Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with fourier-analysis
Search options not deleted
user 15570
The representation of functions (or objects which are in some generalize the notion of function) as constant linear combinations of sines and cosines at integer multiples of a given frequency, as Fourier transforms or as Fourier integrals.
0
votes
How far can the domain of definition of multiplier operators be extended?
I think I can now prove the following (which covers the case requested in the bounty):
Theorem. Let $g=P/Q$ for polynomials $P$ and $Q$ where $\mathrm{order}(P) \leq \mathrm{order}(Q)$ and $Q$ has no …
- 708
4
votes
0
answers
170
views
Convergence of integral formula for Fourier inversion (and Hilbert transform) for integrable...
I asked the question below on Math Stack Exchange, https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/2592555/convergence-of-integral-formula-for-fourier-inversion-and-hilbert-transform-fo, but [despite it havi …
- 708
3
votes
2
answers
337
views
How far can the domain of definition of multiplier operators be extended?
Given any $g \in L^\infty(\mathbb{R})$, we define the associated multiplier operator $T_g \colon L^2(\mathbb{R}) \to L^2(\mathbb{R})$ by
$$ \mathcal{F}(T_g f) \ = \ g.\mathcal{F}f $$
where $\mathcal{F …
- 708