A Why don't we multiply generalized functions?

AI Thread Summary
Multiplying generalized functions leads to contradictions, as demonstrated by examples involving the Dirac delta function and other distributions. While it is valid to multiply generalized functions from the space of distributions with smooth functions, attempting to multiply two generalized functions results in inconsistencies. For instance, the expression involving the product of the delta function and a function that is not well-behaved leads to undefined results. This highlights the inability to define a binary operation on the space of distributions that adheres to standard multiplication properties. Consequently, the multiplication of generalized functions remains a complex and problematic area in mathematical analysis.
wrobel
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
1,153
Reaction score
993
Because it drives to contradictions. Here is a nice example from E. Rosinger Generalized solutions of nonlinear PDE.

We can multiply generalized functions from ##\mathcal D'(\mathbb{R})## by functions from ##C^\infty(\mathbb{R})##. This operation is well defined. For example $$x\delta(x)=0\in \mathcal D'(\mathbb{R}),\quad x\cdot\frac{1}{x}=1\in \mathcal D'(\mathbb{R}),\quad \frac{1}{x}\in \mathcal D'(\mathbb{R}).$$
On the other hand ##C^\infty(\mathbb{R})\subset \mathcal D'(\mathbb{R})##

Ok then:)
$$\delta=\Big(x\cdot\frac{1}{x}\Big)\cdot\delta=\frac{1}{x}\cdot(x\delta)=0.$$
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I have interpreted ##x \delta(x)=0## as for support of good behavior function, i.e.
\int f(x) x \delta(x) dx= 0
for f(x) such that f(0) is finite. 1/x does not satisfy it.
 
This example shows that you can not define a binary operation of ##\mathcal D'(\mathbb R)\times \mathcal D'(\mathbb R)## with values in ##\mathcal D'(\mathbb R) ## such that
1) this operation acts on ##C^\infty(\mathbb{R})\times \mathcal D'(\mathbb R)## in the standard way;
2) this operation possesses the standard properties of the arithmetic multiplication
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
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...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

Back
Top