For a bandlimited signal $x(t)$ that is reconstructed after Nyquist-sampling at intervals $T$,

$$x(t) = \sum_{k=-\infty}^{\infty} {x[k]\textrm{sinc}\left(\frac{t-kT}{T}\right)}$$

where $x[k]$ = $x(kT)$. For a non-band limited signal $x(t)$, the reconstructed signal will not be same as $x(t)$. Let me call that $p(t)$. Writing the same formula again, so

$$p(t) = \sum_{k=-\infty}^{\infty} {x[k]\textrm{ sinc}\left(\frac{t-kT}{T}\right)}$$

I am trying to see if there is an alternate way of expressing $p(t)$ in terms of $x(t)$ WITHOUT INVOLVING AN INFINITE SUM. It need not be simpler looking, but just wondering if there are other ways of expressing it.

  • $\begingroup$ I think you mean $x[kT]$ and $(t-kT)$ in your equations. The way it's currently written doesn't make any sense. $\endgroup$ – Hilmar Mar 25 '16 at 11:48
  • $\begingroup$ @Hilmar, I agree, I edited the question. $\endgroup$ – MBaz Mar 25 '16 at 13:48

It seems to me that the only way is to cheat and hide the sum behind a variable. For example, say that $X_T(f)$ is the Fourier transform of

$$x_T(t) = T \sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty x(nT)\delta(t-nT).$$

One can show that

$$ \begin{align} X_T(f) &= \mathcal F \lbrace x_T(t) \rbrace \\ &= \sum_{k=-\infty}^\infty X\left(f - \frac{k}{T}\right) \\ \end{align} $$

where $ X(f) = \mathcal F \lbrace x(t) \rbrace .$ Then,

$$p(t)=\mathcal F^{-1} \lbrace H(f)X_T(f) \rbrace$$

where $H(f)$ is a brick-wall low-pass filter with cutoff frequency $f_c=1/(2T)$:

$$ H(f) = \begin{cases} 1 \quad \text{for }|f|<f_c \\ 0 \quad \text{for }|f|>f_c \\ \end{cases} $$

and $\mathcal F^{-1}$ represents the inverse Fourier transform. This is cheating, though, since in general $X_T(f)$ involves an infinite sum.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.