Property of the convolution product

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of the convolution product and its relationship with the Fourier transform and its inverse. Participants explore whether the convolution property holds for the inverse transform as it does for the forward transform, focusing on theoretical implications and mathematical definitions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant states the known property of the Fourier transform of the convolution product and questions if it applies to the inverse transform as well.
  • Another participant suggests that the only difference between the Fourier transform and its inverse is the sign in the exponential, implying that the convolution property should hold for the inverse transform, although they note a lack of references to this property.
  • A third participant advises to apply the inverse Fourier transform directly to the known property without concern for integral definitions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the applicability of the convolution property to the inverse transform, with no consensus reached on its validity.

Contextual Notes

Unresolved aspects include the lack of formal references to the property for the inverse transform and the implications of the integral definitions on the discussion.

Jhenrique
Messages
676
Reaction score
4
It is known that:[tex]\mathcal{F}\{f\ast g\}=\mathcal{F}\{f\}\mathcal{F}\{g\}[/tex][tex]\mathcal{F}\{f g\}=\mathcal{F}\{f\}\mathcal\ast{F}\{g\}[/tex]

But this property is valid for inverse tranform too?[tex]\mathcal{F}^{-1}\{F\ast G\}=\mathcal{F}^{-1}\{F\} \mathcal{F}^{-1}\{G\}[/tex][tex]\mathcal{F}^{-1}\{F G\}=\mathcal{F}^{-1}\{F\}\ast \mathcal{F}^{-1}\{G\}[/tex]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Think about this for a moment...
 
Ben Niehoff said:
Think about this for a moment...

The only difference between ##\mathcal{F}## and ##\mathcal{F}^{-1}## is the sign in the exponential in the kernel, thus, appears there isn't reason for the property of the convolution not be valid for inverse transform, I think. Although I never saw this affirmation/property for inverse transform in anywhere.
 
You don't need to worry about the integral definitions. Just use this:

Jhenrique said:
It is known that:[tex]\mathcal{F}\{f\ast g\}=\mathcal{F}\{f\}\mathcal{F}\{g\}[/tex][tex]\mathcal{F}\{f g\}=\mathcal{F}\{f\}\ast\mathcal{F}\{g\}[/tex]

and apply ##\mathcal F^{-1}## to each line.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Oh yeah! Thank you!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K