Proving the Convolution Formula: Integral Equations

  • Thread starter Thread starter icystrike
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Property Urgent
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the convolution formula using integral equations, specifically focusing on the double integral of the product of two variables over a defined range.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the separation of multiple integrals and question the conditions under which this separation is valid, particularly referencing Fubini's theorem.

Discussion Status

The conversation is exploring the validity of separating integrals and the implications of the region of integration. Some participants have provided insights into the conditions for applying Fubini's theorem, while others are seeking clarification on these concepts.

Contextual Notes

There is an ongoing examination of the assumptions related to the convergence of integrals and the nature of the integration region, with references to theorems that govern these principles.

icystrike
Messages
444
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



[tex]\int_{0}^{1} \int_{0}^{1} (xy) dx dy = [\int_{0}^{1} (x) dx] [\int_{0}^{1} (y) dy][/tex]

Its use to prove the convolution formula..


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's just standard separating multiple integrals, you could write the same thing with xy replaced by f(x)f(y).
 
Tangent87 said:
It's just standard separating multiple integrals, you could write the same thing with xy replaced by f(x)f(y).

But why is that so? Is it because the region of integration is rectangular?
Referring to Fubini Theorem
 
icystrike said:
But why is that so? Is it because the region of integration is rectangular?
Referring to Fubini Theorem

No the region of integration does not have to be rectangular, it will work whenever the integral converges/exists, as you say Fubini's theorem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fubini's_theorem
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K