Does Each Component of a Vector Have an Independent Fourier Transform?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the properties of the Fourier transform applied to vector-valued functions, specifically whether each component of a vector can be treated independently in the context of Fourier transforms. The scope includes mathematical reasoning and technical explanations related to Fourier analysis.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that the Fourier transform of a vector function can be expressed as separate transforms for each component, suggesting that ##\mathcal{F}(f(x_1)) = \hat{f}(k_1)##, ##\mathcal{F}(f(x_2)) = \hat{f}(k_2)##, and ##\mathcal{F}(f(x_3)) = \hat{f}(k_3)##.
  • Another participant questions the clarity of the notation and argues that if ##f## maps vectors to scalars, then the resulting Fourier transform ##\hat{f}## should remain scalar-valued, challenging the idea of independent component transforms.
  • A subsequent reply corrects the earlier notation, asserting that the Fourier transform maps vectors to vectors, and emphasizes that the inverse transform must also yield a vector to avoid loss of information.
  • Further clarification is provided regarding the mathematical formulation of the Fourier transform, detailing the integrals involved in transforming between vector and Fourier conjugate spaces.
  • One participant acknowledges a misunderstanding and admits to a mistake in their earlier reasoning.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether the components of a vector can be treated independently in the context of Fourier transforms. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing perspectives on the nature of the Fourier transform for vector functions.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations regarding the assumptions made about the mapping of vectors to scalars and the implications for the Fourier transform. The discussion also highlights dependencies on definitions of vector and scalar functions in the context of Fourier analysis.

redtree
Messages
335
Reaction score
15
TL;DR
Is the Fourier transform of a function whose argument is a vector equivalent to performing a Fourier transform on the function of each vector component separately?
Given ##f(\vec{x})##, where the Fourier transform ##\mathcal{F}(f(\vec{x}))= \hat{f}(\vec{k})##.
Given ##\vec{x}=[x_1,x_2,x_3]## and ##\vec{k}=[k_1,k_2,k_3]##, is the following true?

\begin{equation}

\begin{split}

\mathcal{F}(f(x_1))&= \hat{f}(k_1)

\\

\mathcal{F}(f(x_2))&= \hat{f}(k_2)

\\

\mathcal{F}(f(x_3))&= \hat{f}(k_3)

\end{split}

\end{equation}

such that

\begin{equation}

\begin{split}

f(\vec{k})&= [\hat{f}(k_1), \hat{f}(k_1), \hat{f}(k_1)]

\end{split}

\end{equation}
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your notation is not entirely clear to me. (Also, I think there are typos in (2)?)

In any case, I don't think what you want will work. Let's say that ##f## maps vectors to scalars. Then the Fourier transform ##\hat{f}## is still scalar-valued, but your vector of partial Fourier transforms is vector-valued.
 
You are correct; the equation should be the following:

\begin{equation}

\begin{split}

\hat{f}(\vec{k})&= [\hat{f}(k_1), \hat{f}(k_2), \hat{f}(k_3)]

\end{split}

\end{equation}

The Fourier transform maps vectors to vectors; otherwise one could not transform back from the Fourier conjugate space to the original vector space with the inverse Fourier transform. Information would have been lost in the mapping of a vector to a scalar.

That the Fourier conjugate of a vector is also a vector is seen in the variance relationship between Fourier conjugates, such as for example between position ##\vec{x}## and momentum ##\hbar \vec{k}##, where both are 3-vectors.
 
In your example ##f## is a scalar-valued function of 3 variables. It's Fourier transform is therefore a scalar-valued function of 3 variables. The forward and inverse transforms are then
##
\begin{eqnarray*}
\hat{f}(\vec{k}) & = & \int_{-\infty}^\infty f(\vec{x})\, e^{-i \vec{k}\cdot\vec{x}} \, d^3x\\
& = & \int_{-\infty}^\infty \int_{-\infty}^\infty \int_{-\infty}^\infty f(x_1,x_2,x_3)\, e^{-i (k_1 x_1 + k_2 x_2 + k_3 x_3)} \, dx_1 dx_2 dx_3 \\
f(\vec{x}) & = & \frac{1}{(2\pi)^3} \int_{-\infty}^\infty \hat{f}(\vec{k})\, e^{i \vec{k}\cdot\vec{x}} \, d^3k \\
& = & \frac{1}{(2\pi)^3} \int_{-\infty}^\infty \int_{-\infty}^\infty \int_{-\infty}^\infty \hat{f}(k_1,k_2,k_3)\, e^{i (k_1 x_1 + k_2 x_2 + k_3 x_3)} \, dk_1 dk_2 dk_3
\end{eqnarray*}
##

jason
 
Got it. My mistake.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
2K