6D Fourier transform of Coulomb potential The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Fourier transform of projection of spherical cap$k$-space tensor integral in statistical physicsHow to do this two complex integrals?Fourier Transform of Window FunctionCalculate Hankel Transform by Fast Fourier TransformSolving an ODE for the Green function using Fourier transform2-dim Fourier Transform of HeavisideDerivation of the Fourier Transform of a PDE$left( partial^2_xy + partial^2_xz + partial^2_yz right)u(x,y,z) = delta(x,y,z)$Integration with Dirac delta function of two-argument function

Derivation tree not rendering

Why does the Event Horizon Telescope (EHT) not include telescopes from Africa, Asia or Australia?

How did the audience guess the pentatonic scale in Bobby McFerrin's presentation?

Is this wall load bearing? Blueprints and photos attached

Are my PIs rude or am I just being too sensitive?

Was credit for the black hole image misattributed?

What do you call a plan that's an alternative plan in case your initial plan fails?

What information about me do stores get via my credit card?

Finding degree of a finite field extension

Problems with Ubuntu mount /tmp

Road tyres vs "Street" tyres for charity ride on MTB Tandem

Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?

Did the UK government pay "millions and millions of dollars" to try to snag Julian Assange?

Can a 1st-level character have an ability score above 18?

Match Roman Numerals

How to copy the contents of all files with a certain name into a new file?

Windows 10: How to Lock (not sleep) laptop on lid close?

How to prevent selfdestruct from another contract

Do warforged have souls?

Semisimplicity of the category of coherent sheaves?

Take groceries in checked luggage

Can a novice safely splice in wire to lengthen 5V charging cable?

Create an outline of font

What are these Gizmos at Izaña Atmospheric Research Center in Spain?



6D Fourier transform of Coulomb potential



The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Fourier transform of projection of spherical cap$k$-space tensor integral in statistical physicsHow to do this two complex integrals?Fourier Transform of Window FunctionCalculate Hankel Transform by Fast Fourier TransformSolving an ODE for the Green function using Fourier transform2-dim Fourier Transform of HeavisideDerivation of the Fourier Transform of a PDE$left( partial^2_xy + partial^2_xz + partial^2_yz right)u(x,y,z) = delta(x,y,z)$Integration with Dirac delta function of two-argument function










2












$begingroup$


I just wanted to check my result.



Let's define the Fourier transform as (the integral over whole real line):



$$g(k)=frac1sqrt2 pi int e^-i k x f(x) dx$$



We have the following function:



$$f(mathbfr_1,mathbfr_2)=frac1$$



I want to Fourier it in all the Cartesian coordinates, which should be:



$$g(mathbfk_1,mathbfk_2)=frac1(2 pi)^3 int int e^-i mathbfk_1 mathbfr_1-i mathbfk_2 mathbfr_2 fracdmathbfr_1 dmathbfr_2=$$



Substituting:



$$mathbfr_1=mathbfr+mathbfr_2$$



$$=frac1(2 pi)^3 int int e^-i (mathbfk_1+mathbfk_2) mathbfr_2-i mathbfk_1 mathbfr fracdmathbfr_2 dmathbfrmathbfr=delta(mathbfk_1+mathbfk_2) int e^-i mathbfk_1 mathbfr fracdmathbfrmathbfr=frac4 pi delta(mathbfk_1+mathbfk_2)mathbfk_1^2$$



The last integral is evaluated using spherical coordinates and the properties of Bessel functions.




What's confusing to me is that the transform should be symmetric in $1 leftrightarrow 2$, meaning that if we exchange the indices, the result should be the same. But it doesn't seem to be symmetric. Where's my mistake?





Appendix:



$$int e^-i mathbfk mathbfr fracdmathbfrmathbfr=int_0^2 pi int_0^pi int_0^infty e^-i rho ( k_x sin theta cos phi + k_y sin theta sin phi+k_z cos theta) rho sin theta d rho d theta d phi=$$



$$=2 pi int_0^pi int_0^infty e^-i rho k_z cos theta J_0 (sqrtk_x^2+k_y^2 rho sin theta ) rho sin theta d rho d theta=$$



$$=2 pi int_0^pi int_0^infty e^-i rho k_z cot theta J_0 (sqrtk_x^2+k_y^2 rho ) rho csc theta d rho d theta=$$



$$=4 pi int_0^infty K_0 (k_z rho) J_0 (sqrtk_x^2+k_y^2 rho ) rho d rho=frac4 pik_x^2+k_y^2+k_z^2$$










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$
















    2












    $begingroup$


    I just wanted to check my result.



