Fourier Transform of a Square Annulus

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on computing the Fourier transform of a square annulus, drawing parallels to known transforms of circular annuli and square apertures. It suggests representing the square annulus as the difference between two square boxes, leading to a combination of sinc functions. The conversation also explores using delta functions and separating the transform into x and y components, resulting in periodic sinusoidal patterns. Numerical results are shared, indicating challenges in achieving an analytical limit for the transform. Ultimately, participants are seeking a more effective technique or coordinate system to simplify the problem.
DrFurious
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
Hello all. I'm trying to compute the Fourier transform of a square annulus analytically. A "square annulus" would be the square analog of an infinitely thing ring (circular annulus). Here's what I know:

The Fourier transform of a circular annulus is a Bessel function. In polar coordinates,

\int_0^\infty\int_0^{2 \pi}\!\delta(r-a)e^{i k r \cos{\theta}}r\,\mathrm{d}r \,\mathrm{d}\theta=2 \pi J_0(ka)

The Fourier transform of a square aperture is a sinc function:
\int_{-1/2}^{1/2}\int_{-1/2}^{1/2}e^{i(k_x + k_y y)}\mathrm{d}x\,\mathrm{d}y=\frac{4\sin\left(\frac{k_x}{2}\right)\sin\left(\frac{k_y}{2}\right)}{k_x k_y}

I was thinking of maybe convolving the functions to get the correct output, but I'm not so sure. Any ideas on how to solve the square annulus problem?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Try writing your annulus as a large square box minus a smaller square box. The FT will be the difference of two sincs.
 
I don't know if that quite does it. In that case, the annulus still has some thickness... I want it to be a true delta function.

I think that if one could take the derivative of the two dimensional box function and use that, then maybe something tractable might pop out...
 
Ah, I missed that you wanted a square line of infinitesimal thickness. In that case use delta functions. The problem is separable--that is, you can transform x and y separately because your function has the form
f(x,y)=g(x)h(y)
where g and h are each the sum of two delta functions. Here's g
g(x)=a[\delta(x+x0)+\delta(x-x0)].
The transform will be the product F(kx,ky)=G(kx)H(ky), where G and H each are cosines.
 
So this is getting trickier. I have attached two files: One is the Fourier transform of just a "square", and the other a "square annulus". I did these two numerically.

If you make something like

\frac{4 \sin\left(\frac{k_x}{2}\right) \sin\left(\frac{k_y}{2}\right)}{k_x k_y}-\frac{4 \sin\left(0.999\frac{k_x}{2}\right) \sin\left(0.999\frac{k_y}{2}\right)}{k_x k_y}

You get the correct answer as you get closer to 1. However, there doesn't seem to be a way to do the limit analytically... (just get zero)

Separating the Fourier transform as suggested seems to produce a periodic sinusoidal "lattice", which is also not quite the correct answer.

There must be some technique I'm missing... maybe a way to do Fourier transforms piecewise, or some strange coordinate. I tried making this delta function box in polar coordinates but the integrals were too nasty.
 

Attachments

  • fftsquareannulus.png
    fftsquareannulus.png
    35.4 KB · Views: 629
  • fftsquare.png
    fftsquare.png
    23.6 KB · Views: 579
Sorry, you are right, I flubbed the function f. It is a sum of four line segments, each of finite length.
f(x,y)=a[\delta(x+x_0)+\delta(x-x_0)]rect\left(\frac{y}{2y_0}\right)+a[\delta(y+y_0)+\delta(y-y_0)]rect\left(\frac{x}{2x_0}\right).
Now do the x transform of f(x,y), then do the y transform of the result. You will get the sum of two terms, each of which is a product of a sinc times a cosine.

Sorry again to lead you astray.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Thread 'Griffith, Electrodynamics, 4th Edition, Example 4.8. (First part)'
I am reading the Griffith, Electrodynamics book, 4th edition, Example 4.8 and stuck at some statements. It's little bit confused. > Example 4.8. Suppose the entire region below the plane ##z=0## in Fig. 4.28 is filled with uniform linear dielectric material of susceptibility ##\chi_e##. Calculate the force on a point charge ##q## situated a distance ##d## above the origin. Solution : The surface bound charge on the ##xy## plane is of opposite sign to ##q##, so the force will be...
Dear all, in an encounter of an infamous claim by Gerlich and Tscheuschner that the Greenhouse effect is inconsistent with the 2nd law of thermodynamics I came to a simple thought experiment which I wanted to share with you to check my understanding and brush up my knowledge. The thought experiment I tried to calculate through is as follows. I have a sphere (1) with radius ##r##, acting like a black body at a temperature of exactly ##T_1 = 500 K##. With Stefan-Boltzmann you can calculate...
Back
Top