1
$\begingroup$

How do I find the inverse fourier transform of a function of the form $$\hat{f}(k)=\frac{e^{-ck}}{k},$$ with $c$ being some constant (can be complex)? The definition of the inverse fourier transform that I am using is $$f(x) = \frac{1}{2\pi} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{ikx}\hat{f}(k)\, dk$$ I have tried direct integration which has led nowhere, and I cannot come up with some function which gives this as its Fourier transform. Thanks :)

$\endgroup$
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ There are some integrability issues. Are you sure $\hat{f}$ is in the given form? My bet is on $$\widehat{f}(k) = \frac{e^{-c|k|}}{|k|},$$ instead. In such a case the inverse Fourier transform is related with $2\gamma+\log(1+s^2)$. $\endgroup$ – Jack D'Aurizio Dec 14 '16 at 22:40
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I am fairly sure$\hat{f}$ is of that form, since it comes from taking the Fourier transform of the 2D Laplace equation with respect to one of the spatial co-ordinates, which gives $f''-k^2f=g$ where $g$ is just the Fourier transform of the forcing term. I then used Green's functions to solve which gives exponentials (some imaginary, some not). Can you see any mistakes in that? $\endgroup$ – John Doe Dec 15 '16 at 12:38
  • $\begingroup$ Also I am not familiar with the Fourier transform you mentioned: $$2\gamma + \log(1+s^2)$$ so could you please elaborate on this? Or send some link where I can see it? $\endgroup$ – John Doe Dec 15 '16 at 12:39
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If $\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}e^{isk}\hat{f}(k)\,dk$ is not a converging integral, there has to be a mistake somewhere. $\endgroup$ – Jack D'Aurizio Dec 15 '16 at 12:59
  • $\begingroup$ Hmm, OK thanks I shall run through the question again, hopefully the mistake is amended. :) $\endgroup$ – John Doe Dec 15 '16 at 13:35
1
$\begingroup$

If $c$ is a pure imaginary number, then the transform can be computed in the sense of tempered distributions. Let $1/k$ be the distribution defined by $$\left( \frac 1 k, \phi \right) = \operatorname{v.\!p.} \int_{-\infty}^\infty \frac {\phi(k)} k dk,$$ then $$\mathcal {F} \!\left[ \frac 1 k \right] = \left( \frac 1 k, \frac 1 {2 \pi} e^{i x k} \right) = \frac i 2 \operatorname{sgn}x, \\ \mathcal {F} \!\left[ \frac {e^{-c k}} k \right] = \mathcal {F} \!\left[ \frac 1 k \right](x + i c) = \frac i 2 \operatorname{sgn} (x + i c).$$ If $c$ has a real component, the answer will depends on the chosen space of test functions. Gelfand and Shilov's book defines the Fourier transform for distributions acting on functions with finite support. Then $\mathcal {F}[e^k]$ is well-defined, but it is a distribution living in a different dual space (acting on entire functions with a certain condition on their rate of growth). For the Schwartz space of functions of rapid decay, $e^k$ is not a valid functional, because the integral of $e^k \phi(k)$ does not necessarily converge.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, this is an interesting answer. I haven't really studied anything about distributions in much detail, so I don't fully understand what is going on here. I will hopefully be reading about this area soon though, after which this answer may be more accessible for me. What I can say is, I am fairly certain I wouldn't have been required to know about these things when given the original problem, so I probably made a prior computational error (unfortunately I can't quite remember or find the work). I will accept this answer since it would be the answer that future readers would be looking for $\endgroup$ – John Doe Apr 7 '18 at 3:39
1
$\begingroup$

As in @JackD'Aurizio 's observations, there was probably a prior computational error: in solving $(\Delta-s^2) u=\delta$, taking Fourier transforms gives (up to constants) $(x^2+s^2)\widehat{u}=1$, and $\widehat{u}(x)=1/(x^2+s^2)$. The inverse Fourier transform can be evaluated by residues (unsurprisingly), and/but this technique gives slightly different results depending on whether $x$ is positive or negative...

For that matter, we should certainly expect that a Fourier transform of a tempered distribution is a tempered distribution, and something like $e^x$ is definitely not a tempered distribution, whatever virtues it may have. So any computation that produces this as an alleged FT of a tempered distribution is ... doubtful.

And, then, indeed, something like $e^{-|x|}$ (with constants) is surely the right thing...

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Unfortunately, I can't quite remember what the prior computations were. Looking at the question again now, I can see the issues with performing this integral too, so it is probably true that I was looking for a different Fourier transform. $\endgroup$ – John Doe Apr 7 '18 at 3:35

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.