14
$\begingroup$

I need to prove that Dirac's delta does not belong in $L^2(\mathbb{R})$.

First, I found the next definition of Dirac's delta

$$\delta :D(\mathbb R)\to \mathbb R$$

is defined by:

$$\langle \delta,\varphi \rangle=\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}\varphi(x)\delta(x)\,\mathrm{d}x = \varphi(0),$$

and

$$\delta(x)= \begin{cases} 1,& x= 0\\ 0 ,& x\ne 0. \end{cases} \\$$

The space $L^2(\mathbb{R})=\{f:f \text{ is measurable and } \|f\|_{2}<+\infty \}$.

I'm thinking suppose otherwise, i.e, Dirac's delta in $L^2$, but I have problems to prove that Dirac's delta is measurable, but I suspect that in calculating of $\|f\|_2$ I'll find the contradiction.

Could you give me any suggestions??

$\endgroup$
7
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ You misunderstood something with the Dirac delta. Suppose that $\int_{-1}^1 |\delta(x)| dx$ exists and is $=1$ then $\delta$ is still not in $L^1([-1,1])$ because there is no sequence $(f_n)$ of continuous functions $\in L^p([-1,1])$ such that $\|\delta-f_n\|_1 \to 0$ as $n \to \infty$. $\endgroup$ Commented May 30, 2016 at 2:02
  • $\begingroup$ another way to say this is that if a sequence of functions $f_n$ converges (in the sense of distributions !) to $\delta$, then $f_n$ is not a Cauchy sequence in $L^1$ (nor in $L^p$ for any $p \ge 1$) $\endgroup$ Commented May 30, 2016 at 2:05
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ $L^2(\mathbb R)$ is a set of (equivalence classes) of functions defined on $\mathbb R$. The Dirac $\delta$ is not a function. Hence, $\delta$ is not in $L^2(\mathbb R)$. $\endgroup$ Commented May 30, 2016 at 13:21
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ The proof is trivial: $\delta$ is zero almost everywhere with respect to Lebesgue measure and yet has a positive integral. This is impossible for a measurable function. $\endgroup$ Commented May 30, 2016 at 14:41
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Because the Dirac delta is not a function, it is also incorrect (or lacks an obvious meaning) to say that $\delta(0)=1$ as the OP does. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 1, 2016 at 4:03

3 Answers 3

18
$\begingroup$

If it were $L^2$ then it would satisfy Cauchy-Schwarz, i.e. you would have $|f(0)| \leq C \| f \|_{L^2}$ for some $C$. Construct a sequence of functions $f_n$ such that $|f_n(0)|>n \| f_n \|_{L^2}$ to contradict this.

$\endgroup$
8
  • $\begingroup$ I found this document leetspeak.org/math/notes/dirac_delta_not_in_lp.pdf , but the document prove that Dirac's delta not belong in $L^p(0,2)$, then how could we pass the case $L^p(0,2)$ to the case $L^p(\mathbb{R})$ ? $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 5, 2016 at 3:28
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @AlexPozo You really can't use their result as a black box, you need to re-do the argument. But I already said an easy way to do that. For a concrete example, let $f$ be any continuous function with $f(0) \neq 0$ and $\int_{\mathbb{R}} f(x)^2 dx = 1$, then let $f_n(x)=\sqrt{n} f(nx)$. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 5, 2016 at 3:54
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ If I give $f_n(x)=\frac{ne^{-n^2 x^2}}{\sqrt{\pi}}$, and f(x) is the Dirac's delta, Have I to prove that $||f-fn||$ no converge to zero? $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 5, 2016 at 5:28
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ If you had $\delta \in L^2$ then you would have $\int \delta (x) f (x) dx \leq \| \delta \|_2 \| f\|_2$ for any $L^2$ $f $. But by definition this integral is $f (0) $ for continuous $f $. So it is enough to show that there is no $C $ such that $f (0) \leq \| f \|_2$ for all continuous and $L^2$ functions $gf $. A sequence of the form $f_n (x)=\sqrt {n} f (nx) $ where $f$ is continuous and $L^2$ and $f (0)>0$ will show this, because $\| f_n \|_2$ will be constant but $f_n (0) $ will blow up. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 5, 2016 at 5:47
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Typos: in the second sentence I should have $f(0) \leq C \| f \|_2$ and at the end of that sentence I should have $f$, not $gf$. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 5, 2016 at 6:14
10
$\begingroup$

