Complex Contour Integral Evaluation.inequality and complex integrationComplex Contour Integration - Complex Analysiscontour integral branch cutContour integral independant of parametrisationImproper integrals with Jordan's lemma, choice of contour?Evaluating an improper integral using complex contour integrationHow to solve this integral using Residue TheoryIntegral $int_0^infty left( fracsin xx right)^2dx$.Integral of a complex function over contourIntegrate $exp (iz^2)$ using contour integration
The IT department bottlenecks progress. How should I handle this?
Multiplicative persistence
Why can Carol Danvers change her suit colours in the first place?
Not using 's' for he/she/it
Travelling outside the UK without a passport
How to explain what's wrong with this application of the chain rule?
Electoral considerations aside, what are potential benefits, for the US, of policy changes proposed by the tweet recognizing Golan annexation?
The screen of my macbook suddenly broken down how can I do to recover
Is there a name for this algorithm to calculate the concentration of a mixture of two solutions containing the same solute?
Does an advisor owe his/her student anything? Will an advisor keep a PhD student only out of pity?
How do you make your own symbol when Detexify fails?
Why electric field inside a cavity of a non-conducting sphere not zero?
On a tidally locked planet, would time be quantized?
Are the IPv6 address space and IPv4 address space completely disjoint?
Why does the Sun have different day lengths, but not the gas giants?
Is it better practice to read straight from sheet music rather than memorize it?
Offered money to buy a house, seller is asking for more to cover gap between their listing and mortgage owed
Start making guitar arrangements
Where does the bonus feat in the cleric starting package come from?
Symbol used to indicate indivisibility
It grows, but water kills it
Aragorn's "guise" in the Orthanc Stone
Redundant comparison & "if" before assignment
How to implement a feedback to keep the DC gain at zero for this conceptual passive filter?
Complex Contour Integral Evaluation.
inequality and complex integrationComplex Contour Integration - Complex Analysiscontour integral branch cutContour integral independant of parametrisationImproper integrals with Jordan's lemma, choice of contour?Evaluating an improper integral using complex contour integrationHow to solve this integral using Residue TheoryIntegral $int_0^infty left( fracsin xx right)^2dx$.Integral of a complex function over contourIntegrate $exp (iz^2)$ using contour integration
$begingroup$
I am having troubles evaluating this integral: $$int_-infty^infty fraccos x-1x^2(x^2+4)dx$$
Well, actually, I'm quite sured about the numerical part: the value of this integral is likely to be $-frac(e^-2+1)pi8$. However, I am having troubles when proving it.
Firstly, by a given hint, I constructed a new function which is: $$f(z)=frace^iz-1-izz^2(z^2+4)$$
Then, I constructed a contour $gamma =gamma_1cupgamma_2cupgamma_rcupgamma_R$, with:$$gamma_1=x+0i:-Rle xle-r$$ $$gamma_2=x+0i:rle x le R$$ $$ gamma_r = re^itheta:thetain[pi,0]$$$$ gamma_R = Re^itheta:thetain[0, pi]$$
Then, by residue theorem, I evaluate the integral $int_gammaf(z)dz$ to be equal to $-frac(e^-2+1)pi8$. Then, what's left is to prove that $int_gamma_1f(z)dz$ and $int_gamma_2f(z)dz$ are both equal to zero as $rto0$ and $Rtoinfty$ and that's what's troubling me.
I have no idea how to prove that the integral: $$lim_rto0int_gamma_rfrace^iz-1-izz^2(z^2+4)dz$$where clearly, $z=re^itheta$, is equal to $0$, and also, for the case where the contour is $gamma_R$.
Please help me! Thanks a lot.
integration complex-analysis contour-integration residue-calculus
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am having troubles evaluating this integral: $$int_-infty^infty fraccos x-1x^2(x^2+4)dx$$
Well, actually, I'm quite sured about the numerical part: the value of this integral is likely to be $-frac(e^-2+1)pi8$. However, I am having troubles when proving it.
Firstly, by a given hint, I constructed a new function which is: $$f(z)=frace^iz-1-izz^2(z^2+4)$$
Then, I constructed a contour $gamma =gamma_1cupgamma_2cupgamma_rcupgamma_R$, with:$$gamma_1=x+0i:-Rle xle-r$$ $$gamma_2=x+0i:rle x le R$$ $$ gamma_r = re^itheta:thetain[pi,0]$$$$ gamma_R = Re^itheta:thetain[0, pi]$$
Then, by residue theorem, I evaluate the integral $int_gammaf(z)dz$ to be equal to $-frac(e^-2+1)pi8$. Then, what's left is to prove that $int_gamma_1f(z)dz$ and $int_gamma_2f(z)dz$ are both equal to zero as $rto0$ and $Rtoinfty$ and that's what's troubling me.
I have no idea how to prove that the integral: $$lim_rto0int_gamma_rfrace^iz-1-izz^2(z^2+4)dz$$where clearly, $z=re^itheta$, is equal to $0$, and also, for the case where the contour is $gamma_R$.
Please help me! Thanks a lot.
integration complex-analysis contour-integration residue-calculus
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
HINT: $$frace^iz-1-izz^2(z^2+4)$$ has a removable singularity at $z=0$, hence it is bounded locally at $z=0$. This proves that the limit is zero as $r to 0$.
$endgroup$
– Crostul
Mar 15 at 16:44
$begingroup$
Look at page 102 (section "Third type") in books.google.com/…. Also, it's not clear to me why not work with the function $$ f(z) = (e^iz + e^-iz)/2 - 1 over z(z^2+1). $$
$endgroup$
– avs
Mar 15 at 16:47
1
$begingroup$
@avs I have no idea why there is a strange $iz$ term but I was instructed to do so on the paper. Also, thanks for the book! I'm reading it to try to find some hints.
