All right, if you're watching this, that means it's probably AP exam week or pretty close to it. And we're looking for some ways to boost our AP physics exam score. And realistically, you're not going to do a whole lot this week to boost your score based on attaining more physics knowledge. But what we absolutely can do is talk about good test taking tips to get some extra points because the AP physics exam is definitely not about getting all the points, but it's about getting enough to get to that threshold that you want. So, we're just going to look at some test taking strategies, especially for the 2025 tests that will help you get to that goal score, whatever that is. So, first, uh, we're going to review the multiple choice format. So, this is new this year. So, it's 40 questions, 80 minutes across all four physics C or sorry, physics A and Physics C exams. Uh, one change that physics C will really notice is that the time was increased this year. One of the options was removed. But all four exams uh they're approximately giving you two minutes per question. So our first multiple choice tip and this is something I noticed across the practice exams for all the classes is that it's less of an average difficulty per question test as it was before and now it's more of each question is sort of sorted in a bin based on how hard college board would presume it is. Think about it on a 1 2 3 4 5 scale. So, what you should do as soon as you read a question is you should attempt to diagnose its difficulty. Is this a question that will take me a while? Then I might want to save it for later. Or is it something that looks easy and I can do it right now? And you probably won't be wrong. If you look at a multiple choice question, you think it's not very involved. Usually those really higheffort questions are quite easy to spot. usually because they'll have a very involved diagram or have functions or graphs or things that are clearly requiring some multi-step derivations. And that goes into my main multiple choice tip. And that's sort of our game plan on how we should attack the multiple choice. And it's not going to be a work cover to cover in order on everything sort of thing. What I recommend doing is on your first pass through the content, read each question. And after reading a question, decide, is this something that I think I can do right now, or is it something that I don't think I can do right now and should probably pull towards later? And with all the issues of digital testing, this is one of the better things is the ability to bookmark a question for later. So that's why we'd utilize this feature in Blue Book to flag for review. So, we should just work through each question and sort of read it. And if we can do it, go ahead. And if we can't, just mark it, no problem. We just kind of want to read the whole exam and take an inventory before we start uh tackling those unique and more novel problems. And even if you know how to do it, maybe save the computation ones for the second round because that can just take a lot of time. So, uh, one of our most powerful skills on multiple choice is the ability to eliminate answers. So, of course, if you know how to do it, that's great. You'll get the answer. But if you're stuck and are trying to eliminate some options, which you also can do in blue book, you can strike through some of the answers that you want to eliminate is look at what we call functional dependence. So that means like how does changing one variable affect the expression. So maybe for example uh you have a charged particle that's getting attracted to a plate and you want to derive some expression uh for its final speed. Well you know that sort of the more time that goes on the faster it should go. So you can eliminate the answers that have the particle get slower over time for example. And also you could look at what happens if you plug in really really big values or really really small values and see if your expressions work out and which ones of the multiple choice actually work there. This also is a good technique for those ratio proportion questions that basically ask you uh I have this sort of kinetic energy or this force. What happens to it if I double blank? And your intuition as long as you're only changing one thing can usually clue you in on if it's going to increase or decrease uh the entire uh quantity of interest. So, usually you can use that to eliminate some of the choices because you'll have like two ratios below one and one and two ratios above and they'll get rid of that middle option from going the from five choices to four usually. Although, there are quite a few tricky ratio questions where they'll change multiple things and it ends up unchanged. But, I'm thinking the classic like 1/4, 1/2, 2, and four is your multiple choice options there. Uh, another common uh, thing you'll see is be on the lookout on your multiple choice for your exam on what I call the one-off questions. And these are questions that are consistently tested exactly once in exam. And they show up all the time, every year, sort of exactly once. Uh, the poster child for this one, and I I put it in the mechanics and AP1 category, but I see it all the time in ENM, and people still get it wrong, is Newton's third law, right? uh middle school version of it. For every action, there's an equal and opposite reaction. But if you ever have two objects interacting, the forces exerted