Fourier transform with complex variables

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the use of a specific formula for the Fourier transform involving complex variables, as presented in a paper. Participants explore the notation, its commonality, and the implications of the mathematical manipulations involved. The scope includes theoretical aspects of Fourier transforms and their applications in quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a formula for the Fourier transform of a function D, questioning the commonality and usability of the notation.
  • Another participant expresses unfamiliarity with the notation and prefers standard notations.
  • A request for a reference to the notation is made by a participant who has not encountered it before.
  • Concerns are raised about the meaning of the term ##D(\eta)/ \pi d^2 \eta##, indicating confusion over its interpretation.
  • A link to a paper is provided, where a participant attempts to relate the formula to a standard Fourier transform by substituting variables.
  • Mathematical manipulations are discussed, with one participant justifying the classification of the formula as a 2D Fourier transform.
  • A participant references another paper discussing the Wigner function and its relation to the density matrix, seeking clarification on the inverse Fourier transform and a specific coefficient.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not appear to reach a consensus on the notation or its commonality. There are multiple competing views regarding the interpretation and application of the formula, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express confusion over specific terms and mathematical expressions, indicating potential limitations in understanding the notation and its implications. The discussion includes references to external papers that may contain additional context or definitions.

naima
Gold Member
Messages
936
Reaction score
54
I found this formula in a paper:
[tex]\int exp( \frac{x1 + i x2}{ \sqrt 2} \eta^* - \frac{x1 - i x2}{ \sqrt 2}<br /> \eta) D(\eta)/ \pi d^2 \eta[/tex]
the author calls it the Fourier transform of D.
It is the first time thar i see this formula.
How common is this notation? Can we use it without problem?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I've not seen this notation before.

I tend to stick with the standard notations.
 
I haven't seen this either - could you give us a reference?
 
This part is especially confusing to me: ##D(\eta)/ \pi d^2 \eta##. I have no idea what it means.
 
the link is here (eq 40):
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0112110

I can follow a part of the calculus.with ##\eta = (q + ip)/ \sqrt 2##
we get ##\int \int exp(i (x_2 q - x_1 p)) D(q,p) dq dp##
So it would be twice a Fourier transform?
 
When you define
$$
Z = \frac{x_1 + i x_2}{ \sqrt 2} \eta^*
$$
you can write
$$
\exp( \frac{x_1 + i x_2}{ \sqrt 2} \eta^* - \frac{x_1 - i x_2}{ \sqrt 2}\eta) = \exp( Z-Z^*) = \exp( 2i\Im[Z]) = \exp( 2i(-x_1\xi_2+x_2\xi_1)/\sqrt{2})
$$
justifying the calling of Fourier transform. In other words, it's just mathematical manipulation of the exponent
naima said:
So it would be twice a Fourier transform?
It's a 2D Fourier transform.
.
 
Last edited:
I see here:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1510.02746
that the wigner function of a density matrix (with a Fourier transfom) can be written
##W_\rho(\alpha) = Tr [ \rho U(\alpha)]##
We will retrieve the density matrix with an inverse Fourier transform.
But i do not see why we have
##\rho = \int W(\alpha) U(\alpha) d \alpha## up to a ##2 \pi## coefficient
could you help me?
the second formula is in
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0112110
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K