She said he said

Posted by E-George on December 9, 2007

She said:

Professor -

I have reviewed your posted solution for Test 3 Problem 3. Clearly, the Laplace method would have been a faster, and more readily accurate solution. Even so, I believe that I executed accurate steps for solving the problem using the convolution integral, with my only mistake existing in a missed minus sign which, unfortunately, propagated through the equation process and ultimated created a wrong answer. The error occurred when converting x(t) to x(t-λ) when I failed to multiply through with the minus sign getting 4e^(-t-λ) when I should have gotten 4e^(-t+λ). An algebraic tragedy, to be sure.

I submit for your consideration that my minus sign infraction did not compromise the demonstrated evidence that I executed the convolution integral correctly, including a series of labeled and legible plots as part of the process. I respectfully advance the opinion that a 10-point deduction may be excessive for an algebraic error. Concordantly, I ask for the possibility of regaining up to 5 of the 10 lost points for clearly showing a well-cogitated convolution process solution, despite the algebraic flub which compromised the final result.

Please see the attached .jpg scanned copy of the graded problem in question. Thank you, in advance, for your consideration.

He said:

E. George….You sound like an attorney, have you considered patent law?
I have credited your account with 8 points. Have a nice weekend…Prof.
S.

Kick. Ass.

Filed Under: hur-hur - Comments:



top