I know that $\{e^{inx}\}_{n\in\mathbb N}$ is a basis of $L^2(\mathbb S^1)$ where $\mathbb S^1=\mathbb R/\mathbb Z$. Using this result, and the fact that $$\left<f ,g \right>=\int_0^1 f(x)e^{-inx}\mathrm d x,$$ is a scalar product over $L^2(\mathbb S^1)$, we can wrrite any function $$f:\mathbb S^1\longrightarrow \mathbb R$$ as $$f(x)=\sum_{n\in\mathbb N}\int_0^1f(x)e^{-iny}\mathrm d ye^{inx},$$ or, as usually denoted, by setting $$c_n=\int_0^1f(x)e^{-inx}\mathrm d x,$$ we write $$f(x)=\sum_{n\in\mathbb Z}c_ne^{inx}=:Sf(x),$$ which is called it's Fourier Series.
Question : Now, does $\{e^{i\alpha x}\}_{\alpha \in \mathbb R}$ a basis of $L^2(\mathbb R)$ ?
If yes, then (without rigor), for $f:\mathbb R\longrightarrow \mathbb R$, we could write $$f(x)=\int_{-\infty }^\infty \int_{-\infty }^\infty f(y)e^{-i \alpha y}\mathrm d ye^{i\alpha x}\mathrm d \alpha ,$$ what is in fact exactly the inversion of Fourier transform, i.e. $$f(x)=\int_{-\infty }^\infty \hat f(\alpha )e^{i\alpha x}\mathrm d \alpha .$$
To me, if my conjecture that $L^2(\mathbb R)=span\{e^{i\alpha x}\}_{\alpha \in\mathbb R}$, then this formula would make totally sense (as replacing $$\sum_{\alpha \in\mathbb R}\hat f(\alpha )e^{i\alpha x}\quad \text{by}\quad \int_{\mathbb R}\hat f(\alpha )e^{i\alpha x}\mathrm d \alpha,$$ since an integral "can be seen" as a continuous sum.) Of coure that to have the existence of the Fourier inverse, we need that $f$ is Schwartz, but as I said, I ask the question without rigor; in other words, we suppose that we have all good conditions for that things exist.