Using a Fourier transform on the wave equation

In summary: you mean, it's just\frac{1}{2 \pi}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\nabla^2 \tilde{\psi}\left( x,y,z,\omega \right) e^{-i\omega t}d\omega -c^{-2}\frac{1}{2 \pi}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\frac{\partial^2}{\partial t^2} \left[ \tilde{\psi} \left( x,y,z,\omega \right) e^{-i\omega t} \right] d\omega?
  • #1
Luminous Blob
50
0
Hi, I want to know how to get rid of the time part of the homogeneous wave equation:

[tex]
\newcommand{\pd}[3]{ \frac{ \partial^{#3}{#1} }{ \partial {#2}^{#3} } }
\nabla^2\psi-c^{-2}\pd{\psi}{t}{2} = 0[/tex]

I've read that this can be done using a Fourier transform, with the following given as the "frequency-time Fourier transform pair" that is apparently used for this (according to a document I found on the internet, anyway):

[tex]f(t)=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}f(\omega)e^{-i\omega t}d\omega[/tex]
[tex]f(\omega)=\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}f(t)e^{i\omega t}dt[/tex]

Now, I've never used Fourier transforms before and all the references I've come across say to use a Fourier transform to get the Helmholtz equation, but don't explain the steps.

Can anyone explain to me step-by-step how one applies a Fourier transform to the above wave equation to get the Helmholtz equation, or provide a good reference for beginners that explains it in reasonable detail?

Also, if there is another way it can be done (without using a Fourier transform) I'd appreciate any explanation. Thanks.

This isn't so much a homework question as me trying to understand some things that I've glossed over in the past (accepting the results without really understanding how they were reached). Should this question be in the maths forum instead, or is it okay to post it here?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
try:
introduction to Fourier optics. pages 32 (starting on "the helmholtz equation") up to 50.
author: joseph w. goodman.
 
  • #3
To get the Helmholtz, you substitute in:

[tex]E(r,t)=\Re\{E(r)e^{-i\omega t}\}[/tex]

for the field - this gives you the Hh. eqn. with a propagation constant.

(r is a direction vector)

To tie in with George's very detailed answer, the above treats the field as a single harmonic.
 
Last edited:
  • #4
[itex]\psi[/itex] is function of 4 variables, 3 spatial coordinates and time, i.e., [itex]\psi= \psi \left( x,y,z,t \right)[/itex].

Define a new, related function [itex]\tilde{\psi} \left( x,y,z, \omega \right)[/itex] that is also a function of 4 variables, by

[tex]\tilde{\psi} \left( x,y,z, \omega \right) = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \psi \left( x,y,z,t \right) e^{i\omega t}dt.[/tex]

Note that [itex]\tilde{\psi} \left( x,y,z, \omega \right)[/itex] is a function of the same 3 spatial coordinates as [itex]\psi[/itex], but now time is replaced by frequency. By the Fourier inversion theorem,

[tex]\psi \left( x,y,z, t \right) = \frac{1}{2\pi} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \tilde{\psi} \left( x,y,z,\omega \right) e^{-i\omega t}d \omega.[/tex]

Substitute this into your wave equation, and assume that you can move partial derivatives through the integral signs. This is as as much as you can do for the first term in the wave equation. In the second term, though, the time partial derivatives operate on [itex]e^{-i\omega t}[/itex].

What do you get for the wave equation?

Do things step-by-step, and if at any point things are unclear, just ask more questions.

Edit: I have been correcting mistakes in this post as I see them. I just corrected a serious mistake - the integration variable in the last equation was wrong.

Regards,
George
 
Last edited:
  • #5
So, wherever [tex]\psi[/tex] appears in the original wave equation, it is replaced by

[tex]\frac{1}{2\pi} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \tilde{\psi} \left( x,y,z,\omega \right) e^{-i\omega t}dt[/tex]

?

Also, what do you mean by "assume that you can move partial derivatives through the integral signs"?

Thanks for your help.
 
