1

I've recently seen a proof of the inversion formula for the Fourier transform for $f,\hat{f}\in L^1(\mathbb{R}^d)$.
The main idea of the proof is this

We have $$\int_{\mathbb{R}^d}e^{2\pi i x\cdot \xi}\hat f(\xi)d\xi=\int_{\mathbb{R}^d}e^{2\pi i x\cdot \xi}\left(\int_{\mathbb{R}^d}e^{-2 \pi i y\cdot \xi}dy\right)d\xi.$$ But at this point Fubini doesn't apply thus we can't change the two integrals.
Nevertheless, here is the trick (which I find really smart) for $t>0$ we consider this modified version of the integral $$I_t(x):=\int_{\mathbb{R}^d}\hat f(\xi)e^{-\pi t^2\vert\xi\vert^2}e^{2\pi i x\cdot\xi}d\xi.$$ Now we can use Fubini and compute the integral in two ways and for $t\rightarrow0$ we get the result. By the way everything works because the damping factor is an eigenvector of the Fourier transform of eigenvalue 1 (so it is far from being a random choice).

I was astonished by the proof, we considered an apparently more complicated expression which allowed us to use a particular property and then passed to the limit and obtained the result.
My question is: what are other examples of the same idea?
I know that basically anything which involves approximation with smooth functions falls in this class but I'm asking for some particular example/application (of this or a similar idea) that made you think 'cool'.
(details are welcome).

Uskebasi
  • 1,523

1 Answers1

1

Computing real integrals via complex contour integration and limits seems to fit exactly.

This also happens in discrete mathematics: I recently came to a combinatorial proof of the identity $$ \sum_{k=0}^{n}{(-1)^k\binom{n}{k}\frac{1}{2k+1}}={(2n)!!\over (2n+1)!!} $$ where the key is to consider the properties of $\sum_{k=0}^{n}{(-1)^k\binom{n}{k}\frac{1}{2k+m}}$ for arbitrary values of $m$.

  • I've never studied complex integration, but now I'm intrigued and I will take a look at your links (tomorrow) – Uskebasi Apr 20 '18 at 23:09
  • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combinatorial_proof – adfriedman Apr 20 '18 at 23:09
  • @adfriedman Not sure I see your point. Are you trying to imply that The term "combinatorial proof" may also be used more broadly to refer to any kind of elementary proof in combinatorics. should appear in boldface so that people don't miss it? – Arnaud Mortier Apr 20 '18 at 23:14