Prove the inverse transform of unilateral Laplace transform












0












$begingroup$


I'm reading this article and having a question.



Consider a function $f$ and its Laplace transform



$hspace{3.0cm} F(s) = int_0^infty f(t) e^{-st} dt$, with ${s|text{Re}(s) = 0} in text{ROC}[F(s)]$



The inverse Laplace transform would be $f(t) = lim_{omega to infty} frac{1}{2pi i}int_{sigma - i omega}^{sigma + i omega} F(s) e^{st} ds$.



Now, consider the case where $text{Re}(s) = 0$, we can see that



$hspace{3.0cm} f(t) = lim_{omega to infty} frac{1}{2pi i}int_{- i omega}^{i omega} F(s) e^{st} ds = frac{1}{2pi}int_{-infty}^infty F(i omega) e^{i omega t} domega$



is an inverse Fourier transform.



According to Fourier transform, we know that



$hspace{3.0cm} F(i omega) = cal{F}{f(t)} = int_{-infty}^infty f(t) e^{-iomega t} dt$



But the Laplace transform of $f$, when $text{Re}(s) = 0$, suggests that



$hspace{3.0cm} F(i omega) = int_0^infty f(t) e^{-i omega t} dt$



It turns out that $int_{-infty}^infty f(t) e^{-i omega t} dt = int_0^infty f(t) e^{-i omega t} dt$ ? This seems wrong to me ? Am I getting wrong somewhere ?






fourier-analysis laplace-transform fourier-transform inverselaplace







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    The answer lies in the fact that your function $f$, if you want to define it on $(-infty,0]$, would be $0$ there. Then everything works. By the way, I edited your question to include factors of $2pi$ that you were missing. However, you are stilling missing some in the second part of the answer.
    $endgroup$
    – DisintegratingByParts
    Jan 17 at 16:03












  • $begingroup$
    If you define $f$ in that way, $f(t) = f(t) u(t)$ where $u(t)$ is the heavy-side function. But this assumption isn't stated in the definition of unilateral Laplace transform.
    $endgroup$
    – HOANG GIANG
    Jan 18 at 7:18












  • $begingroup$
    As written in some text, if $f(t) = f(t) u(t)$ then unilateral transform is the same as bilateral transform. But in the other case, unilateral transform is said to be different from bilateral transform
    $endgroup$
    – HOANG GIANG
    Jan 18 at 7:21










  • $begingroup$
    In your case, you started with $f(t)=f(t)u(t)$ and, in that case, the Laplace transform is a holomorphic function on a right half-plane. Then your inverse Laplace transform is performed on that holomorphic function, with the result being a function $f$ such that $f(t)=f(t)u(t)$. If you want to start with a different $f$, then the issues are different.
    $endgroup$
    – DisintegratingByParts
    Jan 19 at 21:49
















0












$begingroup$


I'm reading this article and having a question.



Consider a function $f$ and its Laplace transform



$hspace{3.0cm} F(s) = int_0^infty f(t) e^{-st} dt$, with ${s|text{Re}(s) = 0} in text{ROC}[F(s)]$



The inverse Laplace transform would be $f(t) = lim_{omega to infty} frac{1}{2pi i}int_{sigma - i omega}^{sigma + i omega} F(s) e^{st} ds$.



Now, consider the case where $text{Re}(s) = 0$, we can see that



$hspace{3.0cm} f(t) = lim_{omega to infty} frac{1}{2pi i}int_{- i omega}^{i omega} F(s) e^{st} ds = frac{1}{2pi}int_{-infty}^infty F(i omega) e^{i omega t} domega$



is an inverse Fourier transform.



