Why is the Fourier transform of a sinusoid assumed as this?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Fourier transform of a sinusoidal function and its implications in structured illumination microscopy. Participants explore the differences between temporal and spatial frequency representations and the resulting Fourier transforms, particularly focusing on the presence of three impulses in the transform of a sinusoidal intensity pattern.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes the Fourier transform of a sinusoid yielding three impulses: one at the origin and two at the positive and negative spatial frequencies.
  • Another participant presents a derivation showing that the Fourier transform of a cosine function results in two delta functions, questioning the origin of the additional impulse mentioned in the paper.
  • Some participants suggest that the discrepancy may arise from the difference between one-dimensional and two-dimensional analysis, as well as the distinction between temporal and spatial frequencies.
  • One participant notes that the term "intensity" typically refers to the square of the signal, indicating that the paper likely considers the squared cosine function, which introduces a DC component.
  • Another participant confirms that the "DC" term results from the square-to-double-argument trigonometric identity, indicating a resolution to their confusion about the three impulses.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the origin of the additional impulse in the Fourier transform of the sinusoidal intensity pattern. While some clarify the role of intensity and its implications, the discussion remains unresolved regarding the exact relationship between the one-dimensional and two-dimensional Fourier transforms.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight potential limitations in their understanding, such as the dependence on definitions of intensity and the differences between temporal and spatial frequency analysis. The discussion does not resolve these complexities.

loginorsinup
Messages
54
Reaction score
2
Hello everyone.

I'm trying to better understand structured illumination microscopy and in the literature, I keep coming across bits of text like this.
Structured illumination is one such method where the object is illuminated with a sinusoidal pattern instead of the conventional uniform illumination. The Fourier transform of the intensity of a sinusoid is three impulses—one at the origin and the other two at the positive and negative spatial frequency of the sinusoid. Therefore, when a sinusoidal illumination is incident on an object, the Fourier transform of the image consists of three replicas of the object Fourier transform, each centered at one of the three impulses.

Source: http://www.optics.rochester.edu/workgroups/fienup/PUBLICATIONS/SAS_JOSAA09_PhShiftEstSupRes.pdf

From Fourier analysis, if I take the Fourier transform ##X(f)## of a time-varying function ##x(t)## that is a cosine, I get a pair of delta functions (quick derivation below).
\begin{align*}
X(f) & = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} x(t)\exp(-i2\pi f t)\; dt\\
x(t) &= \cos(2 \pi f_0 t) = \frac{1}{2}\left[\exp(i2\pi f_0 t) + \exp(-i2\pi f_0 t)\right]\\
X(f) &= \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{1}{2}\left[\exp(i2\pi f_0 t) + \exp(-i2\pi f_0 t)\right]\exp(-i2\pi f t)\; dt\\
&= \frac{1}{2}[\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \exp(i2\pi f_0 t)\exp(-i2\pi f t)\; dt + \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \exp(-i2\pi f_0 t)\exp(-i2\pi f t)\; dt\\
&= \frac{1}{2}[\mathcal{F}\left\{\exp(i2\pi f_0 t)\right\} + \mathcal{F}\left\{\exp(-i2\pi f_0 t)\right\}]\\
\mathcal{F}\left\{\exp(i2\pi f_0 t)\right\} &= \delta(f-f_0)\\
\mathcal{F}\left\{\exp(-i2\pi f_0 t)\right\} &= \delta(f+f_0)\\
\therefore X(f) &= \frac{1}{2}[\delta(f-f_0) + \delta(f+f_0)]
\end{align*}
But the paper says that I should be getting three impulses. One at the origin, and the two I have detailed above. Where does the one at the origin come from?

My only hunch so far is it might have something to do with the fact that this derivation I just did was in 1D, and what they are describing is in 2D (a surface). Of course, the other minor difference is that they are describing spatial frequency and I am describing temporal frequency, but replacing ##t## with ##x## and ##f## with a scaled ##k## (spatial frequency) isn't a big deal.

Any tips?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
An aside: the argument for the exp function should have "i" in it. 2\pi ift etc.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: loginorsinup
mathman said:
An aside: the argument for the exp function should have "i" in it. 2\pi ift etc.
You're right. I will fix that.
 
The word "intensity" usually means the square of the signal - from a quick glance at the paper they are indeed considering the square. Look at equation (1) in the paper, and note
<br /> \cos^2(x) = \frac{1}{2}(1 + \cos(2x))<br />
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: loginorsinup
jasonRF said:
The word "intensity" usually means the square of the signal - from a quick glance at the paper they are indeed considering the square. Look at equation (1) in the paper, and note
<br /> \cos^2(x) = \frac{1}{2}(1 + \cos(2x))<br />

That's exactly it. The "DC" term comes from the square-to-double-argument trigonometric identity. Got it. Thank you very much! The rest of it is straightforward. :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K