Does the Laplace Transform Have an Orthonormal Basis in Hilbert Space?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jbusc
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Laplace Space
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the existence of an orthonormal basis for the Laplace transform in Hilbert space, drawing comparisons to the established orthonormal basis provided by Fourier series for square-integrable functions. Participants explore the properties of these transforms and their implications in the context of function spaces.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants recall that the Fourier series provides an orthonormal basis for square-integrable functions, prompting questions about a similar structure for the Laplace transform.
  • One participant suggests that the set \{exp(inx)\}_{n∈ℤ} serves as a complete orthonormal basis for real-valued square-integrable functions, leading to a discussion about analogous bases for the Laplace transform.
  • Another participant proposes that the set \{x^n\}_{n∈ℕ} could be considered as a basis for functions developable in a Taylor series, questioning whether it is orthonormal or merely orthogonal.
  • Concerns are raised about the appropriate inner product that would yield the desired orthogonality conditions for the proposed basis related to the Laplace transform.
  • There is uncertainty regarding whether the basis \{x^n\}_{n∈ℕ} is orthonormal without applying the Gram-Schmidt process.
  • Participants express varying levels of understanding and processing of the concepts discussed, indicating a mix of familiarity and confusion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether an orthonormal basis exists for the Laplace transform, and there are competing views on the properties of the proposed basis sets.

Contextual Notes

Discussions include unresolved questions about the definitions of inner products and the conditions under which the proposed bases may be considered orthonormal or orthogonal.

jbusc
Messages
210
Reaction score
0
I was just thinking back to my advanced linear algebra class and I remember the prof mumbling something about the Fourier series being an orthonormal basis for the hilbert space of square-integrable real-valued functions, lebesgue something, etc., and demonstrating the properties of the integral inner product and projections into that space. It all made sense at the time, I think. :) Sorry if I'm kinda vague, I can provide more info if needed.

I am curious, though, if something similar exists for laplace transform. It certainly looks like it fits the form, but I have been unable to find any detailed analysis of such. Anyone have insight?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Some of the following may be nonsense but...

The way I interpret the article is that \{exp(inx)\}_{n\in \mathbb{Z}} is a complete orthonormal basis for the space of real valued square integrable smooth function on (-\pi,\pi) of domain (-\pi,\pi) with inner product defined by

\langle f,g \rangle =\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}f(x)g(x)dx.

This allows us to write, for any function f of that space,

f(x) = \sum_{n\in \mathbb{Z}}\langle f,\exp(inx) \rangle \exp(inx)

Using the language of vector spaces, <f,exp(inx)> is the projection of the vector f in the direction of the unit vector \exp(inx), i.e. the component of f in the direction of \exp(inx)

More generally,

\left\{ \exp \left( in\frac{2\pi}{P}x \right) \right\} _{n\in \mathbb{N}}

is a complete orthonomal basis for the space of real valued periodic functions of period P.

For functions that are NOT periodic, but that have the property that the integral

\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}f(x)\exp (-in\omega)dx = F(\omega)

converges, we can write them in a kind of "continuous" form of a Fourier series, i.e. as its Fourier transform:

f(x) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}F(\omega)\exp (inx)d\omegaNow let's make the analogy with the Laplace transform. Suppose a function f:(0,+\infty)\subset D \rightarrow \mathbb{R} can we written as the Laplace transform of some function a(t):

f(s) = \int_0^{+\infty} a(t) \exp(-st)dt

Note that \exp(-st)=(e^{-s})^t. Make the substitution e^{-s}=x and the equation becomes a restriction of f to the positive real line:

f|_{\mathbb{R}^+} = f(x) = \int_0^{+\infty} a(t) x^t dt

This is a kind of "continuous" form of a power series, right?

So to answer your question...

jbusc said:
I am curious, though, if something similar exists for laplace transform

...the analogue is the set \{x^n\}_{n\in \mathbb{N}}, which is a complete orthonormal basis for, say, the space of real valued function developable in a Taylor series of convergence radius R and of domain (-R,R), with the inner product defined as...

...as what exactly? Also, maybe \{x^n\}_{n\in \mathbb{N}} is not orthoNORMAL, but just orthogonal. What inner product would yield

\langle f,x^n \rangle = \frac{f^{(n)}(0)}{n!}

and

\langle x^m,x^n \rangle = 0

except for m=n

??
 
Last edited:
Ohh I see! I still have to process all that but just skimming it makes sense. Thanks!
 
quasar987 said:
...the analogue is the set \{x^n\}_{n\in \mathbb{N}}, which is a complete orthonormal basis for, say, the space of real valued function developable in a Taylor series of convergence radius R and of domain (-R,R), with the inner product defined as...

...as what exactly? Also, maybe \{x^n\}_{n\in \mathbb{N}} is not orthoNORMAL, but just orthogonal. What inner product would yield

\langle f,x^n \rangle = \frac{f^{(n)}(0)}{n!}

and

\langle x^m,x^n \rangle = 0

except for m=n

??

Hmm, I vaguely remember this. But isn't \{x^n\}_{n\in \mathbb{N}} neither orthonormal nor orthogonal? You have to apply Gram-Schmidt for that to be true, right?

As for which inner product...I have to think about it for a minute...

hmm.the laplace transform? is that what I'm missing? I think I'm overthinking it...
 
Last edited:
At least it's a complete set, we know that much! :p

(Also, the Fourier integrals in post #3 are with 'x' in the exponential and not 'n')
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
707
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
10K