According to Fourier transform, we know that



$hspace{3.0cm} F(i omega) = cal{F}{f(t)} = int_{-infty}^infty f(t) e^{-iomega t} dt$



But the Laplace transform of $f$, when $text{Re}(s) = 0$, suggests that



$hspace{3.0cm} F(i omega) = int_0^infty f(t) e^{-i omega t} dt$



It turns out that $int_{-infty}^infty f(t) e^{-i omega t} dt = int_0^infty f(t) e^{-i omega t} dt$ ? This seems wrong to me ? Am I getting wrong somewhere ?






fourier-analysis laplace-transform fourier-transform inverselaplace







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    The answer lies in the fact that your function $f$, if you want to define it on $(-infty,0]$, would be $0$ there. Then everything works. By the way, I edited your question to include factors of $2pi$ that you were missing. However, you are stilling missing some in the second part of the answer.
    $endgroup$
    – DisintegratingByParts
    Jan 17 at 16:03












  • $begingroup$
    If you define $f$ in that way, $f(t) = f(t) u(t)$ where $u(t)$ is the heavy-side function. But this assumption isn't stated in the definition of unilateral Laplace transform.
    $endgroup$
    – HOANG GIANG
    Jan 18 at 7:18












  • $begingroup$
    As written in some text, if $f(t) = f(t) u(t)$ then unilateral transform is the same as bilateral transform. But in the other case, unilateral transform is said to be different from bilateral transform
    $endgroup$
    – HOANG GIANG
    Jan 18 at 7:21










  • $begingroup$
    In your case, you started with $f(t)=f(t)u(t)$ and, in that case, the Laplace transform is a holomorphic function on a right half-plane. Then your inverse Laplace transform is performed on that holomorphic function, with the result being a function $f$ such that $f(t)=f(t)u(t)$. If you want to start with a different $f$, then the issues are different.
    $endgroup$
    – DisintegratingByParts
    Jan 19 at 21:49














0












0








0





$begingroup$


I'm reading this article and having a question.



Consider a function $f$ and its Laplace transform



$hspace{3.0cm} F(s) = int_0^infty f(t) e^{-st} dt$, with ${s|text{Re}(s) = 0} in text{ROC}[F(s)]$



The inverse Laplace transform would be $f(t) = lim_{omega to infty} frac{1}{2pi i}int_{sigma - i omega}^{sigma + i omega} F(s) e^{st} ds$.



Now, consider the case where $text{Re}(s) = 0$, we can see that



$hspace{3.0cm} f(t) = lim_{omega to infty} frac{1}{2pi i}int_{- i omega}^{i omega} F(s) e^{st} ds = frac{1}{2pi}int_{-infty}^infty F(i omega) e^{i omega t} domega$



is an inverse Fourier transform.



According to Fourier transform, we know that



$hspace{3.0cm} F(i omega) = cal{F}{f(t)} = int_{-infty}^infty f(t) e^{-iomega t} dt$



But the Laplace transform of $f$, when $text{Re}(s) = 0$, suggests that



$hspace{3.0cm} F(i omega) = int_0^infty f(t) e^{-i omega t} dt$



It turns out that $int_{-infty}^infty f(t) e^{-i omega t} dt = int_0^infty f(t) e^{-i omega t} dt$ ? This seems wrong to me ? Am I getting wrong somewhere ?






fourier-analysis laplace-transform fourier-transform inverselaplace







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




I'm reading this article and having a question.



Consider a function $f$ and its Laplace transform



$hspace{3.0cm} F(s) = int_0^infty f(t) e^{-st} dt$, with ${s|text{Re}(s) = 0} in text{ROC}[F(s)]$



The inverse Laplace transform would be $f(t) = lim_{omega to infty} frac{1}{2pi i}int_{sigma - i omega}^{sigma + i omega} F(s) e^{st} ds$.



Now, consider the case where $text{Re}(s) = 0$, we can see that



$hspace{3.0cm} f(t) = lim_{omega to infty} frac{1}{2pi i}int_{- i omega}^{i omega} F(s) e^{st} ds = frac{1}{2pi}int_{-infty}^infty F(i omega) e^{i omega t} domega$



is an inverse Fourier transform.