    Let's define the Fourier transform as (the integral over whole real line):



    $$g(k)=frac1sqrt2 pi int e^-i k x f(x) dx$$



    We have the following function:



    $$f(mathbfr_1,mathbfr_2)=frac1$$



    I want to Fourier it in all the Cartesian coordinates, which should be:



    $$g(mathbfk_1,mathbfk_2)=frac1(2 pi)^3 int int e^-i mathbfk_1 mathbfr_1-i mathbfk_2 mathbfr_2 fracdmathbfr_1 dmathbfr_2=$$



    Substituting:



    $$mathbfr_1=mathbfr+mathbfr_2$$



    $$=frac1(2 pi)^3 int int e^-i (mathbfk_1+mathbfk_2) mathbfr_2-i mathbfk_1 mathbfr fracdmathbfr_2 dmathbfrmathbfr=delta(mathbfk_1+mathbfk_2) int e^-i mathbfk_1 mathbfr fracdmathbfrmathbfr=frac4 pi delta(mathbfk_1+mathbfk_2)mathbfk_1^2$$



    The last integral is evaluated using spherical coordinates and the properties of Bessel functions.




    What's confusing to me is that the transform should be symmetric in $1 leftrightarrow 2$, meaning that if we exchange the indices, the result should be the same. But it doesn't seem to be symmetric. Where's my mistake?





    Appendix:



    $$int e^-i mathbfk mathbfr fracdmathbfrmathbfr=int_0^2 pi int_0^pi int_0^infty e^-i rho ( k_x sin theta cos phi + k_y sin theta sin phi+k_z cos theta) rho sin theta d rho d theta d phi=$$



    $$=2 pi int_0^pi int_0^infty e^-i rho k_z cos theta J_0 (sqrtk_x^2+k_y^2 rho sin theta ) rho sin theta d rho d theta=$$



    $$=2 pi int_0^pi int_0^infty e^-i rho k_z cot theta J_0 (sqrtk_x^2+k_y^2 rho ) rho csc theta d rho d theta=$$



    $$=4 pi int_0^infty K_0 (k_z rho) J_0 (sqrtk_x^2+k_y^2 rho ) rho d rho=frac4 pik_x^2+k_y^2+k_z^2$$










    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$














      2












      2








      2





      $begingroup$


      I just wanted to check my result.



      Let's define the Fourier transform as (the integral over whole real line):



      $$g(k)=frac1sqrt2 pi int e^-i k x f(x) dx$$



      We have the following function:



      $$f(mathbfr_1,mathbfr_2)=frac1$$



      I want to Fourier it in all the Cartesian coordinates, which should be:



      $$g(mathbfk_1,mathbfk_2)=frac1(2 pi)^3 int int e^-i mathbfk_1 mathbfr_1-i mathbfk_2 mathbfr_2 fracdmathbfr_1 dmathbfr_2=$$



      Substituting:



      $$mathbfr_1=mathbfr+mathbfr_2$$



      $$=frac1(2 pi)^3 int int e^-i (mathbfk_1+mathbfk_2) mathbfr_2-i mathbfk_1 mathbfr fracdmathbfr_2 dmathbfrmathbfr=delta(mathbfk_1+mathbfk_2) int e^-i mathbfk_1 mathbfr fracdmathbfrmathbfr=frac4 pi delta(mathbfk_1+mathbfk_2)mathbfk_1^2$$



      The last integral is evaluated using spherical coordinates and the properties of Bessel functions.




      What's confusing to me is that the transform should be symmetric in $1 leftrightarrow 2$, meaning that if we exchange the indices, the result should be the same. But it doesn't seem to be symmetric. Where's my mistake?





      Appendix:



      $$int e^-i mathbfk mathbfr fracdmathbfrmathbfr=int_0^2 pi int_0^pi int_0^infty e^-i rho ( k_x sin theta cos phi + k_y sin theta sin phi+k_z cos theta) rho sin theta d rho d theta d phi=$$



      $$=2 pi int_0^pi int_0^infty e^-i rho k_z cos theta J_0 (sqrtk_x^2+k_y^2 rho sin theta ) rho sin theta d rho d theta=$$



      $$=2 pi int_0^pi int_0^infty e^-i rho k_z cot theta J_0 (sqrtk_x^2+k_y^2 rho ) rho csc theta d rho d theta=$$



      $$=4 pi int_0^infty K_0 (k_z rho) J_0 (sqrtk_x^2+k_y^2 rho ) rho d rho=frac4 pik_x^2+k_y^2+k_z^2$$










      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      I just wanted to check my result.



