4 ms·
Hm. Interesting. I always viewed real functions as infinite-dimensional vectors in the "canonical" basis, that is, shifted Dirac impulses. I guess it can be tr
by tzahola 8y ago
Hm. Interesting.
I always viewed real functions as infinite-dimensional vectors in the "canonical" basis, that is, shifted Dirac impulses. I guess it can be transformed into your representation with a change of basis with some handwaving.
- azernik 8y agoWhat you're describing may not be a subspace of the space I'm describing. Mine is definitely a subspace of yours - e.g. you can project functions into sums of shifted Dirac impulses by representing each function dimension as a linear combination of the "Dirac vectors" for that function's values.
- tzahola 8y agoHmmm. I think it’s easy to fix that: Suppose that there’s a function f, that can be written as an infinite sum (integral) of shifted Dirac impulses, but cannot be written in your representation as a sum of those “base functions”. Then simply add a new dimension to your representation that will correspond to f, so that f will be represented as 1 at this new dimension, and zero everywhere else. (In other words: add f to the base functions) Repeat until you have covered every function.