on each object by the other are equal and opposite. So mechanics likes to do things of different masses. ENM likes to look at charges of different magnitude. So like what charge is more attracted to the other? Uh same thing with wires like they have wires with different currents and ask to compare the forces or a proton near a wire. And in all case, equal and opposite. Equal and opposite. Equal and opposite. So Newton's third law is tested a lot. Also like some signs of work done. So thinking about that in terms of bar charts. Mechanics also likes comparing rotational inertias like racing a hoop uh and a cylinder down an incline. Uh they also love the orbit question of like the ratio of speeds at ahelion versus parihelion. Uh where you have to conserve l like if you're twice as far away your speed would be hald. things like that. Uh some other things for ENM or AP2. Uh APC has this idea of electric flux. They love to ask about what happens to the flux through a surface if you double its size uh or if you move a charge around. And you have to use the fact that the flux only depends on what's inside the little box. Additionally, they ask about E and V inside conductors a lot. Uh so like E has to be zero in a conductor because charges aren't moving around in an electrostatic situation. So the charges must arrange themselves. So there's no field. But that doesn't mean the potential zero. There's just no change in potential. Additionally, they like to draw equipotentials. So knowing that positives sort of create hills, negatives create valleys. Uh meaning the electric field points down the slope of the terrain. They like that idea. positives go downhill, negatives accelerate uphill. Uh, also classic right-hand rule, that's usually at least a question. So, either what's the force on this charge in this magnetic field? Make sure it's moving or else the force is zero. Uh, and also like what's the field generated from this wire? Can you do the circle uh with your right hand? That sort of thing. And also, they'll absolutely dedicate something to Lens's law. So like how could I generate a clockwise current through this loop or how does changing the magnetic field uh what sort of current does that create? Clockwise counterclockwise justify those are things to look for or the hall effect could also have gone in this category. So things that show up exactly once and are usually good multiple choice questions. Be on the lookout for those. Now for the free response. Uh this is our greatest blessing of the change where it's no longer a three question crapshoot for APC of them trying to test a million things in 15 minutes. Now we have this set format for all four exams that allow us to at least have some sense of we know what we're going to get here. So there's four FRQs of known format that we'll go through shortly. Uh you get 100 minutes. So timing I didn't really find to be an issue this time. Uh the MR question this is uh as it says mathematical routines uh it's about deriving expressions. So there are some points due to diagrams but it's mostly about deriving. I would consider this depending on which one you get. This can be one of the harder questions. Question two is the longest one. It's worth 12 points. It's called translation between representations and it's about analyzing a scenario in all these different ways. So even though it's the longest, I usually don't consider question two the hardest one. Uh it just tests the most skills. I know that sounds like a copout answer, but I actually like it. And if you have a good enough question too, uh it can actually be quite easy if you have a deep understanding of what's going on. But if you have a complicated scenario, that's when it can get tricky uh with that question too. So you have to draw a diagram, you have to derive an expression, you have to sketch a graph, and then you probably got to compare two of the parts you just did. Or sometimes they'll just say, "How does changing blah about the situation affect your diagram derivation graph, something like that?" So this one takes a lot of of time because you have to look at the same problem three ways. But I really like this one. Uh the most set in stone question for sure is the experimental design and as we'll see later I always tell you to start with this one because it's a known thing like we know what we're going to get with FRQ3. So uh the lab questions split into sort of two mini FRQs. So the first part is A and B and you have to design an experiment to do something and then you have to analyze it. So those are separate parts. So part A you just say sort of here's what we're doing here's how you do it and part B is explaining how you calculate the thing you want. Although I also seen some question uh threes that are instead of calculating something it's like does this spring follow Hook's law. So you'd have to say graph it see if it's graph force versus extension see if it's linear. Same thing with Ohms law for ENM right? you just graph uh voltage and current see if it's linear or testing dependencies I've seen as well but usually it's a solve for something and then parts C and D are the other part where it's a related lab but totally different in its setup and it exists in an independent place. So this is your classic what do I graph to make a line? Can I graph a best fit line and can I use the slope or y intercept to solve for something? I always recommend starting with