In the case of FFTs, no. Which is why I prefer the term Fourier space. I don’t like frequency domain because I frequently work with 3-D and 5–D FFTs while I’ve always felt frequency is connected to single dimension FFT.
Maybe something like "recurrence space" would be better. Frequency does have a physical interpretation which could be misconstrued, e.g. the FFT of a wave in the space domain yields the wavenumber in the independent variable, not the frequency.
Unfortunately that’s very vague because there’s many notions of “dual space” within applied mathematics, even just considering the parts relevant to engineering applications.
Ite called reciprocal because the fourier transformation is it's own inverse, and the input and output space have the same 'shape' (functions from the reals to the complex numbers).
So they are considered two sides of the same coin. And reciprocal in that sense.
In the case of FFTs, no. Which is why I prefer the term Fourier space. I don’t like frequency domain because I frequently work with 3-D and 5–D FFTs while I’ve always felt frequency is connected to single dimension FFT.
Maybe something like "recurrence space" would be better. Frequency does have a physical interpretation which could be misconstrued, e.g. the FFT of a wave in the space domain yields the wavenumber in the independent variable, not the frequency.
The formal, general name is “Dual space” I think.
Unfortunately that’s very vague because there’s many notions of “dual space” within applied mathematics, even just considering the parts relevant to engineering applications.
Ite called reciprocal because the fourier transformation is it's own inverse, and the input and output space have the same 'shape' (functions from the reals to the complex numbers).
So they are considered two sides of the same coin. And reciprocal in that sense.
yes. usually 1/space is often called wavenumber (k).