cheers to GRE for giving an easy test..!!Even the copyright logos in the test booklets for different years are of the same year
This statement is false... You can significantly increase your scores by a few weeks of preparation and last minute cramming can help you a lot... I can say this, because I crammed up some stuff this morning (special relativity and Doppler effect formulas) and it helped me a lot... I think there were around 5-6 questions on these topics and getting 5-6 questions correct means increasing your score by about 50 points...Although you might increase your scores to some extent through preparation a few weeks or months before you take the test, last minute cramming is unlikely to help
) 
))
are you absolutely sure that this will work in this easy test too.99percent wrote: I was going through the scoring guides of the previous GRE physics exams... I saw one thing... if you get more than 84-85 as raw score in any of the forms, then you will get 990 scaled scored...
I think it should be like this only... I think today's exam was very much similar to the 2001 released exam... Maybe a bit easier... or may be it feels easier to us cos we had all gone through the 2001 test before appearing for today's test...emperial wrote:I dunno why they prepared such an easy test. I think if you want more than 900 you should hit more than 80 corrects.
are you absolutely sure that this will work in this easy test too.99percent wrote: I was going through the scoring guides of the previous GRE physics exams... I saw one thing... if you get more than 84-85 as raw score in any of the forms, then you will get 990 scaled scored...
that's why i feel horrible that i only answered about 60 q. This is certainly not the case. If all tests labeled "9277" (or this year "0877") were the same test, then the April, October and November tests would all be the same in a given year (and hence people could quickly figure out how to get perfect scores). We confirmed last year that there are several different versions of the test (with distinct questions) on any given test day. There are other number/letter codes on the booklets that probably represent these individual forms.99percent wrote: I think the test will be almost the same in the US as well, they will just reorder the questions... I am saying this, because you can see the released GRE tests have just the year mentioned and the code 77 - which is the code for physics... I think they have the same paper everywhere, its just the questions are either reordered or are marginally different...
Yes this is true (vacuously). If you manage to do well in a test you didn't take, any consequence and its negation follows. haha this is why Obama should introduce parenthesis into the English language...duck85 wrote:Does anyone know if this "recommendation" is code for "if you don't take it and do well, you won't get in"?
scallions wrote:I thought it was reasonable, but I still only answered ~60 questions before time was called. I didn't answer anything unless I could knock out 3 of the choices (or 2 if I could intuition something "looking right") and there were still ~40 I felt fairly confident about. 600-town here I come!
Here's hoping we all did well!
PoincareSection wrote:I didn't think it was THAT easy... I thought the difficulty level was around the 9277. I answered 51 questions, so I'm hoping for at least a 650, and I'd be ecstatic with a 700 . I was positive for about 35 - 40 questions and took educated guesses on the rest. I hope being an american female and having awesome research experience makes up for a crappy score.
This will be the longest six weeks ever....
Good luck to everyone!!!
Looks like I'm right in league with you guys. Answered about 60, all of which I either knew were correct or eliminated two/three choices.Ren wrote:it really was easy
my pacing was way off. I should have don't much better.
what do you guys think the scaling will be like? would you get around 700 if you have~ 50 raw score?
Yeah, I saw a logic gate question that I skipped, and then one about Cooper pairs and stuff...random facts that if you didn't know you were screwed on.cato88 wrote:I dont know what form you guys took but my test version was a bit harder than the October test version. What is it it with logic gates? I didnt realize I was supposed to have learned about logic gates in my physics courses. There were also more questions that were based on historical facts than principles you could derive with undergrad classes because as far as I know you cant derive CP violation in weak interactions using lagrangians.
Hey,Slim Shady wrote:I'm hoping there are different versions out there because I definitely didn't think the test was easy. As was mentioned above, there were cooper pairs, logic gates, and J particles on mine. Did you guys with the "easy" test have those things? if so, I may be screwed, because I would compare the test more to the difficulty of 1992, and not nearly as easy as 2001 (despite the fact that I agree that most of the first 10 to 15 were ridiculously easy). I was hoping to get in high 800s to low 900s and now am not so confident. I answered about 90. In hindsight, I know of at least 12-15 dumb mistakes and had no idea on 8-10 (the ones I didn't answer), not to mention I'm sure that I must have goofed up many of the ones I thought I got right. Anyone else think the test compared more to 1992 in overall difficulty?
