A question on Laplace transform

Debdut
Messages
18
Reaction score
2
x(t) and y(t) are related by y(t)=1/(x(t) -k), how should I derive Y(s)/X(s)?
 
I'm thinking of expanding the inverse term in its Taylor series form. But it would involve terms like (x(t))^2, (x(t))^3, etc if I am right. That would lead to convolution in Laplace domain which according to me is becoming more complicated!
 
I cannot make sense of the question. Here is what I think, y is the "output" and x is the "input" and the relationship is supposed to be y(t) = 1 / x( t - k )
Note I have put the " - k " inside the function argument. This way it has y(t) depending on what x(t) was k seconds ago. This makes more sense since input/output signals in the time domain should be causal and not responding instantaneously. Although maybe I'm missing the point of the question entirely.
 
Then again, why do they put x downstairs without even specifying what it is?
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top