Subscribed. Took me one second to reason why. This man describes all the details in an exhaustive manner. This is exactly what many students are searching for. I can't imagine Lebesgue Integration at this level of detail. Even thinking about makes me cry of happiness. . There are many Doctors like him doing an outstanding job. And this was recommended as a random video.....
I'm really appreciate this video that professor made.It's helps me understanding this concept and helps me to accomplish my assignment, sorry for my bad english, thank you.
Also, something else that I think needs to be addressed is the way that EVERYONE describes the difference between correlation and convolution. In the time domain, one of the functions is time reversed for convolution. But, and this is a big BUT, in the frequency domain it is when we are performing a cross-correlation that one of the DFTs is conjugated (equivalent to time reversal in the time domain). It took me a long time to sort this inherent ambiguity out. This ambiguity needs to be recognized. To assume that everyone realizes this is a big mistake.
At approx. 5:37, you said that you are going to multiply e^-i(omega)y with e^i(omega)x and you took i(omega) common for both the terms. But I think that you can't take -ve and +ve positive common because they are opposite. Or, what I think is that when you took i(omega) common, your final expression came out to be e^i(omega)(x - y) so you are correct. Please correct me If I am wrong
yes, you are absolutely wrong and seem a bit confused. by algebraic property of exponential, one can add their exponents [e^a * e^b = e^(a+b) ; a,b belongs to R or C]
Great one, i want to thank you for your work. And i have also a request : can you make for us some videos about the following topics: Fast fourrier transforme (FFT) and the integrator operation. Thank you in advance.
Is he still alive? Did you loose hair? Is still with Jenny or she separated him when she discovered some Fourier Convolutions on this desk? (Just some humor).
@SteveBrunton Hallow, professor Steve. A wonderful vide series with precise and definite explanation. First of all, thank you and your team. Now coming to my question and that is why do we need convolution ? We had function multiplication operation before but even then why we had to invent Convolution, what's the advantage and purpose of convolution ?
With convolution in the time domain, we have to time reverse one of the functions before we do the convolution. When we do the convolution in the frequency domain(multiplication in frequency domain) do we have to time reverse one of the functions before we take its fourier transform? If not, why not?
It is not intuitively obvious to me that the in the formula for convolution ( sum over k (f(t)*g(t-k) ) that g(t-k) implies that it is time reversed. That is not obvious. What part of the formula for convolution (in the time domain) implies that one of the functions is reversed in time?
I like your videos but this is definitely not a rigorous mathematical setting for the problem. Engineers would like it but mathematicians will doubt alot of assumptions you already did in the proof.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
your in-depth explanation of complex concepts is phenomenal. thank you
He does a pretty good job with real concepts too
Subscribed. Took me one second to reason why.
This man describes all the details in an exhaustive manner. This is exactly what many students are searching for. I can't imagine Lebesgue Integration at this level of detail. Even thinking about makes me cry of happiness. . There are many Doctors like him doing an outstanding job.
And this was recommended as a random video.....
I'm really appreciate this video that professor made.It's helps me understanding this concept and helps me to accomplish my assignment, sorry for my bad english, thank you.
Steve, Big fan of your lectures.
Hahaha. "Rather convoluted expression." I see what you did there.
By far the best math lecturor i've ever experienced!
Also, something else that I think needs to be addressed is the way that EVERYONE describes the difference between correlation and convolution. In the time domain, one of the functions is time reversed for convolution. But, and this is a big BUT, in the frequency domain it is when we are performing a cross-correlation that one of the DFTs is conjugated (equivalent to time reversal in the time domain). It took me a long time to sort this inherent ambiguity out. This ambiguity needs to be recognized. To assume that everyone realizes this is a big mistake.
Holy moly I've never found math so satisfying
Great video! Thanks Steve. I've learnt so much from your lectures.
That's gorgeous man. Simple and nice
6:22, it is called Fubini's theorem :)
Awesome, thanks!
Its a liiitle bit convoluted . Smooth explanation, I havent done convolution integrals yet but i understood this
At approx. 5:37, you said that you are going to multiply e^-i(omega)y with e^i(omega)x and you took i(omega) common for both the terms. But I think that you can't take -ve and +ve positive common because they are opposite. Or, what I think is that when you took i(omega) common, your final expression came out to be e^i(omega)(x - y) so you are correct. Please correct me If I am wrong
yes, you are absolutely wrong and seem a bit confused. by algebraic property of exponential, one can add their exponents [e^a * e^b = e^(a+b) ; a,b belongs to R or C]
@@sayanjitb I also thought the same but I got a bit confused and got the answer wrong. Thanks for correcting me
Finally someone explained mathematically everything.
Great series on FT's and FS's but It would be awesome to include dirac delta function in this lecture series
Great one, i want to thank you for your work. And i have also a request : can you make for us some videos about the following topics: Fast fourrier transforme (FFT) and the integrator operation. Thank you in advance.
Thanks -- Yep, the FFT is coming soon!
I love this. I’m giving a crash course of DFT to my younger colleague, where I’m fuzzy on some theorem derivations.
Is he still alive? Did you loose hair? Is still with Jenny or she separated him when she discovered some Fourier Convolutions on this desk?
(Just some humor).
i love u just survived my breakdown thank you seriously thank you
Thank u for ur clear explanation!
you saved my homework
@SteveBrunton Hallow, professor Steve. A wonderful vide series with precise and definite explanation. First of all, thank you and your team. Now coming to my question and that is why do we need convolution ? We had function multiplication operation before but even then why we had to invent Convolution, what's the advantage and purpose of convolution ?
Fantastic representation!
Thank you so much for this embellished presentation. I got a doubt, what is the diffusion kernel, anyway?
Excellent
Where does one use this property in physical applications?
saved my life! Thanks
На часах 2 часа ночи, но я не могу оторваться. Круто!
4:41 "This is where it gets a little bit convoluted". Hah, quite topical!
Great video! Thanks.
With convolution in the time domain, we have to time reverse one of the functions before we do the convolution. When we do the convolution in the frequency domain(multiplication in frequency domain) do we have to time reverse one of the functions before we take its fourier transform? If not, why not?
No, because the time reversing appears naturally in the inverse transform.
It is not intuitively obvious to me that the in the formula for convolution ( sum over k (f(t)*g(t-k) ) that g(t-k) implies that it is time reversed. That is not obvious. What part of the formula for convolution (in the time domain) implies that one of the functions is reversed in time?
Amazing, thanks a lot!
Massively simplify this "convoluted" expression :D
Great vid
love this
"That is a little bit convoluted" hahahaha
Wait, this guy is writing upside down? Pretty useful video btw
There is a LOT to be said about the commutative property of the integrals. But I am sure simple minded physicists don't mind.
Is he writing backwards?
The aesthetics in this video are crazy good but a bit unsettling lol
I only want to be taught by a floating head and arms on a black background in 4K from now on.
Yes, this is it ))
K-see
Bless you
K-see
Bless you again
I thought it was 1/sqrt(2pi)?
That’s what my professor taught us
"My red integral" I guess Steve might be color blind, or I am color blind
I am not convinced!
I like your videos but this is definitely not a rigorous mathematical setting for the problem.
Engineers would like it but mathematicians will doubt alot of assumptions you already did in the proof.
Kuh-sey might be the worst variable
Who is this guy, why can he write in mirror like nobody's business?