Why are my equations giving different curves?

  • Thread starter Thread starter LucasGB
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around discrepancies in curve outputs from two equations derived from an original equation. The user, Estevão, is confused about why Equations 3 and 4 yield different results despite using the same parameters. A key insight suggests that X and Y must be treated as constants rather than variables dependent on "n" to maintain consistency in the equations. Additionally, Z-Transforms are proposed as a potential method for simplifying Equation 3 for manual computation, although some participants argue that they may not be necessary. The conversation concludes with gratitude for the creative solutions provided by other users.
LucasGB
Messages
181
Reaction score
0
What am I doing wrong?

When you have an equation such as the one displayed in Equation 1 (see attached figure) and want to compute it by hand, you may rewrite it as Equation 2.

Setting X and Y to the following values:

X = Exp[-(n-1)/beta]
Y = Exp[-T/alpha]

I got Equation 3. Thereafter, I tried to transform it in the same way, and then I got Equation 4. However, Equation 3 and 4 are not the same. For alpha=360, beta=5, A1=10 and T=1, these two equations give very different curves, as you can see at the bottom of the image (Equation 3 represented as the purple curve, and Equation 4 represented as the blue line). What am I doing wrong?

Thanks in advance,

Estevão

P.S.: Please, I really need help in this issue.
 

Attachments

  • Figure 1.JPG
    Figure 1.JPG
    27.6 KB · Views: 412
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org


Here's a hint Lucas. Go back and have a look at how you derived equation 2 from equation 1. Notice that to get it in the form of a geometric series you had to factorize out the X's and Y's across the sum of multiple terms. Think about what that means about X and Y, they must be constants, neither can depend on "n".
 


uart said:
Here's a hint Lucas. Go back and have a look at how you derived equation 2 from equation 1. Notice that to get it in the form of a geometric series you had to factorize out the X's and Y's across the sum of multiple terms. Think about what that means about X and Y, they must be constants, neither can depend on "n".

You are right! Thank you very much for the answer. However, now I have a new problem: how to simplify Equation 3 so I can compute it by hand?
 


Have you ever used Z-Transforms LucasGB? There are many ways to solve difference equations but z-transforms are one of the easiest.

See : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z-transform

I'll leave some of the work to you, but I get an answer that exactly matches your "red curve" and it's in the form of :

A_n = \frac{A_1}{b-a} ( b^n - a^n )

where "a" and "b" are constants in terms of your alpha, beta, T etc.
 


uart said:
Have you ever used Z-Transforms LucasGB? There are many ways to solve difference equations but z-transforms are one of the easiest.

See : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z-transform

I'll leave some of the work to you, but I get an answer that exactly matches your "red curve" and it's in the form of :

A_n = \frac{A_1}{b-a} ( b^n - a^n )

where "a" and "b" are constants in terms of your alpha, beta, T etc.

It seems great, but I'm having a hard time searching for introdutory texts to Z-Transforms. Could you suggest one to me?
 


LucasGB, I think there is no need of Z-transform.
Look at the attached picture.
I hope it will help you.
(Sorry, in the picture, when it says "knowing that X(1)=0", it should say "knowing that X(1)=1"
 

Attachments

  • LucasGB's function.jpg
    LucasGB's function.jpg
    18.7 KB · Views: 469
Last edited:


Karlx said:
LucasGB, I think there is no need of Z-transform.
Look at the attached picture.
I hope it will help you.
(Sorry, in the picture, when it says "knowing that X(1)=0", it should say "knowing that X(1)=1"

Thank you very much, Karlx. This is a very creative way to solve the equation. You and uart helped me a lot!
 
Back
Top