{"id":326,"date":"2010-05-10T19:37:01","date_gmt":"2010-05-10T23:37:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.mathworks.com\/steve\/2010\/05\/10\/fourier-transforms-where-to-go-from-here\/"},"modified":"2019-10-29T13:27:27","modified_gmt":"2019-10-29T17:27:27","slug":"fourier-transforms-where-to-go-from-here","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.mathworks.com\/steve\/2010\/05\/10\/fourier-transforms-where-to-go-from-here\/","title":{"rendered":"Fourier transforms – where to go from here"},"content":{"rendered":"
\r\n

Last fall I started posting occasionally about Fourier transforms<\/a>. This topic causes much confusion, which is particularly unfortunate given how many people are interested in it.\r\n <\/p>\r\n

I speculate that the fundamental source of confusion is that there are really several different (but related) transforms that\r\n go by the name \"Fourier transform.\" Most people who encounter the Fourier transform only know about one form, and the confusion\r\n starts when they encounter another form which doesn't seem to have the same properties as the one they learned.\r\n <\/p>\r\n

To address that confusion, I have previously described three of the four basic forms of Fourier transform: the continuous-time\r\n Fourier transform, the discrete-time Fourier transform, and the discrete Fourier transform. And I've described the relationships\r\n between them.\r\n <\/p>\r\n

Well, now it's been a few weeks since my last Fourier transform post, and I'm thinking about where to go next. I'd like to\r\n get your feedback and advice about this.\r\n <\/p>\r\n

I've reviewed my own notes and brainstormed a bit, and I've also reviewed all of your posted comments. In no particular order,\r\n here are some possible follow-up topics.\r\n <\/p>\r\n

\r\n