Fourier Analysis: What is the Difference with (w-wo)?

hanson
Messages
312
Reaction score
0
Hi all.
I am learning a numerical method that involves Fourier transform.
As far as I know, I think Fourier transform is tool to find the frequency spectrum of a signal.
And the usual form shall be
"Integrate from negtive infinity to positive infinity, f(x)*exp(i*w*x)dx"

However, when i search this in wikipedia, it is defined with (w-wo), where wo is the central frequency.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split-step_method

I don't really know what this definition is doing and what changes it would bring.

Why is it necessary to do so?

Please help.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Second, it is necessary to Fourier transform back and forth because the linear step is made in the frequency domain while the nonlinear step is made in the time domain. An example of usage of this method is in the field of light pulse propagation in optical fibers, where the interaction of linear and nonlinear mechanisms makes it difficult to find general analytical solutions. However, the split-step method provides a numerical solution to the problem.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Back
Top