Inverting Fourier transform “on circles”
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
Dear Math enthusiasts,
I am struggeling with a problem for which a solution is already given to me, but I can just not see why it is true. Here is the setting: I am given a function $f(x,y,t)$. It's well behaved let's say. Smooth and things like that. Now, this function should be reexpressed in the following form $$f(x,y,t) = int g(k_x,k_y,w) {rm e}^{-jmath (k_x x + k_y y - w t)} d k_x dk_y dw. tag{1}label{eq1}$$ If it were only this it would be very simple, $g$ is some sort of 3-D Fourier transform of $f$. However, the trouble is that the variables $k_x, k_y, w$ are not independent. They need to satisfy the relation $k_x^2 + k_y^2 = w^2$. Therefore, I would claim that the correct form of the above expression should be $$f(x,y,t) = int oint_{S(w)} g(k_x,k_y,w) {rm e}^{-jmath (k_x x + k_y y - w t)} d begin{bmatrix} k_x\ k_yend{bmatrix} dw,tag{2}label{eq2}$$ where $S(w)$ is a circle of radius $w$, so that the inner integral goes over the perimeter of the circle and the outer over circle radii.
My question is essentially: given a target function $f(x,y,t)$, how do I find $g(k_x, k_y, w)$ such that eqref{eq2} is true for every point $x,y,t$?
The reference I have for this simply redefines $g(k_y,k_y,w)$ into $h(k_x,w)$ since only two variables are independent (I'm assuming this means $h(k_x,w)=g(k_x,pm sqrt{w^2-k_x^2},w)$ though that's never written) and uses this in the first integral. This leads to $$f(x,y,t) = int int h(k_x,w) {rm e}^{-jmath (k_x x+k_y y - w t)} d k_x dw = int int tilde{g}(k_x,y,w) {rm e}^{-jmath (k_x x - w t)} d k_x dw,tag{3}label{eq3}$$ where $tilde{g}(k_x,y,w) = h(k_x,w) {rm e}^{-jmath k_y y} $ (again, omitting the argument $k_y$ for me can only mean the implicit relation $k_y = pm sqrt{w^2-k_x^2}$). From eqref{eq3}, they claim that $f$ is the 2-D Fourier transform of $tilde{g}$ along the first and third dimension so that all we need to do to find $tilde{g}$ is $$ tilde{g}(k_x,y,w) = frac{1}{4pi^2} int int f(x,y,t) {rm e}^{jmath (k_x x-wt)} dx dt$$ which gives $h$ as $ h(k_x,w) = tilde{g}(k_x,y,w) {rm e}^{jmath k_y y} $.
However, I have the feeling this is oversimplifying things a bit. I'm lacking rigor. My feeling is that the original problem eqref{eq2} may not have a unique solution (due to the variable dependence) and a particular one was chosen here. Integration limits are always skipped which may be a delicate issue (after all, $k_x$ should never leave the interval $[-w,w]$, maybe this can be solved by defining $h$ zero outside this support). The fact that we cannot directly solve for $k_y$ (due to the $pm$) troubles me. Overall I have a vague feeling that this may work but I cannot quite put my finger on it and really understand what's going on.
Would anyone be able to enlighten me how to treat such problems rigorously?
edit: A concrete example I am interested in is the function $f(x,y,t)={rm e}^{-jmath left(omega_0 t - frac{omega_0}{c}sqrt{(x-x_0)^2+(y-y_0)^2}right)}$. I'm awarding a bounty to anyone who can systematically explain me how to find the (set of) function(s) $g(k_x,k_y,omega)$ that satisfy eqref{eq2} for a given $f(x,y,t)$ everywhere. A concrete example may be helpful for the understanding, it can be the one I provided in this paragraph, but I'm also happy with any other non-trivial example, as long as it aids the understanding.
integration functional-analysis fourier-analysis integral-geometry
This question has an open bounty worth +50
reputation from Florian ending in 7 days.
This question has not received enough attention.
As I explained in the question, I'm awarding a bounty to anyone who can systematically explain me how to find the (set of) function(s) $g(k_x,k_y,omega)$ that satisfy (2) for a given $f(x,y,t)$ everywhere. A concrete example may be helpful for the understanding, it can te the one I provided in this paragraph, but I'm also happy with any other non-trivial example, as long as it aids the understanding.