WontonBurritoMeals wrote:I'm suprised that people are complaining about Logic Gates, Parity, and Cooper Pairs... At my completely unknown state school, we've covered each of those in at least 3 places.
Logic Gates: Proofs class, discrete mathematics, electronics, logic class.
Parity: In Quantum Mechanics, we learned to use the Parity Operator to solve problems by knowing its commutator (or anticommutator) with other operators. And everyone knows the story about Landau and his shoe...
May the wind be always at your back,
-Wonton Burrito Meals
anyone has any idea what culd be the 90 percentile cutoff??
Other than the J/Psi comment the rest way too general to violate nda. About as useful as saying Lagrangians will be in test.TrueBLUE wrote: I saw some questions of the test being discussed here. What abt the declaration we printed and signed
Wow you guys got screwed. I suggest you report this to ETS. I think there is a procedure for getting this done.IM SO F***ING PISSEDDDD!!!!!!!!
ok so i take the test and it was totally easy!!!! But thats not the part i am pissed about...the clock in front of the room that was recording time stopped working about half way into the test!!!!!!!
The clock just stopped so i thought i has wayyyy more time than i actually did; EVERYONE DID. When the lady administrator told us we only have twenty minutes left, everyone was like "WTF!", cus the clock on the wall said we had an hour left. This totally f***ed me up!!!! I think i could have killed the f***ing test if it werent for this f***ing set back. BAH!
When time was called there were two-three questions i KNEW exacty how to do but just not enough time...im so f***ing pissed
You are absolutely right. One thing is absolutely clear. The people who took in India and other parts of the world have got a completely different version than what we got. I took it in Boston and I had all the questions that you mentioned. I also took the October test and found this test four times harder than the October test. If the Oct test was at the level of 0177, I would call this at the level of 9277.I managed to answer 85. I believe that a 75 in this test should definitely count towards 990. Unfortunately, I cannot state specific examples to substantiate my point.Slim Shady wrote:I'm hoping there are different versions out there because I definitely didn't think the test was easy. As was mentioned above, there were cooper pairs, logic gates, and J particles on mine. Did you guys with the "easy" test have those things? if so, I may be screwed, because I would compare the test more to the difficulty of 1992, and not nearly as easy as 2001 (despite the fact that I agree that most of the first 10 to 15 were ridiculously easy). I was hoping to get in high 800s to low 900s and now am not so confident. I answered about 90. In hindsight, I know of at least 12-15 dumb mistakes and had no idea on 8-10 (the ones I didn't answer), not to mention I'm sure that I must have goofed up many of the ones I thought I got right. Anyone else think the test compared more to 1992 in overall difficulty?
I think that's very likely. The test I got was no where close to being as difficult as the 9277. Anyway, it's done now, no use worrying. I hope you do well, best of luck!mike164 wrote: You are absolutely right. One thing is absolutely clear. The people who took in India and other parts of the world have got a completely different version than what we got. I took it in Boston and I had all the questions that you mentioned. I also took the October test and found this test four times harder than the October test. If the Oct test was at the level of 0177, I would call this at the level of 9277.I managed to answer 85. I believe that a 75 in this test should definitely count towards 990. Unfortunately, I cannot state specific examples to substantiate my point.
); but anyways my test didnt go as bad as thought it would (owing to the lack of sleep) .
; so much for good luck,eh ) I felt as if an electrical engineering background would be more useful than a physics background. If there were more quantum questions I would change my mind. Ann EE student would have taken classical mech and E&M.temujin_cosmobug wrote: In the test however I found one mean mean question, a Delta-wye transformation, I have taken a lot of electronics classes but, i couldnt remember the formula (it was easy considering all the resistors were the same value, but mean because that was completely unexpected, and more relating to electrical engineering than physics ). I know not every one has the same question set, did anyone else also get a question relating to a delta- wye transformation?
