Deriving the inverse Fourier transform without knowledge of the form it will take

360 Views Asked by At

I've run by several proofs of the Fourier inversion theorem. However, every proof I have come across starts by assuming the form that the inverse transform will take. For example, Ron Gordon's answer to this question starts with the following assumption:

Now let's assume that the inverse FT may be written as

$$f(x) = A \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dk \, \hat{f}(k) \, e^{-i k x}$$

Suppose I am stupid and I do not know what the inverse Fourier transform should look like. How do I derive it using my knowledge of the definition of the Fourier transform?

1

There are 1 best solutions below

2
On BEST ANSWER

I assume $-ikx$ on the right should be $ikx$. You can use what you have instead, but it is not standard. \begin{align} \int_{-R}^{R}f(x)e^{-ixl}dx & = A\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\hat{f}(k)\int_{-R}^{R}e^{ix(k-l)}dxdk \\ & = 2A\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\hat{f}(k)\frac{\sin(R(k-l))}{k-l}dk \end{align} The sinc function $$ S_{R}(k-l)=\frac{\sin(R(k-l))}{k-l} $$ is increasingly peaked as $R\rightarrow\infty$ with a peak value of $R$ at $k-l=0$ (i.e., at $l=k$.) The total integral in $k$ of $S_{R}$ remains constant with a value of $\pi$. And the oscillatory nature of $\sin$ causes cancelling so that, for every $\epsilon > 0$, one has $$ \lim_{R\rightarrow\infty}\left(\int_{-\infty}^{l-\epsilon}+\int_{l+\epsilon}^{\infty}\right)\hat{f}(k)\frac{\sin(R(k-l))}{k-l}dk = 0. $$ Finally, if $\hat{f}$ is smooth at $l$, \begin{align} \lim_{R\rightarrow\infty}\int_{-R}^{R}f(x)e^{-ixl}dx & = \lim_{R\rightarrow\infty}2A\int_{l-\epsilon}^{l+\epsilon}\hat{f}(k)\frac{\sin(R(k-l))}{k-l}dk \\ & \approx 2A\hat{f}(l)\lim_{R\rightarrow\infty}\int_{l-\epsilon}^{l+\epsilon}\frac{\sin(R(k-l))}{k-l}dk \\ & = 2A\pi\hat{f}(l) \end{align}