  • #6
Luminous Blob said:
So, wherever [tex]\psi[/tex] appears in the original wave equation, it is replaced by

[tex]\frac{1}{2\pi} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \tilde{\psi} \left( x,y,z,\omega \right) e^{-i\omega t}dt?[/tex]

Yes, but note the edit in my previous post that changes the integration variable.
Also, what do you mean by "assume that you can move partial derivatives through the integral signs"?

Thanks for your help.
I just mean that, for example,

[tex]\frac{\partial^2}{\partial t^2} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \tilde{\psi} \left( x,y,z,\omega \right) e^{-i\omega t}d\omega = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial t^2} \left[ \tilde{\psi} \left( x,y,z,\omega \right) e^{-i\omega t} \right] d\omega[/tex]

Similarly for the spatial derivitaves. This is possible if the function are nice enough, and amount to the changing the order of limits.

Regards,
George
 
  • #7
So it'd look like this after the substitution?

[tex] \frac{1}{2 \pi}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\nabla^2 \tilde{\psi}\left( x,y,z,\omega \right) e^{-i\omega t}d\omega -c^{-2}\frac{1}{2 \pi} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial t^2} \left[ \tilde{\psi} \left( x,y,z,\omega \right) e^{-i\omega t} \right] d\omega=0[/tex]
 
Last edited:
  • #8
Right.

There is no need to to anything more to the first term. In the second term, [itex]\tilde{\psi}[/itex] is not a function of time, and so is treated as a constant in terms of the time partials, but [itex]e^{-i \omega t}[/itex] needs to be differentiated twce with respect to time.

Also, collect everything under one integral sign, and 2 pi is missing from the second term.

What results?

Regards,
George
 
  • #9
After doing that, you get

[tex] \frac{1}{2 \pi}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}e^{-i\omega t} \left( \nabla^2 \tilde{\psi}\left( x,y,z,\omega \right) + c^{-2} \omega^2 \tilde{\psi} \left( x,y,z,\omega \right) \right)d\omega=0[/tex]

?
 
  • #10
Yes, and for this to be true in general, what's under the integral must be zero.

After setting the integrand to zero, multiply both sides of the equation by [itex]e^{i\omega t}[/itex].

Regards,
George
 
  • #11
Right then, setting the integrand to zero:

[tex]e^{-i\omega t} \left( \nabla^2 \tilde{\psi}\left( x,y,z,\omega \right) + c^{-2} \omega^2 \tilde{\psi} \left( x,y,z,\omega \right) \right) = 0[/tex]

Which gives

[tex]\nabla^2\tilde{\psi}+\frac{\omega^2 \tilde{\psi}}{c^2}=0[/tex]

which is...the Helmholtz equation!

HA! You're a legend! Thanks a million for all the help. It all makes a lot more sense now.
 

Related to Using a Fourier transform on the wave equation

1. What is a Fourier transform?

A Fourier transform is a mathematical operation that breaks down a signal or function into its individual frequency components. It allows us to analyze and understand the different frequencies present in a signal.

2. How is a Fourier transform used on the wave equation?

A Fourier transform can be applied to the wave equation to decompose it into its respective frequencies. This allows us to analyze the behavior of a wave at different frequencies and understand its overall shape and characteristics.

3. What are the benefits of using a Fourier transform on the wave equation?

Using a Fourier transform on the wave equation allows for a more efficient and accurate analysis of the wave. It simplifies the complex wave equation into its individual frequency components, making it easier to understand and manipulate.

4. Are there any limitations to using a Fourier transform on the wave equation?

While a Fourier transform is a powerful tool, it does have limitations. It assumes that the signal is stationary and continuous, which may not always be the case in real-world scenarios. Additionally, it is not suitable for analyzing non-linear systems.

5. How is a Fourier transform different from a Laplace transform?

Both Fourier and Laplace transforms are used to analyze signals and functions, but they have different applications. A Fourier transform is used for signals that are periodic in nature, while a Laplace transform is used for signals that are not necessarily periodic. Additionally, a Laplace transform can also handle non-linear systems, making it more versatile than a Fourier transform.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
772
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
386
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
794
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
982
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
237
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
797
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
362
Back
Top