Enter image description here

Consider a typical detector equivalent circuit, where the detector can be seen as an ideal current generator $I(t)$. Since $I = I_C + I_R$ (currents through the capacitor and resistor), $I_R R=V$ and $\frac{I_C}{C}=\frac{dV}{dt}$, the equation of the circuit is:


When $C$ goes to $0$, the equation should read $V=IR$ as it happens in detectors with a low $RC$ constant. But if I wanted to send $C$ to zero in the solution of the differential equation, which is $V(t)=\int_0^t \frac{I}{C}e^{\frac{t'-t}{RC}}dt'$, to obtain the same exact result, I would be brought to think that $e^{\frac{t'-t}{RC}}$ is kind of double a Dirac delta function. Substituting in the integral: $$V(t)=\int_0^t \frac{I}{C}2\delta(t'-t)RCdt'=I(t)R.$$

Is it actually a delta? Is it correct to reason this way?

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Whether it is correct or not, it's much easier to rewrite your equation as $CR\dfrac{dV}{dt} + V= IR$ and not play complicated mathematical games at all. $\endgroup$
    – alephzero
    Jul 16 at 18:54
  1. Yes, OP has essentially constructed a one-sided Dirac delta distribution $$\delta_{[0,\infty[}(x)~=~\lim_{\varepsilon\searrow 0} \frac{1}{\varepsilon} e^{-x/\varepsilon}$$ on the positive half line $[0,\infty[$ via a generalized function, so that $$\int_{[0,\infty[} \mathrm{d}x~\delta_{[0,\infty[}(x)~f(x)~=~f(0) $$ for all test functions $f:[0,\infty[\to \mathbb{R}$.

  2. Notice that OP's distribution is different from the usual two-sided Dirac delta distribution $\delta_{\mathbb{R}}(x)$ on the real line $\mathbb{R}$, which satisfies $$\int_{\mathbb{R}} \mathrm{d}x~\delta_{\mathbb{R}}(x)~f(x)~=~f(0) $$ for all test functions $f:\mathbb{R}\to \mathbb{R}$.

  3. This also explains why OP's last formula has a correction factor of 2.

  • $\begingroup$ Would you have a reference for a more detailled analysis about the "one sided delta function" ? Thanks ! $\endgroup$ Jul 16 at 17:06
  • $\begingroup$ @VincentFraticelli. Do you have a proper distribution-theoretical definition of "one sided delta function"? $\endgroup$
    – md2perpe
    Jul 16 at 17:19
  • $\begingroup$ I found out that it exists on this post. But, I had already asked myself the question about the currents induced on the surface of a conductor when the conductivity tends towards infinity. There is the same problem because the conductor exist only for $z>0$ $\endgroup$ Jul 16 at 17:26

A more mathematical treatment

We have an ordinary differential equation (ODE): $$\alpha^{-1}y'(t) + y(t) = f(t).$$ In our case, $y(t)=V(t),$ $\alpha=\frac{1}{RC},$ $f(t)=RI(t).$

The ODE can be solved by finding a Green's function $G_\alpha(t)$ satisfying $$\alpha^{-1}G_\alpha'(t) + G_\alpha(t) = \delta(t)$$ and then get the solution $y(t)$ as $$y(t) = (G_\alpha*f)(t) = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} G_\alpha(t-t')\,f(t')\,dt'.$$

A Green's function that only gives a response for $t>0$ (so that it's causal) is given by $$G_\alpha(t) = \alpha e^{-\alpha t} H(t),$$ where $H(t)$ is the Heaviside step function.

Distributions and convergence as such are defined by how they "act" on, or work in an integral when multiplied with, a test function $\varphi\in C^\infty_c(\mathbb{R}).$ Therefore, to show that $G_\alpha(t) \to \delta(t)$ in the sense of distributions, when $\alpha\to\infty,$ we need to show that $$ \lim_{\alpha\to\infty} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} G_\alpha(t)\,\varphi(t)\,dt = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \delta(t)\,\varphi(t)\,dt = \varphi(0) $$ for all $\varphi\in C^\infty_c(\mathbb{R}).$

That is easy. Using the variable change $t=s/\alpha$ we get $$ \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} G_\alpha(t) \, \varphi(t) \, dt = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \alpha e^{-\alpha t} H(t) \, \varphi(t) \, dt = \int_{0}^{\infty} \alpha e^{-\alpha t} \, \varphi(t) \, dt = \int_{0}^{\infty} \alpha e^{-s} \, \varphi(s/\alpha) \, ds/\alpha \\ = \int_{0}^{\infty} e^{-s} \, \varphi(s/\alpha) \, ds \to \int_{0}^{\infty} e^{-s} \, \varphi(0) \, ds = \int_{0}^{\infty} e^{-s} \, ds \, \varphi(0) = 1 \cdot \varphi(0). $$

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Might be worth mentioning it's a linear ODE, which is necessary for solving it with a Green's function. $\endgroup$ Jul 16 at 22:38
  • $\begingroup$ +1, Hopefully there is a correct mathematical answer. $\endgroup$
    – LL 3.14
    Jul 24 at 0:52
  • $\begingroup$ @LL3.14. I would say that this is a correct mathematical answer. There are just a few things to fix to make it fully rigorous. $\endgroup$
    – md2perpe
    Jul 24 at 8:35
  • $\begingroup$ Oh yes, sorry if I was not clear, I was saying that your answer was a rigorous. $\endgroup$
    – LL 3.14
    Jul 24 at 21:49

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.