Starting with the definition of the Dirac delta function,

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
10 replies · 2K views
skrtic
Messages
14
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Starting with the definition of the Dirac delta function, show that [itex]\delta( \sqrt{x})[/itex]um... i have looked in my book and looked online for a problem like this and i really have no clue where to start. the only time i have used the dirac delta function is in an integral with another function and never with it in this form, only like delta(x-a).looking for guidance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
skrtic said:

Homework Statement



Starting with the definition of the Dirac delta function, show that [itex]\delta( \sqrt{x})[/itex]

Show that [itex]\delta( \sqrt{x})[/itex] is what?
 
sorry about that.

equal to 0
 
from what i get out of the text. it is what replaces an inner product that vanishes if x doesn't equal x'.

I also know that it's integral is unity.
 
[tex]\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}dx\,f(x)\delta(x)=f(0)[/tex]

Now, if only the argument of the delta function was [itex]\sqrt{z}[/itex] instead of [itex]x[/itex] ... hmmm, how could we make this happen?
 
let x= [itex]\sqrt{z}[/itex] then dx=(1/2)z^(-1/2)dz

and we get [itex]\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dz z^{-1/2} f(z^{-1/2})\delta(z^{-1/2})[/itex]
 
is this a valid assumption

treat [itex]\delta(\sqrt{x})[/itex] as [itex]\delta(\sqrt{x}-0)[/itex]
 
Aside: I know the hand-wavy argument is clear, but does anyone know of a source that actually defines the result of composing a distribution with a function of some sort?
 
so assuming i made the substitution right and that was what i was supposed to do, i still don't see how i proved that it equals zero.

is that supposed to say if i plug in zero for x i get zero?

and even if i treat [itex] \delta(\sqrt{x}) [/itex] as [itex] \delta(\sqrt{x}-0) [/itex]
i still don't have a function to plug zero into.

i am still quite confused about what i am trying to do.
 
Hurkyl said:
Aside: I know the hand-wavy argument is clear, but does anyone know of a source that actually defines the result of composing a distribution with a function of some sort?

Section 7.4.d Composition of [itex]\delta[/itex] with a function, from Mathematics for Physics and Physicists by Walter Appel.

The idea, as usual, is to to use the distribution obtained by integrating a locally integrable function against test functions to motivate a more general definition.

1. Use locally integrable [itex]g[/itex] and integration to generate a distribution [itex]G[/itex].

2. Use locally integrable [itex]g \circ f[/itex] and integration to generate a distribution denoted by [itex]G \circ f[/itex].

3. If [itex]x[/itex] is the integration variable in 2., make the substitution [itex]y = f(x)[/itex].

4. Relate [itex]G \circ f[/itex] to [itex]G[/itex].

5. Use 4. to motivate the definition of [itex]T \circ f[/itex] in tems of an arbitrary distribution [itex]T[/itex] and differentiable and bijective function [itex]f[/itex].

If I get time tomorrow, I might type in the details.
 
Last edited: