Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I'm trying to express the integral

$$I = \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} f(x_1, x_2) \; g(x_1, x_2) \; \mathrm{d}x_1 \mathrm{d}x_2$$

of two real valued functions $f(x_1,x_2)$ and $g(x_1,x_2)$ in terms of their Fourier transforms $\tilde{f}(\omega_1, \omega_2)$ and $\tilde{g}(\omega_1, \omega_2)$. However, as $f(x_1,x_2)$ and $g(x_1,x_2)$ are real-valued functions and $I$ is not defined as the the product of $f(x_1,x_2)$ and $g(x_1,x_2)^\ast$ I'm not working with the complex conjugate).

$$f(x_1,x_2) = \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \tilde{f}(\omega_1, \omega_2) \; e^{2 \pi i ( \;\omega_1 x_1 \;+ \;\omega_2 x_2 \;) } \; \mathrm{d}\omega_1 \mathrm{d}\omega_2$$


$$g(x_1,x_2) = \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \tilde{g}(\omega_1, \omega_2) \; e^{2 \pi i ( \;\omega_1 x_1 \;+ \;\omega_2 x_2 \;) } \; \mathrm{d}\omega_1 \mathrm{d}\omega_2$$

The integral becomes

$$I = \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \; \left[ \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \tilde{f}(\omega_1, \omega_2) \; e^{2 \pi i ( \;\omega_1 x_1 \;+ \;\omega_2 x_2 \;) } \; \mathrm{d}\omega_1 \mathrm{d}\omega_2 \right] \; \left[ \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \tilde{g}(\omega_1, \omega_2) \; e^{2 \pi i ( \;\omega_1 x_1 \;+ \;\omega_2 x_2 \;) } \; \mathrm{d}\omega_1 \mathrm{d}\omega_2 \right] \mathrm{d}x_1 \mathrm{d}x_2$$

This is where it starts to get confusing. I'm not sure if I should write:

$$I = \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \mathrm{d}\omega_1 \; \tilde{f}(\omega_1, \omega_2) \; \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \mathrm{d}\omega_2 \tilde{g}(\omega_1, \omega_2) \; \; \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \; e^{2 \pi i x_1 ( \; \omega_1 \;+ \;\omega_2 \;) } \; \mathrm{d}x_1 \; \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \; e^{2 \pi i x_2 ( \; \omega_1 \;+ \;\omega_2 \;) } \; \mathrm{d}x_2$$

and extract two one-dimensional dirac deltas, or write:

$$I = \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \mathrm{d}\omega_1 \; \tilde{f}(\omega_1, \omega_2) \; \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} d\omega_2 \tilde{g}(\omega_1, \omega_2) \; \;\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} e^{2 \pi i x_1 ( \; \omega_1 \;+ \;\omega_2 \;) + x_2 ( \; \omega_1 \;+ \;\omega_2 \;) } \; \mathrm{d}x_1 \; \mathrm{d}x_2$$

with the hope of extracting the two-dimensional dirac delta. (I'm not even sure what the inverse Fourier transform of the two dimensional dirac delta is).

I'd appreciate advise on how to proceed. (Thanks.)

share|cite|improve this question
This is Plancherel's theorem (not Parseval's). The one-dimensional proof carries over essentially verbatim to $n$ dimensions. See for an account by Oliver Diaz that eschews hand-waving such as the use of the "Dirac function". – Robin Chapman Sep 8 '10 at 12:17
There is no such thing as the "Dirac function" — the Dirac delta is a distribution (i.e. generalized function, not probability distribution). – You Sep 9 '10 at 20:30
Thanks Robin. I finally understand the proof. I would have given you credit for the answer if you'd posted a full reply instead of a comment. – Olumide Sep 12 '10 at 7:18

I don't see what you're doing. Are you trying to show that:

$$\int_{\mathbb R^2} f(x) g(x) \, dx = \int_{\mathbb R^2} \widehat{f(\xi)} \overline{\widehat{g(\xi)}} \, d\xi$$? This is usually called Parseval's identity.

You can prove it as follows (even in $\mathbb R^n$), first prove by Fubini (very simple) that:

$$\int_{\mathbb R^2} f(x) \widehat{g(x)} \, dx = \int_{\mathbb R^2} \widehat{g(x)} f(x) \, dx$$

Then let $g = \overline{\hat{h}}$ and note then that $\hat{g} = \overline{h}$ (by Fourier inversion), then we get

$$\int_{\mathbb R^2} f(x) h(x) \, dx = \int_{\mathbb R^2} \widehat{g(x)} \overline{\widehat{h(x)}} \, dx$$ (assuming $h$ is real, otherwise we get the conjugate).

share|cite|improve this answer
Yes I'm trying to prove that $\int_{\mathbb R^2} f(x) g(x) \, dx = \int_{\mathbb R^2} \hat{f(\xi)} \overline{\hat{g(\xi)}} \, d\xi$ . I understand that the hat means a Fourier transform. Why is the hat in the first equation small? Is this a typo? – Olumide Sep 9 '10 at 1:26
BTW, the integral on the LHS of the first equation should be something like $\int_{\mathbb R^2} f(x_1,x_2) g(x_1,x_2) \, dx_1 dx_2$ – Olumide Sep 9 '10 at 13:06
Yes, that is a typo hat instead of widehat, it is the same, $x = (x_1, x_2)$, it is just a shorthand. – Jonas Teuwen Sep 9 '10 at 15:45

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.