Standard notation for "open integral"

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the notation for an "open integral" in the context of functions defined over integrals, specifically how to denote an integral that combines multiple functions without implying multiplication of the integral result by another function. The scope includes mathematical reasoning and notation conventions.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks a standard notation for an "open integral" that would allow them to express a function as an integral combined with another function without implying multiplication of the integral result.
  • Another participant suggests that the concept of convolution may be related to the discussion, although they express limited knowledge on the topic.
  • A later reply acknowledges the similarity to convolution but emphasizes that the original question is more general than just the convolution form.
  • Further clarification is provided that the integral form presented leads to a different notation than what is typically used for convolution.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not appear to reach a consensus on a standard notation for the "open integral." There are multiple viewpoints regarding the relationship to convolution and the generality of the question posed.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the potential ambiguity in notation and the need for clarity in mathematical expressions, particularly when combining integrals with other functions.

qu_bio
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
If I have a function defined over an integral, e.g.

## F(t') = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dt \tilde{F}(t,t') ##

is there a standard way to denote this integral as being "Open", that is to say if I write

## H = F(t') G(t) ##

I want this to mean

## H = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dt \tilde{F}(t,t') G(t) ##

Rather than

## H = [\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dt \tilde{F}(t,t') ] * G(t) ##

I could make up some notation, but I'd rather not if one exists!

Many thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't know too much about this, but I believe a convolution is a closely related concept.
 
certainly said:
I don't know too much about this, but I believe a convolution is a closely related concept.
Yes I suppose it looks similar if F(t,t') -> F(t-t'), but my question is a little more general.
 
qu_bio said:
Yes I suppose it looks similar if F(t,t') -> F(t-t'), but my question is a little more general.
One more difference:-
##\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}\bar{F}(t'-t)G(t) dt=[\bar{F}\ast G](t')## not ##F(t')##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K