The arrow "$\xrightarrow{\mathcal H}$" denotes a Hilbert transform:

$$\cos(\omega t)\xrightarrow{\mathcal H} \sin(\omega t)$$



$$\cos(\omega t) = \cos(-\omega t) \xrightarrow{\mathcal H} \sin(-\omega t) = -\sin(\omega t)$$


This is a contradiction. What have I done wrong?

  • $\begingroup$ hm, hard to say what you've done wrong. How did you arrive at $\cos(-\omega t) \rightarrow \sin(-\omega t)$? $\endgroup$ – Marcus Müller Dec 10 '17 at 14:20
  • $\begingroup$ @MarcusMüller I just applied the same rule as in the first line. I could write $\Omega = -\omega$ then have $\cos(\Omega t) \rightarrow \sin(\Omega t)$ then substitute back in for $\omega$. $\endgroup$ – user3856370 Dec 10 '17 at 14:27
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ no, you did not just apply the same rule! You also assumed something that doesn't apply to the Hilbert Transform: universal linearity. $\endgroup$ – Marcus Müller Dec 10 '17 at 14:29

The error lies in the assumption that if $g(t)$ is the Hilbert transform of $f(t)$, then the Hilbert transform of $f(-t)$ must be $g(-t)$. This is not the case.

Let $f^-(t)=f(-t)$. Then we have




So if $f(t)=\cos(\omega t)$ and $g(t)=\mathcal{H}\{f\}(t)=\sin(\omega t)$, then the Hilbert transform of $f^-(t)=\cos(-\omega t)$ equals $-g(-t)=-\sin(-\omega t)=\sin(\omega t)$. Happiness again.


In response to your comment about substituting for $\omega$ instead of reversing time, note that

$$\mathcal{H}\{\cos(\omega_0 t)\}=\sin(\omega_0 t)$$

is only valid for $\omega_0>0$. This can most easily be seen in the frequency domain, where the Hilbert transform corresponds to a multiplication with $-j\;\text{sign}(\omega)$. The Fourier transform of $f(t)=\cos(\omega_0t)$ is given by


If $\omega_0>0$, multiplication by $-j\;\text{sign}(\omega)$ gives the Fourier transform of $\sin(\omega_0t)$. However, if $\omega_0<0$, we obtain the Fourier transform of $-\sin(\omega_0t)$, because then $\delta(\omega+\omega_0)$ appears at positive frequencies instead of $\delta(\omega-\omega_0)$.

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ ah yay for happiness! Did this on paper in the time you TeXed it, as it's been quite a while since I've been doing Hilbert transforms. Nice! $\endgroup$ – Marcus Müller Dec 10 '17 at 14:29
  • $\begingroup$ I think I accepted this answer too quickly. I agree with everything you say, but my intent is to change the sign on $\omega$ rather than reverse time. Please see my comment to my original question. I still can't understand why it goes wrong when I substitute $\Omega$ with $-\omega$. Thanks. $\endgroup$ – user3856370 Dec 10 '17 at 16:18
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @user3856370: If you change the sign of $\omega$ you do reverse time, simply because $(-\omega)t=\omega(-t)$. Looking at formula (1) in my answer, you will understand that you can't just substitute $at$ for $-at$. The Hilbert transforms transforms $t$ to a "new" $t$. $\endgroup$ – Matt L. Dec 10 '17 at 16:29
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @user3856370: Maybe an easier formulation would be: $\mathcal{H}\{\cos(\omega_0t)\}=\sin(\omega_0t)$ only for $\omega_0>0$! $\endgroup$ – Matt L. Dec 10 '17 at 16:43
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @user3856370: See my updated answer. $\endgroup$ – Matt L. Dec 10 '17 at 16:57

There is not contradiction. If you are more familiar with the Fourier transform, you may remember the time reversal property: if $$\mathcal{F} [x(t)] = X(\omega)$$ then:

$$\mathcal{F} [x(-t)] = X(-\omega)$$ but you cannot say in general that

$$\mathrm{(FALSE)\quad}\mathcal{F} [x(-t)] = -X(\omega)\mathrm{\quad (FALSE)}$$

One cannot pull the minus sign out of formula so easily. Fourier and Hilbert are linear transforms. This tells you about what an outer sum and multiplication can do: $$\mathcal{T}(a.x(t)+b.y(t)) = a.\mathcal{T}(x(t))+b. \mathcal{T}(y(t))$$ but nothing about a sign change on the inner variable $t$.

| improve this answer | |

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.