On convolution theorem of Laplace transform: Schiff

  • #1
psie
122
12
TL;DR Summary
I'm reading Schiff's book The Laplace Transform. On page 92-93 he proves the convolution theorem. It's a very self-contained proof, with no reference to any prior results. However, I have some integration-related questions that I struggle with.
Here follows the theorem and proof:

Theorem (Convolution Theorem). If ##f## and ##g## are piecewise continuous on ##[0,\infty)## and of exponential order ##\alpha##, then $$\mathcal{L}\left[(f*g)(t)\right]=\mathcal{L}\big(f(t)\big)\cdot\mathcal{L}\big(g(t)\big)\quad \Big(Re(s)>\alpha\Big).$$

Proof. Let us start with the product \begin{align} \mathcal{L}\big(f(t)\big)\cdot\mathcal{L}\big(g(t)\big)&=\left(\int_0^\infty e^{-s\tau}f(\tau)d\tau\right)\left(\int_0^\infty e^{-su}g(u)du\right) \nonumber \\
&=\int_0^\infty \left(\int_0^\infty e^{-s(\tau+u)}f(\tau)g(u)du\right)d\tau \nonumber .
\end{align}
Substituting ##t=\tau+u##, and noting that ##\tau## is fixed in the interior integral, so that ##du=dt##, we have $$\mathcal{L}\big(f(t)\big)\cdot\mathcal{L}\big(g(t)\big)=\int_0^\infty \left(\int_\tau^\infty e^{-st}f(\tau)g(t-\tau)dt\right)d\tau .\tag 1$$ If we define ##g(t)=0## for ##t<0##, then ##g(t-\tau)=0## for ##t<\tau## and we can write ##(1)## as $$\mathcal{L}\big(f(t)\big)\cdot\mathcal{L}\big(g(t)\big)=\int_0^\infty \int_0^\infty e^{-st}f(\tau)g(t-\tau)dtd\tau .$$ Due to the hypotheses on ##f## and ##g##, the Laplace integrals of ##f## and ##g## converge absolutely and hence, in view of the preceding calculation, $$\int_0^\infty \int_0^\infty |e^{-st}f(\tau)g(t-\tau)|dtd\tau$$ converges. This fact allows us to reverse the order of integration,* so that \begin{align} \mathcal{L}\big(f(t)\big)\cdot\mathcal{L}\big(g(t)\big)&=\int_0^\infty \int_0^\infty e^{-st}f(\tau)g(t-\tau)d\tau dt \nonumber \\
&=\int_0^\infty \left(\int_0^t e^{-st}f(\tau)g(t-\tau)d\tau\right)dt \nonumber \\
&=\int_0^\infty e^{-st} \left(\int_0^t f(\tau)g(t-\tau)d\tau\right)dt \nonumber \\ &=\mathcal{L}[(f*g)(t)]. \nonumber
\end{align}

*Let $$a_{mn}=\int_n^{n+1}\int_m^{m+1} |h(t,\tau)|dtd\tau,\quad b_{mn}=\int_n^{n+1}\int_m^{m+1} h(t,\tau) dtd\tau,$$ so that ##|b_{mn}|\leq a_{mn}##. If $$\int_0^\infty\int_0^\infty |h(t,\tau)|dtd\tau <\infty,$$ then ##\sum_{n=0}^\infty\sum_{m=0}^\infty a_{mn}<\infty##, implying ##\sum_{n=0}^\infty\sum_{m=0}^\infty |b_{mn}|<\infty##. Hence, by a standard result on double series, the order of summation can be interchanged $$\sum_{n=0}^\infty\sum_{m=0}^\infty b_{mn}=\sum_{m=0}^\infty\sum_{n=0}^\infty b_{mn},$$
i.e., $$\int_0^\infty\int_0^\infty h(t,\tau) dtd\tau =\int_0^\infty\int_0^\infty h(t,\tau) d\tau dt.$$

Questions:

1. I do not understand the following part "...and hence, in view of the preceding calculation, ##\int_0^\infty \int_0^\infty |e^{-st}f(\tau)g(t-\tau)|dtd\tau## converges".

We know that ##\mathcal{L}\big(f(t)\big)## and ##\mathcal{L}\big(g(t)\big)## converge absolutely. So does their product converge absolutely (I assume this is the statement he is making)? If yes, how come?

The definition of absolute convergence given in the book is that ##\int_0^\infty |e^{-st}f(t)|dt## converges for a given real or complex parameter ##s##.

