Fourier Transform of e^(ip0x)F(x) to F(p)

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on demonstrating that the Fourier Transform of the function e^(ip0x)f(x) results in f(p - p0). The participants utilize the definitions of the Fourier Transform, specifically f(x) = (1/√(2π))∫e^(ixp)f(p)dx and f(p) = (1/√(2π))∫e^(-ixp)f(x)dx. A key suggestion involves defining a new function g(x) = e^(ip0x)f(x) to simplify the transformation process. The conclusion is reached by substituting p with p - p0 in the Fourier Transform equation, confirming that g(p) equals f(p - p0).

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Fourier Transform definitions and properties
  • Familiarity with complex exponentials in mathematical functions
  • Ability to perform variable substitutions in integrals
  • Knowledge of integral calculus
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of Fourier Transforms, focusing on shifts and modulation
  • Learn about the implications of variable substitutions in integral transforms
  • Explore advanced applications of Fourier Transforms in signal processing
  • Investigate the relationship between Fourier Transforms and differential equations
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physicists, and engineers involved in signal processing, as well as students studying Fourier analysis and its applications in various fields.

kathrynlaa
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


f(p) is the Fourier transform of f(x). Show that the Fourier Transform of eipox f(x) is f(p- p0).

Homework Equations


I'm using these versions of the Fourier transform:
f(x)=1/√(2π)∫eixpf(p)dx
f(p)=1/√(2π)∫e-ixpf(x)dx

The Attempt at a Solution



I have:
f(p)=1/√(2π)∫eix(po-p)f(x)dx
which is the same as:
f(p)=1/√(2π)∫e-ix(p-po)f(x)dx
but I don't know where to go from here. I think I need to make a substitution using the original transform as I don't need to solve the integral. My other idea is that I have nearly proved it so just need to state the theory as to why this proves it; however, I don't know what that theory would be.
Any help would be appreciated!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You are using ##\underline{f}(p)## to refer to two different integrals which are not equal.

To avoid confusion, I suggest defining a new function. Let ##g(x) = e^{ip_0x}f(x)##. Then the goal is to show that ##\underline{g}(p) = \underline{f}(p - p_0)##. You have already established that
$$\underline{g}(p) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int e^{-ix(p - p_0)}f(x) dx$$
Can you express this in terms of ##\underline{f}##?
 
I understand why I should of renamed the functions but I really can't figure out the next step.
I realize this is the final aim:
g(p) = 1/√(2π)∫eix(p - p0f(x) dx = f(p-p0)
But I don't know how f(x) is related to f(p-p0) and the best I seem able to do is get g(p) in terms of g(x), which is useless.
Sorry I'm being dense!
 
You have
$$\underline{f}(p) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} e^{-ixp} f(x) dx$$
so what is ##\underline{f}(p - p_0)##? Just replace ##p## with ##p - p_0## in the equation above. What can you conclude?

Maybe to make it clearer, recognize that I can use any variable instead of ##p## and the equation will still be true. For example,
$$\underline{f}(y) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} e^{-ixy} f(x) dx$$
What does this give you when ##y = p - p_0##?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K