this question. And then FRQ4 is the quantitative qualitative translation. This is worth the least points, but the best question four is I found to be some of the hardest you can get on the exam just based on how to answer it without equations. So you have to make some claim without using formulas for the QT. Then you have to derive a formula for something. And then you usually have to explain whether your formula is consistent with your claim. But this absence of equations in part A can make it quite tricky. But we'll see there's a way around that if you get stuck. This is also my favorite type of question is the QQT because it really tests what we're trying to do as physicists. Can you understand something both with and without math? First FRQ tip, read all of the questions first. Now, this seems counterintuitive that I'm telling you to spend 5 to 10 minutes of your precious time just reading everything and making slight annotations, but trust me, this usually pays off in the long term because you know absolutely every question that's asked. There's no surprises later on and it helps you get a game plan of where to best spend your time. And I sort of learned this skill in college when taking math exams. I think it was my linear algebra class that I really had to learn the strategy for. And your brain is just making these subconscious connections sort of knowing what's coming next after you've read it once. I I I'll never take a test another way. So doing it cover to cover is not really recommended with this either. Now, especially since we have these four questions, uh what I've seen this year is it's not like the big synthesis questions in the past where it's how many things can we shove into one question that goes up to part G. It's none of that anymore. It's actually can we test sort of the four quarters of the course separately and give you a really interesting and new scenario with each of those. So if you can identify what question belongs to what quarter of your course, you're able to at least get a start because the problem is almost certainly new and something you haven't seen before. So knowing what topic it is really helps. So in terms of topics based on all the practice exam data we have, uh it seems like we can predict for AP1 they like to split it usually into forces, conservation laws, rotation, and fluids. AP2 likes electricity, magnetism, thermo and modern physics. Mechanics like likes forces, energy, momentum, and rotation. And ENM likes electrostatics, circuits, magnetism, and induction. And we don't know how these topics are going to be split up. So, they could decide that maybe they want a magnetism question one, and an electrostatics question two on the ENM test. Again, they could pick uh any of these. They just know that one of these are going to each of the four questions. So, if you can identify which one is related to what on your test, it gives you a big advantage in understanding what well what the whole questions about and what equations are going to be helpful. And you can usually tell just by the diagram because yes, it's not going to be something you've seen before, but it probably looks similar to at least something. And some of them are it's very hard to misidentify a circuits question or fluids question. But figuring out is it momentum, is it energy, that takes a minute sometimes. And here's our last tip before diving into the specific question types. These problems are weird. If you've seen some of the practice exams, there's some weird scenarios on there. And that's the point. Physics is about problem solving and how you approach new things. And I know they're weird and strange because even I haven't heard of them. and I wrote a whole freaking book on AP Physics C. So if I haven't understood the situation before, chances are you haven't seen it either. But when I open the test and I see a situation and I myself as the teacher, I go, "Oh, WTF is this." I sit down, I read it for a few minutes, and I'm like, "Oh, okay. I see what's going on here." Because I know physics. So you're not supposed to be a walking memory bank of everything. You're supposed to know principles. So that's why knowing the topic helps here because you're going to have a weird diagram. Maybe there's a weird angle. Maybe the pulley is in a place it's not usually at. Maybe there's a second battery in your circuit, but it's okay. You just need to read it, relax, and figure out what topic it is so you at least have a starting point. Same thing. If there's something weird and you know you messed up, just continue working out your solution. There is tons of partial credit to be had. It's way more generous in the old tests. you can get points. Usually the correct answer is only one of them. So if you're doing good physics along the way with your wrong answer, you'll get most of the points. And that's what this test is about. It's not getting all the points is how many can we get. So here's sort of our game plan. This is what I would recommend and I find this to to give lots of success. Read all parts of all four questions first. And as you go through each of the four, write on the top, what question is this? We know it's going to go in the order MRT, TBR, lab, QQT. But what I'm talking about is the topic. Is it rotation, momentum, energy, forces? So, write down that order of your questions. Or is it deflux, dt, magnetism, uh, circuits, electrostatics? So, you got