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
Dear Math enthusiasts,
I am struggeling with a problem for which a solution is already given to me, but I can just not see why it is true. Here is the setting: I am given a function $f(x,y,t)$. It's well behaved let's say. Smooth and things like that. Now, this function should be reexpressed in the following form $$f(x,y,t) = int g(k_x,k_y,w) {rm e}^{-jmath (k_x x + k_y y - w t)} d k_x dk_y dw. tag{1}label{eq1}$$ If it were only this it would be very simple, $g$ is some sort of 3-D Fourier transform of $f$. However, the trouble is that the variables $k_x, k_y, w$ are not independent. They need to satisfy the relation $k_x^2 + k_y^2 = w^2$. Therefore, I would claim that the correct form of the above expression should be $$f(x,y,t) = int oint_{S(w)} g(k_x,k_y,w) {rm e}^{-jmath (k_x x + k_y y - w t)} d begin{bmatrix} k_x\ k_yend{bmatrix} dw,tag{2}label{eq2}$$ where $S(w)$ is a circle of radius $w$, so that the inner integral goes over the perimeter of the circle and the outer over circle radii.
My question is essentially: given a target function $f(x,y,t)$, how do I find $g(k_x, k_y, w)$ such that eqref{eq2} is true for every point $x,y,t$?
The reference I have for this simply redefines $g(k_y,k_y,w)$ into $h(k_x,w)$ since only two variables are independent (I'm assuming this means $h(k_x,w)=g(k_x,pm sqrt{w^2-k_x^2},w)$ though that's never written) and uses this in the first integral. This leads to $$f(x,y,t) = int int h(k_x,w) {rm e}^{-jmath (k_x x+k_y y - w t)} d k_x dw = int int tilde{g}(k_x,y,w) {rm e}^{-jmath (k_x x - w t)} d k_x dw,tag{3}label{eq3}$$ where $tilde{g}(k_x,y,w) = h(k_x,w) {rm e}^{-jmath k_y y} $ (again, omitting the argument $k_y$ for me can only mean the implicit relation $k_y = pm sqrt{w^2-k_x^2}$). From eqref{eq3}, they claim that $f$ is the 2-D Fourier transform of $tilde{g}$ along the first and third dimension so that all we need to do to find $tilde{g}$ is $$ tilde{g}(k_x,y,w) = frac{1}{4pi^2} int int f(x,y,t) {rm e}^{jmath (k_x x-wt)} dx dt$$ which gives $h$ as $ h(k_x,w) = tilde{g}(k_x,y,w) {rm e}^{jmath k_y y} $.
However, I have the feeling this is oversimplifying things a bit. I'm lacking rigor. My feeling is that the original problem eqref{eq2} may not have a unique solution (due to the variable dependence) and a particular one was chosen here. Integration limits are always skipped which may be a delicate issue (after all, $k_x$ should never leave the interval $[-w,w]$, maybe this can be solved by defining $h$ zero outside this support). The fact that we cannot directly solve for $k_y$ (due to the $pm$) troubles me. Overall I have a vague feeling that this may work but I cannot quite put my finger on it and really understand what's going on.
Would anyone be able to enlighten me how to treat such problems rigorously?
edit: A concrete example I am interested in is the function $f(x,y,t)={rm e}^{-jmath left(omega_0 t - frac{omega_0}{c}sqrt{(x-x_0)^2+(y-y_0)^2}right)}$. I'm awarding a bounty to anyone who can systematically explain me how to find the (set of) function(s) $g(k_x,k_y,omega)$ that satisfy eqref{eq2} for a given $f(x,y,t)$ everywhere. A concrete example may be helpful for the understanding, it can be the one I provided in this paragraph, but I'm also happy with any other non-trivial example, as long as it aids the understanding.
integration functional-analysis fourier-analysis integral-geometry
This question has an open bounty worth +50
reputation from Florian ending in 7 days.
This question has not received enough attention.
As I explained in the question, I'm awarding a bounty to anyone who can systematically explain me how to find the (set of) function(s) $g(k_x,k_y,omega)$ that satisfy (2) for a given $f(x,y,t)$ everywhere. A concrete example may be helpful for the understanding, it can te the one I provided in this paragraph, but I'm also happy with any other non-trivial example, as long as it aids the understanding.
1
$f$ seems some kind of Radon transform of $g$: these problems are studied within the realm of integral geometry.
– Daniele Tampieri
Nov 7 at 16:04
Thanks for the suggestion. I added a tag. I know Radon transform only as integrals over lines, but you are right, this might be strongly related.
– Florian
Nov 7 at 16:23
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
Dear Math enthusiasts,
I am struggeling with a problem for which a solution is already given to me, but I can just not see why it is true. Here is the setting: I am given a function $f(x,y,t)$. It's well behaved let's say. Smooth and things like that. Now, this function should be reexpressed in the following form $$f(x,y,t) = int g(k_x,k_y,w) {rm e}^{-jmath (k_x x + k_y y - w t)} d k_x dk_y dw. tag{1}label{eq1}$$ If it were only this it would be very simple, $g$ is some sort of 3-D Fourier transform of $f$. However, the trouble is that the variables $k_x, k_y, w$ are not independent. They need to satisfy the relation $k_x^2 + k_y^2 = w^2$. Therefore, I would claim that the correct form of the above expression should be $$f(x,y,t) = int oint_{S(w)} g(k_x,k_y,w) {rm e}^{-jmath (k_x x + k_y y - w t)} d begin{bmatrix} k_x\ k_yend{bmatrix} dw,tag{2}label{eq2}$$ where $S(w)$ is a circle of radius $w$, so that the inner integral goes over the perimeter of the circle and the outer over circle radii.
