A question on Laplace transform

AI Thread Summary
To derive Y(s)/X(s) from the relationship y(t) = 1/(x(t) - k), expanding the inverse term using a Taylor series is suggested, but this introduces complexity due to higher-order terms leading to convolution in the Laplace domain. The discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding the causal relationship between input x(t) and output y(t), particularly with the adjustment of y(t) to depend on x(t - k). This adjustment aligns with the concept that output signals should not respond instantaneously. There is confusion regarding the notation, particularly why x(t) appears in the denominator without clear definition. Overall, the derivation process and the causal nature of the relationship are central to the discussion.
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?
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
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...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top