Solving Fourier Inverse: Integrals and Techniques for Exam Revision

  • Thread starter Thread starter usn7564
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fourier Inverse
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the inverse Fourier transform of a function given in the context of exam revision. The original poster is attempting to find the inverse of the function F(ω) = e^(iω)/(1+ω²) and is struggling with the last step of the process. They mention the use of a table for reference during exams but are unable to find a suitable match for their function.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Some participants suggest using the convolution theorem as a potential method for solving the problem. Others mention applying the inverse Fourier transform formula and utilizing the residue theorem for evaluating the integral. The original poster questions the specific methods applicable when dealing with a product of functions whose Fourier inverses are known.

Discussion Status

The discussion includes various approaches to tackle the problem, with some participants offering guidance on using the convolution theorem and the residue theorem. There appears to be an ongoing exploration of methods without a clear consensus on the best approach yet.

Contextual Notes

The original poster notes that the integral resulting from the inverse Fourier transform seems complex and possibly beyond the scope of their course content. There is also mention of different conventions in the application of the Fourier transform, which may affect the interpretation of the problem.

usn7564
Messages
61
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Doing some exam revision and one of the questions from an old exam has me stuck at the last step, simply need to inverse the following

F( \omega ) = \frac{e^{i \omega}}{1+\omega ^2}


We're allowed to use a table on the exams but I cannot find anything quite resembling what I have (nor in any way that I can manipulate it). The inverse formula lead me to an integral that seems to be well over my head or the content of this course.

Is there some specific method to utilize when I have a product of two functions whose Fourier inverse I know? The exponential or denominator on its own wouldn't be a problem.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Use the convolution theorem.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
For the inverse FT just use the formula. I don't know your convention. In theoretical high-energy physics it would read
f(t)=\int_{\mathbb{R}} \mathrm{d} \omega \frac{1}{2 \pi} F(\omega) \exp(-\mathrm{i} \omega t).
Now you can use the theorem of residues easily in your case. You just close the contour in the appropriate upper or lower half-plane for t<0 or t>0 respectively. Your function has only simple poles along the imaginary axis. So there is no big trouble getting the result.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
vela said:
Use the convolution theorem.
Didn't think of going backwards with the convolution theorem, that should certainly work thank you.

vanhees71 said:
For the inverse FT just use the formula. I don't know your convention. In theoretical high-energy physics it would read
f(t)=\int_{\mathbb{R}} \mathrm{d} \omega \frac{1}{2 \pi} F(\omega) \exp(-\mathrm{i} \omega t).
Now you can use the theorem of residues easily in your case. You just close the contour in the appropriate upper or lower half-plane for t<0 or t>0 respectively. Your function has only simple poles along the imaginary axis. So there is no big trouble getting the result.
Only half a year since I finished our course in complex analysis and the fact that I could use residues completely slipped my mind, thanks. Going to need to revise that a tiny bit, but was rather algorithmic if I recall correctly.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K