My question is essentially: given a target function $f(x,y,t)$, how do I find $g(k_x, k_y, w)$ such that eqref{eq2} is true for every point $x,y,t$?
The reference I have for this simply redefines $g(k_y,k_y,w)$ into $h(k_x,w)$ since only two variables are independent (I'm assuming this means $h(k_x,w)=g(k_x,pm sqrt{w^2-k_x^2},w)$ though that's never written) and uses this in the first integral. This leads to $$f(x,y,t) = int int h(k_x,w) {rm e}^{-jmath (k_x x+k_y y - w t)} d k_x dw = int int tilde{g}(k_x,y,w) {rm e}^{-jmath (k_x x - w t)} d k_x dw,tag{3}label{eq3}$$ where $tilde{g}(k_x,y,w) = h(k_x,w) {rm e}^{-jmath k_y y} $ (again, omitting the argument $k_y$ for me can only mean the implicit relation $k_y = pm sqrt{w^2-k_x^2}$). From eqref{eq3}, they claim that $f$ is the 2-D Fourier transform of $tilde{g}$ along the first and third dimension so that all we need to do to find $tilde{g}$ is $$ tilde{g}(k_x,y,w) = frac{1}{4pi^2} int int f(x,y,t) {rm e}^{jmath (k_x x-wt)} dx dt$$ which gives $h$ as $ h(k_x,w) = tilde{g}(k_x,y,w) {rm e}^{jmath k_y y} $.
However, I have the feeling this is oversimplifying things a bit. I'm lacking rigor. My feeling is that the original problem eqref{eq2} may not have a unique solution (due to the variable dependence) and a particular one was chosen here. Integration limits are always skipped which may be a delicate issue (after all, $k_x$ should never leave the interval $[-w,w]$, maybe this can be solved by defining $h$ zero outside this support). The fact that we cannot directly solve for $k_y$ (due to the $pm$) troubles me. Overall I have a vague feeling that this may work but I cannot quite put my finger on it and really understand what's going on.
Would anyone be able to enlighten me how to treat such problems rigorously?
edit: A concrete example I am interested in is the function $f(x,y,t)={rm e}^{-jmath left(omega_0 t - frac{omega_0}{c}sqrt{(x-x_0)^2+(y-y_0)^2}right)}$. I'm awarding a bounty to anyone who can systematically explain me how to find the (set of) function(s) $g(k_x,k_y,omega)$ that satisfy eqref{eq2} for a given $f(x,y,t)$ everywhere. A concrete example may be helpful for the understanding, it can be the one I provided in this paragraph, but I'm also happy with any other non-trivial example, as long as it aids the understanding.
integration functional-analysis fourier-analysis integral-geometry
Dear Math enthusiasts,
I am struggeling with a problem for which a solution is already given to me, but I can just not see why it is true. Here is the setting: I am given a function $f(x,y,t)$. It's well behaved let's say. Smooth and things like that. Now, this function should be reexpressed in the following form $$f(x,y,t) = int g(k_x,k_y,w) {rm e}^{-jmath (k_x x + k_y y - w t)} d k_x dk_y dw. tag{1}label{eq1}$$ If it were only this it would be very simple, $g$ is some sort of 3-D Fourier transform of $f$. However, the trouble is that the variables $k_x, k_y, w$ are not independent. They need to satisfy the relation $k_x^2 + k_y^2 = w^2$. Therefore, I would claim that the correct form of the above expression should be $$f(x,y,t) = int oint_{S(w)} g(k_x,k_y,w) {rm e}^{-jmath (k_x x + k_y y - w t)} d begin{bmatrix} k_x\ k_yend{bmatrix} dw,tag{2}label{eq2}$$ where $S(w)$ is a circle of radius $w$, so that the inner integral goes over the perimeter of the circle and the outer over circle radii.
My question is essentially: given a target function $f(x,y,t)$, how do I find $g(k_x, k_y, w)$ such that eqref{eq2} is true for every point $x,y,t$?