to go through and think about that. I always recommend doing question three first because as we'll see in our deep dive here in a second, it's the most fixed in its format. You know what you're getting with three for sure. And even if you're not the most confident in what question three is about, there are lots of points to be had there. And then I'd say it doesn't really matter what order you do it in. Probably just go for the order of your own comfort. So here's the suggested timing. And I took the 10-minute reading period into account. So 10 minutes reading, then 30 minutes for question three, which seems like a lot for one question, but realize that's the plotting points question, and you underestimate how long it takes to scale a graph, plot points, use a ruler, run the Desmos regression. So that might be an overestimate, but just keep that in mind. And then you got 20 minutes for Q1, 25 for Q2, and 15 for Q4. And you see that that does add to 10 + 30 is 40 plus 20 is 60, and plus another 40 is 100. So that's a way to split the time. And remember that in the past the timing was a lot more brutal than this. You will have time if you use it wisely. So that's why reading this just really helps because you know exactly what will need more and less time. So first we're just going to go through each question now. So questions one and two involve drawing a diagram. So if you're drawing a diagram, there's usually a couple types. So for free body diagrams, make sure to draw the real forces. It's often that the thing that's causing your acceleration isn't actually the full force. So think like down an incline. It's not mg causing you to go down down the incline. It's mg sin theta. Don't draw components anywhere on the free body diagram. And make sure that all your vectors are drawn on the dot and pointing away from the dot. Do not do tip totail. If you have a grid, they gave you a grid for a reason. Meaning, you got to show forces that balance. Or if it's on two objects or two different times, show what force is bigger. If you have a more massive object, it should have a bigger mg force. Things like that. They would not give you a grid for no reason. They don't grade on length if it's not a grid. Uh bar charts are very popular now. Uh I really like them. Bar charts are usually about showing conservation. Most of these bar chart questions are about conservation laws. So you get three points for these if they're on the TBR. And usually you get a point for showing some sort of conservation law. So for example, if it's a kinetic and potential bar chart, you'd get a point for showing the energy summing to a constant. Same thing with a momentum bar chart. Does the momentum lost by cart A get gained by cart B? showing momentum's conserved for example. And then for ENM, they really like this also in terms of electric potential. So be on the lookout for the absolute potential versus potential drops. So this is do you understand Kirchoff's loop rule? Do you know that things in parallel should drop the same volts? Do you know that going around the full loop should drop the battery voltage? Things like that. Additionally, you could draw field vectors. So electric field lines, remember they point away from positives and towards negatives because negatives suck all of the positivity out of the room. And if you got a conductor, you better write E equals Z. For magnetic field lines, we know that it forms circles around a wire via the right hand rule. So again, you just circulate your right hand uh and make sure your thumb points in the direction of the current. And also magnetic field lines go along the solenoid axis before closing back in on themselves. And B would be equal to zero if you don't really have any enclosed current. So maybe equal and opposite currents in a coaxial cable. But don't think don't get it mixed up with the conductor. Like yes, conductors carry current, but there is no B field. And uh there is a B field. There's just no E field. And I don't know why this went out of order. Uh, I must have put this slide out of order, but the diagrams you may need to create generally it's free body diagrams, bar charts of some sort, field vectors of some sort, or maybe marking up a circuit diagram or array diagram for AP2. For circuit diagrams, you might have to draw like maybe a voltmeter or draw the current direction. Not too much they'll have you draw from scratch, but those seem to be about the extent of it. Now for derivation tips. This is where a lot of points are locked in because derivations are 5 + 3 equals eight points on question one, four points on question two and three points on question four. So that's over a quarter of the free response is deriving, which makes sense because physics is about deriving expressions and analyzing problems that way. So it is important that we try to maximize our derivation points on top of all else. We have this blurb that's annoying for me to copy paste at the end of every problem I write. But realize that it means something. If you must start from a fundamental physics principle or equation from the reference book, you must do that. So maybe organizing your thoughts ahead of time is a good idea. Uh someone online called this stream of consciousness writing. Uh which I thought was pretty funny. And it does seem like that when I grade some free responses that just looks like we're writing whatever we're thinking. Please use the scrap paper