What Basis Spans Square Integrable Functions with Exponential Tails on [0,∞)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter cfp
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Basis
cfp
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Hi,
I have a function on [0,\infty) which is represented as:

\sum_{ \stackrel{ \Re( \alpha )\in\mathbb{Q}^+ }{ \Im( \alpha )\in\mathbb{Q} } }{\beta_\alpha e^{-\alpha t}}

It seems like this must be a basis for the square integrable functions on [0,\infty) with exponential tails. Am I right though in thinking that if the \alphas are constrained to be real, then it is no longer a basis? What class of functions are spanned then? It also seems like there are many redundant terms in the sum. On the complex side I expect you could restrict \Im(\alpha)=q where q\in\mathbb{N} \cup 1/\mathbb{N}. Is a similar restriction possible on the real side?

Any comments would be much appreciated, as would directions to any papers on the properties of bases like this.

Thanks in advance,

Tom
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, I see no reason why requiring that the exponents be real would mean you did not have a basis for "square integrable functions on [0,∞) with exponential tails".

If you allow complex or even pure imaginary exponents, you will have, effectively, a Fourier series which would span much more than "square integrable functions on [0,∞) with exponential tails".
 
Yes, you are correct about pure imaginary exponents spanning a greater space. I'm only really interested in what's needed to span the "square integrable functions on [0,∞) with exponential tails" though, for which real parts must be negative.
Your first claim might be correct, but the proof doesn't seem trivial to me. For example, how would you construct a series of real alphas and betas such that the sum converged to 1 on the interval [a,b] and 0 everywhere else?
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
Back
Top