Formal proof of Thevenin theorem

Click For Summary
A request for a formal proof of Thevenin's theorem focuses on understanding why any linear network can be viewed as a linear bipole from a specific port. Participants suggest conducting a Google search for existing proofs, noting the abundance of resources available. The discussion emphasizes the importance of linear algebra in demonstrating that a composite network can be simplified into two parts, which can be represented by Thevenin or Norton equivalents. There is a call for clarification on the argument regarding the structure of the linear system. The conversation highlights the need for a deeper exploration of the theorem's mathematical foundations.
cianfa72
Messages
2,848
Reaction score
302
TL;DR
Formal proof of Thevenin theorem from an algebraic point of view
Hi,
I am looking for a formal proof of Thevenin theorem. Actually the first point to clarify is why any linear network seen from a port is equivalent to a linear bipole.

In other words look at the following picture: each of the two parts are networks of bipoles themselves.
Thevenin.jpg

Why the part 1 -- as seen from the interconnection's port (topological cut) -- is equivalent to a linear bipole itself ?

Thank you.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Have you tried a google search? I did "proof of thevenin's theorem pdf" and got so much good stuff I honestly don't know which one to link to here. Many have references to other papers too.
 
  • Like
Likes jim mcnamara
DaveE said:
Have you tried a google search? I did "proof of thevenin's theorem pdf" and got so much good stuff I honestly don't know which one to link to here.
Yes, I believe the point is to show - from a linear algebraic point of view - that the linear system of the complete composite network actually breaks in two parts: by mean of elimination (e.g. Gauss elimination) we may always reduce each part to a linear equation (the Thevenin or Norton equivalent).
 
  • Like
Likes Delta Prime
@cianfa72 did you mean to post this in another thread? As it stands now, this makes no sense.
 
jim mcnamara said:
@cianfa72 did you mean to post this in another thread?
No, I mean whether or not you can confirm my argument about the structure of the linear system and how to break it in the two parts involved.
 
Thanks for the clarity.