Regarding Inverse Laplace Transforms

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the conditions under which a function F(s) can undergo an inverse Laplace transform, particularly when the limit as s approaches infinity is zero, i.e., lim_{s\to\infty}F(s) = 0. It is established that this condition alone does not guarantee the existence of the inverse transform via the Bromwich integral. A sufficient condition mentioned is |sF(s)| < M, although this does not apply to functions like F(s)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{s}}. The conversation also explores the use of Post's inversion formula and the Grunwald-Letnikov differintegral as potential tools for proof.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Laplace Transforms and their properties
  • Familiarity with the Bromwich integral
  • Knowledge of Post's inversion formula
  • Concept of the Grunwald-Letnikov differintegral
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the conditions for the existence of the Bromwich integral
  • Study Post's inversion formula in detail
  • Explore the Grunwald-Letnikov differintegral and its applications
  • Examine examples of functions that do not meet sufficient conditions for inversion
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, engineers, and students studying control theory or differential equations who are interested in the properties of Laplace transforms and their inverses.

flouran
Messages
64
Reaction score
0
I was looking through some tables of Laplace Transforms on f(t) the other day, and I noticed that in all cases, as s \to \infty, F(s) \to 0. A question that I have been trying to prove is that if \lim_{s\to\infty}F(s) = 0, then does that necessitate whether F(s) can undergo an inverse Laplace transform (i.e. by the Bromwich integral)?

I suspect that the answer is "no", but if anyone has some attempt at a proof I would appreciate it (my idea would be to use Post's inversion formula and utilizing the Grunwald-Letnikov differintegral for evaluating F^{(k)}\left(\frac{k}{t}\right), but so far this has been futile)?

Thanks (and if my question needs any clarification please let me know),
flouran
 
Physics news on Phys.org
flouran said:
I was looking through some tables of Laplace Transforms on f(t) the other day, and I noticed that in all cases, as s \to \infty, F(s) \to 0. A question that I have been trying to prove is that if \lim_{s\to\infty}F(s) = 0, then does that necessitate whether F(s) can undergo an inverse Laplace transform (i.e. by the Bromwich integral)?
No.
flouran said:
I suspect that the answer is "no", but if anyone has some attempt at a proof I would appreciate it (my idea would be to use Post's inversion formula and utilizing the Grunwald-Letnikov differintegral for evaluating F^{(k)}\left(\frac{k}{t}\right), but so far this has been futile)?
Managed to prove it.
 
flouran said:
I was looking through some tables of Laplace Transforms on f(t) the other day, and I noticed that in all cases, as s \to \infty, F(s) \to 0. A question that I have been trying to prove is that if \lim_{s\to\infty}F(s) = 0, then does that necessitate whether F(s) can undergo an inverse Laplace transform (i.e. by the Bromwich integral)?

Interesting. One book that I read gives |sF(s)| < M as a sufficient condition for the Bromwich integral to exist. With this condition it is not possible to invert F(s)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{s}}. But of course we can find the inverse from the Laplace transform table.

Is there a more less restricted sufficient condition? As you stated \lim_{s\to\infty}F(s) = 0 doesn't works.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
10K