I have noticed that the Fourier integral $\int_{-\infty}^\infty \mathscr{F}f(\omega) e^{i\omega t} d\omega $ of $f(t) = \mu(t) e^{-t}$, where $\mathscr{F}f(\omega) = \frac{1}{2\pi} \int_{-\infty}^\infty f(t) e^{-i\omega t} dt$ and $\mu(t)$ is the step function diverges at $t = 0$. Is there a beautiful notation using the Riemann-integral that fixes the problem? Here I mean the improper Riemann-integral of the first kind. I have considered the operator pair \begin{eqnarray} \mathscr{F}f(\omega) & = & \frac{1}{2\pi} \int_0^\infty (f(t) e^{-i\omega t} + f(-t) e^{i\omega t}) dt \\ \mathscr{F}'F(t) & = & \int_0^\infty (F(\omega) e^{i\omega t} + F(-\omega) e^{-i\omega t}) d\omega \ , \end{eqnarray} that is defined for functions $f$ that satisfy i) $\mathscr{F}f$ exists everywhere, ii) $\mathscr{F}' \mathscr{F}f$ exists everywhere, iii) $\mathscr{F}' \mathscr{F} f = f$. The Cauchy principal value would be ideal, but I don't quite like the notation P.V. in front of the integral and it might allow functions to satisfy all conditions without being locally bounded. The limit form $\lim_{M \rightarrow \infty} \int_{-M}^M f(x) dx$ isn't good either because it isn't notationally optimal for applications. I mean that for example the formula $De^x = e^x$ is simple but $D \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} \big(1+\frac{x}{n}\big)^n = \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} \big(1+\frac{x}{n}\big)^n$ is a little more complicated. I would want to find good expressions for Fourier and inverse Fourier transform that exist everywhere for some important functions familiar from signal processing including $\chi_{[-1,1]}(x)$ and $\textrm{sinc}(x)$.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Sorry, what is the question? $\endgroup$ – lcv Jun 7 '13 at 7:31
  • $\begingroup$ Is there a beautiful notation using the Riemann-integral that fixes the problem? $\endgroup$ – Juha-Matti Vihtanen Jun 7 '13 at 17:48
  • $\begingroup$ I guess I did not understand what the problem is. $\endgroup$ – lcv Jun 8 '13 at 19:49
  • $\begingroup$ The problem is that the imaginary part $\frac{1}{2\pi} \frac{-\omega}{1+\omega^2}$ of $\mathscr{F}f$, where $f(t)=\mu(t)e^{-t}$ causes the Fourier integral to diverge at $0$ with the conventional definitions of transform and inverse transform. $\endgroup$ – Juha-Matti Vihtanen Jun 20 '13 at 20:09

I think you end up defining $f(t)=1/2$ for $t=0$. I will explain why below.

$$\hat{f}(\omega) = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dt \, f(t) \, e^{i \omega t} = \frac{1}{1-i \omega}$$

To recover $f(t)$, use the inverse transform:

$$\frac{1}{2 \pi} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} d\omega \, \frac{e^{-i \omega t}}{1-i \omega}$$

Consider the following integral in the complex plane:

$$\oint_C dz \, \frac{e^{-i z t}}{1-i z}$$

When $t>0$, $C$ is a positively oriented semicircular contour in the lower half plane of radius $R$. The integral about the circular arc vanishes as $R \to \infty$. The integral over $C$ is $i 2 \pi$ times the residue at the pole at $z=-i$:

$$-\frac{1}{2 \pi} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} d\omega \, \frac{e^{-i \omega t}}{1-i \omega} = \frac{i 2 \pi}{2 \pi i} e^{-i (-i) t} = e^{-t}$$

When $t<0$, $C$ is a semicircular contour in the upper half plane. Since there are no poles there, the integral there is zero.

When $t=0$, neither contour leads to convergence. In this case, we impose a sort of "analytic" continuation at $t=0$, even though we make no pretense at continuity at $t=0$. Rather, we impose the condition that

$$f(0) = \frac12 [f(0^-) + f(0^+)]$$

where $f(0^-)=0$ and $f(0^+)=1$. This then allows us to write $f(t)=\mu(t) e^{-t}$.

  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for your answer. Yes, I have noticed also that the inverse transform should converge to $1/2$ at $0$. There is however a problem with the definition of integral because the integral of the imaginary part $\frac{\omega}{1+\omega^2}$ diverges. Now even the Lebesgue integral doesn't help. So I thougth to define the transform with a special expression. $\endgroup$ – Juha-Matti Vihtanen Jun 7 '13 at 18:08
  • $\begingroup$ So I thought to define the transform-inverse transform pair with special expressions. Note that by linearity we may analyze the imaginary part alone. Define now $f(\omega) = \frac{\omega}{1+\omega^2}$. Then $\mathscr{F}'f(0) = \int_0^\infty 0 d\omega = 0$. $\endgroup$ – Juha-Matti Vihtanen Jun 7 '13 at 18:19
  • $\begingroup$ For the real part $f(\omega) = \frac{1}{2\pi} \frac{1}{1+\omega^2}$ $\mathscr{F}'f(0) = \int_0^\infty \frac{1}{2\pi} \frac{2}{1+\omega^2} d\omega = \frac{1}{2}$. Yet corrections to the previous comments. The imaginary part equals to $\frac{1}{2\pi} \frac{\omega}{1+\omega^2}$. That's because of the definition of Fourier transform in our Complex analysis book "Complex Analysis for Mathematics and Engineering". $\endgroup$ – Juha-Matti Vihtanen Jun 7 '13 at 18:35
  • $\begingroup$ @Juha-MattiVihtanen: when confronted with a situation like this, a divergence at one point, I like to impose "continuity" in a Fourier sense. Think of it as some sort of analytic continuation. $\endgroup$ – Ron Gordon Jun 7 '13 at 18:45
  • $\begingroup$ It seems to me that we miss a minus sign. The transform $\mathscr{F}f(\omega) = \frac{1}{2\pi} \frac{1}{i+\omega}$ and its imaginary part is $\frac{1}{2\pi} \frac{-\omega}{1+\omega^2}$ using the definitions above that are equivalent to the definitions in my Comlpex nalysis book.. $\endgroup$ – Juha-Matti Vihtanen Jun 7 '13 at 18:54

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.