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 15 at 16:54
$begingroup$
@Crostul Thanks for the hint. What about the case when $Rtoinfty$?
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 15 at 16:56
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am having troubles evaluating this integral: $$int_-infty^infty fraccos x-1x^2(x^2+4)dx$$
Well, actually, I'm quite sured about the numerical part: the value of this integral is likely to be $-frac(e^-2+1)pi8$. However, I am having troubles when proving it.
Firstly, by a given hint, I constructed a new function which is: $$f(z)=frace^iz-1-izz^2(z^2+4)$$
Then, I constructed a contour $gamma =gamma_1cupgamma_2cupgamma_rcupgamma_R$, with:$$gamma_1=x+0i:-Rle xle-r$$ $$gamma_2=x+0i:rle x le R$$ $$ gamma_r = re^itheta:thetain[pi,0]$$$$ gamma_R = Re^itheta:thetain[0, pi]$$
Then, by residue theorem, I evaluate the integral $int_gammaf(z)dz$ to be equal to $-frac(e^-2+1)pi8$. Then, what's left is to prove that $int_gamma_1f(z)dz$ and $int_gamma_2f(z)dz$ are both equal to zero as $rto0$ and $Rtoinfty$ and that's what's troubling me.
I have no idea how to prove that the integral: $$lim_rto0int_gamma_rfrace^iz-1-izz^2(z^2+4)dz$$where clearly, $z=re^itheta$, is equal to $0$, and also, for the case where the contour is $gamma_R$.
Please help me! Thanks a lot.
integration complex-analysis contour-integration residue-calculus
$endgroup$
I am having troubles evaluating this integral: $$int_-infty^infty fraccos x-1x^2(x^2+4)dx$$
Well, actually, I'm quite sured about the numerical part: the value of this integral is likely to be $-frac(e^-2+1)pi8$. However, I am having troubles when proving it.
Firstly, by a given hint, I constructed a new function which is: $$f(z)=frace^iz-1-izz^2(z^2+4)$$
Then, I constructed a contour $gamma =gamma_1cupgamma_2cupgamma_rcupgamma_R$, with:$$gamma_1=x+0i:-Rle xle-r$$ $$gamma_2=x+0i:rle x le R$$ $$ gamma_r = re^itheta:thetain[pi,0]$$$$ gamma_R = Re^itheta:thetain[0, pi]$$
Then, by residue theorem, I evaluate the integral $int_gammaf(z)dz$ to be equal to $-frac(e^-2+1)pi8$. Then, what's left is to prove that $int_gamma_1f(z)dz$ and $int_gamma_2f(z)dz$ are both equal to zero as $rto0$ and $Rtoinfty$ and that's what's troubling me.
I have no idea how to prove that the integral: $$lim_rto0int_gamma_rfrace^iz-1-izz^2(z^2+4)dz$$where clearly, $z=re^itheta$, is equal to $0$, and also, for the case where the contour is $gamma_R$.
Please help me! Thanks a lot.
integration complex-analysis contour-integration residue-calculus
integration complex-analysis contour-integration residue-calculus
edited Mar 17 at 13:01
Jamie Carr
asked Mar 15 at 16:39
Jamie CarrJamie Carr
516
516
1
$begingroup$
HINT: $$frace^iz-1-izz^2(z^2+4)$$ has a removable singularity at $z=0$, hence it is bounded locally at $z=0$. This proves that the limit is zero as $r to 0$.
$endgroup$
– Crostul
Mar 15 at 16:44
$begingroup$
Look at page 102 (section "Third type") in books.google.com/…. Also, it's not clear to me why not work with the function $$ f(z) = (e^iz + e^-iz)/2 - 1 over z(z^2+1). $$
$endgroup$
– avs
Mar 15 at 16:47
1
$begingroup$
@avs I have no idea why there is a strange $iz$ term but I was instructed to do so on the paper. Also, thanks for the book! I'm reading it to try to find some hints.
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 15 at 16:54
$begingroup$
@Crostul Thanks for the hint. What about the case when $Rtoinfty$?
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 15 at 16:56
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
HINT: $$frace^iz-1-izz^2(z^2+4)$$ has a removable singularity at $z=0$, hence it is bounded locally at $z=0$. This proves that the limit is zero as $r to 0$.
$endgroup$
– Crostul
Mar 15 at 16:44
$begingroup$
Look at page 102 (section "Third type") in books.google.com/…. Also, it's not clear to me why not work with the function $$ f(z) = (e^iz + e^-iz)/2 - 1 over z(z^2+1). $$
$endgroup$
– avs
Mar 15 at 16:47
1
$begingroup$
@avs I have no idea why there is a strange $iz$ term but I was instructed to do so on the paper. Also, thanks for the book! I'm reading it to try to find some hints.
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 15 at 16:54
$begingroup$
@Crostul Thanks for the hint. What about the case when $Rtoinfty$?
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 15 at 16:56
1
1
$begingroup$
HINT: $$frace^iz-1-izz^2(z^2+4)$$ has a removable singularity at $z=0$, hence it is bounded locally at $z=0$. This proves that the limit is zero as $r to 0$.
$endgroup$
– Crostul
Mar 15 at 16:44
$begingroup$
HINT: $$frace^iz-1-izz^2(z^2+4)$$ has a removable singularity at $z=0$, hence it is bounded locally at $z=0$. This proves that the limit is zero as $r to 0$.
$endgroup$
– Crostul
Mar 15 at 16:44
$begingroup$
Look at page 102 (section "Third type") in books.google.com/…. Also, it's not clear to me why not work with the function $$ f(z) = (e^iz + e^-iz)/2 - 1 over z(z^2+1). $$
$endgroup$
– avs
Mar 15 at 16:47
$begingroup$
Look at page 102 (section "Third type") in books.google.com/…. Also, it's not clear to me why not work with the function $$ f(z) = (e^iz + e^-iz)/2 - 1 over z(z^2+1). $$
$endgroup$
– avs
Mar 15 at 16:47
1
1
$begingroup$
@avs I have no idea why there is a strange $iz$ term but I was instructed to do so on the paper. Also, thanks for the book! I'm reading it to try to find some hints.
