Line 13: Line 13:
  
 
One problem with the definition of a non-linear system.  It should be worded as "...system is called "Non-Linear" if '''there exists''' constants <math> \alpha, \beta \!</math> (part of the Complex Number domain) and '''there exists''' inputs <math> x_1(t),  x_2(t)\!</math> (or  <math>x_1[n],  x_2[n]\!</math>) yielding..."  It only takes one set of constants/ inputs to prove a system non-linear.  -- Jeff Kubascik
 
One problem with the definition of a non-linear system.  It should be worded as "...system is called "Non-Linear" if '''there exists''' constants <math> \alpha, \beta \!</math> (part of the Complex Number domain) and '''there exists''' inputs <math> x_1(t),  x_2(t)\!</math> (or  <math>x_1[n],  x_2[n]\!</math>) yielding..."  It only takes one set of constants/ inputs to prove a system non-linear.  -- Jeff Kubascik
 +
----
 +
 +
it makes sense for me. very clear definition!.

Revision as of 05:44, 18 September 2008

Correct and clear! - Ronny Wijaya


Looks pretty good to me! -- Kathleen Schremser


This is a good definition and the use of the mathematical definition makes it even better. -- Aishwar Sabesan


This definition works for me. -- Derek Hopper


One problem with the definition of a non-linear system. It should be worded as "...system is called "Non-Linear" if there exists constants $ \alpha, \beta \! $ (part of the Complex Number domain) and there exists inputs $ x_1(t), x_2(t)\! $ (or $ x_1[n], x_2[n]\! $) yielding..." It only takes one set of constants/ inputs to prove a system non-linear. -- Jeff Kubascik


it makes sense for me. very clear definition!.

Alumni Liaison

Have a piece of advice for Purdue students? Share it through Rhea!

Alumni Liaison