Fourier analysis and the sinusoidal plane wave

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on Fourier analysis, specifically the Fourier transform equations and their applications to sinusoidal plane waves. The Fourier transform is defined as f(t) = \frac{1}{2 \pi} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} F(\omega) e^{i \omega t} d\omega, with the inverse transform being F(\omega) = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} f(t) e^{-i \omega t} dt. Participants clarified the conventions regarding signs in Fourier transforms, emphasizing that the signs are arbitrary and can be adjusted based on the context. The discussion also highlighted the importance of initial conditions in solving the wave equation, (\partial_t^2-\partial_x^2) \phi(x,t)=0, to obtain unique solutions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Fourier transforms and their mathematical definitions
  • Familiarity with wave equations and their physical interpretations
  • Knowledge of complex exponentials and their applications in physics
  • Basic principles of linear algebra and differential equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation and applications of the Fourier transform in physics
  • Explore the concept of wave propagation and the role of initial conditions in wave equations
  • Learn about the differences between the Fourier transform and its inverse
  • Investigate recommended textbooks on Fourier analysis, particularly those with applications in physics
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, engineers, and students studying wave phenomena, signal processing, or mathematical methods in physics will benefit from this discussion.

BacalhauGT
Messages
21
Reaction score
1
hey

So Fourier transform is

##f(t) = \frac{1}{2 \pi} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} F(\omega) e^{i \omega t} d\omega##

with

##F(\omega) = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} f(t) e^{-i \omega t} dt##

Question 1 - The Fourier mode for the continuous case is ## \frac{1}{2 \pi} F(\omega) e^{i \omega t}##, is it right?

So a function can be written as a superposition of Fourier modes.

Question 2 - Why does the sinusoidal plane wave is always considered in the form

##\phi(x,t) = A \exp [i (k x - \omega t)]## ?

I mean, Should it be ##\phi(x,t) = A \exp [i (kx + \omega t)]## ? Because this is the form of two dimensional Fourier mode for x and t.

So using this, it makes sense for me analysing the linear equations using a Fourier mode, because since it is linear, any function can be given by a sum of Fourier modes, so we can see what happens to one frequency and k.

Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
All the signs and factors in front of the Fourier transformation are arbitrary, but it's good to stick to conventions of your field. You have the sign for the time-frequency FT opposite to what physicists are used to. I've seen this convention in some engineering textbook once. That said concerning question 1, it's correct.

Question 2 adresses the Fourier transform in time and space for the wave equation (setting the phase velocity of the waves to 1 for convenience)
$$(\partial_t^2-\partial_x^2) \phi(x,t)=0.$$
The plane wave you've given first is the one describing a wave moving in positive ##x##-direction, i.e., setting the phase constant, ##k x-\omega t=\text{const}## implies that
$$x=\frac{\omega}{k} t + \text{const}.$$
For the same reason your 2nd mode describes a wave moving in the negative ##x##-direction. A general wave is a superposition of both (and a superposition over ##\omega##).

Here, btw. you use the physicists' sign convention (i.e., a ##-## in front of time in your Fourier mode). Here you can write the solutions of the wave equation as
$$\phi(x,t)=\frac{1}{2 \pi} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \mathrm{d} \omega \left \{A(\omega) \exp[-\mathrm{i} \omega (t-x)] + B(\omega) \exp[-\mathrm{i} \omega (t+x)] \right \},$$
where I used the wave equation to get ##k=\pm \omega##.

Since the wave equation is 2nd order in time you need to give two initial conditions to get a unique solution, i.e., you need to give as initial conditions
$$\phi(0,x)=\phi_0(x), \quad \dot{\phi}(0,x)=\psi_0(x).$$
You can think about, how to determine ##A(\omega)## and ##B(\omega)## given these initial conditions!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BacalhauGT
vanhees71 said:
All the signs and factors in front of the Fourier transformation are arbitrary, but it's good to stick to conventions of your field. You have the sign for the time-frequency FT opposite to what physicists are used to. I've seen this convention in some engineering textbook once. That said concerning question 1, it's correct.