According to Fourier transform, we know that



$hspace{3.0cm} F(i omega) = cal{F}{f(t)} = int_{-infty}^infty f(t) e^{-iomega t} dt$



But the Laplace transform of $f$, when $text{Re}(s) = 0$, suggests that



$hspace{3.0cm} F(i omega) = int_0^infty f(t) e^{-i omega t} dt$



It turns out that $int_{-infty}^infty f(t) e^{-i omega t} dt = int_0^infty f(t) e^{-i omega t} dt$ ? This seems wrong to me ? Am I getting wrong somewhere ?






fourier-analysis laplace-transform fourier-transform inverselaplace




fourier-analysis laplace-transform fourier-transform inverselaplace






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Jan 17 at 16:04









DisintegratingByParts

60.4k42681




60.4k42681










asked Jan 17 at 6:57









HOANG GIANGHOANG GIANG

175




175












  • $begingroup$
    The answer lies in the fact that your function $f$, if you want to define it on $(-infty,0]$, would be $0$ there. Then everything works. By the way, I edited your question to include factors of $2pi$ that you were missing. However, you are stilling missing some in the second part of the answer.
    $endgroup$
    – DisintegratingByParts
    Jan 17 at 16:03












  • $begingroup$
    If you define $f$ in that way, $f(t) = f(t) u(t)$ where $u(t)$ is the heavy-side function. But this assumption isn't stated in the definition of unilateral Laplace transform.
    $endgroup$
    – HOANG GIANG
    Jan 18 at 7:18












  • $begingroup$
    As written in some text, if $f(t) = f(t) u(t)$ then unilateral transform is the same as bilateral transform. But in the other case, unilateral transform is said to be different from bilateral transform
    $endgroup$
    – HOANG GIANG
    Jan 18 at 7:21










  • $begingroup$
    In your case, you started with $f(t)=f(t)u(t)$ and, in that case, the Laplace transform is a holomorphic function on a right half-plane. Then your inverse Laplace transform is performed on that holomorphic function, with the result being a function $f$ such that $f(t)=f(t)u(t)$. If you want to start with a different $f$, then the issues are different.
    $endgroup$
    – DisintegratingByParts
    Jan 19 at 21:49


















  • $begingroup$
    The answer lies in the fact that your function $f$, if you want to define it on $(-infty,0]$, would be $0$ there. Then everything works. By the way, I edited your question to include factors of $2pi$ that you were missing. However, you are stilling missing some in the second part of the answer.
    $endgroup$
    – DisintegratingByParts
    Jan 17 at 16:03












  • $begingroup$
    If you define $f$ in that way, $f(t) = f(t) u(t)$ where $u(t)$ is the heavy-side function. But this assumption isn't stated in the definition of unilateral Laplace transform.
    $endgroup$
    – HOANG GIANG
    Jan 18 at 7:18












  • $begingroup$
    As written in some text, if $f(t) = f(t) u(t)$ then unilateral transform is the same as bilateral transform. But in the other case, unilateral transform is said to be different from bilateral transform
    $endgroup$
    – HOANG GIANG
    Jan 18 at 7:21










  • $begingroup$
    In your case, you started with $f(t)=f(t)u(t)$ and, in that case, the Laplace transform is a holomorphic function on a right half-plane. Then your inverse Laplace transform is performed on that holomorphic function, with the result being a function $f$ such that $f(t)=f(t)u(t)$. If you want to start with a different $f$, then the issues are different.
    $endgroup$
    – DisintegratingByParts
    Jan 19 at 21:49
















$begingroup$
The answer lies in the fact that your function $f$, if you want to define it on $(-infty,0]$, would be $0$ there. Then everything works. By the way, I edited your question to include factors of $2pi$ that you were missing. However, you are stilling missing some in the second part of the answer.
$endgroup$
– DisintegratingByParts
Jan 17 at 16:03






$begingroup$
The answer lies in the fact that your function $f$, if you want to define it on $(-infty,0]$, would be $0$ there. Then everything works. By the way, I edited your question to include factors of $2pi$ that you were missing. However, you are stilling missing some in the second part of the answer.
$endgroup$
– DisintegratingByParts
Jan 17 at 16:03














$begingroup$
If you define $f$ in that way, $f(t) = f(t) u(t)$ where $u(t)$ is the heavy-side function. But this assumption isn't stated in the definition of unilateral Laplace transform.
$endgroup$
– HOANG GIANG
Jan 18 at 7:18






$begingroup$
If you define $f$ in that way, $f(t) = f(t) u(t)$ where $u(t)$ is the heavy-side function. But this assumption isn't stated in the definition of unilateral Laplace transform.
$endgroup$
– HOANG GIANG
Jan 18 at 7:18














