5
$\begingroup$

Suppose that $x(q)$ is the Fourier transform of the function $x(r)$, where $r$ is the real-space variable and $q$ is the Fourier-space variable. Then, suppose that $E$ is an energy functional which can be differentiated either in real-space (with respect to $x(r)$) or Fourier-space (with respect to $x(q)$).

Representing the Fourier-transform operator as FT[], is the following relation logically valid?

$$\mathrm{FT}\left[\frac{\delta E}{\delta x(r)}\right] = \frac{\delta E}{\delta x(q)}$$

If not, what would be the correct mapping between these functional derivatives?

$\endgroup$
3
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I am not sure to understand your notation. Is $x_q$ a function? And is it the Fourier transform of the function $x_r$? If the answers are positive also the answer to your question should be positive (with a suitable interpretation of the formulae). $\endgroup$ Nov 3, 2022 at 7:07
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @ValterMoretti Yes, that's right. I have edited the question now to use conventional notation, i.e. $x_q = x(q)$ and $x_r = x(r)$. $x(q)$ is the Fourier transform of the function $x(r)$. $\endgroup$ Nov 3, 2022 at 7:40
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Hi Ferreroire. Is your question inspired by a particular physical context? $\endgroup$
    – Qmechanic
    Nov 3, 2022 at 8:04

2 Answers 2

8
$\begingroup$
  1. Note that if a functional $S[\phi]$ is local in position space with variable $x$, it is typically not local in wavevector space with Fourier transformed variable $k$, where$^1$ $$\widetilde{\phi}(k)~=~ \int \!d^dx~e^{-ik\cdot x}\phi(k)\tag{1}$$ is the Fourier transform.

  2. In physical applications, it is often convenient to define functional derivatives in $x$- and $k$-space with slightly different conventions for an infinitesimal variation: $$\begin{align}\delta S~=~&\int \!d^dx~\frac{\delta S}{\delta \phi(x)}\delta\phi(x)\cr ~=~&\int \!\frac{d^dk}{\color{red}{(2\pi)^d}}~\frac{\delta S}{\delta \widetilde{\phi}(\color{red}{-}k)}\delta\widetilde{\phi}(k),\end{align}\tag{2}$$ which is inspired by the Plancherel theorem/convolution theorem.

  3. Then it is easy to see that OP's conjecture is correct: $$ FT\left[x\mapsto \frac{\delta S}{\delta \phi(x)}\right](k)~=~ \frac{\delta S}{\delta \widetilde{\phi}(k)}.\tag{3} $$

  4. If one doesn't like to use a different convention (2) for the functional derivative in $k$-space marked in $\rm \color{red}{red}$ color, then the formula (3) will be modified accordingly.

--

$^1$ Here we assume for simplicity a real field $\phi$, and leave to the reader to generalize to a complex field.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I think that relevant theorem here is not the convolution one, but the Plancherel theorem... $\endgroup$ Nov 3, 2022 at 9:06
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Thanks @Valter Moretti. Yes, the Plancherel theorem is indeed closer. Edited. $\endgroup$
    – Qmechanic
    Nov 3, 2022 at 9:10
6
$\begingroup$

Without paying much attention to mathematical hypotheses (however they can be fixed), your idea is correct in view of the following "proof". $$E[\hat{x}(q)]= E\left[ \frac{1}{(2\pi)^{n/2}}\int e^{irq} \hat{x}(q) dr\right]$$ Hence $$\int \frac{\delta E}{\delta \hat{x}(q)} \hat{h}(q) dq = \frac{d}{d\alpha}|_{\alpha=0} E\left[ \frac{1}{(2\pi)^{n/2}}\int e^{irq} (\hat{x}(q) + \alpha \hat{h}(q)) dr \right] $$ $$=\frac{d}{d\alpha}|_{\alpha=0} E\left[ \frac{1}{(2\pi)^{n/2}}\int e^{irq} \hat{x}(q) dr+ \alpha (2\pi)^{-n/2}\int e^{irq} \hat{h}(q) dr \right] $$ $$ =\frac{d}{d\alpha}|_{\alpha=0} E\left[x(r)+ \alpha (2\pi)^{-n/2}\int e^{irq} \hat{h}(q) dr \right] = \int \frac{\delta E}{ \delta x(r)} \frac{1}{(2\pi)^{n/2}}\int e^{irq} \hat{h}(q) dr dq$$ Using the Plancherel theorem, the found integral can be recast to
$$\int \left( \frac{1}{(2\pi)^{n/2}}\int e^{-iqr} \frac{\delta E}{ \delta x(r)} dr\right) \: \hat{h}(q) \:dq$$ This identity says that $$ \frac{\delta E}{\delta \hat{x}(q)} = \frac{1}{(2\pi)^{n/2}}\int e^{-iqr} \frac{\delta E}{ \delta x(r)} dr$$ which is your thesis.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

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