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 15 at 16:54
$begingroup$
@avs I have no idea why there is a strange $iz$ term but I was instructed to do so on the paper. Also, thanks for the book! I'm reading it to try to find some hints.
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 15 at 16:54
$begingroup$
@Crostul Thanks for the hint. What about the case when $Rtoinfty$?
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 15 at 16:56
$begingroup$
@Crostul Thanks for the hint. What about the case when $Rtoinfty$?
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 15 at 16:56
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Appreciate you are seeking a solution via Residues. Here is a solution using Feynman's Trick coupled with Laplace Transforms (which is Residue in disguise). Here your integral is:
beginequation
I = int_-infty^infty fraccos(x) - 1x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dxnonumber
endequation
Here we introduce the function:
beginequation
J(t) = int_-infty^infty fraccos(tx) - 1x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dxnonumber
endequation
Here we see that $J(0) = 0$ and $lim_t rightarrow 1^+ J(t) = I$. We begin by taking the derivative with respect to $t$. To do so, we need to employ Leibniz's Integral Rule:
beginequation
J'(t) = int_-infty^infty fracfracpartialpartial tleft[cos(tx) - 1right]x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dx = int_-infty^infty frac-xsin(tx)x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dx = int_-infty^infty frac-sin(tx)xleft(x^2 + 1right):dx
endequation
We note that $J'(0) = 0$. Differentiating with respect to $t$ again, yields:
beginequation
J''(t) = int_-infty^infty frac-xcos(tx)xleft(x^2 + 1right):dx = - int_-infty^infty fraccos(tx)x^2 + 1:dx
endequation
We proceed by taking the Laplace Transform with respect to $t$. To do so, we must employ Fubini's Theorem:
beginalign
mathscrLleft[J''(t)right] &=- int_infty^inftyfracmathscrLleft[cos(tx)right]x^2 + 1:dx nonumber \
s^2mathscrLleft[J(t)right] - sJ(0) - sJ'(0) &= -int_infty^infty fracss^2 + x^2 cdot frac1x^2 + 1:dx nonumber \
s^2mathscrLleft[J(t)right] &= -s int_infty^infty frac1left(s^2 + x^2right)left(x^2 + 1right) :dx nonumber \
-smathscrLleft[J(t)right] &= frac1s^2 - 1int_infty^inftyleft[frac1x^2 + 1 - fracs^2 + x^2 right]:dx = frac1s^2 - 1left[arctan(x) - frac1sarctanleft(fracxs right) right]_-infty^infty nonumber \
&= frac1s^2 - 1left[pi - fracpis right] = fracpis^2 - 1cdotfracs - 1s = fracpisleft(s + 1right)
endalign
And so,
beginequation
mathscrLleft[J(t)right] = -fracpis^2left(s + 1right) Longrightarrow J(t) = mathscrL^-1left[-fracpis^2left(s + 1right) right] = -pileft( t + e^-t - 1right)
endequation
We now may resolve $I$ by taking the limit as above:
beginequation
I = int_-infty^infty fraccos(x) - 1x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dx = -pileft(1 + e^-1 - 1right) = -pi e^-1nonumber
endequation
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Hi, thanks for your detailed answer! It must take some time and I appreciate your work. The problem is, I checked the value of this integral with WolframAlpha which gave me a number approximately equal to -0.445845 and my answer, which is $-frac(e^-2+1)pi8$, is also equal to that number. However, $-pi e^-1$ is approximately equal to -1.55727. Could you please double-check your calculations so that I can learn more about it? Many thanks
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 16 at 21:37
$begingroup$
@JamieCarr - Yes, I will look into that now.
$endgroup$
– DavidG
Mar 17 at 2:28
$begingroup$
@JamieCarr - Are you sure you put it into wolframalpha correctly? I just put in and got the $-pi e^-1$ result: wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%E2%88%AB(cos(x)+-+1)%2F(x%5E2*(x%5E2+%2B+1))+from+-%E2%88%9E+to+%E2%88%9E
$endgroup$
– DavidG
Mar 17 at 2:31
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Hi I am new to the site and was looking to comment a small fix, but am not immediately able to, so anyways I am just going to write it out here (hopefully no one takes offense to that, sorry in advance).
So one thing I saw in the explanation of your work is that you said "Then, what's left is to prove that ∫γ1f(z)dz and ∫γ2f(z)dz are both equal to zero as r→0 and R→∞ and that's what's troubling me.", but those two parts are combined to form the orginal integral that you were trying to solve.
So really you are just trying to prove that the two semicircles both go to zero. And in response to the end of your question when you want to know how to show that the γr integral becomes zero, think about the fact that the smaller semi-circle is bounded by the absolute value of that smaller semi-circle being less than or equal to ((pi)r)/(r^2-4), which when taking the limit as r goes to zero clearly becomes zero.
Sorry for not having much knowledge or understanding of formatting the math but hopefully you could still understand some of what I wrote, and if I made any mistakes on something please tell me so I can fix it.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks for your answer! No worries about the format, if you want to learn about it, check out this link: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/…. Can you tell me more about the upper-bound, $fracpi rr^2-4$? I'm kind of confused about how you derive this. Thank you!
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 16 at 21:44
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Oh my bad I didn't even think to explain that part, but for example, if we have a slightly different integral such as the integral of (e^ix)/x from negative infinity to positive infinity we can rewrite it as f(z)=(e^iz)/z, which has a simple pole at the origin but is analytic everywhere else. So let's say we used the same contour as you did for your original integral (so the smaller semi-circle within the larger semi-circle) for this one.
