Hypotheses on Plancherel's theorem
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Plancherel's theorem is stated as (e.g. in Rudin's Real and Complex Analysis)
If $fin L^1 cap L^2$ then
$$ |f|_2 = |hat f|_2 $$
where $hat f$ is the Fourier transform of $f$. On the other hand, Parseval's formula
$$ int f,overline{g}, d x = int hat{f}~overline{hat{g}}, d x$$
should hold whenever $f,hat f, gin L^1$.
My question is: is the requirement $fin L^2$ in Plancherel's theorem needed just to have the two norms to be finite or is there some (more or less hidden) detail that I'm missing and that makes the statement to actually be false if $fnotin L^2$?
real-analysis fourier-analysis lebesgue-integral parsevals-identity
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Plancherel's theorem is stated as (e.g. in Rudin's Real and Complex Analysis)
If $fin L^1 cap L^2$ then
$$ |f|_2 = |hat f|_2 $$
where $hat f$ is the Fourier transform of $f$. On the other hand, Parseval's formula
$$ int f,overline{g}, d x = int hat{f}~overline{hat{g}}, d x$$
should hold whenever $f,hat f, gin L^1$.
My question is: is the requirement $fin L^2$ in Plancherel's theorem needed just to have the two norms to be finite or is there some (more or less hidden) detail that I'm missing and that makes the statement to actually be false if $fnotin L^2$?
real-analysis fourier-analysis lebesgue-integral parsevals-identity
If $p>2$, the this link says that there exists $fin L^p$ whose Fourier transform, as in distribution sense, is not a proper function. So it seems that we do need certain restrictions on the regularity of $f$.
– Sangchul Lee
Nov 19 at 22:48
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Plancherel's theorem is stated as (e.g. in Rudin's Real and Complex Analysis)
If $fin L^1 cap L^2$ then
$$ |f|_2 = |hat f|_2 $$
where $hat f$ is the Fourier transform of $f$. On the other hand, Parseval's formula
$$ int f,overline{g}, d x = int hat{f}~overline{hat{g}}, d x$$
should hold whenever $f,hat f, gin L^1$.
My question is: is the requirement $fin L^2$ in Plancherel's theorem needed just to have the two norms to be finite or is there some (more or less hidden) detail that I'm missing and that makes the statement to actually be false if $fnotin L^2$?
real-analysis fourier-analysis lebesgue-integral parsevals-identity
Plancherel's theorem is stated as (e.g. in Rudin's Real and Complex Analysis)
If $fin L^1 cap L^2$ then
$$ |f|_2 = |hat f|_2 $$
where $hat f$ is the Fourier transform of $f$. On the other hand, Parseval's formula
$$ int f,overline{g}, d x = int hat{f}~overline{hat{g}}, d x$$
should hold whenever $f,hat f, gin L^1$.
My question is: is the requirement $fin L^2$ in Plancherel's theorem needed just to have the two norms to be finite or is there some (more or less hidden) detail that I'm missing and that makes the statement to actually be false if $fnotin L^2$?
real-analysis fourier-analysis lebesgue-integral parsevals-identity
real-analysis fourier-analysis lebesgue-integral parsevals-identity
asked Nov 18 at 11:30
Manlio
900719
900719
If $p>2$, the this link says that there exists $fin L^p$ whose Fourier transform, as in distribution sense, is not a proper function. So it seems that we do need certain restrictions on the regularity of $f$.
– Sangchul Lee
Nov 19 at 22:48
add a comment |
If $p>2$, the this link says that there exists $fin L^p$ whose Fourier transform, as in distribution sense, is not a proper function. So it seems that we do need certain restrictions on the regularity of $f$.
– Sangchul Lee
Nov 19 at 22:48
If $p>2$, the this link says that there exists $fin L^p$ whose Fourier transform, as in distribution sense, is not a proper function. So it seems that we do need certain restrictions on the regularity of $f$.
– Sangchul Lee
Nov 19 at 22:48
If $p>2$, the this link says that there exists $fin L^p$ whose Fourier transform, as in distribution sense, is not a proper function. So it seems that we do need certain restrictions on the regularity of $f$.
– Sangchul Lee
Nov 19 at 22:48
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
If $f,g in L^{1}$ there is no reason $int f overline {g} , dx$ exists. Ex: $f(x)=g(x)=x^{-1/2}$ for $0<|x|<1$ and $0$ otherwise.
Doesn't $int f,bar g dx$ simply diverges in your example? The same happens to the right-hand side of Parseval's equality, so you would still have $infty = infty$. Sorry, I'm probably missing something very basic.
– Manlio
Nov 19 at 9:30
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
If $f,gin L^1$, then
$$
int f hat{g}dx = int ghat{f}dx.
$$
If $f,hat{f} in L^1$, then $f= (hat{f})^{vee}$, which allows you to swap $f$ and $hat{f}$ in the above in order to obtain the identity that you need. Then you need
$$
f,hat{f},g in L^1.
$$
However, $|f|_2 = |hat{f}|_2$ makes sense for any $fin L^2$ because $hat{f}$ can be defined as the $L^2$ limit of the truncated Fourier transform integral:
$$
hat{f} = L^2-lim_{Rrightarrowinfty}widehat{fchi_{[-R,R]}}
$$
and $fchi_{[-R,R]}in L^1cap L^2$ for $fin L^2$.
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
If $f,g in L^{1}$ there is no reason $int f overline {g} , dx$ exists. Ex: $f(x)=g(x)=x^{-1/2}$ for $0<|x|<1$ and $0$ otherwise.