The reference I have for this simply redefines $g(k_y,k_y,w)$ into $h(k_x,w)$ since only two variables are independent (I'm assuming this means $h(k_x,w)=g(k_x,pm sqrt{w^2-k_x^2},w)$ though that's never written) and uses this in the first integral. This leads to $$f(x,y,t) = int int h(k_x,w) {rm e}^{-jmath (k_x x+k_y y - w t)} d k_x dw = int int tilde{g}(k_x,y,w) {rm e}^{-jmath (k_x x - w t)} d k_x dw,tag{3}label{eq3}$$ where $tilde{g}(k_x,y,w) = h(k_x,w) {rm e}^{-jmath k_y y} $ (again, omitting the argument $k_y$ for me can only mean the implicit relation $k_y = pm sqrt{w^2-k_x^2}$). From eqref{eq3}, they claim that $f$ is the 2-D Fourier transform of $tilde{g}$ along the first and third dimension so that all we need to do to find $tilde{g}$ is $$ tilde{g}(k_x,y,w) = frac{1}{4pi^2} int int f(x,y,t) {rm e}^{jmath (k_x x-wt)} dx dt$$ which gives $h$ as $ h(k_x,w) = tilde{g}(k_x,y,w) {rm e}^{jmath k_y y} $.
However, I have the feeling this is oversimplifying things a bit. I'm lacking rigor. My feeling is that the original problem eqref{eq2} may not have a unique solution (due to the variable dependence) and a particular one was chosen here. Integration limits are always skipped which may be a delicate issue (after all, $k_x$ should never leave the interval $[-w,w]$, maybe this can be solved by defining $h$ zero outside this support). The fact that we cannot directly solve for $k_y$ (due to the $pm$) troubles me. Overall I have a vague feeling that this may work but I cannot quite put my finger on it and really understand what's going on.
Would anyone be able to enlighten me how to treat such problems rigorously?
edit: A concrete example I am interested in is the function $f(x,y,t)={rm e}^{-jmath left(omega_0 t - frac{omega_0}{c}sqrt{(x-x_0)^2+(y-y_0)^2}right)}$. I'm awarding a bounty to anyone who can systematically explain me how to find the (set of) function(s) $g(k_x,k_y,omega)$ that satisfy eqref{eq2} for a given $f(x,y,t)$ everywhere. A concrete example may be helpful for the understanding, it can be the one I provided in this paragraph, but I'm also happy with any other non-trivial example, as long as it aids the understanding.
integration functional-analysis fourier-analysis integral-geometry
integration functional-analysis fourier-analysis integral-geometry
edited 2 hours ago
asked Nov 7 at 15:57
Florian
1,3001719
1,3001719
This question has an open bounty worth +50
reputation from Florian ending in 7 days.
This question has not received enough attention.
As I explained in the question, I'm awarding a bounty to anyone who can systematically explain me how to find the (set of) function(s) $g(k_x,k_y,omega)$ that satisfy (2) for a given $f(x,y,t)$ everywhere. A concrete example may be helpful for the understanding, it can te the one I provided in this paragraph, but I'm also happy with any other non-trivial example, as long as it aids the understanding.
This question has an open bounty worth +50
reputation from Florian ending in 7 days.
This question has not received enough attention.
As I explained in the question, I'm awarding a bounty to anyone who can systematically explain me how to find the (set of) function(s) $g(k_x,k_y,omega)$ that satisfy (2) for a given $f(x,y,t)$ everywhere. A concrete example may be helpful for the understanding, it can te the one I provided in this paragraph, but I'm also happy with any other non-trivial example, as long as it aids the understanding.
1
$f$ seems some kind of Radon transform of $g$: these problems are studied within the realm of integral geometry.
– Daniele Tampieri
Nov 7 at 16:04
Thanks for the suggestion. I added a tag. I know Radon transform only as integrals over lines, but you are right, this might be strongly related.
– Florian
Nov 7 at 16:23
add a comment |
1
$f$ seems some kind of Radon transform of $g$: these problems are studied within the realm of integral geometry.
– Daniele Tampieri
Nov 7 at 16:04
Thanks for the suggestion. I added a tag. I know Radon transform only as integrals over lines, but you are right, this might be strongly related.
– Florian
Nov 7 at 16:23
1
1
$f$ seems some kind of Radon transform of $g$: these problems are studied within the realm of integral geometry.
– Daniele Tampieri
Nov 7 at 16:04
$f$ seems some kind of Radon transform of $g$: these problems are studied within the realm of integral geometry.
– Daniele Tampieri
Nov 7 at 16:04
Thanks for the suggestion. I added a tag. I know Radon transform only as integrals over lines, but you are right, this might be strongly related.
– Florian
Nov 7 at 16:23
Thanks for the suggestion. I added a tag. I know Radon transform only as integrals over lines, but you are right, this might be strongly related.
– Florian
Nov 7 at 16:23
add a comment |
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
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
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2988706%2finverting-fourier-transform-on-circles%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
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
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
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
1
$f$ seems some kind of Radon transform of $g$: these problems are studied within the realm of integral geometry.
– Daniele Tampieri
Nov 7 at 16:04
Thanks for the suggestion. I added a tag. I know Radon transform only as integrals over lines, but you are right, this might be strongly related.
– Florian
Nov 7 at 16:23