$begingroup$
As written in some text, if $f(t) = f(t) u(t)$ then unilateral transform is the same as bilateral transform. But in the other case, unilateral transform is said to be different from bilateral transform
$endgroup$
– HOANG GIANG
Jan 18 at 7:21




$begingroup$
As written in some text, if $f(t) = f(t) u(t)$ then unilateral transform is the same as bilateral transform. But in the other case, unilateral transform is said to be different from bilateral transform
$endgroup$
– HOANG GIANG
Jan 18 at 7:21












$begingroup$
In your case, you started with $f(t)=f(t)u(t)$ and, in that case, the Laplace transform is a holomorphic function on a right half-plane. Then your inverse Laplace transform is performed on that holomorphic function, with the result being a function $f$ such that $f(t)=f(t)u(t)$. If you want to start with a different $f$, then the issues are different.
$endgroup$
– DisintegratingByParts
Jan 19 at 21:49




$begingroup$
In your case, you started with $f(t)=f(t)u(t)$ and, in that case, the Laplace transform is a holomorphic function on a right half-plane. Then your inverse Laplace transform is performed on that holomorphic function, with the result being a function $f$ such that $f(t)=f(t)u(t)$. If you want to start with a different $f$, then the issues are different.
$endgroup$
– DisintegratingByParts
Jan 19 at 21:49










0






active

oldest

votes












Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3076672%2fprove-the-inverse-transform-of-unilateral-laplace-transform%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























0






active

oldest

votes








0






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes
















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3076672%2fprove-the-inverse-transform-of-unilateral-laplace-transform%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

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







-

Popular posts from this blog

Human spaceflight

Image
Human spaceflight From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigation Jump to search "Space traveler" redirects here. For other uses, see Space traveler (disambiguation). @media all and (max-width:720px){.mw-parser-output .tmulti>.thumbinner{width:100%!important;max-width:none!important}.mw-parser-output .tmulti .tsingle{float:none!important;max-width:none!important;width:100%!important;text-align:center}} Apollo 11 crewmember Buzz Aldrin on the Moon, 1969 International Space Station crewmember Tracy Caldwell Dyson views the Earth, 2010 Space Shuttle Discovery heads into space with a crew aboard, STS-121 in 2006 Inside a space suit on the Canadarm, 1993 Human spaceflight (also referred to as crewed spaceflight or manned spaceflight ) is space travel with a crew or passengers aboard the spacecraft. Spacecraft carrying people may be operated directly, by human crew, or it may be e
Read more

Can not write log (Is /dev/pts mounted?) - openpty in Ubuntu-on-Windows?

Image
0 1 What exactly does the error message beginning with E: mean? I assume it has to do with the file structure on Ubuntu-on-Windows, but what exactly? The following package was automatically installed and is no longer required: os-prober Use 'apt-get autoremove' to remove it. The following extra packages will be installed: libxslt1.1 The following NEW packages will be installed: libxslt1.1 xmlstarlet 0 upgraded, 2 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. Need to get 435 kB of archives. After this operation, 1023 kB of additional disk space will be used. Get:1 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ trusty/main libxslt1.1 amd64 1.1.28-2build1 [145 kB] Get:2 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ trusty/universe xmlstarlet amd64 1.5.0-1 [290 kB]
Read more

File:DeusFollowingSea.jpg

Image
File:DeusFollowingSea.jpg From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigation Jump to search File File history File usage No higher resolution available. DeusFollowingSea.jpg ‎ (238 × 211 pixels, file size: 12 KB, MIME type: image/jpeg ) Summary [ edit ] Media data and Non-free use rationale Description Cover art of the Deus CD Following Sea Author or copyright owner Deus Source (WP:NFCC#4) rocksucker.co.uk Date of publication 2012 Use in article (WP:NFCC#7) Following Sea Purpose of use in article (WP:NFCC#8) to serve as the primary means of visual identification at the top of the article dedicated to the work in question. Not replaceable with free media because (WP:NFCC#1) n.a. Minimal use (WP:NFCC#3) Low res image used in infobox of the article on the album Respect for commercial opportunities (WP:NFCC#2) n.a. Fair use Fair use of co
Read more