Integral of Dirac times Heaviside

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The integral of the product of the Heaviside step function H(x) and the Dirac delta function δ(x) is defined as ∫_{-∞}^∞ H(x) δ(x) dx = H(0). The common convention is to set H(0) = 1/2, leading to the conclusion that ∫_{-∞}^∞ H(x) δ(x) dx = 1/2. However, this value is contingent on the chosen definition of H(0), as H(x) is not a valid test function for the Dirac delta in strict terms. The discussion also highlights that the Dirac delta function is a distribution, and integration involving it requires careful handling of discontinuities.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Dirac delta function and its properties
  • Familiarity with the Heaviside step function and its conventions
  • Knowledge of distribution theory in mathematical analysis
  • Experience with integral calculus and improper integrals
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of distributions and their applications in functional analysis
  • Learn about the extension of the Dirac delta function to include discontinuous functions
  • Explore the implications of different definitions of the Heaviside function at zero
  • Investigate integration techniques involving distributions, such as the Gaussian integral approach
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physicists, and engineers who work with distributions, particularly in fields involving signal processing, control theory, and theoretical physics.

wil3
Messages
177
Reaction score
1
I am trying to solve the integral

\int_{-\infty}^\infty H(x) \delta(x) dx

Where H(x) is a unit step and d(x) is a standard Dirac delta. Mathematica chokes on this, but I'm pretty sure that the value is

\int_{-\infty}^\infty H(x) \delta(x) dx = \dfrac12 \left(H(0^+) + H(0^-) \right) = 1/2

However, I am having trouble proving that my intuition is correct. Is this claim correct, and, if so, how can I show it?

Thank you in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The intuitive way would be...in order for ##\int_{-\infty}^\infty f(x) \delta(x) \, dx## to be well defined, ##f(x)## needs to have the domain to be all of the reals. That means ##H(0)## needs to be defined. A lot of books choose ##H(0) = 1/2## as a convention, but it is just a convention. You could theoretically choose any real number, and indeed the notation ##H_c (x)## is the Heaviside step function with ##H(0) = c##.

Anyway, ##\int_{-\infty}^\infty H(x) \delta(x) dx = H(0)##, so the question is what have you chosen ##H(0)## to be?

Disclaimer: it's worth pointing out that in the strict definition of Dirac delta, H(x) is not a valid test function. Mathematica "chokes" because that is the correct response. What you are asking for is an extension of Dirac to include discontinuous functions. There is no "correct" way to do this. You can use what you wrote as a new definition of Dirac, and then demonstrate that it is consistent with the standard definition. I personally wouldn't do it that way because the value is now dependent on the neighborhood of 0, rather than 0 itself.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
One standard way that the Dirac delta function is extended is to define
\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \delta(x) h(x) dx = \lim_{a\to 0} \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi} a} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-x^2/(2a)} h(x) dx
for h(x) any distribution. This satisfies the definition for \delta(x) when h(x) is continuous and integrable (the Gaussian function defined has a peak at 0 that goes to infinity as a goes to zero, so this is not too hard to prove). and for h(x) the Heaviside function you will in fact get 1/2.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
These were both great answers, I agree that using this trick is sketchy in a proof but it seems to work for my application. Thank you!
 
Another method

Doesn't this integrate directly to 1/2 H^2(x) between -∞ and ∞, which equals 1/2?

This observation seems to have no dependence on how H(0) is defined, other than what is implied from the statement that d/dx of H(x) is δ(x).
 
davidmoore63@y said:
Doesn't this integrate directly to 1/2 H^2(x) between -∞ and ∞, which equals 1/2?

No, because Dirac delta is not a real function but a distribution. That integral that is written is not actually an integral. We just write the evaluation in that notation.

This observation seems to have no dependence on how H(0) is defined, other than what is implied from the statement that d/dx of H(x) is δ(x).

Dirac delta is the distributional derivative of Heaviside. Integration by substitution requires continuous differentiability, which Heaviside does not have.
 
interesting thanks
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K