4
$\begingroup$

The G. Barton textbook “Elements of Green’s functions and Propagation,”, Oxford University Press, 1991 has a very nice introduction on the Dirac delta function. When the 3-D delta function is expressed in spherical coordinates, the author uses what it calls the “strong definition” of the radial delta function: $$\int_{0}^{\eta}\delta \left ( r \right )=1$$ which leads to $$\delta \left ( \mathbf{r} \right )=\frac{\delta \left ( r \right )}{4\pi r^{2}}$$ Other authors use the definition $$\int_{0}^{\eta}\delta \left ( r \right )=\frac{1}{2}$$ which leads to $$\delta \left ( \mathbf{r} \right )=\frac{\delta \left ( r \right )}{2\pi r^{2}}$$ as can be seen, for example, in the Mathematica web site. On the other hand, the Barton textbook shows that the derivative of the radial delta function is $$ {\delta}'\left ( r \right )=-\frac{\delta \left ( r \right )}{r}$$ My problem is that I find that this expression for the delta function derivative is incompatible with the strong definition of the radial delta function.
Here is my proof. I start from the standard Fourier representation of the 3D delta function: $$ \delta \left ( \mathbf{r} \right )=\frac{1}{\left ( 2\pi \right )^3}\int d\mathbf{k}\exp \left ( i\mathbf{k\cdot \mathbf{r}} \right )$$ Carrying out the integral in spherical coordinates and choosing the $\mathbf{r}$ vector along the $z$ axis, this becomes $$ \delta \left ( \mathbf{r} \right )=\frac{1}{\left ( 2\pi \right )^2}\int_{0}^{\infty }dkk^{2}\int_{0}^{\pi }d\theta \sin \theta \exp \left ( ikr\cos \theta \right )$$ which is trivially integrated to give $$\delta \left ( \mathbf{r} \right )=\frac{1}{\left ( 2\pi \right )^2ir}\int_{0}^{\infty }dkk\left [ \exp \left ( ikr \right ) -\exp \left ( -ikr \right ) \right ]$$ This can be re-written as $$ \delta \left ( \mathbf{r} \right )=\frac{1}{\left ( 2\pi \right )^2ir}\left [ \frac{1}{i}\frac{\partial }{\partial r}\int_{0}^{\infty }dk\exp \left ( ikr \right )-\left ( -\frac{1}{i}\frac{\partial }{\partial r} \right )\int_{0}^{\infty }dk\exp \left ( -ikr \right ) \right ]$$ which can be simplified to $$\delta \left ( \mathbf{r} \right )=-\frac{1}{\left ( 2\pi \right )^2r}\left [ \frac{\partial }{\partial r}\int_{-\infty }^{\infty } dk\exp \left ( ikr \right )\right ]$$ If I now invoke the Fourier representation of the delta function, I can write this as $$\delta \left ( \mathbf{r} \right )=-\frac{1}{\left ( 2\pi \right )^2r}\left [ \frac{\partial }{\partial r}\left ( 2\pi \delta \left ( r \right ) \right )\right ]$$ And using the above expression for the derivative of the radial delta function we finally get: $$ \delta \left ( \mathbf{r} \right )=\frac{1}{2\pi r^{2}}\delta \left ( r \right )$$ Therefore, unless I am making a mistake in my derivation which smart readers may discover, my result implies that the expression $ {\delta}'\left ( r \right )=-\frac{\delta \left ( r \right )}{r}$ is incompatible with the strong definition of the radial delta function $\delta \left ( \mathbf{r} \right )=\frac{\delta \left ( r \right )}{4\pi r^{2}}$.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

I don't agree with what you wrote, because you don't define any rigorous setting.

If you want a continuous functional $T$ such that for $\phi$ smooth on $\Bbb{R}^3$ $$\int_{-\infty}^\infty \int_0^{2\pi} \int_0^\pi T(r,\theta,\phi)\phi(r \sin\theta \cos \phi, r \sin\theta \sin \phi, r \cos \theta) r^2 \sin(\theta) dr d \theta d\phi = \phi(0,0,0)$$ Then you can take $T(r,\theta,\phi) =\delta(r) \frac{ 1}{\pi^2 r^2}$, and think to the division by $r^2$ as the linear map sending smooth functions $f : \Bbb{R} \times \Bbb{R/2\pi Z} \times \Bbb{R/2\pi Z}\to \Bbb{C}$, $f(0,\phi,\theta)=\partial_r f(0,\phi,\theta) = 0$ to smooth functions $\Bbb{R} \times \Bbb{R/2\pi Z} \times \Bbb{R/2\pi Z} \to \Bbb{C}$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I apologize for my lack of rigor. ( I am a physicist.) However, I believe that the issue here is more mundane, and it probably has to do with the integration-by-parts approach customarily used to derive expressions for the derivative of the delta "function". This becomes problematic for the radial component because you have to evaluate the delta function at $r=0$. $\endgroup$ – Jose Menendez Aug 4 at 17:02

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.