I Can a Gaussian distribution be represented as a sum of Dirac Deltas?

Click For Summary
A Dirac Delta function can be approximated as a limiting case of a Gaussian distribution as the width approaches zero. Conversely, it is proposed that a Gaussian spectrum can be represented as a weighted sum of Dirac Deltas, where the weights determine the distribution. While any function can be expressed as an integral of Dirac delta functions, a discrete sum representation is not feasible for most functions. However, an approximation using small increments can be made, allowing for a representation that works in an integration sense. This discussion highlights the relationship between Gaussian distributions and Dirac delta functions in mathematical modeling.
tworitdash
Messages
104
Reaction score
25
We know that Dirac Delta is not a function. However, I just talk about the numerical version of it that we use every day. We can simply represent the Dirac delta function as a limiting case of Gaussian distribution when the width of the distribution ##\sigma->0##.

$$
\delta(x - \mu) = lim_{\sigma -> 0} \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi \sigma^2}} e^{\frac{-(x - \mu)^2}{2\sigma^2}}
$$

Is it possible to also say the reverse with a weighted sum of Dirac Deltas to construct a Gaussian spectrum?

$$
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi \sigma^2}} e^{\frac{-(x - mu)^2}{2\sigma^2}} = \sum_{i} w_i \delta(x - i)
$$

Where, somehow the weights ##w_i## constitute how it is distributed (##\sigma##). If yes, how do we decide these weights?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Any function can be represented as a sum of Dirac delta functions:

Let ##f(x)## be an arbitrary function of ##x##. Then you can represent it as:

##\int f(y) \delta(x-y) dy##

So that's a weighted sum (well, integral) of delta functions.
 
stevendaryl said:
Any function can be represented as a sum of Dirac delta functions:

Let ##f(x)## be an arbitrary function of ##x##. Then you can represent it as:

##\int f(y) \delta(x-y) dy##

So that's a weighted sum (well, integral) of delta functions.

If you really want a discrete sum, instead of an integral, then it can't be done for most functions. But I guess for some purposes, you can approximate a function by delta functions: Pick a small positive x increment ##\Delta x## and define ##\tilde{f}(x, \Delta x)## by:

##\tilde{f}(x, \Delta x) = \sum_j f(j \Delta x) \delta(x- j\Delta x) \Delta x##

where ##\Delta x## is some small real number. This approximation works in an integration sense: For any other smooth function ##g(x)##, we have:

##lim_{\Delta x \Rightarrow 0} \int \tilde{f}(x, \Delta x) g(x) dx = \int f(x) g(x) dx##
 
I have been insisting to my statistics students that for probabilities, the rule is the number of significant figures is the number of digits past the leading zeros or leading nines. For example to give 4 significant figures for a probability: 0.000001234 and 0.99999991234 are the correct number of decimal places. That way the complementary probability can also be given to the same significant figures ( 0.999998766 and 0.00000008766 respectively). More generally if you have a value that...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
27K