Is this for real or is this photoshop?
There is a detailed explanation of the tattoo, which describes the physics behind the Fourier Transforms rather well.
Anyway, the tattoo shows the Fourier transform, one of the most extraordinary accomplishments in mathematics. It is due to Jean Baptiste Joseph Fourier, 1768-1830. I won’t put his picture here because he’s butt ugly. Anyway JB realized that in a way, a different universe lives beside us. We are accustomed to x, y, z and t. x is horizontal, y is vertical, z is near-far, and t is time. Everything we can feel and intuit is expressed in these terms. But entangled in this Cartesian universe is another one, a jiggly world of images and sounds and signals and waves.
Anyway, sound is a frequency-domain phenomenon. You can’t understand it in the space-time domain. Some things are strictly space-time, and other things can be seen either way. You might be amazed at how useful it is to look at the visual world in the frequency domain. In fact, that’s how our brain does it. Everything passes through a kind of Fourier transform before the higher visual processing centers do anything with it. Visual computation, for the most part, follows frequency analysis. You have to admit–The Foomeister was definitely the man.
Source David Bradley’s blog (seems to be down for now)
There is a joke floating around that you know you are a real physicist, when you go to the beach and see the waves, and the first thing that comes to your mind is the Fourier Transforms!
David Bradley’s blog is inaccessible, maybe you could contact him, so he can fix it. I would, if I had his contact.
Your blog is great, by the way.
‘the foomeister’ ha ha! nice
The equation is wrong. If he has omega in the exponential, then he does not need the 2*pi.
The equation is wrong….
2*pi on the exp. have to be removed…
but..
it doesn’t realy matter… hehe….
quite nice tatoo.
FAIL! frequency isn’t angular speed and the limits of integration are -inf to +inf.
Do this guy got the anti-transform in the other arm? Wrong too?
The equation is right, the problem is that he used the omega letter to denote ordinary frequency.
It’s not photoshop, it’s real. The equation isn’t wrong, it just doesn’t use the usual symbol conventions. I like the way the omega looks so I used it instead; I figured no one would ever know the difference. So much for my assumption….
The anti-transform on the other arm is a great idea. Next time I get really drunk I’ll do that.
David Bradley
the limits of integration are pretty important, though
I understand the dude. I myself drive around with a vanity plate that says, “Fourier”. Honest. But I’m still searching for a portrait of Bracewell for my living room.
you stupid fuck, you got the equation wrong…
DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUHH
so this guy decided to use omega instead of “f”? bad call. omega is conveniently the symbol used for angular frequency and is probably used more commonly than “f” in transforms. i also probably would’ve used “j” instead of “i”, but thats just me