Integration of funtion multiplied by shifted heavyside step

  • Level: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter SpaceDomain
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integration
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
2 replies · 2K views
SpaceDomain
Messages
58
Reaction score
0
As I understand it, the following is true:

[tex] \int_{0}^{\infty}{u(t - \lambda) d\lambda} = <br /> \int_{0}^{t}{d\lambda}[/tex]


But I do not understand why. It seems to me that the left side above should equal

[tex] \int_{\lambda}^{\infty}{d\lambda}[/tex]

since

[tex] u(t - \lambda) =<br /> \left\{\begin{array}{cc}0,&\mbox{ if }<br /> t< \lambda \\ 1, & \mbox{ if } t> \lambda \end{array}\right.[/tex]

I obviously don't understand this correctly. What am I not doing right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I guess there is not a function multiplied by the unit step function here. But if there were, like:
[tex] <br /> \int_{0}^{\infty}{f( \lambda ) u(t - \lambda) d\lambda} <br /> [/tex]

then it would be equal to

[tex] \int_{0}^{t}{f( \lambda) d\lambda}[/tex]

Right?
 
Oh, I think I am seeing my mistake in logic here.

The unit step [tex]u(t - \lambda)[/tex] is a shift the unit step [tex]u(\lambda)[/tex] and then symmetric about the vertical axis.

I should be thinking of this as a graph of [tex]\lambda[/tex] vs. [tex]u(\lambda)[/tex].

I was getting thrown off by the variable t here because I am so used to it being the independent variable. Okay, okay. Never mind.