Question 2 adresses the Fourier transform in time and space for the wave equation (setting the phase velocity of the waves to 1 for convenience)
$$(\partial_t^2-\partial_x^2) \phi(x,t)=0.$$
The plane wave you've given first is the one describing a wave moving in positive ##x##-direction, i.e., setting the phase constant, ##k x-\omega t=\text{const}## implies that
$$x=\frac{\omega}{k} t + \text{const}.$$
For the same reason your 2nd mode describes a wave moving in the negative ##x##-direction. A general wave is a superposition of both (and a superposition over ##\omega##).

Here, btw. you use the physicists' sign convention (i.e., a ##-## in front of time in your Fourier mode). Here you can write the solutions of the wave equation as
$$\phi(x,t)=\frac{1}{2 \pi} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \mathrm{d} \omega \left \{A(\omega) \exp[-\mathrm{i} \omega (t-x)] + B(\omega) \exp[-\mathrm{i} \omega (t+x)] \right \},$$
where I used the wave equation to get ##k=\pm \omega##.

Since the wave equation is 2nd order in time you need to give two initial conditions to get a unique solution, i.e., you need to give as initial conditions
$$\phi(0,x)=\phi_0(x), \quad \dot{\phi}(0,x)=\psi_0(x).$$
You can think about, how to determine ##A(\omega)## and ##B(\omega)## given these initial conditions!

Thank you. But please let me clarify one thing. I still don't get why the signs of the Fourier transformation are arbitrary. Can you explain me?

So Fourier transform is

##f(t) = \frac{1}{2 \pi} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} F(\omega) e^{i \omega t} d\omega## with ##F(\omega) = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} f(t) e^{-i \omega t} dt##

can i write:

##f(t) = \frac{1}{2 \pi} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} F(\omega) e^{-i \omega t} d\omega## with ##F(\omega) = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} f(t) e^{+i \omega t} dt##

Please check if that's the reason: This is because since the domain is ##-\infty## to ##\infty##, so integrating in ##\omega## covers the positive and negative ##\omega##. So making ##\omega \rightarrow -\omega'##:

##f(t) = \frac{1}{2 \pi} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} F(\omega) e^{i \omega t} d\omega = \frac{1}{2 \pi} \int_{\infty}^{-\infty} F(-\omega') e^{i -\omega' t} - d\omega' =\frac{1}{2 \pi} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} F(-\omega') e^{i -\omega' t} d\omega' = \frac{1}{2 \pi} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} F'(\omega') e^{i -\omega' t} d\omega'##

Is this correct?

So:

##f(t) = \frac{1}{2 \pi} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} F(\omega) e^{ \pm i \omega t} d\omega## with ##F(\omega) = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} f(t) e^{\mp i \omega t} dt##
 
The signs are indeed arbitrary and so is the place where we put the 2pi normalization constant. That's indeed because we can just as easily use ##\omega'=-\omega##, and we can put the 2pi also in the other equation, or divide a ##\sqrt{2\pi}## over the 2 of them.

However, the first equation that you have called the Fourier transform is usually called the inverse Fourier transform. And the 2nd equation is usually called the Fourier transform. Together they form a Fourier transform pair.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BacalhauGT and vanhees71
I like Serena said:
The signs are indeed arbitrary and so is the place where we put the 2pi normalization constant. That's indeed because we can just as easily use ##\omega'=-\omega##, and we can put the 2pi also in the other equation, or divide a ##\sqrt{2\pi}## over the 2 of them.

However, the first equation that you have called the Fourier transform is usually called the inverse Fourier transform. And the 2nd equation is usually called the Fourier transform. Together they form a Fourier transform pair.
thank you. It was a distraction
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: I like Serena
btw, can anyone recommend me a book for Fourier analysis with applications in physics? thank you
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K