What is the result of using Euler's equation for Fourier transform integrals?

Galizius
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
when I am using Euler equation for Fourier transform integrals of type \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dx f(x) exp[ikx]I am getting following integrals:

\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dx f(x) cos(kx) (for the real part) and

i* \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dx f(x) sin(kx) (for its imaginary part)

I am wondering what is the final integration result though. Is that the sum of both parts or are they separate results? And if it is sum, when the imaginary or real part is being reduced to 0
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
The Fourier transform is the sum of both real and imaginary parts.
 
Surely if you know that e^{ikx}= cos(kx)+ i sin(kx) then you know that \int f(x)e^{ikx}dx= \int (f(x)cos(kx)+ if(x)sin(kx))dx= \int f(x)cos(kx) dx+ i \int f(x)sin(kx) dx.
 
  • Like
Likes Dr. Courtney
HallsofIvy said:
Surely if you know that e^{ikx}= cos(kx)+ i sin(kx) then you know that \int f(x)e^{ikx}dx= \int (f(x)cos(kx)+ if(x)sin(kx))dx= \int f(x)cos(kx) dx+ i \int f(x)sin(kx) dx.

Well, when you put it that way ...

Nice proof. Thanks.
 
what is the complete form of euler equation?
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top