Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck pass
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

Fourier transform agrees with l one and plancherel transforms

Statement

Assume Countable Choice and use the negative-sign 2π normalization. If f∈L1(Rn;C), then

Fuf=uf^,

where f^ is the integral Fourier transform. If f∈L2(Rn;C), then

Fuf=uF2f,

where F2 is the Plancherel extension. These equalities are in S′(Rn) and therefore depend only on the corresponding almost-everywhere classes.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Countable Choice and the fixed 2π Fourier convention.

[F1]

Every Lp class, including p=1,2,∞, defines a regular tempered distribution (Polynomial growth functions define tempered distributions).

[F2]

The transform on S′ is defined by bilinear transposition (Fourier transform of a tempered distribution).

[F3]

Absolute Fubini applies on the sigma-finite Euclidean product (Fubini's theorem for L1 functions on a sigma-finite product).

[F4]

Schwartz space is dense in complex L2, and the Plancherel transform is its unitary extension (Schwartz space is dense in L2, Plancherel theorem).

[F5]

The integral and Plancherel transforms agree on L1∩L2 (Agreement of the integral and L2 transforms).

[F6]

Hölder applied to moduli controls all L2 test pairings (Holder's inequality for integrals, including the endpoint cases).

Proof

technique · Fubini followed by square-integrable approximation
1.1F1F2F3

Let f∈L1 and φ∈S. Schwartz decay makes φ∈L1, so ∫ ⁣∫∣f(x)φ(ξ)∣ dx dξ<∞. Absolute Fubini is therefore applicable. [F2, F3] ⟨Fuf,φ⟩=∫f(x) ⁣(∫φ(ξ)e−2πix⋅ξ dξ)dx=∫f^(ξ)φ(ξ) dξ. Since f^ is bounded, [F1] makes the last functional tempered. This proves the L1 assertion.

1.2F4F6

Let f∈L2 and choose fj∈S with fj→f in L2. For a fixed φ∈S, also Fφ∈L2, and Hölder gives the first convergence below. [F4, F6] ∫(fj−f)Fφ⟶0. Plancherel gives F2fj→F2f in L2, so a second Hölder estimate gives ∫(F2fj−F2f)φ→0.

2.1F1F2F5step 1.2∎

Each fj belongs to L1∩L2, and the two agreement results give the displayed identity. [F5, step 1.1] ∫fjFφ=∫(F2fj)φ. Passing to the two limits from step 1.2 yields ⟨Fuf,φ⟩=⟨uF2f,φ⟩. Since this holds for every Schwartz test, the L2 assertion follows.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

44 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources