HappyCal Monthly Schedule
(Honors AP Calculus, Period A)
W 11/1/00 |
HW due: §5-4 #3-42 mo3, 43, 44, 46. |
|
|||
Th 11/2/00 |
HW due: §5-5 #4, 7-13 all. You may choose between 10 and 13 (no need to do both). |
|
|||
F 11/3/00 |
No school. |
|
|||
M 11/6/00 |
HW due: §5-6 #3, 7, 11-17 all, (29), 30, 31, 32, 35, 39. If you can't do all of these (because we haven't really discussed MVT yet), then at a minimum write out MVT using symbols and memorize what the theorem says. |
|
|||
T 11/7/00 |
HW due: §5-7 #8-13 (note: #12 refers to #11, not #10). |
|
|||
W 11/8/00 |
HW due: §5-8 #3, 8; also §5-9 #3-24 mo3, 25-38 all. |
|
|||
Th 11/9/00 |
HW due: §5-10 #1, 3, 4, 7. |
|
|||
F 11/10/00 |
HW due: §5-11 #1-3 all, 6-11 all. Please also prove that S = (2M + T)/3 (i.e., that the Simpson's Rule result is equal to a weighted average involving midpoint and trapezoid rule approximations, where the midpoint rule is weighted twice as heavily as the trapezoid rule). |
|
|||
M 11/13/00 |
Chapter 5 review. Suggested problems: §5-12 #R1-R11 all. (You may wish to use the Integral Approximation Thingy for R8.) Before tomorrow, be sure to work on the sample problems handed out in class today, and compare your answers with the key. |
|
|||
T 11/14/00 |
Test on Chapter 5. |
|
|||
W 11/15/00 |
HW due: Free-response #3 from yesterday's test. |
|
|||
Th 11/16/00 |
HW due: §6-3 #3-45 mo3. |
|
|||
F 11/17/00 |
HW due: §6-3 #58, §6-4 #3-12 mo3, and prove that FTC2 Þ FTC1. (In class, we proved that FTC1 Þ FTC2.) |
|
|||
M 11/20/00 |
HW due: §6-5 #3-30 mo3, plus your choice of #37 or #38. |
|
|||
T 11/21/00 |
HW due: §6-6 #3-18 mo3, plus #20. |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
M 11/27/00 |
HW due: §6-7 #3-57 mo3, plus #59. Also prove the Rule of 72 by solving for t in the equation 2P = Per t. (Here, P denotes the initial population, account balance, or amount of some quantity present; t denotes the number of time periods; and r denotes the rate of increase in each time period.) |
|
|||
T 11/28/00 |
HW due: §6-8 #3-36 mo3, plus answer the following question: In our in-class proof (Monday, 11/27) of the lemma limn® ¥ (1 + r/n)n = er, what allowed us to legitimately say ln lim(1 + r/n)n = lim ln(1 + r/n)n? In other words, why were we able to interchange the position of the ln and lim operators? (The answer begins with the letter C.) |
|
|||
W 11/29/00 |
HW due: §6-9 #3-54 mo3. |
|
|||
Th 11/30/00 |
HW due: §6-9 #57-90 mo3. Begin Chapter 6 review in class. |
|
Return to Mr. Hansen's home page
Last updated: 04 Dec 2000