2. Regarding the footnote, if ##I=\int_0^\infty\int_0^\infty f(x,y)dxdy##, can we then always write ##I## as a double series, i.e. ##I=\sum_{n=0}^\infty\sum_{m=0}^\infty c_{mn}## where ##c_{mn}=\int_n^{n+1}\int_m^{m+1} f(x,y)dxdy## (I assume this is what Schiff is doing)? If not, what justifies that we can in this case and how?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
psie said:
1. I do not understand the following part "...and hence, in view of the preceding calculation, ##\int_0^\infty \int_0^\infty |e^{-st}f(\tau)g(t-\tau)|dtd\tau## converges".
You are given that ##|f(\tau)|\le K_1 e^{\alpha\tau}## and ##|g(t-\tau)|\le K_2 e^{\alpha(t-\tau)}##, hence

##|e^{-st}f(\tau)g(t-\tau)|\le K_1K_2 e^{-Re(s)t} e^{\alpha\tau} e^{\alpha(t-\tau)} =K_1K_2 e^{(\alpha-Re(s))t} ##

Which is integrable for ##Re(s) > \alpha##.
 
  • Like
Likes psie
  • #3
martinbn said:
Which is integrable for ##Re(s) > \alpha##.
Hmm, I get then that $$\int_0^\infty \int_0^\infty |e^{-st}f(\tau)g(t-\tau)|dtd\tau\leq \int_0^\infty \int_0^\infty K_1K_2e^{(\alpha-Re(s))t}dtd\tau,$$ under the assumption that improper integrals depending on a parameter respect monotonicity. Are you sure the above converges?

By the way, in his book the definition of exponential order ##\alpha## means that it's supposed to hold eventually, so we have ##|f(\tau)|\le K_1 e^{\alpha\tau}## for ##\tau\geq\tau_0## where ##\tau_0\geq 0##.
 
  • #4
psie said:
Hmm, I get then that $$\int_0^\infty \int_0^\infty |e^{-st}f(\tau)g(t-\tau)|dtd\tau\leq \int_0^\infty \int_0^\infty K_1K_2e^{(\alpha-Re(s))t}dtd\tau,$$ under the assumption that improper integrals depending on a parameter respect monotonicity. Are you sure the above converges?

Recall that [itex]g(u) = 0 [/itex] for [itex]u < 0[/itex], so the lower limit of the inner integral is really [itex]\tau[/itex]. Also note that convergence requires [itex]\alpha - \operatorname{Re}(s) < 0[/itex], so we can replace it by [itex]-|\alpha - \operatorname{Re}(s)|[/itex]. Then [tex]\begin{split}
\int_0^\infty \int_0^\infty |e^{-st}f(\tau)g(t-\tau)|\,dt\,d\tau &\leq \int_0^\infty \int_\tau^\infty K_1K_2e^{-|\alpha-\operatorname{Re}(s)|t}\,dt\,d\tau \\
&= K_1K_2\frac1{|\alpha - \operatorname{Re}(s)|}\int_0^\infty e^{-|\alpha-\operatorname{Re}(s)|\tau}\,d\tau.\end{split}[/tex]
 
  • Like
Likes psie
  • #5
Thank you.

I think I can answer my second question. Let ##\int_0^\infty f(x) dx=\lim_{t\to\infty}\int_0^t f(x)dx## be an improper Riemann integral. Then, if we let ##t=n\in\mathbb N##, we get ##\int_0^n f(x)dx = \sum_{i=0}^{n-1} \int_i^{i+1} f(x)dx##, and in the limit ##n\to\infty##, we get $$\int_0^\infty f(x)dx=\sum_{i=0}^\infty \int_i^{i+1} f(x)dx.$$ So if the integral converges, then the sum converges. However, consider ##f(x)=\sin(2\pi x)##. Then the integral over the interval ##[i,i+1]## is ##0##, so the sum converges, but the improper integral does not. Hence the converse does not hold.
 

What is the convolution theorem of Laplace transform?

The convolution theorem of Laplace transform states that the Laplace transform of the convolution of two functions is equal to the product of their individual Laplace transforms.

How is the convolution theorem applied in practice?

In practice, the convolution theorem is used to simplify the process of finding the Laplace transform of a convolution of two functions. Instead of convolving the functions directly, you can simply multiply their Laplace transforms.

What is the significance of the convolution theorem in signal processing?

In signal processing, the convolution theorem is crucial for analyzing and manipulating signals. It allows for efficient computation of convolutions using the simpler operations of multiplication and addition in the Laplace domain.

Are there any limitations or conditions for applying the convolution theorem?

One important condition for applying the convolution theorem is that the functions involved must be of exponential order. Additionally, the Laplace transforms of the functions must exist for the convolution theorem to be valid.

Can the convolution theorem be extended to other transform domains?

Yes, the convolution theorem has analogs in other transform domains, such as the Fourier transform. The concept of transforming convolutions into products is a powerful tool that is widely used in various branches of mathematics and engineering.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
161
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
793
Replies
1
Views
940
  • Differential Equations
Replies
17
Views
867
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Calculus
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top