I am usually more comfortable working with sines and cosines. However, its often cleaner and more efficient to work with exponentials.

Is there a reason other then preference, to use one over the other?

EDIT: Thinking more on this, Exp Fourier series allows the spectra to be expanded into negative frequency. But in the end, isnt this the same information?

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ You seem to already have given two great reasons: it's often cleaner and more efficient to work with exponentials. What else do you want to hear? $\endgroup$ – Qiaochu Yuan Sep 21 '12 at 2:45
  • $\begingroup$ I wanted to know if there was a mathematical reason to use one form over the other. Something beyond personal preference. $\endgroup$ – Michael Sep 21 '12 at 5:05
  • $\begingroup$ Cleanliness and efficiency aren't mathematical reasons? $\endgroup$ – Qiaochu Yuan Sep 21 '12 at 5:21
  • $\begingroup$ No, cleanliness and efficiency (in this context with no measurable baseline) are subjective in my opinion. One may find something efficient, while another may find it cumbersome. $\endgroup$ – Michael Sep 24 '12 at 23:07

Speaking as an EE, imaginary exponentials are generally easier to manipulate then their trigonometric counterparts since they essentially let you get a polynomial out of your sin/cos function.

For example if I gave you $$ \cos \Bigg(n_1\omega t+\theta_1\Bigg)\cos\Bigg(n_2\omega t+\theta_2\Bigg) $$

You can imagine trying to do any kind of algebra with that. Using exponentials we can write it in a simpler form.

$$ \Bigg[\mathrm e^{\theta_1}\mathrm e^{jn_1\omega t}+\mathrm e^{\theta_1}\mathrm e^{-jn_1\omega t} \Bigg] \Bigg[\mathrm e^{\theta_2}\mathrm e^{jn_2\omega t}+\mathrm e^{\theta_2}\mathrm e^{-jn_2\omega t} \Bigg] $$

Do some math and you get him down to $$ \Bigg[\mathrm e^{\theta_1\theta_2}\mathrm e^{j\omega t(n_1+n_2)}+\mathrm e^{\theta_1\theta_2}\mathrm e^{-j\omega t(n_1+n_2)} \Bigg]+\Bigg[\mathrm e^{\theta_1\theta_2}\mathrm e^{j\omega t(n_2-n_1)}+\mathrm e^{\theta_1\theta_2}\mathrm e^{-j\omega t(n_2-n_1)} \Bigg] $$

And simplify to $$ \cos \Bigg[(n_1+n_2)\omega t + \theta_1\theta_2) \Bigg]+\cos \Bigg[(n_2-n_1)\omega t + \theta_1\theta_2) \Bigg] $$

That looks much nicer doesn't it?


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.