10

I know that $\{e^{inx}\}_{n\in\mathbb N}$ is a basis of $L^2(\mathbb S^1)$ where $\mathbb S^1=\mathbb R/\mathbb Z$. Using this result, and the fact that $$\left<f ,g \right>=\int_0^1 f(x)e^{-inx}\mathrm d x,$$ is a scalar product over $L^2(\mathbb S^1)$, we can wrrite any function $$f:\mathbb S^1\longrightarrow \mathbb R$$ as $$f(x)=\sum_{n\in\mathbb N}\int_0^1f(x)e^{-iny}\mathrm d ye^{inx},$$ or, as usually denoted, by setting $$c_n=\int_0^1f(x)e^{-inx}\mathrm d x,$$ we write $$f(x)=\sum_{n\in\mathbb Z}c_ne^{inx}=:Sf(x),$$ which is called it's Fourier Series.

Question : Now, does $\{e^{i\alpha x}\}_{\alpha \in \mathbb R}$ a basis of $L^2(\mathbb R)$ ?

If yes, then (without rigor), for $f:\mathbb R\longrightarrow \mathbb R$, we could write $$f(x)=\int_{-\infty }^\infty \int_{-\infty }^\infty f(y)e^{-i \alpha y}\mathrm d ye^{i\alpha x}\mathrm d \alpha ,$$ what is in fact exactly the inversion of Fourier transform, i.e. $$f(x)=\int_{-\infty }^\infty \hat f(\alpha )e^{i\alpha x}\mathrm d \alpha .$$

To me, if my conjecture that $L^2(\mathbb R)=span\{e^{i\alpha x}\}_{\alpha \in\mathbb R}$, then this formula would make totally sense (as replacing $$\sum_{\alpha \in\mathbb R}\hat f(\alpha )e^{i\alpha x}\quad \text{by}\quad \int_{\mathbb R}\hat f(\alpha )e^{i\alpha x}\mathrm d \alpha,$$ since an integral "can be seen" as a continuous sum.) Of coure that to have the existence of the Fourier inverse, we need that $f$ is Schwartz, but as I said, I ask the question without rigor; in other words, we suppose that we have all good conditions for that things exist.

idm
  • 12,049

2 Answers2

5

The functions $e^{i\alpha x}$ are not in $L^2$, which means they cannot be a basis. However, there is a general principle associated with Sturm-Liouville theory that can help give you an approximation to what you want. Integrals over any small interval of the parameter $\alpha$ are in the space, and, for such intervals $I$, $J$, you have orthogonality: $$ \left\langle \int_{I} e^{i\alpha x}d\alpha,\int_{J} e^{i\alpha x}d\alpha\right\rangle =0, \;\; \mbox{ if $I\cap J$ is of measure $0$ }. $$ Furthermore, if $|I|$ is the length of the interval $I$, then $$ \left\|\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi|I|}}\int_{I}e^{i\alpha x}d\alpha\right\|^2=1. $$ So you can divide up the real axis into very small disjoint intervals $I_n$, and you end up with an orthonormal set $$ \left\{\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi|I_n|}}\int_{I_n}e^{i\alpha x}d\alpha\right\}_{n=-\infty}^{\infty} $$ If you let $e_n$ denote the integral over $I_n$, and you attempt to expand in this basis $\{ e_n \}$, you end up with what looks like a type of Riemann integral approximation for the Fourier integral inversion problem. $$ \sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty}\langle f,e_n\rangle e_n = \frac{1}{2\pi}\sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty}\left(\frac{1}{|I_n|}\int_{I_n}\hat{f}(\alpha)d\alpha\right)\int_{I_n}e^{i\alpha t}dt $$ The term in parentheses is the integral average of the Fourier transform over $I_n$. So this is very much like a Riemann approximation of the inversion integral applied to the Fourier transform. And it makes Mathematical sense. If the function $f$ is constant on each of intervals $I_n$, then (ignoring values at endpoints) the above is a correct inversion integral to give you back $f$.

Disintegrating By Parts
  • 91,908
  • 6
  • 76
  • 168
  • Would it be possible to provide a specific name, and at least one name, for the "general principle associated with Sturm-Liouville theory" that is mentioned in the answer? It is not clear from how the answer is currently written how exactly this principle is formulated and how one might learn more about it. – Chill2Macht Jan 05 '25 at 16:18
3

Assuming you're talking about Hilbert-basis : the $e^{inx}$ family is an Hilbert basis of $\mathbf R / 2\pi \mathbf Z$, the $e^{ix\alpha}$ family isn't an Hilbert basis of $L^2(\mathbf R)$. The first reason is that the elements of the family are not in $L^2(\mathbf R)$.

But this is not the only obstruction. The cardinality of an hilbert basis is constant, ie 2 hilbert basis of a same hilbert space must have the same cardinality (which allow one to talk about "hilbert dimension"), which isn't the case here. In particular a Hilbert space with countable hilbert basis is separable, a hilbert space with uncountable basis isn't separable.

Now $L^2(\mathbf R)$ is indeed separable, and the Hermite polynomials are an Hilbert basis, and yes you can do "fourier series" on $L^2(\mathbf R)$ : if $f\in H$ a separable Hilbert space and $(e_n)_{n\in \mathbf N}$ is a hilbert basis then $f=\sum_{n\geq 0} (f|e_n)e_n$.

Now for your idea of using the $e^{i\alpha x}$ as a "basis" to explain fourier transform can be formalized using representation theory.

Last thing to note, exercise 18 chapter 4 of real and complex analysis by Walter Rudin make you construct a Hilbert space with hilbert basis $(e^{i\alpha x})_{\alpha \in \mathbf R}$ (but with a different scalar product), as i said this space is not separable and not isometric to $L^2(\mathbf R)$.

Renart
  • 3,046
  • $\int_0^1 e^{inx}e^{-imx}dx=\frac{1}{i(n-m)}(e^{(n-m)i}-1)\neq \delta_{nm}$, so how can it be an orthonormal basis ? – idm Sep 15 '16 at 07:58
  • you need to normalize something, either work with $\mathbf R/2\pi \mathbf Z$ or work with $e^{2i\pi n}$. Also your formula in your comment isn't true for $n=m$. – Renart Sep 15 '16 at 08:03
  • I would say $L^2(\mathbb R)$ is separable because $\Psi_{n,k}(x) = e^{2 i \pi n x} 1_{x \in [k,k+1]}$ is an orthogonal basis – reuns Sep 15 '16 at 11:57
  • Would it be possible to explain the claim that the idea of the Fourier transform as a basis decomposition can be formalized using representation theory? E.g. give a name of a specific theorem, or point to a specific result in a specific set of notes about representation theory? It is interesting claim but currently difficult to follow up on / learn more about. – Chill2Macht Jan 05 '25 at 17:45