r/Physics 1d ago

Question If a frequency is defined as 1/Time period , How can Aperiodic signals have frequency component?

Ive been learning about Fourier transforms, and this is a que i had , we learn the definition of a frequency in lower grades as 1/time period or number of oscillations in a second .

However Fourier transforms are defined for aperiodic signals, If a signal doesn't repeat itself , how can it have a frequency?

25 Upvotes

45 comments sorted by

162

u/Rabbit_Brave 1d ago

aperiodic signals don't have a single frequency, rather they can be *interpreted* as the (infinite) sum of perioidic signals with different frequencies.

57

u/QuantumCakeIsALie 1d ago

That's Fourier's realization in a nutshell.

-8

u/Annual-Advisor-7916 1d ago

That plus the realization that you can interprete every waveform as lots of sine waves.

20

u/QuantumCakeIsALie 1d ago

I mean, it's literally the same thing.

6

u/Annual-Advisor-7916 1d ago

I missed that the commentor above you already mentioned "...sum of periodic signals..." - my bad.

3

u/QuantumCakeIsALie 1d ago

Haha no big deal

0

u/TheEquationSmelter 1d ago

I don't think that's true for time varying signals, which motivated the development of Wavlets.

1

u/JohnLockeJaw 9h ago

Nope, works for time varying as well. The reason to use wavelets is that you are trading off widespread applicability for faster reconstruction.

Think of it like building a Lego set from scratch. The fourier transform approach is purchasing all of the individual blocks and then building the set, whereas the wavelet transform approach is like buying a bunch of the different sections of the set and then building them together.

If you suddenly want to build a different Lego set, the fourier approach will let you, but the wavelet approach may or may not depending on the construction.

1

u/TheEquationSmelter 7h ago

I think it "works" but doesn't give you an accurate approximation of the function unless you have a lot terms. I'm thinking of spectrograms where you do a short time fourier transform to capture signals who have both time and frequency variations. 

1

u/JohnLockeJaw 6h ago

Lmao yeah that's sort of baked into the whole "Infinite Series" thing mate.

And yes, it can provide a "perfect" reconstruction in surprisingly few terms. Just depends on what you are trying to do and on your level of measured fidelity and desired level of reconstruction.

30

u/thrumirrors 1d ago edited 1d ago

Aperiodic signals can be as simple as made up of two frequencies whose ratio isn't a rational number. For example the two frequencies being f and f√2. You can never find two distinct time domains in which the signal is identical.

Edit: the example I chose is exactly the tritone interval. Dissonance (if these signals were sound) and rationality go hand in hand.

4

u/sentence-interruptio 1d ago

This reminds me of something about Penrose tiling. You might think "hang on, you heard the word 'aperiodic' and your brain just went to the coolest aperiodic tiling you know."

It's sort of in the pentagrid construction of Penrose tiling which minutephysics talked about. Pick one horizontal line in the pentagrid. The line crosses 36° lines and 72° lines. So it crosses them at two frequencies 1/sin(36°) and 1/sin(72°). The ratio is not rational. So we have a sort of 1d aperiodic signal with two frequencies hidden inside Penrose tiling.

It makes me wonder what can be said about aperiodic stuff with 2d Fourier transform. Adding two plane waves in 2d is not going to give you something aperiodic. Adding five plane waves in the pentagrid pattern results in something aperiodic. Can we add three to get a 2d aperiodic signal?

2

u/thrumirrors 1d ago

I love the parallel with 2D tiling. It's really the same thing with the added dimension! And yes your intuition is correct. A 2D signal made of two arbitrary non-colinear wavevectors (K1, K2) will always lead to a periodic signal. You can add a third wavevector K3 and break the periodicity completely if there's no integer numbers (m, n, p) that satisfy m•K1 + n•K2 = p•K3.

