|
|
Line 23: |
Line 23: |
|
(c) Do another property on the Wiki and get it reviewed (i.e. review a second property) -- [[Fourier Transform Properties]] |
|
(c) Do another property on the Wiki and get it reviewed (i.e. review a second property) -- [[Fourier Transform Properties]] |
|
|
|
|
|
'''Find <math>\mathcal{F} \left[ g(t-t_{0})e^{j2 \pi f_{0}t} \right]</math><br/>''' |
|
(i) '''Find <math>\mathcal{F} \left[ g(t-t_{0})e^{j2 \pi f_{0}t} \right]</math><br/>''' |
|
|
|
|
|
-- 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... |
|
-- 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... |
Line 68: |
Line 68: |
|
|
|
|
|
<br/> |
|
<br/> |
|
|
|
|
|
(ii) |
|
|
I reviewed Max's second Fourier Transform property: <math>\mathcal{F}\bigg[\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}g(t) h^*(t) dt\bigg]</math> |
|
|
|
|
|
As near as I can tell, it all looks legitimate. I made one comment about adding an additional step to make the proof/identity more complete, but that was all that I could find. |
Revision as of 16:30, 31 October 2009
Perform the following tasks:
Nick Christman
(a) Show . HINT:
(b)If can you find in terms of ?
(c) Do another property on the Wiki and get it reviewed (i.e. review a second property) -- Fourier Transform Properties
(i) 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:
(ii)
I reviewed Max's second Fourier Transform property:
As near as I can tell, it all looks legitimate. I made one comment about adding an additional step to make the proof/identity more complete, but that was all that I could find.