Talk:Derivation of the Routh array
WikiProject Systems  (Rated Startclass, Midimportance)  


Comments
Isn't the left hand side of eqns 13 and 14 supposed to be only (no index )? (Havresylt (talk) 05:45, 19 October 2009 (UTC))
 Thanks! You are absolutely correct, too much copypasta. I've corrected it. Zaxxonal (talk) 22:07, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Equation (6) uses a formula for the argument of a complex number, that depends upon the complex number to have a positive real part. Note that the arguments of 0.001 + i and 0.001+i do not differ by pi as the formula would suggest! Equation (9) uses equation (6) on a complex number with a negative real part. The rest of the article builds upon this result, so this needs to be fixed. Mreiki (talk) 18:44, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
 Sorry for my inadequate initial response, Mreiki. Perhaps it would be better if equation 6 merely stated tan(@) = IM{f(x)}/RE{f(x)}. Equation (9) is not evaluated on a complex number with a negative real part. Before evaluation, the negative sign is removed and applied to the limit, which can be done since tan([email protected]) = tan(@).
 Please also note that if you were to apply the atan2 function directly to the arguments shown in (9), (10), (11) and (12), instead of performing a limit substitution, you get the same results. For example, in (9), pi/2 + pi = 3pi/2 which is the same angle as pi/2, in (10), pi/2  pi = 3pi/2 which is the same angle as pi/2. In (11) and (12), the arguments have positive real parts without substitution. Zaxxonal (talk) 06:43, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Talk:Derivation of the Routh array"; it is used under the Creative Commons
AttributionShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CCBYSA). You may
redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with
the terms of the CCBYSA