I Orthogonal 3D Basis Functions in Spherical Coordinates

dreens
Messages
40
Reaction score
11
I'd like to expand a 3D scalar function I'm working with, ##f(r,\theta,\phi)##, in an orthogonal spherical 3D basis set. For the angular component I intend to use spherical harmonics, but what should I do for the radial direction?

Close to zero, ##f(r)\propto r##, and above a fuzzy threshold ##r_0## I don't really care about the value of f anymore. So I can make it go to zero exponentially, polynomially, or just cut it off suddenly depending on which allows me to have the best numerical computation time for the expansion I obtain.

It seems like I have a number of options, like the normalized hydrogenic radial wavefunctions since they're automatically orthonormal by virtue of being the solution of schrodinger's equation. This seems silly though since my scalar has nothing to do with hydrogen or schrodinger's equation.

Maybe the spherical bessel functions, but they don't seem to converge when I integrate them, since they go to zero to slowly.

I suppose I could just do a Fourier expansion with a cutoff at ##r_0## and just divide the basis functions by r so that when I do the spherical integral the ##r^2## in the Jacobean gives me the usual Fourier orthogonality. Anything wrong with this way?
 
Okay, I have an update and I'll try and add some more details and pretty equations :-).

So I'd like to represent ##h(r,\phi,\theta)## as an expansion of orthonormal functions:

$$h(r,\theta,\phi) = \sum_{n=0}^\infty \sum_{l=0}^\infty \sum_{m=-l}^l A_{nlm} f_n(r)g_{lm}(\theta,\phi)\\$$

Where by orthonormality I mean that the families ##g_{lm}## and ##f_n## satisfy the following:
$$\int_0^\pi\sin(\theta) d\theta\int_0^{2\pi}d\phi\,g_{lm}(\theta,\phi)g_{l^*m^*}(\theta,\phi)=\delta_{ll^*}\delta_{mm^*}\\
\int_0^{r_0}r^2dr f_n(r)f_{n^*}(r)=\delta_{nn^*}$$

Which would allow me to calculate each ##A_{nlm}## by convolving h with the corresponding members of the orthonormal families:

$$A_{nlm} = \int_0^{r_0}r^2dr\int_0^\pi\sin(\theta) d\theta\int_0^{2\pi}d\phi\,h(r,\theta,\phi)\cdot f_n(r) g_{lm}(\theta,\phi)$$

The reason I want to do this is that I only have access to a numerical approximation of ##h## evaluated on a grid of data points, but I'd like to perform a routine that would involve calculating symbolic second order derivatives of ##h##, which I could do if I first represent ##h## as an expansion of differentiable analytic functions.

For ##g_{lm}## I am using the well known spherical harmonics, with a slight modification to focus on my real rather than complex scalar:

$$g_{lm} = N_{lm} P_l^m(\cos(\theta))\text{sincos}(m,\phi)\\
\text{sincos}(m,x) = \begin{cases}
\cos(x) & m<0 \\
1& m=0 \\
\sin(x)& m>0
\end{cases}\\
N_{lm}\text{ defined s.t. }\int_0^\pi\sin(\theta) d\theta\int_0^{2\pi}d\phi \left(N_{lm}P_l^m(\cos(\theta))\text{sincos}(m,\phi)\right)^2 = 1
$$

In my first post above, I mentioned my intention to try using ##f_n(r) = \sin(n\pi r/r_0)/r##: We can check orthogonality:

$$ \int_0^{r_0}r^2dr\,\sin(n\pi r/r_0)/r\sin(m\pi r/r_0)/r = N_n^2\delta_{nm} $$

The ##r^2## cancels the two ##1/r##'s, leaving the usual Fourier orthogonality, and we can make the related orthonormal set ##\tilde{f}_n=f_n/N_n##.

Unfortunately this fails to converge to my desired function ##h##, because I know that close to ##r=0##, ##h(r)\propto r##, whereas the sinc function ##\sin(r)/r\propto1##. If I could take a large number of terms, it would do better and better, but I would be better off choosing a family of functions ##f_n(r)## such that for all ##n##, ##f_n(r)\propto r## near ##r=0##. Does anyone know such a family that also satisfies the requisite orthogonality?

I also tried the family of Hydrogen wavefunctions, since at least for l=1, their radial components go to ##r=0## like ##r##. The Laguerre and Legendre polynomials proved a bit too computationally intensive for my dataset. I may still be able to get it to work, but I'd rather hunt for a better functional family.

Another idea I had was to just fit an expansion to ##h(r) - \alpha r##, where I just subtract away the linear behavior close to ##r=0## and then use the sinc family to fit the rest. This would still give me the analytic expression for ##h## I desire, even though one of the terms wouldn't truly belong to my chosen functional family. I'm stalled on this approach however, because actually there's angle dependence: ##h(r) = \alpha(\theta,\phi)\cdot r## as ##r\rightarrow 0##. I suppose I could first fit alpha with a 2D spherical expansion and go from there. But again, it would be nice to find the right family of functions and do a single complete 3D expansion.
 
  • Like
Likes S.G. Janssens
Thank you, I read bits and pieces (time permitting), but I wanted to let you know that I appreciate your follow-up.
 
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...
Thread 'Imaginary pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top