Then the sum of all the individual contours that define this closed contour would be equal to zero, because there are no singularities within the closed contour in order for us to use residue theory with.
Now this is somewhat obvious but your original integral has a singularity within the closed contour, and as such the sum of all the individual contours will equal 2(pi)i*(sum of the residues).
So now it is just a matter of proving that your two semi-circle integrals go to zero, and to start with the larger one from -R to R, we can make use of Jordan's Lemma.
And actually, I am going to give a different example for this in order to show that the larger semi-circle goes to zero, and let you try to figure out the smaller semi-circle with some of the intuition you might pick up here(though if you are still stumped on the smaller circle then please comment and I will try to explain it). So the integral I will use is (cosx)/(x^2+1), where we rewrite it as f(z)=(e^iz)/(z^2+1) and use a semi-circular contour made up of two integrals, the semi-circle and the real axis. So we want to prove that the semi-circle integral goes to zero and that the real axis integral is the original integral(which I won't do here since you already know that). So we can rewrite (absolute value f(z) is |f(z)|, still not good with the math formatting, wanted to clarify) |f(z)| as |f(x+iy)| which is equal to (|e^ix*e^-y|)/|z^2+1| which is equal to (e^-y)/|z^2+1|, and in the upper half plane (y is greater than or equal to 0) we get |f(z)|=1/|z^2+1|.
Now with this what we want to do is bound the absolute value of the integral of the larger semi-circle (the circle from -R to R, with radius R) with a function that will include the singularity within our contour, for this example that singularity is i, so the function will become (pi)R/(R^2-1) where R is greater than 1. Now as R goes to infinity the new function we just made will go to zero and then, as a result, the semi-circle integral will go to zero as well because of the inequality.
All this being said hopefully I was able to help you out a little with this problem.
New contributor
Alejandro Jimenez Tellado is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3149517%2fcomplex-contour-integral-evaluation%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Appreciate you are seeking a solution via Residues. Here is a solution using Feynman's Trick coupled with Laplace Transforms (which is Residue in disguise). Here your integral is:
beginequation
I = int_-infty^infty fraccos(x) - 1x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dxnonumber
endequation
Here we introduce the function:
beginequation
J(t) = int_-infty^infty fraccos(tx) - 1x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dxnonumber
endequation
Here we see that $J(0) = 0$ and $lim_t rightarrow 1^+ J(t) = I$. We begin by taking the derivative with respect to $t$. To do so, we need to employ Leibniz's Integral Rule:
beginequation
J'(t) = int_-infty^infty fracfracpartialpartial tleft[cos(tx) - 1right]x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dx = int_-infty^infty frac-xsin(tx)x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dx = int_-infty^infty frac-sin(tx)xleft(x^2 + 1right):dx
endequation
We note that $J'(0) = 0$. Differentiating with respect to $t$ again, yields:
beginequation
J''(t) = int_-infty^infty frac-xcos(tx)xleft(x^2 + 1right):dx = - int_-infty^infty fraccos(tx)x^2 + 1:dx
endequation
We proceed by taking the Laplace Transform with respect to $t$. To do so, we must employ Fubini's Theorem:
beginalign
mathscrLleft[J''(t)right] &=- int_infty^inftyfracmathscrLleft[cos(tx)right]x^2 + 1:dx nonumber \
s^2mathscrLleft[J(t)right] - sJ(0) - sJ'(0) &= -int_infty^infty fracss^2 + x^2 cdot frac1x^2 + 1:dx nonumber \
s^2mathscrLleft[J(t)right] &= -s int_infty^infty frac1left(s^2 + x^2right)left(x^2 + 1right) :dx nonumber \
-smathscrLleft[J(t)right] &= frac1s^2 - 1int_infty^inftyleft[frac1x^2 + 1 - fracs^2 + x^2 right]:dx = frac1s^2 - 1left[arctan(x) - frac1sarctanleft(fracxs right) right]_-infty^infty nonumber \
&= frac1s^2 - 1left[pi - fracpis right] = fracpis^2 - 1cdotfracs - 1s = fracpisleft(s + 1right)
endalign
And so,
beginequation
mathscrLleft[J(t)right] = -fracpis^2left(s + 1right) Longrightarrow J(t) = mathscrL^-1left[-fracpis^2left(s + 1right) right] = -pileft( t + e^-t - 1right)
endequation
We now may resolve $I$ by taking the limit as above:
beginequation
I = int_-infty^infty fraccos(x) - 1x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dx = -pileft(1 + e^-1 - 1right) = -pi e^-1nonumber
endequation
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Hi, thanks for your detailed answer! It must take some time and I appreciate your work. The problem is, I checked the value of this integral with WolframAlpha which gave me a number approximately equal to -0.445845 and my answer, which is $-frac(e^-2+1)pi8$, is also equal to that number. However, $-pi e^-1$ is approximately equal to -1.55727. Could you please double-check your calculations so that I can learn more about it? Many thanks
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 16 at 21:37
$begingroup$
@JamieCarr - Yes, I will look into that now.