to organize your thoughts because if we can't understand your derivation at the reading, we're instructed to to grade the least correct thing on your paper at that part. So what I'd recommend is coming up with some ideas if you don't know how to do the problem at first and then organize it. It should read nicely. But your first step should be a formula sheet equation or the statement of some physics principle. So if your first line is not something from the formula sheet, you better reevaluate. And it and your first line might be instead something like forces are balanced. Like you could write these out as words too. Energy is conserved. Total momentum is constant. The voltage drops must sum to zero. So you could write these in equation form also. But yes, a lot of people actually lose the first derivation point for skipping too far ahead. So make sure to do that. Make sure to actually write down the physics principle because it is the easiest point to get. And if the problem says starting from blank, you better actually write that blank. Starting from Newton's second law, please write Newton's second law starting from Kirchaw's voltage rule. Please write Kirchaw's voltage rule. Starting from Ampiers's law, please write a law. Please actually write the formula. It says, "I know it sounds silly, but man, the stuff we see. Physics is just as much of a reading game as it is a math game." Uh, we already covered this. Make sure your work is organized. Please draft a solution or at least write it somewhere and just box in the actual correct one. You can cross things off. Please write legibly. Uh, yeah, we've talked about this. So when writing a solution, show all major steps. It should go line sort of do one new thing every line. A derivation is about being multiple steps. So even if you know it's an energy conservation problem but know nothing else, please attempt a second line so you can earn the point for it being a multi-step derivation. A correct final answer is usually only one of the points. So just commit to solving your derivation all the way through. If you're doing correct physics along the way, you will earn points. Messing up at the start does not lock you out of nearly any of the other points. And also, it will tell you what variables are allowed in the final expression. Make sure that you actually obey that rule. So, don't be using any forbidden variables in there. The one exception is maybe time. Like they won't tell you time is allowed, but if they gave you a function that varies with time, it's implied. All right. Also on the TBR is the graph sketching tips. So this is about plotting a qualitative graph. So usually there's not even a grid lines. So this is how I approach graphs in AP physics. Go in order sort of with these steps. Where should my graph start? So these graphs are almost certainly weird ones that you haven't seen before. Like for example, there was a progress check in ENM that had you graph the path integral of B.DL. And I have never once in my life graphed that. So, how you should always approach these graph questions, especially if it's something weird, is realize I am not supposed to know what this graph looks like, right? We're not we're not having a graph flashc card quiz before the test. You're supposed to be seeing this for the first time. So, going through, I would ask myself first, where should my graph start? And I usually am not using equations for this. I'm just thinking about it. So, let's say it's a speed, it's a velocity time graph. Do I start with speed? Do I start with a positive speed? Do I start with a negative speed? Should it be zero? And I can usually figure that out from the context of the problem. Then figure out where should the graph end? Does it keep increasing? Why would that be why would that make sense from a physics perspective? Does it decrease? Does it approach one of the axes? Does it asmtote somewhere else like the circuit graphs typically do? And then you only after knowing your sort of start behavior and end behavior should you try to connect it. And that's when you have to think about functional dependencies more. Then uh you're checking for consistency question. Uh this is asked both on the TBR and the QT. And generally you're asked to compare either your derivation with one of your quantities or more commonly your graph and your picture. So the one that's combined a lot is like force and some sort of graph because force has a lot of relationships. F is MA. So force would be related to the slope of a VT graph or the concavity of a position graph. So think about not just your graph because it might not just be as simple as looking if your graph goes up or down. It might be looking at what the slope of your graph is and especially where the slopes might be zero or it could also be looking at the area of your graph. So thinking about how all of those relate to the thing uh that you drew a diagram for. So the best way of doing this is seeing my diagram was about blank. So write the variable there. It was about F. It was about P. It was about delta V. Then figure out what your graph was about. BT, it was XT. Uh momentum time, current time, something like that. And then think what is the relationship between those two variables I just said. Is it a one for one? Like is it a proportional relationship? Is it a slope relationship? Is it an area relationship? figure out that and that helps you nail the consistency