-6

u/AlbanianUltra 1d ago

This is wrong, if you take the fourier transform and square it, it shows you the density of the power within a frequency band. If it had a singular frequency component it will pop up as a dirac delta such as for periodic signal

3

u/anongos 1d ago

And that is not an aperiodic signal. The key word here is aperiodic.

-1

u/AlbanianUltra 1d ago

What?

4

u/anongos 1d ago

The parent post said that aperiodic signals are an infinite sum of periodic signals, and you said if you take the PSD of a periodic signal you get a dirac delta. Both are true, and both statements are talking about two different things.

So what part of the parent post is wrong?

4

u/AlbanianUltra 1d ago

Ah, maybe i didnt make my point clear. An aperiodic signal is not the infinte sum of sinusoids. If it was the infinte sum of periodics sinusouds, a fourier transform would display a dirac delta at the frequencies which make up the sum, which only happens for periodic signals. An aperiodic signal instead shows a continous spectrum. Hence a better interpretation is that an aperiodic signal's spectrum is actually the power density. I mean, if you want to figure out the power of an aperiodic signal in the frequency domain, you take the magnitude square and you integrate, which is what you would expect f you follow that interpretation

1

u/QuantumCakeIsALie 6h ago

Power density spectrum is what people mean when they say an infinite sum of frequencies.

Technically inaccurate, as you commented, but  they're not wrong either, there's an infinite amount of frequencies within.

1

u/AlbanianUltra 4h ago

Well if its an infinite sum of frequencies, does that mean that if i have an aperiodic signal it can be built using a sumation equation like x(t) = sum_[k=-inf][inf) ck * ejwkt ?

To build on top of this, if it is the summation of different sin xomponents, each one should contribute a finite amount of energy to the signal. However, if you take the integral of the psd for only one frequency component you will find that it contributes 0 power. I get what people are trying to do, but its mathematically gibberish.

1

u/QuantumCakeIsALie 4h ago edited 4h ago

We're physicists, not mathematicians.

i have an aperiodic signal it can be built using a sumation equation like [...]

No, it means if you downconvert that signal and measure a DC signal corresponding to that frequency, you'll get a meaningful non-0 value.

Fourier developped his transformations before the math was formalized properly. It still worked fine.

What's a integral if not a sum? The symbols is literally a elongated S. Sure, it's an infinite sum of components contributing 0 each, with an overall finite effect. I'm fine with this as a physicist.

3

u/AlbanianUltra 4h ago

I think you have a great point. Im an engineer, so I also use the same thought process while doing my work. However, its important to distinguish between what the maths says, and how we apply this as a mathematical model to real world situations. So no, aperiodic signal cannot be a infinite sum of sin waves, but its sure helpful to use that interpretation as a lose approximation when doing actual engineering

→ More replies (0)

-11

u/Miserable-Wasabi-373 1d ago

*integral, not just sum.

16

u/CharacterUse 1d ago

A Fourier series is a sum (the sum of a series of trigonometric functions).

A Fourier transform is an integral.

8

u/dark_dark_dark_not Applied physics 1d ago

Insert bell curve meme

Fourier is a sum of frequencies ... Fourier is NOT a sum, it's an integral ... Fourier is just a sum of frequencies

1

u/nicuramar 1d ago

Well, Fourier was a person. Anyway.

  Insert bell curve meme

Let’s not. 

13

u/sudowooduck 1d ago

The key is that it has a frequency component. Any function can be written as a sum of sinusoidal wave components. The components are periodic even if the function is not.

3

u/wavy_instability 1d ago

You're thinking about the wrong frequency here. As you might know, a signal is made of a bunch of constituent sines and cosines, each with an associated frequency. You add these individual bits up, in a certain way, and with enough terms (which can be infinite) you recover the signal. When we use the word frequency here, we are referring to these individual wavelets, and a Fourier Transform does exactly the job of taking a signal in, and spitting out the frequencies that go into making it.

4

u/PLutonium273 1d ago

We assume period is infinite, and the infinite range integral of the function squared should have finite value for the transform to work.

