From 625eb78bea673859e6f889f9684b449a47bba413 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Guido Wolf Reichert Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2020 12:31:13 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Update population.rst I do not think, that the sentence "knowing x or y does not give you any clue about x' or y' " makes sense, as knowing x or y at `time = t_0` is exactly what we are looking for. I think this has to be simply switched to make sense. --- text/source/behavior/equations/population.rst | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/text/source/behavior/equations/population.rst b/text/source/behavior/equations/population.rst index 7899c367..f05c57d2 100644 --- a/text/source/behavior/equations/population.rst +++ b/text/source/behavior/equations/population.rst @@ -278,8 +278,8 @@ equations: for the initial conditions) this relationship doesn't hold. So there is no "coupling" between :math:`x` and :math:`\dot{x}` in that case (nor for :math:`y`: and :math:`\dot{y}`). In other words, knowing -:math:`x` or :math:`y` doesn't give you any clue as to how to compute -:math:`\dot{x}` or :math:`\dot{y}`. The net result is that for the +:math:`\dot{x}` or :math:`\dot{y}` doesn't give you any clue as to how to compute +:math:`x` or :math:`y`. The net result is that for the initialization problem we can think of :math:`x`, :math:`y`, :math:`\dot{x}` and :math:`\dot{y}` as four independent variables.