Undergrad Visualizing the Fourier transform using the center of mass concept

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around the interpretation of the Fourier transform using the center of mass concept, specifically critiquing a YouTube video explanation. One participant argues that the expression for the x coordinate presented in the video is incorrect and proposes a revised formula based on uniform mass distribution. Another participant defends the video's math, noting that it skips crucial steps in transitioning from discrete to continuous cases. They suggest that the video actually describes a time average rather than a center of mass, as it maintains constant mass for each time interval. The conversation highlights the nuances in understanding these mathematical concepts and the importance of clear explanations in educational content.
person_random_normal
Messages
165
Reaction score
10
I found this video on youtube which is trying to explain Fourier transform using the center of mass concept


At 15:20 the expression of the x coordinate is given in the video. I believe it is wrong, and it should be:

##\frac{{\int g(t)e^{(-2 \pi ift)}.g(t).2 \pi f.dt}} { \int g(t).2 \pi f.dt}##

Because the wire is assumed to have- uniform mass distribution
Can someone please check?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Shreyas Samudra said:
At 15:20 the expression of the x coordinate is given in the video. I believe it is wrong, and it should be:

##\frac{{\int g(t)e^{(-2 \pi ift)}.g(t).2 \pi f.dt}} { \int g(t).2 \pi f.dt}##

Because the wire is assumed to have- uniform mass distribution
Can someone please check?
The math in the video is correct. He doesn't really explain the centre of mass concept (he is giving all sample points the same mass) and he leaves out some steps. He goes from:

$$\hat{x}_{com} = \frac{1}{N} \sum_{k=1}^N g(f)e^{-2\pi ift}$$

directly to:

$$\hat{x}_{com} = \frac{1}{(T_2 - T_1)}\int_{T_1}^{T_2} g(f)e^{-2\pi ift}dt$$

without explanation.

The intermediate steps should be something like:

$$\hat{x}_{com} = \frac{\Delta t}{(T_2-T_1)}\sum_{k=1}^N g(f)e^{-2\pi ift}$$

where ##\Delta t = (T_2-T_1)/N## i.e. ##\Delta t## is the time interval between equally spaced sample points so: ##N = (T_2-T_1)/\Delta t##

It follows that:

$$\hat{x}_{com} = \frac{1}{(T_2-T_1)}\sum_{k=1}^N g(f)e^{-2\pi ift}\Delta t$$

and in the limit where ##\Delta t \rightarrow 0##:

$$\hat{x}_{com} = \frac{1}{(T_2 - T_1)}\int_{T_1}^{T_2} g(f)e^{-2\pi ift}dt$$
AM
 
I am confused about this as well. Here is my take on the problem. I think instead of center of mass what Grant defined is actually the center of time or the time average. Let's compare the limiting process for the center of mass and the time average to go from the discrete case to the continuous case.

For the center of mass we have:
1631764266603.png

In the limiting process we take smaller and smaller mass pieces. This will lead to the integral you derived with a g square integral on the top and a g integral at the denominator.

What Grant did was to keep the mass of each piece constant and take more and more pieces at smaller time intervals.
1631764222801.png

1631764186747.png

This limiting process leads to finding the time average of the position of the winding curve in 2D. Notice that compared to the center of mass integral dm is just replaced with dt. The process of finding the center of mass for more and more particles of constant mass leads to the time average. This will lead to the g integral on top and a constant integral at the bottom.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K