      Let's define the Fourier transform as (the integral over whole real line):



      $$g(k)=frac1sqrt2 pi int e^-i k x f(x) dx$$



      We have the following function:



      $$f(mathbfr_1,mathbfr_2)=frac1$$



      I want to Fourier it in all the Cartesian coordinates, which should be:



      $$g(mathbfk_1,mathbfk_2)=frac1(2 pi)^3 int int e^-i mathbfk_1 mathbfr_1-i mathbfk_2 mathbfr_2 fracdmathbfr_1 dmathbfr_2=$$



      Substituting:



      $$mathbfr_1=mathbfr+mathbfr_2$$



      $$=frac1(2 pi)^3 int int e^-i (mathbfk_1+mathbfk_2) mathbfr_2-i mathbfk_1 mathbfr fracdmathbfr_2 dmathbfrmathbfr=delta(mathbfk_1+mathbfk_2) int e^-i mathbfk_1 mathbfr fracdmathbfrmathbfr=frac4 pi delta(mathbfk_1+mathbfk_2)mathbfk_1^2$$



      The last integral is evaluated using spherical coordinates and the properties of Bessel functions.




      What's confusing to me is that the transform should be symmetric in $1 leftrightarrow 2$, meaning that if we exchange the indices, the result should be the same. But it doesn't seem to be symmetric. Where's my mistake?





      Appendix:



      $$int e^-i mathbfk mathbfr fracdmathbfrmathbfr=int_0^2 pi int_0^pi int_0^infty e^-i rho ( k_x sin theta cos phi + k_y sin theta sin phi+k_z cos theta) rho sin theta d rho d theta d phi=$$



      $$=2 pi int_0^pi int_0^infty e^-i rho k_z cos theta J_0 (sqrtk_x^2+k_y^2 rho sin theta ) rho sin theta d rho d theta=$$



      $$=2 pi int_0^pi int_0^infty e^-i rho k_z cot theta J_0 (sqrtk_x^2+k_y^2 rho ) rho csc theta d rho d theta=$$



      $$=4 pi int_0^infty K_0 (k_z rho) J_0 (sqrtk_x^2+k_y^2 rho ) rho d rho=frac4 pik_x^2+k_y^2+k_z^2$$







      integration fourier-transform multiple-integral






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Apr 8 at 12:00









      Yuriy SYuriy S

      15.9k433118




      15.9k433118




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2












          $begingroup$

          Since $deltane0impliesmathbfk_1=-mathbfk_2$, an equivalent way to write the result would be the manifestly symmetric $dfrac4pidelta(mathbfk_1+mathbfk_2)$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            Could you please elaborate? How is this equivalent? Can we show it from the definition?
            $endgroup$
            – Yuriy S
            Apr 8 at 12:08










          • $begingroup$
            Oh wait, the delta-function factor helps here, am I right? Since we can (and should) have $mathbfk_1=-mathbfk_2$
            $endgroup$
            – Yuriy S
            Apr 8 at 12:13










          • $begingroup$
            @YuriyS Exactly. This is a common thing that surprises people with Dirac deltas.
            $endgroup$
            – J.G.
            Apr 8 at 12:18











          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%2f3179538%2f6d-fourier-transform-of-coulomb-potential%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          2












          $begingroup$

          Since $deltane0impliesmathbfk_1=-mathbfk_2$, an equivalent way to write the result would be the manifestly symmetric $dfrac4pidelta(mathbfk_1+mathbfk_2)$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            Could you please elaborate? How is this equivalent? Can we show it from the definition?
            $endgroup$
            – Yuriy S
            Apr 8 at 12:08










          • $begingroup$
            Oh wait, the delta-function factor helps here, am I right? Since we can (and should) have $mathbfk_1=-mathbfk_2$
            $endgroup$
            – Yuriy S
            Apr 8 at 12:13










          • $begingroup$
            @YuriyS Exactly. This is a common thing that surprises people with Dirac deltas.
            $endgroup$
            – J.G.
            Apr 8 at 12:18















          2












          $begingroup$

          Since $deltane0impliesmathbfk_1=-mathbfk_2$, an equivalent way to write the result would be the manifestly symmetric $dfrac4pidelta(mathbfk_1+mathbfk_2)$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            Could you please elaborate? How is this equivalent? Can we show it from the definition?
            $endgroup$
            – Yuriy S
            Apr 8 at 12:08










          • $begingroup$
            Oh wait, the delta-function factor helps here, am I right? Since we can (and should) have $mathbfk_1=-mathbfk_2$
            $endgroup$
            – Yuriy S
            Apr 8 at 12:13