$endgroup$
– DavidG
Mar 17 at 2:28
$begingroup$
@JamieCarr - Are you sure you put it into wolframalpha correctly? I just put in and got the $-pi e^-1$ result: wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%E2%88%AB(cos(x)+-+1)%2F(x%5E2*(x%5E2+%2B+1))+from+-%E2%88%9E+to+%E2%88%9E
$endgroup$
– DavidG
Mar 17 at 2:31
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Appreciate you are seeking a solution via Residues. Here is a solution using Feynman's Trick coupled with Laplace Transforms (which is Residue in disguise). Here your integral is:
beginequation
I = int_-infty^infty fraccos(x) - 1x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dxnonumber
endequation
Here we introduce the function:
beginequation
J(t) = int_-infty^infty fraccos(tx) - 1x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dxnonumber
endequation
Here we see that $J(0) = 0$ and $lim_t rightarrow 1^+ J(t) = I$. We begin by taking the derivative with respect to $t$. To do so, we need to employ Leibniz's Integral Rule:
beginequation
J'(t) = int_-infty^infty fracfracpartialpartial tleft[cos(tx) - 1right]x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dx = int_-infty^infty frac-xsin(tx)x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dx = int_-infty^infty frac-sin(tx)xleft(x^2 + 1right):dx
endequation
We note that $J'(0) = 0$. Differentiating with respect to $t$ again, yields:
beginequation
J''(t) = int_-infty^infty frac-xcos(tx)xleft(x^2 + 1right):dx = - int_-infty^infty fraccos(tx)x^2 + 1:dx
endequation
We proceed by taking the Laplace Transform with respect to $t$. To do so, we must employ Fubini's Theorem:
beginalign
mathscrLleft[J''(t)right] &=- int_infty^inftyfracmathscrLleft[cos(tx)right]x^2 + 1:dx nonumber \
s^2mathscrLleft[J(t)right] - sJ(0) - sJ'(0) &= -int_infty^infty fracss^2 + x^2 cdot frac1x^2 + 1:dx nonumber \
s^2mathscrLleft[J(t)right] &= -s int_infty^infty frac1left(s^2 + x^2right)left(x^2 + 1right) :dx nonumber \
-smathscrLleft[J(t)right] &= frac1s^2 - 1int_infty^inftyleft[frac1x^2 + 1 - fracs^2 + x^2 right]:dx = frac1s^2 - 1left[arctan(x) - frac1sarctanleft(fracxs right) right]_-infty^infty nonumber \
&= frac1s^2 - 1left[pi - fracpis right] = fracpis^2 - 1cdotfracs - 1s = fracpisleft(s + 1right)
endalign
And so,
beginequation
mathscrLleft[J(t)right] = -fracpis^2left(s + 1right) Longrightarrow J(t) = mathscrL^-1left[-fracpis^2left(s + 1right) right] = -pileft( t + e^-t - 1right)
endequation
We now may resolve $I$ by taking the limit as above:
beginequation
I = int_-infty^infty fraccos(x) - 1x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dx = -pileft(1 + e^-1 - 1right) = -pi e^-1nonumber
endequation
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Hi, thanks for your detailed answer! It must take some time and I appreciate your work. The problem is, I checked the value of this integral with WolframAlpha which gave me a number approximately equal to -0.445845 and my answer, which is $-frac(e^-2+1)pi8$, is also equal to that number. However, $-pi e^-1$ is approximately equal to -1.55727. Could you please double-check your calculations so that I can learn more about it? Many thanks
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 16 at 21:37
$begingroup$
@JamieCarr - Yes, I will look into that now.
$endgroup$
– DavidG
Mar 17 at 2:28
$begingroup$
@JamieCarr - Are you sure you put it into wolframalpha correctly? I just put in and got the $-pi e^-1$ result: wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%E2%88%AB(cos(x)+-+1)%2F(x%5E2*(x%5E2+%2B+1))+from+-%E2%88%9E+to+%E2%88%9E
$endgroup$
– DavidG
Mar 17 at 2:31
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Appreciate you are seeking a solution via Residues. Here is a solution using Feynman's Trick coupled with Laplace Transforms (which is Residue in disguise). Here your integral is:
beginequation
I = int_-infty^infty fraccos(x) - 1x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dxnonumber
endequation
Here we introduce the function:
beginequation
J(t) = int_-infty^infty fraccos(tx) - 1x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dxnonumber
endequation
Here we see that $J(0) = 0$ and $lim_t rightarrow 1^+ J(t) = I$. We begin by taking the derivative with respect to $t$. To do so, we need to employ Leibniz's Integral Rule:
beginequation
J'(t) = int_-infty^infty fracfracpartialpartial tleft[cos(tx) - 1right]x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dx = int_-infty^infty frac-xsin(tx)x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dx = int_-infty^infty frac-sin(tx)xleft(x^2 + 1right):dx
endequation
We note that $J'(0) = 0$. Differentiating with respect to $t$ again, yields:
beginequation
J''(t) = int_-infty^infty frac-xcos(tx)xleft(x^2 + 1right):dx = - int_-infty^infty fraccos(tx)x^2 + 1:dx
endequation
We proceed by taking the Laplace Transform with respect to $t$. To do so, we must employ Fubini's Theorem:
beginalign
mathscrLleft[J''(t)right] &=- int_infty^inftyfracmathscrLleft[cos(tx)right]x^2 + 1:dx nonumber \
s^2mathscrLleft[J(t)right] - sJ(0) - sJ'(0) &= -int_infty^infty fracss^2 + x^2 cdot frac1x^2 + 1:dx nonumber \
s^2mathscrLleft[J(t)right] &= -s int_infty^infty frac1left(s^2 + x^2right)left(x^2 + 1right) :dx nonumber \
-smathscrLleft[J(t)right] &= frac1s^2 - 1int_infty^inftyleft[frac1x^2 + 1 - fracs^2 + x^2 right]:dx = frac1s^2 - 1left[arctan(x) - frac1sarctanleft(fracxs right) right]_-infty^infty nonumber \
&= frac1s^2 - 1left[pi - fracpis right] = fracpis^2 - 1cdotfracs - 1s = fracpisleft(s + 1right)
endalign
And so,
beginequation
