Differences Between Real and Complex Spherical Harmonics in Signal Rotation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the differences between real and complex spherical harmonics (SH), particularly focusing on their expansions, orthogonality relations, and applications in signal rotation. Participants seek clarification on mathematical properties and practical transformations between the two forms of spherical harmonics.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants describe complex spherical harmonics as products of associated Legendre polynomials and complex exponentials, while real spherical harmonics are defined as their real or imaginary parts.
  • There is mention of different orthogonality properties between real and complex spherical harmonics, with some participants noting that the orthonormality relationships may differ by a scale factor.
  • One participant expresses difficulty finding orthogonality relations for real spherical harmonics in standard texts and shares a link to a thesis for reference.
  • Another participant confirms the correctness of the provided PDF file and states that the normalization of real functions differs by a factor of \(\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\).
  • A participant raises a question about transforming a matrix from complex to real spherical harmonics, seeking confirmation on the method of using a transformation matrix.
  • Another participant inquires about the process of expanding signals using real spherical harmonics compared to complex spherical harmonics, indicating uncertainty about the coefficients involved.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the orthogonality relations and normalization factors of real versus complex spherical harmonics. There is no consensus on the best resources for these properties, and the transformation method for matrices remains a point of uncertainty.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include potential missing assumptions regarding the definitions of spherical harmonics and the specific contexts in which the orthogonality relations apply. The discussion also reflects varying levels of familiarity with the mathematical properties and applications of spherical harmonics.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in mathematical physics, signal processing, or those studying spherical harmonics in the context of engineering or applied mathematics may find this discussion relevant.

Cunicultor
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Viva!


I wonder if anyone could explain me the difference between real spherical harmonics (SH) and complex SH.

What's the difference in doing an expansion in either situations?
And what are the orthogonality relations for each case?


Any help would be great...( websites, books..)

Cheers:smile:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The complex spherical harmonics are simply the product of the associated Legendre polynomials and a complex exponential, i.e.

[tex]Y_l^m(\theta ,\phi) = P_l^m(\theta)e^((im\phi))[/tex].

Look in any math methods text, they should be listed with all of their properties. The real shpeherical harmonics are defined as the real or imaginary parts of these. They have slightly different orthogonality properties.

Hope that this helps some

dt
 
Cheers!

But what I was really looking for were those orthogonality relations for the Real SH.

I've been looking in "Arfken" and also in "www.wolfram.com", but I didn't get much.

...
 
Look in Morse and Feshbach, they have them. The orthonormality relationships are the same, maybe a factor of two different, I can't remember, I used them in my dissertation a few years ago and have not used them since. It is simple to derive anyhow, just the product of the Associated Legendre polynomials and trigonometric functions, should only take a few minutes to do.

dt
 
I've got the Morse and Feshbach book just here. There's nothing there that can help. Anyway, I've just derived myself the orthogonality relations; it's true, they are diferent by a scale factor from those for the complex SH. I just wanted to know if it is correct.


Please take a look at this, and see the way he defines the real SH.


http://jilawww.colorado.edu/www/sro/thesis/redfield/appA.pdf

What do you think?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That .pdf file is correct. In general, the normalization is different by a factor of [tex]\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}[/tex]. The real functions are also normalized to 1 anc can be seen from the definition in the .pdf file.

Glad I could help you out.

dt
 
Hello everybody,

I bring this old topic to life, because I would like to convert a matrix expressed in complex spherical harmonics (Y_{lm}) into a matrix expressed in real spherical harmonics (S_{lm}). I have found here http://www1.elsevier.com/homepage/saa/eccc3/paper48/eccc3.html"
the transformation matrix C^{l} between Y_{lm} and S_{lm} for a given l.
Is it just a similarity transformation that I have to do in order to get the new matrix? I mean:
[tex]M_{real}=C^{-1}M_{complex}C[/tex]
[tex]M_{complex}=C^{-1}M_{real}C[/tex]

I want to be sure that I do this transformation in the correct way, because the results are not the ones that I am expecting :)

Thank you!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi everyone,

I need help with SH. My intention is to rotate my signal by using spherical harmonics. I have already everything made. But I am using Real Spherical Harmonics, and I am not pretty sure if for doing the expansion (also the coefficients of the transformation) I have to do this exactly like with Comlpex SH or there is another way.

With Complex SH it was Flm=int(Signal(theta,phi)*Ylm(theta,phi))

Thankss
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
7K