I believe orientation still matters but you’re right that position doesn’t.

> FFT is equivalent to convolution

What do you mean by that? Could you give me an example?

The FFT, composed with pointwise multiplication, composed with the inverse FFT, is equivalent to convolution. The FFT is not.

The basic convolution theorem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convolution_theorem

That is something else entirely.

Then if you know what the OP meant why did you ask?

because they made a nonsensical claim that doesn't align with my (and likely their) understanding of what the FT is and does.

The FT is _NOT_ just a convolution, but under certain conditions a specific operation on FT terms is equivalent to a convolution.

I didn't know what they meant. There are so many FFT tricks. I was hoping this was another.