alt.engineering.electrical

"Salmon Egg" wrote in message
news: %salmonegg@ ...
> On 8/22/07 10:07 AM, in article fahqgi$sp3$1@ , "Anonymous."
> wrote:
>> In message which was
>> published
>> in these
>> newsgroups on 13 Dec 2003, the following is asserted.....
>> "The term e^(-jwt) isn't some magical time machine relating to
>> "minus
>> time", e^(-jwt) is simply another way of writing 1/(e^jwt)
>> which
>> is a value that decreases as t increasing. "
>> Surely this is quite wrong?
>> Surely e^(-jwt) is a cyclic phenomenon, the value, or modulus, of
>> which remains absolutely constant and of the value unity?
> Please do not take this the wrong way. You need a bit more experience and
> understanding in order to interpret this notation well.

Thank-you for your extended reply. Unfortunately you have
missed the boat. The point of my posts was to draw attention
to the heinous error, "is a value that decreases as t increasing"
which was published by a teacher of mathematics in Britland.