0
$\begingroup$

The convolution operation is stated below

enter image description here

and is equivalent to

enter image description here

Now, lets say we have 2 functions namely x(t) and u1(t). If we convolve the x(t) with u1(t) where u1(t) is the unit doublet function, the behavior of the output becomes

x'(t) = x(t) ※ u1(t)

we can seee that everytime we convolve an input function (which is x(t)) with the unit doublet, the output is the derivative of the input function which is x'(t).

Now, according here

enter image description here

The question remains, why is that the integrals above are equated to -g'(t) and not g'(-t)

Reference: http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic133182.files/5-singular_func.pdf page 4, number 2

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

The integrals should be equal to $-g'(-t)$, which does not change the next results when setting $t=0$.

$$ \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}x(t-\tau)u_1(\tau)\mathrm{d}\tau=(x*u_1)(t)=x'(t)=-g'(-t) $$

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I have a question. Why did the negative sign pop out of g? $\endgroup$ – WantIt Jul 4 '13 at 12:14
  • $\begingroup$ @vvavepacket: this is the derivative of a composite function. Let $h:t\mapsto -t$, then we can write $x=g\circ h$, so $x'(t)=h'(t)(g'\circ h)(t)$. Since $h'(t)=-1$, we get the result above. $\endgroup$ – zuggg Jul 4 '13 at 12:24

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.