question. And also think about bar charts and conservation laws in there too and how that might be reflected in a graph. If where we live in a great world where you're at 10 out of 10 up to this point, then you're obviously going to be consistent because physics is consistent. But if it's not, I would not instantly say not consistent. Even though you get full credit for saying not consistent and why, if it is not consistent, I would try to find where your error is. If you have time, you can hunt for why it's not consistent. But at the end of the day, if you know something is wrong between parts A, B, and C, you can say it's not consistent and here's why, and you are not locked out of the part D points, you'll just lose whatever point you missed in A, B, or C that made it not consistent. It is in your best interest to be honest. Don't just blindly say they're consistent. Now, for your justification, uh to justify a claim, make sure that you are adding physics to your explanation. So, usually it's a two-parter, like two points. So, it's a point for the claim, a point for the justification. So, a common sentence stem would be something like if blank increases, then blank happens. Not just I'm not just stopping there. I'm going to say because and then something physics related citing some physics law or physics principle. If you're able to use equations, numerators and denominators are great for this. X inc Y increases when X increases because X is in the numerator. Y decreases when X increases because there's a 1 overx^2 in in the problem. So there's X squ in the denominator. Do not write paragraphs anywhere, please. We prefer bullet points. It is much easier to organize your thoughts that way and it's way easier for us to grade in June. We don't want to be looking around through paragraph answers. And don't use math if it doesn't tell you to use math or if it says it's explicitly banned. And that only applies to 4A. Usually, you can use math anywhere else and it's fair game. Uh experimental design tips. This is really important because I always say to start here. the thing you have to design for yourself. The first part A and B of question three, it's almost certainly simple. It is not going to be a complex experiment because we're assuming that you have access to normal high school laboratory equipment and they're going to give you at least one of the things they want you to use. So, if they give you uh a measuring device, you're almost certainly going to have to use that. So, I would write down what am I given and what does that measure? and it's going to tell you we want an experiment to calculate this or we want to prove some claim and it's usually about proving either linearity or proving a graph of something versus something is linear. So maybe they wanted to prove that uh we had a spring that wasn't Hook's law but instead it was proportional to x squared. So you'd say graph f versus x^2 see if it's linear or not. That's a less common variance. Usually it's actually calculate something. I always say uh let the equation guide your experiment. So there's usually not crazy involved equations either. It could be something as simple as Hook's law or Ohm's law or the centrial force equation. So if you know what you can measure, maybe I'm given a meter stick, so I know it's like length and I know what I want to find, then I can just find an equation that relates those two things. And anything that's missing, I've got to figure out in the lab how to do it myself. If nothing else, use this skeleton for part A. You do not need to change this. It's almost certain that this answers the question entirely. So, this is just designing your experiment and it's almost certain what one of the things is that you have to measure already and then you have to figure out what else you probably want for yourself. So, I would say measure first variable using first measuring device. Then I'd say measure second variable using second measuring device. And you'd also get a point for some way of doing multiple trials or mitigating uncertainty. So I'd say to reduce uncertainty, I'd perform multiple trials after varying blank. And maybe you could also say thus we have data of something versus something. And you can draw a diagram to help although it's not required. The part B is about analyzing. So you're putting nothing about solving in part A. Part A is just how do you get the raw data. So part B I typically start with here is my equation relating my two variables I found and I might have to say some sort of transformation to apply if it's not linear already. So the most common variant is solving for something. So I'd say graph blank versus blank which creates a straight line. Your that's your first point is graphing a valid linear relationship. And then I would say the slope of that line is equal to blank something in terms of symbols. And then I'd say use the slope to solve for whatever the quantity of interest is. You do not actually have to solve it. If you identify how the slope relates to your graph or quantity of interest, that's enough of just saying since the slope is equal to this, we can use the slope to solve for what we want. Then for part C, this is where the most free points on the entire exam live. So first part C is about analyzing some sort of an experiment and solving for something. So this is given to you where you have raw data in a table and you have to find the