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

AI Thread 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##
 
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...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Back
Top