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

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the Fourier transform of the function \( e^{ip_0 x} f(x) \) and its relationship to the Fourier transform of \( f(x) \). The original poster attempts to show that the Fourier transform of \( e^{ip_0 x} f(x) \) results in \( f(p - p_0) \), using specific definitions of the Fourier transform.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the need to clarify function definitions to avoid confusion, particularly regarding the notation for the Fourier transforms. There is an exploration of how to express the transformed function \( g(p) \) in terms of \( f(p - p_0) \) and the implications of variable substitution in the Fourier transform equations.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on renaming functions to clarify the discussion. There is an ongoing exploration of how to relate \( g(p) \) to \( f(p - p_0) \), with attempts to derive conclusions from established equations. Multiple interpretations of the problem are being explored without a clear consensus on the next steps.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of correctly defining functions to avoid confusion in the context of Fourier transforms. There is an acknowledgment of the need for clarity in notation and the implications of variable substitution in the equations being discussed.

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
4K
  • · 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