Open 38968367-17c9-42b1-b82d-c1adf20431c2 opened 14 years ago
Sage has Fourier series in the Piecewise class.
For the FT, I vote to use the normalization so that FT is an isometry from L2(R) to itself.
Replying to @wdjoyner:
Sage has Fourier series in the Piecewise class.
I'll be checking that.
For the FT, I vote to use the normalization so that FT is an isometry from L2(R) to itself.
I don't understand what you mean there. Could you explain, perhaps post some latex formulas to show your proposed definition.
thanks
Oscar
Replying to @sagetrac-olazo:
Replying to @wdjoyner:
For the FT, I vote to use the normalization so that FT is an isometry from L2(R) to itself.
I don't understand what you mean there. Could you explain, perhaps post some latex formulas to show your proposed definition.
The formulas are at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourier_transform (which in turn refers to Rudin)
thanks
Oscar
I don't think anybody is working on this. I'm changing the milestone to sage-wishlist
.
See also the symbolics wiki page for some general pointers about implementing transforms in Sage.
Description changed:
---
+++
@@ -1 +1 @@
-Sage has got laplace and inverse_laplace. It should be fairly easy to add fourier and inverse_fourier. An adecuate definition for each should be agreed upon though...
+Sage has got laplace and inverse_laplace. It should be fairly easy to add fourier and inverse_fourier. An adequate definition for each should be agreed upon though...
Sage has got laplace and inverse_laplace. It should be fairly easy to add fourier and inverse_fourier. An adequate definition for each should be agreed upon though...
CC: @kcrisman
Component: calculus
Keywords: fourier, transform
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/8338