This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.SystemsWikipedia:WikiProject SystemsTemplate:WikiProject SystemsSystems articles
This article is substantially duplicated by a piece in an external publication. Please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of the following source:
Vandome, A. F., Miller, F. P., & McBrewster, J. (2009), Dynamical system, Alphascript Publishing{{citation}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
Dynamical systems is a vast subject and I could not finish this article. I ran out of steam. I have tried to write the article using a minimal amount of formalism. My hope is that the more technical stuff will be in the linked articles. Minimizing formalism turned out to be harder than I expected. For example, it took me close to an hour to write the definition in the first sentence:
Adynamical system is a concept in mathematics where a fixed rule describes the time dependence of a point in a geometrical space.
There are many missing parts to the article, most notably a discussion of hyperbolic systems, and of stable and unstable manifolds and their intersections. There is no history of the subject. The article also needs some illustrations. XaosBits14:05, 11 June 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I am very impressed with your rewrite; well done! However, I don't understand the second sentence of the following fragment:
"Linear systems are simpler than more general dynamical systems. But it is not the linearity that makes them simple, it is the structure of the orbits in phase space. There are coordinate transformations that would not change the structure of phase space, but could make it into a nonlinear system."
I thought that linear systems are so simple because one can solve them explicitly. They are not very simple; for instance, you can have a centre which is a rather non-generic structure. I am certain you have a good reason for what you wrote down, but I am just curious what it is, so could you please enlighten me (in technical language, if necessary)?
A small remark: my browser doesn't show ₀ (₀). What is this supposed to be, and is it necessary to use it, as other people's browsers may have the same problem. I also notice that you did not include any examples. Was this a conscious decision or are they to be included in the illustrations you mention above?
Now that I re-read that sentence, I agree, its wrong (I'm redefining linear). I deleted it. What I had in mind when I was writing that was to point out that it is the structure of the vector field that makes analysis difficult. So if I pick a coordinate change that is nonlinear and apply it to a x-dot = v(x) system, I will end up with a non-linear system that is no more interesting than the linear one.
The lack of examples is lack of energy on my part. There should be examples and illustrations.
The ₀ is a zero subscript. I've replaced them in the main article.
I changed the definition back. A dynamical system is a smooth function from a manifold to itself dependent on one parameter, time. While the manifold could be replaced by a more general set, loosing smoothness takes one to ergodic theory or symbolic dynamics. The parameter needs to be a monoid traditionally written in additive form. One could just formalize that definition, but the challenge is to re-write it so that someone with high school mathematics can follow the definition.
From what I replaced, I liked the use of relationship instead of function and responding to their own values, which emphasizes the mapping a point of the manifold back onto itself. But I could not get it to work. Maybe someone else could try. XaosBits (talk) 05:53, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified 3 external links on Dynamical system. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to trueorfailed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