mathscrLleft[J(t)right] = -fracpis^2left(s + 1right) Longrightarrow J(t) = mathscrL^-1left[-fracpis^2left(s + 1right) right] = -pileft( t + e^-t - 1right)
endequation
We now may resolve $I$ by taking the limit as above:
beginequation
I = int_-infty^infty fraccos(x) - 1x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dx = -pileft(1 + e^-1 - 1right) = -pi e^-1nonumber
endequation
$endgroup$
Appreciate you are seeking a solution via Residues. Here is a solution using Feynman's Trick coupled with Laplace Transforms (which is Residue in disguise). Here your integral is:
beginequation
I = int_-infty^infty fraccos(x) - 1x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dxnonumber
endequation
Here we introduce the function:
beginequation
J(t) = int_-infty^infty fraccos(tx) - 1x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dxnonumber
endequation
Here we see that $J(0) = 0$ and $lim_t rightarrow 1^+ J(t) = I$. We begin by taking the derivative with respect to $t$. To do so, we need to employ Leibniz's Integral Rule:
beginequation
J'(t) = int_-infty^infty fracfracpartialpartial tleft[cos(tx) - 1right]x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dx = int_-infty^infty frac-xsin(tx)x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dx = int_-infty^infty frac-sin(tx)xleft(x^2 + 1right):dx
endequation
We note that $J'(0) = 0$. Differentiating with respect to $t$ again, yields:
beginequation
J''(t) = int_-infty^infty frac-xcos(tx)xleft(x^2 + 1right):dx = - int_-infty^infty fraccos(tx)x^2 + 1:dx
endequation
We proceed by taking the Laplace Transform with respect to $t$. To do so, we must employ Fubini's Theorem:
beginalign
mathscrLleft[J''(t)right] &=- int_infty^inftyfracmathscrLleft[cos(tx)right]x^2 + 1:dx nonumber \
s^2mathscrLleft[J(t)right] - sJ(0) - sJ'(0) &= -int_infty^infty fracss^2 + x^2 cdot frac1x^2 + 1:dx nonumber \
s^2mathscrLleft[J(t)right] &= -s int_infty^infty frac1left(s^2 + x^2right)left(x^2 + 1right) :dx nonumber \
-smathscrLleft[J(t)right] &= frac1s^2 - 1int_infty^inftyleft[frac1x^2 + 1 - fracs^2 + x^2 right]:dx = frac1s^2 - 1left[arctan(x) - frac1sarctanleft(fracxs right) right]_-infty^infty nonumber \
&= frac1s^2 - 1left[pi - fracpis right] = fracpis^2 - 1cdotfracs - 1s = fracpisleft(s + 1right)
endalign
And so,
beginequation
mathscrLleft[J(t)right] = -fracpis^2left(s + 1right) Longrightarrow J(t) = mathscrL^-1left[-fracpis^2left(s + 1right) right] = -pileft( t + e^-t - 1right)
endequation
We now may resolve $I$ by taking the limit as above:
beginequation
I = int_-infty^infty fraccos(x) - 1x^2left(x^2 + 1right):dx = -pileft(1 + e^-1 - 1right) = -pi e^-1nonumber
endequation
answered Mar 16 at 9:11
DavidGDavidG
763
763
$begingroup$
Hi, thanks for your detailed answer! It must take some time and I appreciate your work. The problem is, I checked the value of this integral with WolframAlpha which gave me a number approximately equal to -0.445845 and my answer, which is $-frac(e^-2+1)pi8$, is also equal to that number. However, $-pi e^-1$ is approximately equal to -1.55727. Could you please double-check your calculations so that I can learn more about it? Many thanks
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 16 at 21:37
$begingroup$
@JamieCarr - Yes, I will look into that now.
$endgroup$
– DavidG
Mar 17 at 2:28
$begingroup$
@JamieCarr - Are you sure you put it into wolframalpha correctly? I just put in and got the $-pi e^-1$ result: wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%E2%88%AB(cos(x)+-+1)%2F(x%5E2*(x%5E2+%2B+1))+from+-%E2%88%9E+to+%E2%88%9E
$endgroup$
– DavidG
Mar 17 at 2:31
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Hi, thanks for your detailed answer! It must take some time and I appreciate your work. The problem is, I checked the value of this integral with WolframAlpha which gave me a number approximately equal to -0.445845 and my answer, which is $-frac(e^-2+1)pi8$, is also equal to that number. However, $-pi e^-1$ is approximately equal to -1.55727. Could you please double-check your calculations so that I can learn more about it? Many thanks
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 16 at 21:37
$begingroup$
@JamieCarr - Yes, I will look into that now.
$endgroup$
– DavidG
Mar 17 at 2:28
$begingroup$
@JamieCarr - Are you sure you put it into wolframalpha correctly? I just put in and got the $-pi e^-1$ result: wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%E2%88%AB(cos(x)+-+1)%2F(x%5E2*(x%5E2+%2B+1))+from+-%E2%88%9E+to+%E2%88%9E
$endgroup$
– DavidG
Mar 17 at 2:31
$begingroup$
Hi, thanks for your detailed answer! It must take some time and I appreciate your work. The problem is, I checked the value of this integral with WolframAlpha which gave me a number approximately equal to -0.445845 and my answer, which is $-frac(e^-2+1)pi8$, is also equal to that number. However, $-pi e^-1$ is approximately equal to -1.55727. Could you please double-check your calculations so that I can learn more about it? Many thanks
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 16 at 21:37
$begingroup$
Hi, thanks for your detailed answer! It must take some time and I appreciate your work. The problem is, I checked the value of this integral with WolframAlpha which gave me a number approximately equal to -0.445845 and my answer, which is $-frac(e^-2+1)pi8$, is also equal to that number. However, $-pi e^-1$ is approximately equal to -1.55727. Could you please double-check your calculations so that I can learn more about it? Many thanks
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 16 at 21:37
$begingroup$
@JamieCarr - Yes, I will look into that now.
