1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

1 = 0 <- What goes fundamentally wrong? Delta distribution

  1. Jun 22, 2012 #1
    1 = 0 <-- What goes fundamentally wrong? Delta distribution

    [itex]2 \pi a = \iint \delta(a^2 - (x^2+y^2)) \mathrm d x \mathrm d y [/itex]

    Differentiating both sides w.r.t. "a" (using chain rule on the RHS) gives

    [itex]\frac{\pi}{a} = \iint \delta'(a^2 - (x^2+y^2)) \mathrm d x \mathrm d y[/itex]

    Changing variables (and noting that integrand is independent of theta)

    [itex]\frac{\pi}{a} =2 \pi \int \delta'(a^2 - r^2) \cdot r \cdot \mathrm d r [/itex]

    Eliminate the pi on both sides, but more importantly we can rewrite the RHS as (using chain rule!)

    [itex]\frac{1}{a} = - \int \frac{\partial}{\partial r} \delta(a^2 - r^2) \mathrm d r[/itex]

    However the RHS is obviously zero, explicitly: [itex]0= \delta(a^2-r^2) \big|_{r=0}^{r=+\infty}[/itex].

    DISCLAIMER: I know I use the delta as a physicist would, but please be flexible... I would really appreciate knowing where it essentially goes wrong.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 22, 2012 #2
    Re: 1 = 0 <-- What goes fundamentally wrong? Delta distribution

    Hmmm ... have you forgotten about the constant of integration at all? I don't know which region you're integrating over in the first equation, so I can't verify it.
     
  4. Jun 22, 2012 #3
    Re: 1 = 0 <-- What goes fundamentally wrong? Delta distribution

    I think the very first equation is wrong. The delta function has units of 1/(units of argument). So delta(a^2 - x^2 - y^2) has units of [length]^-2. Thus the RHS of the first equation is unitless, whereas the LHS has units of length, so the equation can't be correct. I haven't worked it out, but I think if you are more careful you can evaluate the RHS of the first equation and it will be some pure number like 2*pi. Then of course differentiating that wrt a gives zero, as you found.
     
  5. Jun 22, 2012 #4
    Re: 1 = 0 <-- What goes fundamentally wrong? Delta distribution

    [itex]\iint \delta(a^2-(x^2+y^2) ) \mathrm d x \mathrm d y = \iint \delta(a^2 - r^2) \cdot r \cdot \mathrm d r \mathrm d \theta = \pi \int \delta(r^2 - a^2) \mathrm d (r^2) = \pi[/itex]

    Err, you seem to be right... I'm totally flabbergasted. Integrating the delta-function on a circle over the plane does not give its circumference? How is that possible...
     
  6. Jun 22, 2012 #5
    Re: 1 = 0 <-- What goes fundamentally wrong? Delta distribution

    I think if you integrated the delta function delta(a - sqrt(x^2 + y^2)) you would indeed get the circumference. You have to recall that if f(x_0) = 0, the integral of delta(f(x)) scales inversely with f'(x_0). For example the integral of

    delta(r - sqrt(x^2 + y^2))

    is not the same as the integral of

    delta(100*[r - sqrt(x^2 + y^2)])

    even though both arguments have zeros on the same circle in the plane.
     
  7. Jun 22, 2012 #6
    Re: 1 = 0 <-- What goes fundamentally wrong? Delta distribution

    Of course, thank you :)
     
  8. Jun 22, 2012 #7
    Re: 1 = 0 <-- What goes fundamentally wrong? Delta distribution

    But... say we reinterpret the correct equation [itex]\pi = \int \delta(x^2+p^2-E) \mathrm d x \mathrm d p[/itex]. The RHS is by definition the (exponential of the) phase volume for a one-dimensional harmonic oscillator (2-dimensional phase space) with energy E.

    So its entropy is independent of its energy? I.e. its temperature is infinite? Am I again overlooking something?
     
  9. Jun 22, 2012 #8

    micromass

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor
    2016 Award

    Re: 1 = 0 <-- What goes fundamentally wrong? Delta distribution

    I'm not an expert on distributions. But one of my favorite books "Functional Analysis" by Lax says that [itex]\delta(x^2)[/itex] doesn't even have a sensible definition. Maybe that is what goes wrong?
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: 1 = 0 <- What goes fundamentally wrong? Delta distribution
  1. Why 0^0 = 1 (Replies: 15)

  2. 0! = 1 (Replies: 24)

  3. 0/0 = 1? (Replies: 14)

  4. Does 0^0 = 1 (Replies: 106)

Loading...