Fourier Analysis

[Anonymous No.6457567]

Hello. Anyone willingto suggest me a really good fourier analysis/harmonic analysis for physics book/course... sth? I have difficulties in finding good material, really well explained. All I find is crap written for engineers most likely and not for theoretical physicists master race

[Anonymous No.6457570]

Signals and Systems by Oppenheim and friends.

[Anonymous No.6457572]

>All I find is crap written for engineers
You mean
>All I find is too difficult for me and I need something even a stupid dumbfuck like me can understand, preferable with pictures on every page and sticker rewards

[Anonymous No.6457604]

It's not a popsicle, it's a tiny plastic garden shovel (whatever you call them in English).

[Anonymous No.6457605]

>>6457604

'tis a trowel

But in response to OP, I too would like more resources for harmonic analysis.

[Anonymous No.6457646]

A lot of fourier analysis I've seen just dealt with Riemann integral. Are you just looking for that?

When I learned it, we just the Lebesgue integral into general spaces, I figured that was the norm.

[Anonymous No.6457664]

>>6457570

What's the point in doing all that math if no one will love a weaboo anyways?

[Anonymous No.6457668]

>>6457664

If you love math strong enough it won't matter if it doesn't love you back.

[Anonymous No.6457701]

>>6457567
Just learn about linear algebra, and function spaces and Hilbert spaces. Then everything will start to make sense.

[Anonymous No.6458029]

>>6457664
>What's the point in doing all that math
6 ECTS

[Anonymous No.6458120]

>>6457567
I fucking hate analysis, that's why I left engineering and became a physicist.

[Anonymous No.6458140]

>>6457570
FUCKKKKKKKKKKKKKK NOOOOOOOOOOOOO

I'm using that book in my current Signals class, that book is a PoS. It's so fucking unclear that I don't even bother using it anymore.

At first you look at it and think it's mathematically rigorous, but not at all, it's just one of those books were try to make things as terse as possible. Also, he does annoying shit like define a signal as for example x(t), then two lines down define a new signal as x(t) even though the two are not related, mixing up the reader.

Oppenheim is seriously one of the shittiest books I've ever read. I'd also like to add that it's not really for fourier analysis, it has a chapter on it, but that's it.

OP, just search "fourier analysis" on amazon and find the book you are interested with the highest rating. Dover books are generally pretty good, find one of those with a high rating.

[Anonymous No.6459042]

>>6458140
The book is pretty good, I think you're just not clever enough or going at it the wrong way.

[Anonymous No.6459053]

>>6457567
>can't understand fourier, the simplest most useful tool
>calls himself master race
Really?

[Anonymous No.6459057]

http://prof.usb.ve/bueno/Libros/069111384X%20-%20Princeton%20University%20-%20Fourier%20Analysis~%20An%20Introduction%20-%20(2003).pdf

Sorry for the long link. This is Steins book on Fourier analysis. Very readable by anyone with background in engineering or physics.

[Anonymous No.6459905]

>>6459053
Did you even fuckin read what Iwrote? Did I say something like "omg everything's too hard, I cant understand" ? You're a fuckin cunt mate. I'm asking for something mathematically rigorous, not stupid shit with simple brain dead explanations and colored text and stupid drawing. Nor am I looking for some very deep mathematics book on this topic, requiring advanced mathematical formalism. A book that will start from scrap and build all the harmonic analysis with little to no knowledge required before hand.

[Anonymous No.6460747]

>>6459905

[Anonymous No.6460954]

>>6460747