses in the history and essay questions, though I would've preferred a 2023 style exam (which I likely would've band 6ed). 2025's dogshit pile of a physics exam made me realise how lucky I was to not wait a year to do physics.

has nothing to do with structure please stop yapping and spreading misinformation when you have never gotten full marks or anything close to it in any of these responses

 

[coolcat6778]

has nothing to do with structure please stop yapping and spreading misinformation when you have never gotten full marks or anything close to it in any of these responses

yup, because these 8 marker questions aren't physics questions. end of story

Also I don't give a shit I didn't get full marks in these useless ass questions lmfao, what kind of projection is this? I legit don't care about my performance in these questions at all (genuinely there's no fucking ounce of intelligence or thinking required for these writing which explains why english scales like dog shit)

you're calling me retarded for being bad at English, but just look at this (these people did better than me in English)

these people are genuinely retards

 

[coolcat6778]

I'm legit smarter than 80% of people who scored higher than me on English in the state. (as per my 2u and physics result)

Please stop projecting useless garbage

 

[coolcat6778]

when you have never gotten full marks or anything close to it in any of these responses

i literally did in that fucking "Model A vs Model B" question. people genuinely thought that was the hardest question in the exam... unless you're referring to the regurgitation essay questions - oh well I don't give a shit

 

[coolcat6778]

Fun fact: part c of this question had a mean mark of 30% . So basically this 2024 surface level question apparently is the hardest question .

I'm actually pissed some stupid bitch (ranked internally higher than me) couldn't answer this, which explains why my assessment mark isn't that good. She said "I couldn't do the last part" of this surface level projectile motion problem as we were coming out of the exam hall. She only ranked higher than me cause of her writing style. Retard. 2024's projectile motion question might be the best one out of the HSC.

I'm pissed some fucking loser can only do part a yet still scrape a band 6 in HSC physics. This clearly shows HSC physics doesn't care how good you are at problem solving.

 

[coolcat6778]

(8 marks)

This is a scenario similar to that HSC question. Imagine if a question like this was asked instead (mean mark will probably be like 15% cause of how dumb everyone is). I'm actually baffled that basic 2024 projectile motion question has such a low mean mark for how surface level it is. (Direct formula substitution from module 6 and basic projectile motion from module 5). Questions of these natures SHOULD be the differentiating ones, not ESSAYS . If they asked questions like this, alignment and scaling will be better than extension 1 and almost as good as extension 2. Additionally, these questions are probably gonna be routine questions asked in university, so yup, I really am ill prepared thanks to HSC physics.

AAArated, even if I can't do this question (doesn't look too hard anyway), I'd rather lose a few marks on this than stupid extended response essays. I wouldn't be mad if I lost marks on these questions because that's fair (it's a true representation of my intelligence and knowledge on physics). At least the people who get full marks on these kinds of questions aren't getting full marks just cause they are good at English. Seriously, physics is meant to be hard. Essay writing skills shouldn't give you an advantage in the subject known as physics.

End of case.

 

[BionicMango]

It’s not that I disagree with you but you’ve made your point - perhaps direct this to NESA? Like email them or smth

 

[coolcat6778]

It’s not that I disagree with you but you’ve made your point - perhaps direct this to NESA? Like email them or smth

NESA will inevitably read something from this website, they lurk here

besides, whats the point of sending emails to NESA if they don't give a shit about opinions?

I'm sure many physics professors in the past 20 years have complained to NESA (formally Board of Studies) already. If NESA is unwilling to listen to actually qualified people (syllabus still basically the same as 2001), they certainly wont for a student like me

the next best thing I can do is emphasize how dogshit our physics syllabus is so future hsc students know to expect an unfulfilling physics course.

 

[ralseiawesomefuntime]

how do you know they lurk here

 

[coolcat6778]

how do you know they lurk here

they copy questions from bos papers sometimes for math extension

 

[coolcat6778]

yea it will be maybe even high 80s because it was very easy

now I agree

the post exam clarity has hit me, I only thought it was hard but looking at it holistically, I see that the MCQ are all garbage piss easy questions, no hard calculation questions, and just regurgitation paragraphs for the last few questions.

However, they are still gonna mark harsher than usual in these regurgitation questions. So scoring a band 6 might be harder - 2024 biology is a good example, people thought it was such an easy exam due to no application questions, then came results and only 6.7% scored a band 6.

Band 6 cutoff goes up, and ur score goes down. Don't be so arrogant you silly goose, you might be in good terms with your physics teacher (they subconsciously mark you higher cause they believe your response are superior) but these HSC markers barely spend a minute looking at your response, nor do they know you.