0
$\begingroup$

I am having trouble understanding this:

I have a function

$$ \delta (t_1-t_2) $$

but I want to prove that in the frequency domain, it is:

$$\delta(\omega_1+\omega_2) $$

So, we have:

$$F(t0,w_{1})=\int _{-\infty }^{\infty }\!\delta \left( {\it t_1}-{\it t_0} \right) { {\rm e}^{-iw_{{1}}t_{{1}}}}{dt_{{1}}}$$

$$ F(w_1,w_2)=\int _{-\infty }^{\infty }\!{{\rm e}^{-i \left( w_{{2}}+w_{{1}} \right) t_{{0}}}}{dt_{{0}}}$$

$$F(w_1,w_2)=2\pi \delta \left( w_{{2}}+w_{{1}} \right)$$

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ But the thing is it's not, is it? $\endgroup$ – Daniel R Dec 5 '14 at 18:22
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, I need to prove this. There are two indep. times and frequencies $\endgroup$ – Jackson Hart Dec 5 '14 at 18:24
  • $\begingroup$ @copper.hat can someone show me why it is not true? $\endgroup$ – Jackson Hart Dec 5 '14 at 18:26
  • $\begingroup$ What are $t_1,t_2$? $\endgroup$ – copper.hat Dec 5 '14 at 18:28
  • $\begingroup$ I don't know what you are trying to do. What function are you trying to take the Fourier transform of? I don't have time for chat now, it always ends up taking 10-15 mins. $\endgroup$ – copper.hat Dec 5 '14 at 18:32
1
$\begingroup$

This is not a formal answer, just a hint of how to proceed.

The two Fourier transform of $f:\mathbb{R}^2 \to \mathbb{R}$ is given by $\hat{f}(\omega_1,\omega_2) = \int_{\mathbb{R}^2} f(t_1,t_2) e^{-i(\omega_1 t_1 + \omega_2 t_2)} d t_1 d t_2$.

With the distribution given by $f(t_1,t_2) = \delta(t_1-t_2)$, we have $f:\mathbb{R}^2 \to \mathbb{R}$ is given by \begin{eqnarray} \hat{f}(\omega_1,\omega_2) &=& \int_{\mathbb{R}} \left( \int_{\mathbb{R}} f(t_1,t_2) e^{-i(\omega_1 t_1 + \omega_2 t_2)} d t_1 \right) d t_2 \\ &=& \int_{\mathbb{R}} \left( \int_{\mathbb{R}} \delta(t_1-t_2) e^{-i(\omega_1 t_1 + \omega_2 t_2)} d t_1 \right) d t_2 \\ &=& \int_{\mathbb{R}} e^{-i(\omega_1 t_2 + \omega_2 t_2)} d t_2 \\ &=& \int_{\mathbb{R}} e^{-i((\omega_1 + \omega_2) t)} d t \\ &=& 2 \pi \delta(\omega_1 + \omega_2) \end{eqnarray} The last equation follows from the fact the transform of the distribution $t \mapsto \delta(t)$ is $\omega \to 1$. Taking the inverse transform gives the desired result.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Was there something wrong with the edited question? $\endgroup$ – Jackson Hart Dec 8 '14 at 20:06
  • $\begingroup$ You are using the same $F$ for a function, the partially transformed function and the transformed function, so it makes it hard to guess what you want. $\endgroup$ – copper.hat Dec 8 '14 at 20:11
  • $\begingroup$ haha yeah, it is somewhat confusing. it seems like you wrote out the answer, even though you said it was just a hint? $\endgroup$ – Jackson Hart Dec 8 '14 at 20:14
  • $\begingroup$ Well, since we are dealing with distributions, there is a little more technical machinery to deal with which I have selfishly avoided by declaring 'informal' :-). $\endgroup$ – copper.hat Dec 8 '14 at 20:16
  • $\begingroup$ Well I am not fully sure of what this technical machinery is, but I was thinking the answer in the Question in satisfactory, as long as I declare the different F's like you were saying $\endgroup$ – Jackson Hart Dec 8 '14 at 20:19

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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