Sum of Related Periodic Functions

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the question of whether the sum of a periodic function \( f(x) \) with a fundamental period \( T \) and a scaled version of itself \( f(cx) \) (where \( c \) is an integer greater than 1) can have a fundamental period less than \( T \). Participants explore this concept through intuition, proposed proofs, and attempts to find counterexamples.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the answer is likely no, based on intuitive reasoning regarding the nature of periodic functions.
  • One participant suggests that a proof could involve taking the derivative of the function and comparing constants to the period, although they express uncertainty about the approach.
  • Another participant attempts to construct a proof by contradiction, indicating that if the sum has a fundamental period less than \( T \), it must take a specific form involving integers, but they encounter a roadblock in proving that this integer must be 1.
  • Several participants present similar proofs regarding the properties of periodic functions, emphasizing that if \( f(x) \) has a fundamental period \( T \), any other period must be an integer multiple of \( T \).
  • There is a clarification that the original question specifically asks about the sum \( f(x) + f(cx) \) and its potential period, highlighting the addition of a higher frequency version of \( f(x) \).
  • One participant notes a lack of new information or counterexamples in the literature, suggesting that the topic may not be widely discussed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the intuition that the sum likely does not have a fundamental period less than \( T \), but there is no consensus on a definitive proof or counterexample. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the existence of such a counterexample.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge limitations in their proofs and reasoning, including assumptions about differentiability and the need for further exploration of the properties of periodic functions. There is also mention of unresolved mathematical steps in the proposed proofs.

Dschumanji
Messages
153
Reaction score
1
I have been looking through the book Counterexamples: From Elementary Calculus to the Beginning of Calculus and became interested in the section on periodic functions. I thought of the following question:

Suppose you have a periodic real valued function f(x) with a fundamental period T. Let c be an integer greater than 1. Is it possible for f(x)+f(cx) to have a fundamental period less than T?

Many simple examples would seem to indicate that the answer is no, but I can't find a proof and have failed to develop my own proof. I searched through many other books on counterexamples and can't seem to find an example that would indicate the answer is yes.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I believe that the answer would be no as well. At least that's what I think it would be intuitively. Perhaps a proof could be made by taking the derivative where the integer is then seen as a constant and comparing said constant to the period or something like that. Perhaps a proof could be made based off of the definitions you have given? I'm not sure how exactly you want to go about your proof. Anything that you started or something else you had in mind?
 
RaulTheUCSCSlug said:
I believe that the answer would be no as well. At least that's what I think it would be intuitively. Perhaps a proof could be made by taking the derivative where the integer is then seen as a constant and comparing said constant to the period or something like that. Perhaps a proof could be made based off of the definitions you have given? I'm not sure how exactly you want to go about your proof. Anything that you started or something else you had in mind?
The function may or may not be differentiable. I have been trying to construct a proof (using contradiction) to show that the sum must have a fundamental period of T using only the information given. I have only gotten as far as showing that if the sum has a fundamental period less than T, then that period must be of the form T/d where d is an integer greater than 1, c does not divide d, and d does not divide c. I have hit a road block trying to show that d must be 1. It seems that there is not enough information to finish the proof. If that were the case then there should be a counterexample showing that the fundamental period of the sum can be less than T.
 
Dschumanji said:
Suppose you have a periodic real valued function f(x) with a fundamental period T. Let c be an integer greater than 1. Is it possible for f(x)+f(cx) to have a fundamental period less than T?
I am not exactly sure of what you are asking, but I will present a proof of something that I hope is what you are asking.

Assume f(x) has fundamental period T (i.e. f(x+T)= f(x) for all x). Of course f(x) is also periodic with period 2T, 3T,... but T is the smallest value that the period can have. Now, if f(x) is also periodic with period U ( f(x+U)= f(x) for all x) and U>T, then there must exist an integer n such that n⋅T≤U<(n+1)⋅T. If U>n⋅T, then f(x+(U-n⋅T)) = f((x+U)-n⋅T)=f(x-n⋅T)=f(x), so f would be periodic with period (U-n⋅T). But subtracting n⋅T from the inequality results in 0≤(U-n⋅T)<T, a contradiction (since T is assumed to be the smallest value for the period).
 
Svein said:
I am not exactly sure of what you are asking, but I will present a proof of something that I hope is what you are asking.

Assume f(x) has fundamental period T (i.e. f(x+T)= f(x) for all x). Of course f(x) is also periodic with period 2T, 3T,... but T is the smallest value that the period can have. Now, if f(x) is also periodic with period U ( f(x+U)= f(x) for all x) and U>T, then there must exist an integer n such that n⋅T≤U<(n+1)⋅T. If U>n⋅T, then f(x+(U-n⋅T)) = f((x+U)-n⋅T)=f(x-n⋅T)=f(x), so f would be periodic with period (U-n⋅T). But subtracting n⋅T from the inequality results in 0≤(U-n⋅T)<T, a contradiction (since T is assumed to be the smallest value for the period).
Your proof shows that if a periodic function has a fundamental period T (the smallest period of the function), then any other period of the function must be an integer multiple of T. My question asks if a periodic function f(x) has a fundamental period T, can the sum of the function f(x) and the function f(cx) have a fundamental period less than T (note that c is an integer greater than 1). The important thing here is that we are adding a higher frequency version of f(x) to f(x).
 
Either this topic is really boring or no one else has been able to find any new information. I have been searching through books online and have yet to come across any counterexamples or proofs.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K