Product of a delta function and functions of its arguments

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of the Dirac delta function, particularly in the context of products involving functions of its arguments. The original poster is examining the validity of an identity involving the delta function and two arbitrary functions, f and g, and is seeking clarification on the implications of their independence and the conditions under which the identity holds.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of the delta function's definition and its application to products of functions. There is a focus on whether the identity holds under certain conditions and the interpretation of variables involved.

Discussion Status

Several participants are actively questioning the assumptions made regarding the independence of variables and the interpretation of results from computational tools like WolframAlpha. There is an ongoing exploration of specific cases and the conditions under which the identity may or may not hold.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the functions f and g are assumed to be "nice," and there is a discussion about the independence of the variables x and x'. The original poster also references a specific case tested in WolframAlpha that returned conflicting results, prompting further inquiry into the nature of generalized functions.

ELB27
Messages
117
Reaction score
15

Homework Statement


I am trying to determine whether
$$f(x)g(x')\delta (x-x') = f(x)g(x)\delta (x-x') = f(x')g(x')\delta(x-x')$$
where \delta(x-x') is the Dirac delta function and f,g are some arbitrary (reasonably nice?) functions.

Homework Equations


The defining equation of a delta function:
$$\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \delta(x-x')f(x')dx' = f(x)$$
(I'm supposing x' is the variable of integration, but it shouldn't matter I think)

The Attempt at a Solution


It appears that from the integral definition of the delta function,
$$\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}f(x)g(x')\delta (x-x') h(x')dx' = f(x)g(x)h(x) = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}f(x)g(x)\delta (x-x') h(x')dx' = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}f(x')g(x')\delta (x-x') h(x')dx'$$
for all h(x). Thus, the above identity appears to be correct. However, when I ask WolframAlpha a special case of this question, the answer is that the identity is false. How can I determine which it is?

Any comments/suggestions would be highly appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't have an answer, but if you replace ##y## with any concrete number, then the equality becomes correct. So wolfram is interpreting ##y## as a variable, while in your proof you treat it as a constant.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: ELB27
Can someone give a counterexample ?
 
ELB27 said:

Homework Statement


I am trying to determine whether
$$f(x)g(x')\delta (x-x') = f(x)g(x)\delta (x-x') = f(x')g(x')\delta(x-x')$$
where \delta(x-x') is the Dirac delta function and f,g are some arbitrary (reasonably nice?) functions.

Homework Equations


The defining equation of a delta function:
$$\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \delta(x-x')f(x')dx' = f(x)$$
(I'm supposing x' is the variable of integration, but it shouldn't matter I think)

The Attempt at a Solution


It appears that from the integral definition of the delta function,
$$\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}f(x)g(x')\delta (x-x') h(x')dx' = f(x)g(x)h(x) = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}f(x)g(x)\delta (x-x') h(x')dx' = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}f(x')g(x')\delta (x-x') h(x')dx'$$
for all h(x). Thus, the above identity appears to be correct. However, when I ask WolframAlpha a special case of this question, the answer is that the identity is false. How can I determine which it is?

Any comments/suggestions would be highly appreciated!

For which special case did WolframAlpha say it is false? AFIK what you wrote is true, at least if ##f## and ##g## are "nice" functions.

If we understand that ##x'## is the integration variable, then the four operators
L_1 = f(x&#039;) g(x) \delta(x&#039;-x)\\<br /> L_2 = f(x) g(x&#039;) \delta(x&#039;-x)\\<br /> L_3 = f(x&#039;)g(x&#039;) \delta(x&#039;-x)\\<br /> L_4= f(x) g(x) \delta(x&#039;-x)<br />
produce the same result when applied to any test function ##h(x')##, so in the generalized-function sense we have ##L_1 = L_2 = L_3=L_4##.

I think it is important that ##x'## and ##x## are "independent"; if they somehow vary together (for example, if ##x = \phi(x')##) then, of course, everything can change.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: ELB27 and BvU
Ray Vickson said:
For which special case did WolframAlpha say it is false? AFIK what you wrote is true, at least if ##f## and ##g## are "nice" functions.

If we understand that ##x'## is the integration variable, then the four operators
L_1 = f(x&#039;) g(x) \delta(x&#039;-x)\\<br /> L_2 = f(x) g(x&#039;) \delta(x&#039;-x)\\<br /> L_3 = f(x&#039;)g(x&#039;) \delta(x&#039;-x)\\<br /> L_4= f(x) g(x) \delta(x&#039;-x)<br />
produce the same result when applied to any test function ##h(x')##, so in the generalized-function sense we have ##L_1 = L_2 = L_3=L_4##.

I think it is important that ##x'## and ##x## are "independent"; if they somehow vary together (for example, if ##x = \phi(x')##) then, of course, everything can change.
Thanks! I indeed meant that ##x## and ##x'## are independent. The special case I entered into WolframAlpha is ##xy\delta (x-y) \overset{?}{=} x^2\delta (x-y)## to which it returned false. Following micromass' comment, I entered ##y=5## and it returned true as an "alternate form" while still answering false as the main answer. Apparently something's wrong with WolframAlpha itself then.

Thanks again!

EDIT: As a follow up: To prove some equality of generalized functions, is it sufficient to simply show as above that they give the same result for all possible test functions? In other words, can such functions be distinguished in any way without considering their action on a test function?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K