Proving a Dirac delta property

carlosbgois
Messages
66
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


[/B]
Prove that \delta[a(x-x_1)]=\frac{1}{a}\delta(x-x_1)

Homework Equations



In my attempt I have used \delta(ax)=\frac{1}{a}\delta(x) but I'm not sure I'm allowed to use it in this proof.

The Attempt at a Solution



Some properties of Dirac delta function are proven using a test function. Thence I tried I=\int f(x)\delta[a(x-x_1)]=

In the following I tried the substitution y = x - x1, getting I=\int f(y+x_1)\delta(ay)=\frac{1}{a}\int f(y+x_1)\delta(y)=\frac{1}{a}f(x_1)=\frac{1}{a}\int f(x)\delta(x-x_1)

But I don't know if this proof is correct, as I have used a property similar to the one I'm trying to prove. Is it ok to do this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
carlosbgois said:
Thence I tried I=\int f(x)\delta[a(x-x_1)]=
Next, do another integration with ##\delta[a(x-x_1)]## replaced by ##\frac{1}{a}\delta(x-x_1)##, with the same ##f(x)##. Then compare the results with the first integration, taking into account that ##f(x)## is an arbitrary function.
 
carlosbgois said:

Homework Statement


[/B]
Prove that \delta[a(x-x_1)]=\frac{1}{a}\delta(x-x_1)

Homework Equations



In my attempt I have used \delta(ax)=\frac{1}{a}\delta(x) but I'm not sure I'm allowed to use it in this proof.
I don't think you're allowed to use that. Try the substitution ##u = a(x-x_1)##.
 
What is your definition of the delta function? Exactly how you would prove this depends upon which definition you are using and I believe there are several.
 
Hallsoflvy: I have used the definition by the integral \int f(x)\delta(x)=f(0)
vela: with this substitution it worked.

Thank you all for the help
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top