Purpose of Norton’s theorem: Like Thevenin’s theorem, Norton’s theorem reduces a complex linear network to a simpler, equivalent form that is easier to analyze at a pair of terminals. True or false?

Introduction / Context:
Norton’s theorem is the current-source dual of Thevenin’s theorem. Both are powerful reduction techniques that replace a complicated network with an equivalent seen at two terminals, streamlining analysis and design such as matching and load sensitivity checks.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Linear circuit behavior is assumed at the operating point/frequency.
• Any combination of R, L, C, and controlled sources is allowed if treated correctly.
• We are interested in terminal behavior as “seen” by a load.

Concept / Approach:

Norton’s equivalent consists of a current source In in parallel with an equivalent impedance Zn. Thevenin’s consists of a voltage source Vth in series with Zth. They are related by source transformation: Vth = In * Zth and Zth = Zn. Either form leads to the same load voltage and current for any load, so both simplify the original network to a compact, manageable model.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:

Attach a test load RL and compute V and I using both models; results will match, confirming that both theorems serve the same simplification purpose with dual source representations.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• “False” would deny Norton’s role as a general reduction method equivalent in power to Thevenin’s theorem.

Common Pitfalls:

Forgetting that dependent sources must remain active when finding Zn; use a test source if necessary. Also, ensure the selected model (Norton or Thevenin) matches the analysis convenience (e.g., current-driven loads favor Norton).

Final Answer:

True