$endgroup$
– DavidG
Mar 17 at 2:28
$begingroup$
@JamieCarr - Yes, I will look into that now.
$endgroup$
– DavidG
Mar 17 at 2:28
$begingroup$
@JamieCarr - Are you sure you put it into wolframalpha correctly? I just put in and got the $-pi e^-1$ result: wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%E2%88%AB(cos(x)+-+1)%2F(x%5E2*(x%5E2+%2B+1))+from+-%E2%88%9E+to+%E2%88%9E
$endgroup$
– DavidG
Mar 17 at 2:31
$begingroup$
@JamieCarr - Are you sure you put it into wolframalpha correctly? I just put in and got the $-pi e^-1$ result: wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%E2%88%AB(cos(x)+-+1)%2F(x%5E2*(x%5E2+%2B+1))+from+-%E2%88%9E+to+%E2%88%9E
$endgroup$
– DavidG
Mar 17 at 2:31
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Hi I am new to the site and was looking to comment a small fix, but am not immediately able to, so anyways I am just going to write it out here (hopefully no one takes offense to that, sorry in advance).
So one thing I saw in the explanation of your work is that you said "Then, what's left is to prove that ∫γ1f(z)dz and ∫γ2f(z)dz are both equal to zero as r→0 and R→∞ and that's what's troubling me.", but those two parts are combined to form the orginal integral that you were trying to solve.
So really you are just trying to prove that the two semicircles both go to zero. And in response to the end of your question when you want to know how to show that the γr integral becomes zero, think about the fact that the smaller semi-circle is bounded by the absolute value of that smaller semi-circle being less than or equal to ((pi)r)/(r^2-4), which when taking the limit as r goes to zero clearly becomes zero.
Sorry for not having much knowledge or understanding of formatting the math but hopefully you could still understand some of what I wrote, and if I made any mistakes on something please tell me so I can fix it.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks for your answer! No worries about the format, if you want to learn about it, check out this link: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/…. Can you tell me more about the upper-bound, $fracpi rr^2-4$? I'm kind of confused about how you derive this. Thank you!
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 16 at 21:44
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Hi I am new to the site and was looking to comment a small fix, but am not immediately able to, so anyways I am just going to write it out here (hopefully no one takes offense to that, sorry in advance).
So one thing I saw in the explanation of your work is that you said "Then, what's left is to prove that ∫γ1f(z)dz and ∫γ2f(z)dz are both equal to zero as r→0 and R→∞ and that's what's troubling me.", but those two parts are combined to form the orginal integral that you were trying to solve.
So really you are just trying to prove that the two semicircles both go to zero. And in response to the end of your question when you want to know how to show that the γr integral becomes zero, think about the fact that the smaller semi-circle is bounded by the absolute value of that smaller semi-circle being less than or equal to ((pi)r)/(r^2-4), which when taking the limit as r goes to zero clearly becomes zero.
Sorry for not having much knowledge or understanding of formatting the math but hopefully you could still understand some of what I wrote, and if I made any mistakes on something please tell me so I can fix it.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks for your answer! No worries about the format, if you want to learn about it, check out this link: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/…. Can you tell me more about the upper-bound, $fracpi rr^2-4$? I'm kind of confused about how you derive this. Thank you!
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 16 at 21:44
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Hi I am new to the site and was looking to comment a small fix, but am not immediately able to, so anyways I am just going to write it out here (hopefully no one takes offense to that, sorry in advance).
So one thing I saw in the explanation of your work is that you said "Then, what's left is to prove that ∫γ1f(z)dz and ∫γ2f(z)dz are both equal to zero as r→0 and R→∞ and that's what's troubling me.", but those two parts are combined to form the orginal integral that you were trying to solve.
So really you are just trying to prove that the two semicircles both go to zero. And in response to the end of your question when you want to know how to show that the γr integral becomes zero, think about the fact that the smaller semi-circle is bounded by the absolute value of that smaller semi-circle being less than or equal to ((pi)r)/(r^2-4), which when taking the limit as r goes to zero clearly becomes zero.
Sorry for not having much knowledge or understanding of formatting the math but hopefully you could still understand some of what I wrote, and if I made any mistakes on something please tell me so I can fix it.
$endgroup$
Hi I am new to the site and was looking to comment a small fix, but am not immediately able to, so anyways I am just going to write it out here (hopefully no one takes offense to that, sorry in advance).
So one thing I saw in the explanation of your work is that you said "Then, what's left is to prove that ∫γ1f(z)dz and ∫γ2f(z)dz are both equal to zero as r→0 and R→∞ and that's what's troubling me.", but those two parts are combined to form the orginal integral that you were trying to solve.
So really you are just trying to prove that the two semicircles both go to zero. And in response to the end of your question when you want to know how to show that the γr integral becomes zero, think about the fact that the smaller semi-circle is bounded by the absolute value of that smaller semi-circle being less than or equal to ((pi)r)/(r^2-4), which when taking the limit as r goes to zero clearly becomes zero.
Sorry for not having much knowledge or understanding of formatting the math but hopefully you could still understand some of what I wrote, and if I made any mistakes on something please tell me so I can fix it.
answered Mar 16 at 20:34
Alejandro Jimenez TelladoAlejandro Jimenez Tellado
1
1
$begingroup$
Thanks for your answer! No worries about the format, if you want to learn about it, check out this link: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/…. Can you tell me more about the upper-bound, $fracpi rr^2-4$? I'm kind of confused about how you derive this. Thank you!
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 16 at 21:44
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Thanks for your answer! No worries about the format, if you want to learn about it, check out this link: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/…. Can you tell me more about the upper-bound, $fracpi rr^2-4$? I'm kind of confused about how you derive this. Thank you!
