MHB Calculate the integral using the Fourier coefficients

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the integral of the square of a periodic signal using its Fourier coefficients. The user confirms the relationship between the integral of the squared signal and the sum of the squares of its Fourier coefficients, questioning their calculation due to an unexpected result. Another participant suggests a correction in the summation limits of the Fourier coefficients and reinforces that the integral of the squared signal can be equated to the integral of the squared magnitude of the signal. The conversation highlights the importance of correctly applying Fourier series properties in signal analysis. The final conclusion emphasizes the relationship between the Fourier coefficients and the integral of the signal's square.
mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! :o

A real periodic signal with period $T_0=2$ has the Fourier coefficients $$X_k=\left [2/3, \ 1/3e^{j\pi/4}, \ 1/3e^{-i\pi/3}, \ 1/4e^{j\pi/12}, \ e^{-j\pi/8}\right ]$$ for $k=0,1,2,3,4$.
I want to calculate $\int_0^{T_0}x^2(t)\, dt$.

I have done the following:

It holds that $$\frac{1}{T_0}\int_{T_0}|x(t)|^2\, dt=\sum_{k=-\infty}^{+\infty}|X_k|^2$$ right? (Wondering)

Then do we get $$\int_{T_0}|x(t)|^2\, dt=2\sum_{k=-\infty}^{+\infty}|X_k|^2=2\left [\left(\frac{2}{3}\right )^2+\left(\frac{1}{3}\right )^2+\left(\frac{1}{3}\right )^2+\left(\frac{1}{4}\right )^2+1\right ]$$ But the result that I get is not one of the choices. So have I done something wrong? (Wondering)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Hey mathmari!

Shouldn't it be:
$$\frac{1}{T_0}\int_{T_0}|x(t)|^2\, dt
=\sum_{k=-N}^{+N}|X_k|^2 \\
\int_{T_0}|x(t)|^2\, dt
=T_0\sum_{k=-N}^{+N}|X_k|^2
=2\left\{\left(\frac{2}{3}\right )^2 + 2\left [\left(\frac{1}{3}\right )^2+\left(\frac{1}{3}\right )^2+\left(\frac{1}{4}\right )^2+1\right ]\right\}$$
(Wondering)

Oh, and since it's given that $x(t)$ is a real signal, we can write $\int_{T_0}|x(t)|^2\, dt = \int_{T_0}x(t)^2\, dt$, can't we? (Wondering)
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

Back
Top