Does that actually depend on that number being a power of 2?
-
-
Replying to @sl2c
i'm quite sure, since if you make the substitution u= 2x you can see why
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @InertialObservr @sl2c
a power of 2 is not necessary in this integral
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mtbatchelor @sl2c
in order for the result to be 2^n, surely it should be
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
ohh or are you saying that a^n would equally as valid?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
-
More generally this integral follows from this result in Gradshteyn and Ryzhikpic.twitter.com/VDl0PfF6jn
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Replying to @mtbatchelor @sl2c
i believer you can obtain it from Glasser's master theorem on the usual square of the sinc
4:31 PM - 8 Jul 2019
0 replies
0 retweets
0 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.