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 ?










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 ?










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 ?










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






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

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

張江高科駅