          • $begingroup$
            @YuriyS Exactly. This is a common thing that surprises people with Dirac deltas.
            $endgroup$
            – J.G.
            Apr 8 at 12:18













          2












          2








          2





          $begingroup$

          Since $deltane0impliesmathbfk_1=-mathbfk_2$, an equivalent way to write the result would be the manifestly symmetric $dfrac4pidelta(mathbfk_1+mathbfk_2)$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          Since $deltane0impliesmathbfk_1=-mathbfk_2$, an equivalent way to write the result would be the manifestly symmetric $dfrac4pidelta(mathbfk_1+mathbfk_2)$.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Apr 8 at 12:19

























          answered Apr 8 at 12:04









          J.G.J.G.

          33.4k23252




          33.4k23252











          • $begingroup$
            Could you please elaborate? How is this equivalent? Can we show it from the definition?
            $endgroup$
            – Yuriy S
            Apr 8 at 12:08










          • $begingroup$
            Oh wait, the delta-function factor helps here, am I right? Since we can (and should) have $mathbfk_1=-mathbfk_2$
            $endgroup$
            – Yuriy S
            Apr 8 at 12:13










          • $begingroup$
            @YuriyS Exactly. This is a common thing that surprises people with Dirac deltas.
            $endgroup$
            – J.G.
            Apr 8 at 12:18
















          • $begingroup$
            Could you please elaborate? How is this equivalent? Can we show it from the definition?
            $endgroup$
            – Yuriy S
            Apr 8 at 12:08










          • $begingroup$
            Oh wait, the delta-function factor helps here, am I right? Since we can (and should) have $mathbfk_1=-mathbfk_2$
            $endgroup$
            – Yuriy S
            Apr 8 at 12:13










          • $begingroup$
            @YuriyS Exactly. This is a common thing that surprises people with Dirac deltas.
            $endgroup$
            – J.G.
            Apr 8 at 12:18















          $begingroup$
          Could you please elaborate? How is this equivalent? Can we show it from the definition?
          $endgroup$
          – Yuriy S
          Apr 8 at 12:08




          $begingroup$
          Could you please elaborate? How is this equivalent? Can we show it from the definition?
          $endgroup$
          – Yuriy S
          Apr 8 at 12:08












          $begingroup$
          Oh wait, the delta-function factor helps here, am I right? Since we can (and should) have $mathbfk_1=-mathbfk_2$
          $endgroup$
          – Yuriy S
          Apr 8 at 12:13




          $begingroup$
          Oh wait, the delta-function factor helps here, am I right? Since we can (and should) have $mathbfk_1=-mathbfk_2$
          $endgroup$
          – Yuriy S
          Apr 8 at 12:13












          $begingroup$
          @YuriyS Exactly. This is a common thing that surprises people with Dirac deltas.
          $endgroup$
          – J.G.
          Apr 8 at 12:18




          $begingroup$
          @YuriyS Exactly. This is a common thing that surprises people with Dirac deltas.
          $endgroup$
          – J.G.
          Apr 8 at 12:18

















          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%2f3179538%2f6d-fourier-transform-of-coulomb-potential%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

          A recreational problem The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manaraprime factors of numbers formed by primorialsAll the small primes close together yet againSimple quadratic, crazy question part 2Can every odd prime $pne 11$ be the smallest prime factor of a carmichael-number with $3$ prime factors?Is the product of consecutive primes in $(a, b)[n]$ $=$ $1$ $pmod ab$?Pythagorean triples that “survive” Euler's totient functionA question about a certain type of primesPrimes of the form $p^2+p+41$

          369. pr. Kr. Događaji Rođenja Smrti

          A weird inequality regarding integrals, limits, as well as sequence of functions. The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InA question regarding limits and integrable functionsChanging the order of $lim$ and $inf$ for point-wise converging monotonic sequence of functionsSequence of Distribution FunctionsBasic question on interchanging limits and integralsA sequence of functions $f_n$ that converges non-uniformly to $f$ but the limit of the integrals equals the integral of the limits?Is this (exotic) integral well defined and convergent (always)? and the bound correct?Sequence of differentiable,equicontinuous functionsProb. 10 (d), Chap. 6, in Baby Rudin: Holder Inequality for Improper Integrals With Infinite LimitsSuppose $f_n : [0,1]rightarrowmathbbR$ is a sequence of $C^1$ functions that converges pointwise to $f$.Suppose $f$ is a continuous function on $[a,b]$ and let $M=sup_ a leq x leq b |f(x)|$