Jncik
- 95
- 0
where δ is the dirac delta function, I'm using the Greek alphabet on my keyboard
how can I prove this?
for the continuous time, we have that
\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}\delta (t) dt = 1
so by having
δ(2t)\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}\delta (2t) dt = 1
I use 2t = u <=> 2dt = du <=> dt = du/2
hence \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}\delta (2t) dt = 1 => \frac{1}{2} \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}\delta (u) du = 1
but since u is just a variable, we have that
\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}\delta (u) du = 2
now about δ[2n] = δ[n]
in discrete time the summation over the integral of (-\infty, +\infty)
is 1.
now, what does δ[2n] mean?
what I understand is that, when we have normal functions in discrete time, and for example we know that from -2 to 2 the values are not zero we say that
-2<=2n<=2
hence
-1<=n<=1
and the step now will be not 1, but 0.5, but in discrete time, we can see the values only when n is an integer, hence we will lose some of them
now for dirac delta we know that for n = 0 it is 1. hence we have
0<=2n<=0
0<=n<=0
hence again, for n = 0, it will be not 0...
but I'm not really sure if this logic is correct
I mean, why can't I use the same thing for the continuous time and say that δ(2t) = δ(t)?
how can I prove this?
for the continuous time, we have that
\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}\delta (t) dt = 1
so by having
δ(2t)\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}\delta (2t) dt = 1
I use 2t = u <=> 2dt = du <=> dt = du/2
hence \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}\delta (2t) dt = 1 => \frac{1}{2} \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}\delta (u) du = 1
but since u is just a variable, we have that
\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}\delta (u) du = 2
now about δ[2n] = δ[n]
in discrete time the summation over the integral of (-\infty, +\infty)
is 1.
now, what does δ[2n] mean?
The Attempt at a Solution
what I understand is that, when we have normal functions in discrete time, and for example we know that from -2 to 2 the values are not zero we say that
-2<=2n<=2
hence
-1<=n<=1
and the step now will be not 1, but 0.5, but in discrete time, we can see the values only when n is an integer, hence we will lose some of them
now for dirac delta we know that for n = 0 it is 1. hence we have
0<=2n<=0
0<=n<=0
hence again, for n = 0, it will be not 0...
but I'm not really sure if this logic is correct
I mean, why can't I use the same thing for the continuous time and say that δ(2t) = δ(t)?
Last edited: