Integration of funtion multiplied by shifted heavyside step

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter SpaceDomain
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integration
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The integration of the unit step function, represented as \( u(t - \lambda) \), leads to the conclusion that \( \int_{0}^{\infty}{u(t - \lambda) d\lambda} = \int_{0}^{t}{d\lambda} \). This equality holds because the unit step function is defined as \( u(t - \lambda) = 1 \) for \( t > \lambda \) and \( 0 \) for \( t < \lambda \). The confusion arises from the interpretation of the variable \( t \) as the independent variable, which can mislead the understanding of the integration limits and the behavior of the step function.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the unit step function \( u(t) \)
  • Familiarity with definite integrals
  • Basic knowledge of variable substitution in integrals
  • Graphical interpretation of functions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of the unit step function \( u(t) \)
  • Learn about the implications of shifting functions in integration
  • Explore the concept of convolution involving step functions
  • Investigate the graphical representation of piecewise functions
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, engineering students, and anyone studying signal processing or control systems will benefit from this discussion, particularly those working with integration and step functions.

SpaceDomain
Messages
58
Reaction score
0
As I understand it, the following is true:

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


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

<br /> \int_{\lambda}^{\infty}{d\lambda}<br />

since

<br /> u(t - \lambda) =<br /> \left\{\begin{array}{cc}0,&amp;\mbox{ if }<br /> t&lt; \lambda \\ 1, &amp; \mbox{ if } t&gt; \lambda \end{array}\right.<br />

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:
<br /> <br /> \int_{0}^{\infty}{f( \lambda ) u(t - \lambda) d\lambda} <br /> <br />

then it would be equal to

<br /> \int_{0}^{t}{f( \lambda) d\lambda}<br />

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

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

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

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.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K