Fourier Transform Properties

From Class Wiki
Revision as of 09:52, 8 November 2009 by Nicholas.Christman (talk | contribs)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Some properties to choose from if you are having difficulty....

Max Woesner

1. Find

Recall , so

Also recall ,so

Now

So


reviewed by Joshua Sarris


2. Find

Recall
Similarly,
So
Now

Note that

Added step per Nick's suggestion

Substituting gives us

And

Since is a simply a dummy variable, we can conclude that:



"I was going to make a comment on the delta identity, but after looking at it closer I think it is fine. One comment I have is that you might consider adding one more step, showing the delta function in the integral and pulling the integrands together to make it look like a double integral -- it isn't necessary and I understood the transition, but it helps the proof/identity look a little more complete. Good job!"

Example:

Reviewed by Nick Christman


Nick Christman

Note: After scratching my head for a couple of hours, I decided that I would try a different Fourier Property. In fact, I chose a property that would need to be defined in order to show my second property.

1. Find

This is a fairly straightforward property and is known as complex modulation

Combining terms, we get:


Now let's make the following substitution

This now gives us a surprisingly familiar function:


This looks just like !

We can now conclude that:



PLEASE ENTER PEER REVIEW HERE



2. Find

-- Using the above definition of complex modulation and the definition from class of a time delay (a.k.a "the slacker function"), I will attempt to show a hybrid of the two...

By definition we know that:

Rearranging terms we get:


Now lets make the substitution .
This leads us to:

After some simplification and rearranging terms, we get:

Rearranging the terms yet again, we get:

We know that the exponential in terms of is simply a constant and because of the Fourier Property of complex modualtion, we finally get:


PLEASE ENTER PEER REVIEW HERE




Joshua Sarris

Find


Recall ,

so expanding we have,


Also recall ,

so we can convert to exponentials.


Now integrating gives us, ( I believe you are missing 'j' in the denominator of the second term)



So we now have the identity,

or rather

Reviewed by Max Woesner

Also reviewed by Nick Christman -- Looks good. I found one typo (I think), see . Good job Josh!



Kevin Starkey

1. Find
First we know that
We also know that
(+) Which gives us
Since is only non-zero at f = 0 this yeilds

So

Reviewed by Nick Christman -- I fixed one typo (needed a minus sign in the exponential). I'm not sure about the step (+). I would like to believe it, but I'm just not sure that it works... if you are sure it works, maybe add a little comment to explain it a little better. Other than that, it looks good!


2. Find
First
or rearranging we get
Which leads to
So


PLEASE ENTER PEER REVIEW HERE