A Can the Unwrapped Phase Function of a Fourier Transform be Derived?

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter Cyrus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function Phase
Cyrus
Messages
3,237
Reaction score
17
I am stuck trying to derive the unwrapped phase function of a Fourier Transform. Here is the gist of the derivation.

We can express the Fourier Transform in polar form: X(e ) = |X(e)| e

We can take the ln of both sides, resulting in:

ln X(ejω) = ln | X(ejω) | + j θ(ω)

Taking the derivative w.r.t. ω:

d ln X(ejω) / dω = d | X(ejω)| / dω + j dθ/dω

But, if we express X(ejω) = Xre(ejω) + j Xim(ejω) then we can also find the derivative to be:

d ln X(ejω) / dω = 1/ X(ejω) [ d X(ejω)/dω] = 1/ X(ejω) [dXre(ejω)/dω + jdXim(ejω)/dω]

Here is where I cannot get to: The author then states: " Therefore, the derivative of θ(ω) with respect to ω is given by the imaginary part of the right hand side of the second equation I wrote from the top. Somehow he is finding the equation below when equating/combining the two definitions of the derivatives of the ln X(ejw),"

dθ/dω = 1/ | X(ejω)|2 [ Xre(ejω) d Xim (ejω) / dω - Xim(ejω)dXre(ejω)/dω]
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I was able to solve the problem, feel free to delete.
 
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...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
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

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
421
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Back
Top