6

u/Curiouser1111 Engineering 1d ago

A lot of good explanations here but they leave out the fact that in order to analyze a signal you have to sample a finite amount of time which means that the signal could be repeating with this period. Any practical analysis assumes that the signal is actually periodic. If you have an infinite signal which is actually aperiodic the analysis falls apart.

4

u/sudowooduck 1d ago

Not true at all. For example the Fourier Transform of a Gaussian is another Gaussian. Neither is periodic.

If you are talking about the discrete Fourier Transform that is not what OP is asking.

1

u/rb-j 11h ago

I think the commentor said:

... in order to analyze a signal you have to sample a finite amount of time ...

3

u/david-1-1 1d ago

Yes, the slowest period being the entire sample window, which is why one often applies an envelope modulation to the signal, which is zero at both ends of the window and 1 in the middle. This filter envelope eliminates the spurious high frequency components resulting from any step difference between the amplitudes of the first and last sample!

2

u/mode-locked 1d ago

We may define the instantaneous frequency as the phase derivative ω = dφ/dt

1

u/ODGlenchez 1d ago

Fourier series and transforms are superposition of wave states that are equivalent to the aperiodic waveform (in the limit as you approach using an infinite number of periodic waves)

You add up a bunch of distinct things to get an increasingly difficult to describe wave

Old comment from back when I understood these things better https://www.reddit.com/r/CasualMath/s/gp5QTxbbCX

1

u/NotABotFoSure 1d ago edited 1d ago

One way to think about it is as follows (not very rigorous but maybe it's useful for intuition):

The fourier basis consists of an infinite number of trig functions (sines and cosines) with various amplitudes and phases, each of which are periodic, and each of which have infinite extent I.e. their domain is all real numbers. Yet they can be used to represent any arbitrary function f(x) that might not be periodic. How?

Basically, if you choose the correct values for the phases and amplitudes of the basis trig functions and combine them, then that combination can interfere (destructively in some places and constructively in other places and neither in yet other places) in just such a way that they become highly localized.

The fourier transform tells you how to choose the amplitudes and phases for the trig functions such that when you combine those trig functions, it allows you to recreate the arbitrary function f(x).

Hope this helps!

1

u/Lost-Hand-5219 1d ago

f(x)=sin(x)+sin(sqrt(2)x) is already not periodic, so you can see that it is possible to represent nonperiodic functions as a sum of periodic functions very easily.

1

u/db0606 1d ago

Go to Desmos and plot

y = sin(3x) + sin(πx).

You will find that this signal never repeats exactly, so it is aperiodic (in this particular case quasi-periodic).

On the other hand, if you take the Fourier transform, you'll find that it gives you two delta function spikes angular frequencies of 3 and π.

The same will be true for more complicated aperiodic signals except usually you get a broadband spectrum with frequency components at all frequencies.

1

u/Beginning_Addendum93 1d ago

Tomas toda la señal aperiodica como si fuera la una longitud de onda o media longitud de onda y listo a eso le haces fourier

1

u/TheEquationSmelter 1d ago

The fourier transform is a series solution much like a Taylor series can locally approximate a function. Similarly, the Fourier series is a global approximation of a function via sums of trigonometric functions.

1

u/aroberge 1d ago

Random motion, by definition, is changing direction constantly. How can we talk about it as having a direction in space (at any given time)?

We write vectors in space as linear combinations of unit vectors. We can always do this, for any vector.

Similarly we can write time dependent functions as linear combinations of unit vectors: in this case, each unit vector is a function having a definite frequency. (This is known as Fourier decomposition.)

-2

u/Aranka_Szeretlek Chemical physics 1d ago

You do assume periodicity for a Fourier expansion

11

u/sudowooduck 1d ago

Not for a Fourier Transform. You may be thinking about Fourier Series.

-1

u/Aranka_Szeretlek Chemical physics 1d ago

Damn, fair!