Doesn't $int f,bar g dx$ simply diverges in your example? The same happens to the right-hand side of Parseval's equality, so you would still have $infty = infty$. Sorry, I'm probably missing something very basic.
– Manlio
Nov 19 at 9:30
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
If $f,g in L^{1}$ there is no reason $int f overline {g} , dx$ exists. Ex: $f(x)=g(x)=x^{-1/2}$ for $0<|x|<1$ and $0$ otherwise.
Doesn't $int f,bar g dx$ simply diverges in your example? The same happens to the right-hand side of Parseval's equality, so you would still have $infty = infty$. Sorry, I'm probably missing something very basic.
– Manlio
Nov 19 at 9:30
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
If $f,g in L^{1}$ there is no reason $int f overline {g} , dx$ exists. Ex: $f(x)=g(x)=x^{-1/2}$ for $0<|x|<1$ and $0$ otherwise.
If $f,g in L^{1}$ there is no reason $int f overline {g} , dx$ exists. Ex: $f(x)=g(x)=x^{-1/2}$ for $0<|x|<1$ and $0$ otherwise.
answered Nov 18 at 12:04
Kavi Rama Murthy
41.7k31751
41.7k31751
Doesn't $int f,bar g dx$ simply diverges in your example? The same happens to the right-hand side of Parseval's equality, so you would still have $infty = infty$. Sorry, I'm probably missing something very basic.
– Manlio
Nov 19 at 9:30
add a comment |
Doesn't $int f,bar g dx$ simply diverges in your example? The same happens to the right-hand side of Parseval's equality, so you would still have $infty = infty$. Sorry, I'm probably missing something very basic.
– Manlio
Nov 19 at 9:30
Doesn't $int f,bar g dx$ simply diverges in your example? The same happens to the right-hand side of Parseval's equality, so you would still have $infty = infty$. Sorry, I'm probably missing something very basic.
– Manlio
Nov 19 at 9:30
Doesn't $int f,bar g dx$ simply diverges in your example? The same happens to the right-hand side of Parseval's equality, so you would still have $infty = infty$. Sorry, I'm probably missing something very basic.
– Manlio
Nov 19 at 9:30
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
If $f,gin L^1$, then
$$
int f hat{g}dx = int ghat{f}dx.
$$
If $f,hat{f} in L^1$, then $f= (hat{f})^{vee}$, which allows you to swap $f$ and $hat{f}$ in the above in order to obtain the identity that you need. Then you need
$$
f,hat{f},g in L^1.
$$
However, $|f|_2 = |hat{f}|_2$ makes sense for any $fin L^2$ because $hat{f}$ can be defined as the $L^2$ limit of the truncated Fourier transform integral:
$$
hat{f} = L^2-lim_{Rrightarrowinfty}widehat{fchi_{[-R,R]}}
$$
and $fchi_{[-R,R]}in L^1cap L^2$ for $fin L^2$.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
If $f,gin L^1$, then
$$
int f hat{g}dx = int ghat{f}dx.
$$
If $f,hat{f} in L^1$, then $f= (hat{f})^{vee}$, which allows you to swap $f$ and $hat{f}$ in the above in order to obtain the identity that you need. Then you need
$$
f,hat{f},g in L^1.
$$
However, $|f|_2 = |hat{f}|_2$ makes sense for any $fin L^2$ because $hat{f}$ can be defined as the $L^2$ limit of the truncated Fourier transform integral:
$$
hat{f} = L^2-lim_{Rrightarrowinfty}widehat{fchi_{[-R,R]}}
$$
and $fchi_{[-R,R]}in L^1cap L^2$ for $fin L^2$.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
If $f,gin L^1$, then
$$
int f hat{g}dx = int ghat{f}dx.
$$
If $f,hat{f} in L^1$, then $f= (hat{f})^{vee}$, which allows you to swap $f$ and $hat{f}$ in the above in order to obtain the identity that you need. Then you need
$$
f,hat{f},g in L^1.
$$
However, $|f|_2 = |hat{f}|_2$ makes sense for any $fin L^2$ because $hat{f}$ can be defined as the $L^2$ limit of the truncated Fourier transform integral:
$$
hat{f} = L^2-lim_{Rrightarrowinfty}widehat{fchi_{[-R,R]}}
$$
and $fchi_{[-R,R]}in L^1cap L^2$ for $fin L^2$.
If $f,gin L^1$, then
$$
int f hat{g}dx = int ghat{f}dx.
$$
If $f,hat{f} in L^1$, then $f= (hat{f})^{vee}$, which allows you to swap $f$ and $hat{f}$ in the above in order to obtain the identity that you need. Then you need
$$
f,hat{f},g in L^1.
$$
However, $|f|_2 = |hat{f}|_2$ makes sense for any $fin L^2$ because $hat{f}$ can be defined as the $L^2$ limit of the truncated Fourier transform integral:
$$
hat{f} = L^2-lim_{Rrightarrowinfty}widehat{fchi_{[-R,R]}}
$$
and $fchi_{[-R,R]}in L^1cap L^2$ for $fin L^2$.
answered Nov 19 at 22:37
DisintegratingByParts
57.7k42376
57.7k42376
add a comment |
add a comment |
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3003423%2fhypotheses-on-plancherels-theorem%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
If $p>2$, the this link says that there exists $fin L^p$ whose Fourier transform, as in distribution sense, is not a proper function. So it seems that we do need certain restrictions on the regularity of $f$.
– Sangchul Lee
Nov 19 at 22:48