I present a sketch show I made from suggestions @Ian:

Suppose that Dirac's delta belongs in $L^2(\mathbb{R})$, i.e., that has $\int\delta(x)f(x)dx\le||\delta||_{L^2}||f||_{L^2}$, for all $f\in L^2(\mathbb{R})$.

By definition Dirac's delta, $f(0)=\int\delta(x)f(x)dx\le||f||_{L^2}$

i.e, $f(0)\le||f||_{L^2}$, for all $f\in L^2(\mathbb{R})$.

Then we will give a sequence of continuous functions in $L^2(\mathbb{R})$ such that the inequality presents some inconvenience.

Let $f_n(x)=n^{1/4} e^{-n\frac{x^2}{2}}$, where $f_n$ are continuous and belong to $L^2(\mathbb{R})$.

Next, $f_n(0)=n^{1/4}>0$, and $||f_n||^2_{L^2}=\int_{\mathbb{R}}\sqrt ne^{-nx^2}\,dx=\sqrt{\frac{\pi}{n}}\longrightarrow 0$, when $n\rightarrow +\infty$.

On the one hand we see that $f_n(0)\rightarrow +\infty$ and by other hand $||f_n||_{L^2}\rightarrow 0$, when $n\rightarrow +\infty$. That is a contradiction.

Therefore, Dirac's delta must not belong to $L^2(\mathbb{R})$.

Any suggestions are welcome.

$\endgroup$
5
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ You are missing the constant $C$ that stands for "the norm of $\delta$" in the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality and in what follows. Still, the proof is easily adapted. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 24, 2019 at 10:30
  • $\begingroup$ @Jan Does "the norm of $\delta$" play a significant role in this argument? I don't think so, since we're just assuming that it's finite in order to get a contradiction, right? $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 19, 2021 at 13:15
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ No, the norm itself does not play a role. But it should be there for (formal) correctness :) $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 23, 2021 at 13:57
  • $\begingroup$ @Alex Pozo could you explain the governance to zero of the L2 norm. $\endgroup$ Commented May 16 at 11:11
  • $\begingroup$ @Alex Pozo The the second integral should be just $\sqrt{\pi}$. Then you get that one side of the Cauchy -Schwarz is going to infinity while the other is constant. Hence, a contradiction. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 17 at 19:40
4
$\begingroup$

Suggestion for a proof.

The Riesz-Fisher theorem states that $L^p(\mathbb{R})$ is complete. Riesz-Fisher theorem

Another theorem states that $C^\infty_c(\mathbb{R})$ is dense in $L^p(\mathbb{R})$. Check out denseness of smooth functions

This implies that for any $f\in L^p(\mathbb{R})$, there exists a sequence of functions $\{f_n\}\in C^\infty_c(\mathbb{R})$ such that $f_n\to f$ in $L^p(\mathbb{R})$

If $\delta(x)\in L^p(\mathbb{R})$, for some fixed $\epsilon >0$ there is an $N\in\mathbb{N}$ such that $||f_n(x) - \delta(x)||_p<\epsilon$, for $n\ge N$.

This results in a contradiction though, because at some point, $f_n$ would not be continuous.

Refer to reuns's first comment: no sequence of continuous functions exist that converge to $\delta(x)$.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Are you sure that no such sequence of continuous functions exists? What about those: functions.wolfram.com/GeneralizedFunctions/DiracDelta/09 ? (Making them compactly supported is not a problem, but maybe I'm missing something else) $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 21, 2020 at 17:28
  • $\begingroup$ @dasWesen, you're absolutely right. There is something I'm missing in my argument. I'm still not sure what. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 14, 2022 at 1:56

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.