Fourier transform of rectangular pulse (Waves)

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the Fourier transform of a rectangular pulse, specifically how to express the amplitude density as a function of frequency. The correct formulation for the Fourier transform F(w) involves integrating the function f(t) multiplied by the exponential term e^(-iwt) with respect to time t, not frequency w. The amplitude density is shown to be proportional to sinc(wt0/2), which is derived from this integration. Clarification was provided regarding the integration variable, emphasizing that the boundaries of integration relate to time, leading to a function of frequency. Understanding this distinction is crucial for accurately applying the Fourier transform in this context.
tigger88
Messages
17
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



F(w) is the Fourier transform of f(t). Write down the equation for F(w) in terms of f(t).
A rectangular pulse has height H and total length t0 in time. Show that as a function of w, the amplitude density is propertional to sinc(wt0/2).

Homework Equations



F(w) = integral from -infinity to +infinity of: f(t)exp(-iwt)dw

The Attempt at a Solution



integral from -t0/2 to +t0/2 of: h*exp(-iwt)dw

I have access to the solution to this problem, which says that it should be:
integral from -t0/2 to +t0/2 of: h*exp(-iwt)dt,
but I don't understand why I'm integrating wrt t now, when the definition says w.

Could somebody please explain this?

Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Where do you get that definition from? Think about it, you want to find a function F(\omega), but if you calculate the integral you've written down as the "definition" then the integration boundaries will be inserted into \omega after the integration. As as a result you won't have a function with variable \omega.

The correct definition is (normalization conventions can be different):
<br /> F(\omega)}=\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-i \omega t} dt<br />
 
Actually I got that definition from the solution to the question. It makes a whole lot more sense now, thanks for your reply!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
11K