answer. So uh the best way of doing this like the suggested way is can I derive an expression that relates the x variable to the y variable and they might be mean and give you actually two independent variables and you have to find a relationship but uh you got to use that to find the linearized relationship and there's lots of practice on linearizing. Now is not really the time for that. It's more of uh just going over how you commit to your relationship. So if you are stuck, you can actually just put the raw data in Desmos and click power regression and it's going to come up with a suggested exponent on the data. So if it's suggesting that y equals some constant times x to the 1.97, then you probably got to graph y and x^2. So if you have extra time, this can kind of cheese it. You obviously won't get the final points of getting the right thing if you're just totally lost. You can actually figure out the relationship by power regressioning it in Desmos. Oh, relationship. Nice, nice spelling error there. Uh, best fit lines. So, here is where you get the points. No matter what you choose to graph, you can get these three points, which is why I say do this problem first. So, if you pick the correct relationship to graph, like something that does create a straight line, you get a point. But you also get three points if you commit to graphing what you pick by doing the following. Label your axes with a unit and scale. So label it with the variable name and the units and don't try to simplify like if if you're graphing force squared just write newtons squared or same thing with like micro Tesla like don't get rid of the micro. If you don't transform if you don't do a bunch of messing around with your units you probably won't make a mistake. So just do the operation to the raw units. So labeling and scaling gets a point. Plotting the data correctly gets a point and graphing an appropriate best fit line with a with a ruler uh will get a point. So that just means approximately uh half the data points above slash below the line. And then part D, you just have to solve for something using that best fit line, usually the slope. You do have to say that you use technology if you use if you get the slope from technology. So you could do slope like rise over run. I find that to just not be optimal. You're so prone to mistakes with doing the slope by hand. And you have Desmos right there. Just use Desmos or the TI84 if that's you. So, I would always write the word Desmos and then I'd literally write the regression equation and then I'd say how my slope relates to the y intercept or the slope. I'd say how the slope or y intercept relates to the thing I'm solving for and then I'd solve it. And I would not simplify my units here either. You get no points for simplifying those units. As long as it's equivalent, it works. So, that helps in terms of messing with scientific notation. Like, you don't have to do it at all. Your final answer will just have some weird funky units that I promise are equivalent. And that's for us to deal with figuring out later. Uh we'll skip past this best fit example. Uh you can feel free to look uh at the code here to see how I'd analyze this uh equation. And now lastly uh for question four, I find this often to be the most challenging even if it is the shortest one. Some of these question fours are very unique in their setup and it's very hard to figure out what the answer is to part A without doing anything. So if that happens, you can guarantee yourself some points by actually doing part B first. So maybe I have no idea how this will change. So I'm going to derive an expression in part B and try my best to come up with an explanation that doesn't use math in part A that's consistent with B. And since I didn't tell the graders this, but since I used B to inform how I answered A, I am guaranteed the two parts are consistent. So at minimum, I should be getting at least a at least a three or four out of eight for free. So I guess if you got at least the starting point of your derivation correct, you should be minimum getting three out of eight on this. So, if you could pick up two points somewhere that's on track for a five. I find question four either super easy or super hard. I don't find too many middle-of the road question fours out there. But that's it. So, notice that we didn't really talk a lot of physics with this today because at this point in the year, the time for learning new physics is done. But that's half the battle for this test. It's understanding how can we maximize our potential, right? That's a physics word. So, how can we earn our points? How can we how can we show partial credit? Right? This is about demonstrating knowledge. So, please just commit to answering the questions. Don't give up on the derivations. You have more self-respect for yourself than giving up after one line. I'm sure you know a lot of physics and this is your chance to show it. So, with that, uh, I wish you luck. I'm also coming out with another video on more specific tips, mainly geared towards physics C, geared toward those one-offs or like facts that I'm almost certain will show up. But other than that, uh, that should be a good start, right? The goal here is, can I get more points than I would have if I just didn't think about the exam format before going? Because the physics will get you some of the way, but you really need to know the format. All right, good luck.