Power series and Laplace transform

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
2 replies · 5K views
ricard.py
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
As it can be read here, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laplace_transform#Relation_to_power_series
the Laplace transform is a continuous analog of a power series in which the discrete parameter n is replaced by the continuous parameter t, and x is replaced by exp(-s).

Therefore, computing a discrete power series or a continuous laplace transform should converge to the same function, is it right?

Let's apply it for the simplest case: a(x)=1

  • For the discrete power series it converges to 1/1-x (provided that -1<x<1)

  • For the continuous power series it converges to 1/s (provided that s>0)
Now, this two should be equivalent right? If you substitute s=-ln(x) you get
-1/ln(x), which is not the same as 1/1-x.

What I am doing wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ricard.py said:
As it can be read here, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laplace_transform#Relation_to_power_series
the Laplace transform is a continuous analog of a power series in which the discrete parameter n is replaced by the continuous parameter t, and x is replaced by exp(-s).

Therefore, computing a discrete power series or a continuous laplace transform should converge to the same function, is it right?

Let's apply it for the simplest case: a(x)=1

  • For the discrete power series it converges to 1/1-x (provided that -1<x<1)

  • For the continuous power series it converges to 1/s (provided that s>0)
Now, this two should be equivalent right? If you substitute s=-ln(x) you get
-1/ln(x), which is not the same as 1/1-x.

What I am doing wrong?

"Replace the discrete parameter n by the continuous parameter t" is not that straightforward.

Doing that literally would require that
[tex] \int_0^\infty f(t)e^{-st}\,dt = \sum_{n=0}^\infty f(n)e^{-ns}[/tex] which, as your example shows, is in general false.
What is true is that if you define [itex]f(t) = \sum_{n=0}^\infty a_n\delta(t - n)[/itex] where [itex]\delta[/itex] is the Dirac delta distribution then
[tex] \int_{0^{-}}^\infty f(t)e^{-st}\,dt = \sum_{n=0}^\infty a_n e^{-ns}.[/tex] Observe that here [itex]f(t) = 0[/itex] for all non-integer [itex]t[/itex] and that [itex]f(t)[/itex] is not technically defined for integer [itex]t[/itex]; it is not the case that [itex]f(n) = a_n[/itex].
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
In general, your statement "computing a discrete power series or a continuous laplace transform should converge to the same function" is incorrect. Interchanging two limit process does NOT always give the same result.