Understanding the Relationship Between Kronecker Delta and Dirac Delta

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter andrewm
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Definition Delta Sum
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
4 replies · 20K views
andrewm
Messages
49
Reaction score
0
Is it true that [tex]\sum_x e^{i(k-k')x} = \delta_{k-k'}[/tex], where [tex]\delta[/tex] is the Kronecker delta? I've come across a similar relation for the Dirac Delta (when the sum is an integral). I do not understand why [tex]k-k' \neq 0[/tex] implies the sum is zero.

Edit: In fact, I'm really confused, since it seems that when the [tex]x=0...\inf[/tex] and k=k' the sum is infinite. So is it a Dirac delta?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
In that sum, x should be an integer, so it is usually written as n.
The sum should be from n=-N to n=+N, and divided by 2N+1.
Then in the limit N-->infinity, it is the Kronecker delta.
 
There are really two different formulas here. For [itex]x[/itex] real (not necessarily an integer), we have

[tex] \sum_{k=-\infty}^{+\infty}e^{ikx}=2\pi\sum_{n=-\infty}^{+\infty}\delta(x-2\pi n)[/tex]

where [itex]\delta(x)[/itex] is the Dirac delta function.

For [itex]n[/itex] an integer,

[tex] \sum_{k=1}^{N}e^{2\pi ikn/N}=N\delta_{n0}[/tex]

where [itex]\delta_{nm}[/itex] is the Kronecker delta. To get an idea of why this sums to zero when [itex]n\ne 0[/itex], consider the case [itex]N=4[/itex]; then the four numbers being summed are [itex]i^n, (-1)^n, (-i)^n, 1^n[/itex].
 
Last edited:
Thank you both, I've written these handy formulas for my future reference.
 
[tex]N\delta_{n0}[/tex] should have been [tex]N\delta_{n\mathop{\rm mod}N,0}[/tex]
That is, [itex]N[/itex] if [itex]n=0,\pm N,\pm 2N, \ldots,[/itex] and zero otherwise.