Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

What is mathematically wrong with this integration?

  1. Apr 7, 2014 #1
    Hello all,

    I have the following integration:

    [tex]\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}e^{-j2\pi f_ct[a_p-a_q]}g(t[1+a_p]-kT_s-\tau_p)g(t[1+a_q]-mT_s-\tau_q)\,dt[/tex]

    where g(t) is 1 in the interval [0,Ts]. This means that the integration has value when both function g(t[1+a_p]-kT_s-\tau_p) and g(t[1+a_q]-mT_s-\tau_q) are 1. Both are 1 when:

    [tex]0\leq t[1+a_p]-kT_s-\tau_p\leq T_s[/tex]


    [tex]0\leq t[1+a_q]-mT_s-\tau_q\leq T_s[/tex]

    Which implies that both are 1 when:


    But the integration over a point is zero, which can be the answer of the physical problem I have in hand. Where did I go wrong in the process?

  2. jcsd
  3. Apr 7, 2014 #2

    This is where you went wrong. You can't use the two inequalities to evaluate t directly. You need to calculate the range of t where the two functions are both nonzero.

    For example le[itex] \tau_p=\tau_q=a_p=a_q=0[/itex],
    [itex] k=-1[/itex],
    [itex] m=-2[/itex]

    [itex]g(t[1+ap]−kTs−τp) =1 [/itex] for [itex]t\in(0,1)[/itex]
    [itex]g(t[1+aq]−mTs−τq) =1 [/itex] for [itex]t\in(0,.5)[/itex]

    As you can see there is still a range in [itex]t[/itex] where both g are nonzero.
  4. Apr 7, 2014 #3
    When I subtract the ranges of both functions I got something like:

    [tex]0\leq x\leq 0[/tex]

    which implies that x=0. Right?
  5. Apr 7, 2014 #4
    But if I add the ranges I'll get a range of t!! Which one is more correct? and why?
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook