|
|
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
[http://cnx.org/content/m0045/latest/ Some properties to choose from if you are having difficulty....] |
|
[http://cnx.org/content/m0045/latest/ Some properties to choose from if you are having difficulty....] |
|
|
|
|
|
[[Max Woesner|<b><u>Max Woesner</u></b>]]<br><br> |
|
==[[Max Woesner|<b><u>Max Woesner</u></b>]]<br><br>== |
|
1. '''Find <math>\mathcal{F}[cos(w_0t)g(t)]\!</math><br><br>''' |
|
1. '''Find <math>\mathcal{F}[cos(w_0t)g(t)]\!</math><br><br>''' |
|
Recall <math> w_0 = 2\pi f_0\!</math>, so <math>\mathcal{F}[cos(w_0t)g(t)] = \mathcal{F}[cos(2\pi f_0t)g(t)] = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}cos(2\pi f_0t)g(t)e^{-j2\pi ft}dt\!</math><br><br> |
|
Recall <math> w_0 = 2\pi f_0\!</math>, so <math>\mathcal{F}[cos(w_0t)g(t)] = \mathcal{F}[cos(2\pi f_0t)g(t)] = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}cos(2\pi f_0t)g(t)e^{-j2\pi ft}dt\!</math><br><br> |
Line 32: |
Line 32: |
|
---- |
|
---- |
|
|
|
|
|
[[Nick Christman|<b><u>Nick Christman</u></b>]]<br><br> |
|
==[[Nick Christman|<b><u>Nick Christman</u></b>]]<br><br>== |
|
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. |
|
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. |
|
|
|
|
Line 128: |
Line 128: |
|
---- |
|
---- |
|
|
|
|
|
[[Joshua Sarris|<b><u>Joshua Sarris</u></b>]]<br><br> |
|
==[[Joshua Sarris|<b><u>Joshua Sarris</u></b>]]<br><br>== |
|
'''Find <math>\mathcal{F}[sin(w_0t)g(t)]\!</math><br>''' |
|
'''Find <math>\mathcal{F}[sin(w_0t)g(t)]\!</math><br>''' |
|
|
|
|
Line 168: |
Line 168: |
|
'''Find <math>\mathcal{F}[\frac{d}{dt} x(t)] \!</math><br>''' |
|
'''Find <math>\mathcal{F}[\frac{d}{dt} x(t)] \!</math><br>''' |
|
|
|
|
|
We begin our proof by finding the inverse Fourer of X(f) in terms of t. |
|
We begin by finding the Fourier of x(t). |
|
|
|
|
|
<math>\mathcal{F}^{-1}[\frac{d}{dt} X(f)] = \frac{d}{dt} [ \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} X(f)e^{j2\pi f t} df]</math> |
|
<math>\mathcal{F}[\frac{d}{dt} X(f)] = \frac{d}{dt} [ \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} X(f)e^{-j2 \pi f t} df]</math> |
|
|
|
|
|
We can then pull the derivitive into the integral and carry out its opperation. |
|
We can then pull the derivitive into the integral and carry out its opperation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<math> \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} X(f)\frac{d}{dt} e^{j2\pi f t} df = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}j2\pif X(f) e^{j2\pi f t} df</math> |
|
<math> \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} x(f)\frac{d}{dt} e^{-j2 \pi ft} df = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}-j2\pi f x(f) e^{j2\pi f t} df</math> |
|
|
|
|
|
---- |
|
---- |
|
|
|
|
|
[[Kevin Starkey|<b><u>Kevin Starkey</u></b>]] <br> <br> |
|
==[[Kevin Starkey|<b><u>Kevin Starkey</u></b>]] <br> <br>== |
|
1. Find <math> \mathcal{F}\left[\int_{-\infty}^ \infty s(t)dt\right]</math> <br> |
|
1. Find <math> \mathcal{F}\left[\int_{-\infty}^ \infty s(t)dt\right]</math> <br> |
|
First we know that <math> \mathcal{F}\left[\int_{-\infty}^ \infty s(t)dt\right] = \int_{-\infty}^\infty\left(\int_{-\infty}^ \infty s(t)dt\right)e^{-j2\pi ft} dt </math> <br> |
|
First we know that <math> \mathcal{F}\left[\int_{-\infty}^ \infty s(t)dt\right] = \int_{-\infty}^\infty\left(\int_{-\infty}^ \infty s(t)dt\right)e^{-j2\pi ft} dt </math> <br> |
Some properties to choose from if you are having difficulty....
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
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:
Reviewed by Kevin Starkey --> add above... other than that it looks good.
Find
Recall
,
so expanding we have,
Also recall
,
so we can convert to exponentials.
Now integrating gives us,
So we now have the identity,
or rather
Reviewed by Max Woesner
Also reviewed by Nick Christman
-- Looks good.
Find
We begin by finding the Fourier of x(t).
We can then pull the derivitive into the integral and carry out its opperation.
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