I Ω=0 and its magnitude for a unit pulse

PainterGuy
Messages
938
Reaction score
72
Hi,

I was trying to find the magnitude of DC signal in a shifted unit pulse signal. The unshifted pulse lasts from -π to π and then it is shifted by π duration.

In Method #1 I have used FT formula and ended up with magnitude of 6.2832 for DC signal, i.e. ω=0.

In Method #2 I have used Laplace transform to derive the FT by setting σ=0 and ended up with magnitude of 6.5938 for the DC signal, i.e. ω=0.

What is contributing toward the error of 6.5938-6.2832=0.3106?

Could you please help me with it? Thank you!

Method #1:
1588132344990.png


Finding magnitude of DC signal:
1588132415122.png
Method #2:
1588132532011.png


Finding magnitude of DC signal:
1588132584329.png
 

Attachments

  • 1588132494144.png
    1588132494144.png
    48 KB · Views: 333
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I think I was able to trace the problem. Method #1 produces the right answer.

There is a mistake Method #2. I have the step where the mistake occurred but even after fixing it, I couldn't simplify it any further. Could you please help me with it?

Please note that I didn't write lim_ω→0 with every step. Thank you

1588148305622.png
 
Yes, you got the right answer in method #1. For method #2 you have,$$
\frac{1}{s}-\frac{e^{2\pi s}}{s}\rightarrow \frac{1}{j\omega}-\frac{e^{2\pi j \omega}}{j\omega} =e^{j\pi \omega}(\frac{e^{-j\pi \omega}-e^{j\pi \omega}}{j\omega})=-e^{j\pi \omega}\frac{2\sin(\pi \omega)}{\omega}$$Taking the absolute value, you recover the answer from method #1
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman
Fred Wright said:
Yes, you got the right answer in method #1. For method #2 you have,$$
\frac{1}{s}-\frac{e^{2\pi s}}{s}\rightarrow \frac{1}{j\omega}-\frac{e^{2\pi j \omega}}{j\omega} =e^{j\pi \omega}(\frac{e^{-j\pi \omega}-e^{j\pi \omega}}{j\omega})=-e^{j\pi \omega}\frac{2\sin(\pi \omega)}{\omega}$$Taking the absolute value, you recover the answer from method #1

Thank you!

But I was purposely trying to avoid exponentials. Is there any way to simplify the trigonometric expression in Method #2 further?
 
Hi,

I was able to fix Method #2 and got the correct answer.

1588381138990.png
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top