Fourier Transforms, Green's function, Helmholtz

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of Fourier Transforms to derive the Green's function for the nonhomogeneous Helmholtz equation. Participants are exploring the mathematical formulation and the implications of variable notation in the context of the problem.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to clarify the correct use of variables in the Fourier Transform process, particularly distinguishing between different vector notations such as r, r1, and r0. There are discussions about the Fourier transform of the delta function and how it relates to the problem at hand.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered guidance on variable notation and the Fourier Transform process, while others are seeking confirmation of their understanding and expressing confusion about the notation. The conversation reflects an ongoing exploration of the mathematical concepts involved.

Contextual Notes

There is an emphasis on maintaining consistency in variable notation throughout the discussion, as well as a recognition of the need for clarity regarding the arguments of the delta function in the context of the Helmholtz equation.

ognik
Messages
626
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement


I've gotten myself mixed up here , appreciate some insights ...

Using Fourier Transforms, shows that Greens function satisfying the nonhomogeneous Helmholtz eqtn
$$ \left(\nabla ^2 +k_0^2 \right) G(\vec{r_1},\vec{r_2})= -\delta (\vec{r_1} -\vec{r_2}) \:is\: G(\vec{r_1},\vec{r_2})= \frac{1}{{2\pi}^{3}} \int \frac{e^{i\vec{k}.(\vec{r_1} -\vec{r_2})}}{k^2 - k_0^2} d^3k $$

Homework Equations


$$ \left(\nabla ^2 +k_0^2 \right) G(\vec{r_1},\vec{r_2})= -\delta (\vec{r_1} -\vec{r_2}) $$

The Attempt at a Solution


Taking the Fourier Transforms:
LHS: $$F\left[ \nabla^2G+k_0^2 G \right] = (- k^2 +k_0^2) \hat{u} $$
RHS: $$F\left[ -\delta (\vec{r_1} -\vec{r_2}) \right] = - \int 1 e^{-i\vec{k}.(\vec{r_1} -\vec{r_2})} d^3r $$

$$ \therefore \hat{u} = \int \frac{1}{(k^2 - k_0^2)} e^{i\vec{k}.(\vec{r_1} -\vec{r_2})} d^3r = \frac{1}{ik(k^2 - k_0^2)} e^{i\vec{k}.(\vec{r_1} -\vec{r_2})}$$

$$ \therefore G(\vec{r_1},\vec{r_2})= F^{-1} \left[\frac{1}{ik(k^2 - k_0^2)} e^{i\vec{k}.(\vec{r_1} -\vec{r_2})} \right] = \frac{1}{{(2\pi)}^{3}} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\frac{1}{ik(k^2 - k_0^2)} e^{i\vec{k}.(\vec{r_1} -\vec{r_2})} e^{ik.r}d^3k$$
 
Physics news on Phys.org
First of all, you must decide which variable you are keeping fixed in your Fourier transformation. In this case, the PDE is in terms of ##\vec r_1## and ##\vec r_2## is a constant. You may want to call them ##\vec r## and ##\vec r_0## instead to emphasise this.

Second, the Fourier transform of the delta function is not an integral - or rather, it is an integral which is trivial to perform. Because of your notation, it is unclear what you mean by the integral you give. The Fourier transform you should be interested in is
$$
F[-\delta(\vec r - \vec r')] = -\int e^{-i \vec k\cdot \vec r} \delta(\vec r - \vec r') dV = - e^{-i\vec k \cdot \vec r'}.
$$
You should be able to take it from there.
 
Awesome, thanks, I clearly need to better understand about the variables in play - may I please get some confirmation of what I have absorbed ...using r1 and r0 as you suggested - and I think r, r1 & r0 are all vectors?

The formula I have for a 3D FT is $$ F[f(r)] ≡ f ̃(ω)= ∫_{-∞}^∞ f(r) e^{-iω.r} d^3 r $$

In the above problem (I'm a bit mixed up, sorry) should I be using r or r1?

Then you use r and r' for the FT of \delta, shouldn't that (for this problem) be $$ F[-\delta (r_1 - r_0)]=- \int e^{-ik.r} \delta (r_{1} - r_{0})] d^3r = e^{-ik.r} $$
(and I think I want the r in the exponent to be r0?)

For the inverse transform, I have $$ F^{-1} [\tilde{f} (ω)] ≡ f (r)= \frac{1}{(2\pi)^3} ∫_{-∞}^∞ \tilde{f}(\omega) e^{+iω.r} d^3 \omega $$

What lead to this doubt was I could see that the (r1 - r0) emerged from the product of the 2 exponents, but I keep mixing up r, r1 & r0 - so would prefer to be certain and not guess. Thanks again, important for me this.
 
Hi would really appreciate if someone could briefly check my thoughts above - let me know if they're right, let me know what's wrong ...thanks
 
ognik said:
Awesome, thanks, I clearly need to better understand about the variables in play - may I please get some confirmation of what I have absorbed ...using r1 and r0 as you suggested - and I think r, r1 & r0 are all vectors?
Actually, he suggested you use ##\vec{r}## and ##\vec{r}_0## instead of ##\vec{r}_1## and ##\vec{r}_2##, so the original equation becomes
$$(\nabla^2 + k_0^2)G(\vec{r},\vec{r_0}) = -\delta(\vec{r}-\vec{r}_0).$$ Clearly, ##\vec{r}## is the variable, so multiply both sides by ##e^{-i \vec{k}\cdot \vec{r}}## and integrate to compute the Fourier transforms.

The formula I have for a 3D FT is $$ F[f(r)] ≡ f ̃(ω)= ∫_{-∞}^∞ f(r) e^{-iω.r} d^3 r $$

In the above problem (I'm a bit mixed up, sorry) should I be using r or r1?

Then you use r and r' for the FT of \delta, shouldn't that (for this problem) be $$ F[-\delta (r_1 - r_0)]=- \int e^{-ik.r} \delta (r_{1} - r_{0})] d^3r = e^{-ik.r} $$
(and I think I want the r in the exponent to be r0?)

For the inverse transform, I have $$ F^{-1} [\tilde{f} (ω)] ≡ f (r)= \frac{1}{(2\pi)^3} ∫_{-∞}^∞ \tilde{f}(\omega) e^{+iω.r} d^3 \omega $$

What lead to this doubt was I could see that the (r1 - r0) emerged from the product of the 2 exponents, but I keep mixing up r, r1 & r0 - so would prefer to be certain and not guess. Thanks again, important for me this.
 
Thanks Vela, indeed Orodruin did, and I am not seeing my r's clearly, but for the delta function part he used r and r'... should I instead use r and ##r_0##?
 
Just be consistent. What's the argument of the delta function in
$$(\nabla^2 + k_0^2)G(\vec{r},\vec{r_0}) = -\delta(\vec{r}-\vec{r}_0)?$$
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K