MHB Property of real-valued Fourier transformation

AI Thread Summary
A signal with a real-valued Fourier transformation does not necessarily imply that the signal itself is real-valued. The discussion highlights that while the real part of the Fourier transform corresponds to an even function and the imaginary part to an odd function, the signal can still contain imaginary components. An example provided is the Fourier transform of a delta function, which results in a signal that includes both real and imaginary parts. The key takeaway is that the signal can be Hermitian, meaning it satisfies certain symmetry properties, but can still have non-zero imaginary components. Thus, the properties of the Fourier transformation do not restrict the signal to being purely real.
mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! :o

When it is given that a signal $x(t)$ has a real-valued Fourier transformation $X(f)$ then is the signal necessarily real-valued?

I have thought the following:

$X_R(ω)=\frac{1}{2}[X(ω)+X^{\star}(ω)]⟺\frac{1}{2}[x(t)+x^{\star}(−t)]=x_e(t) \\ X_I(ω)=\frac{1}{2i} [X(ω)−X^{\star}(ω)]⟺ \frac{1}{2i}[x(t)−x^{\star}(−t)]=−i⋅x_o(t)$

where $X_R(ω)$ and $X_I(ω)$ are the real and imaginary parts of $X(ω)$, and $x_e(t)$ and $x_o(t)$ are the even and odd parts of $x(t)$, respectively.So the odd part of $x$ is $0$ and the even one is real-valued, and so the signal $x(t)$ is real-valued.Is everything correct? Are the above properties known or do we have to derive them? (Wondering)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Hey mathmari!

Wiki lists such a property.
If $X(\omega)$ is real, then $x(t)$ is Hermitian. That is, $x(-t)=x^*(t)$.
It still means that $x(t)$ can be imaginary, but the imaginary part must be odd. Additionally the real part must be even. (Nerd)

Consider for instance $X(\omega)=2\pi\delta(\omega-1)$. It's real isn't it?
Its inverse Fourier transform is $x(t)=\cos t+i\sin t$.
As you can see the real part is even and the imaginary part is odd.
Furthermore, the odd part $x_o(t)$ is indeed $0$, but the even part $x_e(t)$ has an imaginary component. (Worried)
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top