Talk:Z-transform
|
|
"The former is sometimes called a unilateral Z-transform and the latter a bilateral or doubly infinite Z-transform."
- Are "former" and "latter" the wrong way around here?
- Yep. Thanks. Fixed.
I think a section on common Z-Transform pairs should be added. Can someone please do it? I don't know to use the Math functions.
Does anyone know who discovered the z-transform and its usefulness? Maybe we could put a short blurb about it?
- IIRC, my CRC math handbook says something about it. i'll dig it up.
circular coordinate representation of "z"
Although for some it may be obvious, I still think that, for clarity, this should be added to the definition of the Z transform: ... where e is the base of the natural logarithm and j is the imaginary unit (<math>j^2=-1<math>)
- IMO, i see no reason to say that z is a "circular" complex number. z is just a complex variable and there is no reason to say it has to be in polar form. maybe we should take that whole thing out. r b-j 02:53, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
- Most, if not all, texts I have seen use circular and I see no reason to drop it from the WP article... Cburnett 03:45, May 7, 2005 (UTC)
- none of mine do until they start talking about frequency response or maybe ROC. computing those summations in z for various transforms and theorems does not require it. i'm happy to leave it. but then maybe we should respond to the suggestion that we explicitly define "e" and "j". r b-j 05:09, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
- Well, a Z-transform without the ROC is meaningless and I can't recall seeing a ROC that was non-cicular. A non-circular/cartesian Z-transform would be more like a Laplace transform... Cburnett 06:33, May 7, 2005 (UTC)