| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
This definition works for me. -- Derek Hopper | 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 <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 | ||
Revision as of 15:36, 17 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
