Does the delta function integral still hold true for non-continuous functions?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the validity of the delta function integral for non-continuous functions, specifically examining the case of the logarithmic function f(x) = ln(x + 3) at a point where it approaches negative infinity. Participants explore the implications of this behavior on the evaluation of the integral involving the delta function.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant evaluates the integral of f(x) = ln(x + 3) at x0 = -2 and questions whether the behavior of f(x) at x = -3 affects the validity of the delta function integral.
  • Another participant points out that f(-2) is not negative infinity and asks for the value of f(-2).
  • There is a discussion about whether certain conditions on f(x) are necessary for the delta function integral to hold, particularly regarding the suitability of logarithmic functions.
  • One participant mentions that there are ways to define the integration of generalized functions, suggesting that the integral could be well-defined even if f is not continuous.
  • Another participant asserts that the integral holds for any function defined at x0, but expresses discomfort without continuity in a neighborhood of x0.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of continuity for the delta function integral to be valid. While some assert that the integral holds for any function defined at x0, others emphasize the importance of continuity in the vicinity of x0.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the ambiguity in the conditions required for the delta function integral to be applicable, particularly in the context of non-continuous functions like logarithmic functions. There is also mention of generalized functions, which may introduce additional complexity to the evaluation.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and professionals in mathematics and physics, particularly those exploring the properties of distributions and generalized functions in the context of integration.

nicksauce
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Messages
1,270
Reaction score
7
Evaluate:

[tex]\int^{\infty}_{-\infty} f(x)\delta(x-x_0)dx[/tex]

Where

[tex]f(x)=ln(x+3), x_0=-2[/tex]

Ordinarily, you would just evaluate [tex]f(x_0)[/tex], so it would be 0, but in this case, since [tex]f(x)[/tex] is [tex]-\infty[/tex] at [tex]x=-3[/tex], does that make a difference?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
But you have x0=-2 and f(x) is certainly not negative infinity there. What is f(-2)?
 
Right, f(-2) = ln(1) = 0

I'm just wondering if for the formula:

[tex]\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}f(x)\delta (x-x_0) = f(x_0)[/tex]

there need to be certain conditions on f(x), that would make a logarithmic function not suitable? My textbook was very vague in this area.
 
Last edited:
You're missing the + and the - on your limits...


There are ways to define integration of generalized functions so that this integral makes sense for any (partial) function f that is well-behaved near x0. It might even be possible to make this integral well-defined when f is a generalized function that is well-behaved near x0!
 
nicksauce said:
Right, f(-2) = ln(1) = 0

I'm just wondering if for the formula:

[tex]\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}f(x)\delta (x-x_0) = f(x_0)[/tex]

there need to be certain conditions on f(x), that would make a logarithmic function not suitable? My textbook was very vague in this area.
No. For any function defined at x0,
[tex]\int_{-\infty}^\infty f(x)\delta (x)dx= f(x_0)[/tex]
 
HallsofIvy said:
No. For any function defined at x0,
[tex]\int_{-\infty}^\infty f(x)\delta (x)dx= f(x_0)[/tex]
I think I won't feel comfortable unless you insist on continuity in a neighborhood of x0.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K