MATLAB How to Calculate the CTFT of a Function Using MATLAB's FFT?

  • Thread starter Thread starter olen501
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matlab
AI Thread Summary
To find the Continuous-Time Fourier Transform (CTFT) of a function using MATLAB, the built-in FFT function is not directly applicable since it computes the Fast Fourier Transform, which is discrete. Instead, the CTFT requires symbolic math capabilities. Users can input their function into MATLAB's symbolic math toolbox to derive the CTFT. However, this method may produce complex results that are difficult to simplify. For better handling of symbolic computations, alternatives like Mathematica are recommended. Additionally, using online integrators can assist in solving integrals related to CTFT, but they may also yield complicated outputs. Overall, while MATLAB can be useful, it may not be the most efficient tool for CTFT calculations.
olen501
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Does anyone know how to find the CTFT of a function using MatLab? I know MatLab has a built in function called fft that finds the fast Fourier transform, but I don't know how to use the fft to find the CTFT. Can anyone help me out?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can do something like:

x = cos(2*pi*f*t);
ft = fftshift(fft(x));

Then you must plot over the proper frequency range. This is most likely why you can't work with fft and get the right results.
 
When you say CTFT, you mean the Continous-Time Fourier Transform? The only way to do that on a computer is using symbolic math. You can't directly represent a continuous function inside the computer, and so you can't directly compute its Fourier Transform. So, supposing you have an expression for the function in question, you can feed that into the symbolic math toolbox, and have it give you an expression for the answer. I haven't used Matlab's symbolic math capabilities very much, so I can't comment further, but you might also just use The Integrator ( http://integrals.wolfram.com/index.jsp ). The downside to these approaches is that they tend not to be terribly good at simplifying the results, so you're apt to get a huge string of special functions that all end up cancelling each other out. Often, the process of simplifying the output of these symbolic math systems can be as laborious as simply doing the integral yourself in the first place. They are good resources if you're stuck or want to check your answers, though...
 
Yes, better to use a package designed with symbolic computations in mind...like Mathematica.
 
Thanks
 
thanks
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
16
Views
14K
Back
Top