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 16 at 21:44
$begingroup$
Thanks for your answer! No worries about the format, if you want to learn about it, check out this link: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/…. Can you tell me more about the upper-bound, $fracpi rr^2-4$? I'm kind of confused about how you derive this. Thank you!
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 16 at 21:44
$begingroup$
Thanks for your answer! No worries about the format, if you want to learn about it, check out this link: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/…. Can you tell me more about the upper-bound, $fracpi rr^2-4$? I'm kind of confused about how you derive this. Thank you!
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 16 at 21:44
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Oh my bad I didn't even think to explain that part, but for example, if we have a slightly different integral such as the integral of (e^ix)/x from negative infinity to positive infinity we can rewrite it as f(z)=(e^iz)/z, which has a simple pole at the origin but is analytic everywhere else. So let's say we used the same contour as you did for your original integral (so the smaller semi-circle within the larger semi-circle) for this one.
Then the sum of all the individual contours that define this closed contour would be equal to zero, because there are no singularities within the closed contour in order for us to use residue theory with.
Now this is somewhat obvious but your original integral has a singularity within the closed contour, and as such the sum of all the individual contours will equal 2(pi)i*(sum of the residues).
So now it is just a matter of proving that your two semi-circle integrals go to zero, and to start with the larger one from -R to R, we can make use of Jordan's Lemma.
And actually, I am going to give a different example for this in order to show that the larger semi-circle goes to zero, and let you try to figure out the smaller semi-circle with some of the intuition you might pick up here(though if you are still stumped on the smaller circle then please comment and I will try to explain it). So the integral I will use is (cosx)/(x^2+1), where we rewrite it as f(z)=(e^iz)/(z^2+1) and use a semi-circular contour made up of two integrals, the semi-circle and the real axis. So we want to prove that the semi-circle integral goes to zero and that the real axis integral is the original integral(which I won't do here since you already know that). So we can rewrite (absolute value f(z) is |f(z)|, still not good with the math formatting, wanted to clarify) |f(z)| as |f(x+iy)| which is equal to (|e^ix*e^-y|)/|z^2+1| which is equal to (e^-y)/|z^2+1|, and in the upper half plane (y is greater than or equal to 0) we get |f(z)|=1/|z^2+1|.
Now with this what we want to do is bound the absolute value of the integral of the larger semi-circle (the circle from -R to R, with radius R) with a function that will include the singularity within our contour, for this example that singularity is i, so the function will become (pi)R/(R^2-1) where R is greater than 1. Now as R goes to infinity the new function we just made will go to zero and then, as a result, the semi-circle integral will go to zero as well because of the inequality.
All this being said hopefully I was able to help you out a little with this problem.
New contributor
Alejandro Jimenez Tellado is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Oh my bad I didn't even think to explain that part, but for example, if we have a slightly different integral such as the integral of (e^ix)/x from negative infinity to positive infinity we can rewrite it as f(z)=(e^iz)/z, which has a simple pole at the origin but is analytic everywhere else. So let's say we used the same contour as you did for your original integral (so the smaller semi-circle within the larger semi-circle) for this one.
Then the sum of all the individual contours that define this closed contour would be equal to zero, because there are no singularities within the closed contour in order for us to use residue theory with.
Now this is somewhat obvious but your original integral has a singularity within the closed contour, and as such the sum of all the individual contours will equal 2(pi)i*(sum of the residues).
So now it is just a matter of proving that your two semi-circle integrals go to zero, and to start with the larger one from -R to R, we can make use of Jordan's Lemma.
And actually, I am going to give a different example for this in order to show that the larger semi-circle goes to zero, and let you try to figure out the smaller semi-circle with some of the intuition you might pick up here(though if you are still stumped on the smaller circle then please comment and I will try to explain it). So the integral I will use is (cosx)/(x^2+1), where we rewrite it as f(z)=(e^iz)/(z^2+1) and use a semi-circular contour made up of two integrals, the semi-circle and the real axis. So we want to prove that the semi-circle integral goes to zero and that the real axis integral is the original integral(which I won't do here since you already know that). So we can rewrite (absolute value f(z) is |f(z)|, still not good with the math formatting, wanted to clarify) |f(z)| as |f(x+iy)| which is equal to (|e^ix*e^-y|)/|z^2+1| which is equal to (e^-y)/|z^2+1|, and in the upper half plane (y is greater than or equal to 0) we get |f(z)|=1/|z^2+1|.
Now with this what we want to do is bound the absolute value of the integral of the larger semi-circle (the circle from -R to R, with radius R) with a function that will include the singularity within our contour, for this example that singularity is i, so the function will become (pi)R/(R^2-1) where R is greater than 1. Now as R goes to infinity the new function we just made will go to zero and then, as a result, the semi-circle integral will go to zero as well because of the inequality.
All this being said hopefully I was able to help you out a little with this problem.
New contributor
Alejandro Jimenez Tellado is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Oh my bad I didn't even think to explain that part, but for example, if we have a slightly different integral such as the integral of (e^ix)/x from negative infinity to positive infinity we can rewrite it as f(z)=(e^iz)/z, which has a simple pole at the origin but is analytic everywhere else. So let's say we used the same contour as you did for your original integral (so the smaller semi-circle within the larger semi-circle) for this one.
Then the sum of all the individual contours that define this closed contour would be equal to zero, because there are no singularities within the closed contour in order for us to use residue theory with.
Now this is somewhat obvious but your original integral has a singularity within the closed contour, and as such the sum of all the individual contours will equal 2(pi)i*(sum of the residues).
So now it is just a matter of proving that your two semi-circle integrals go to zero, and to start with the larger one from -R to R, we can make use of Jordan's Lemma.
And actually, I am going to give a different example for this in order to show that the larger semi-circle goes to zero, and let you try to figure out the smaller semi-circle with some of the intuition you might pick up here(though if you are still stumped on the smaller circle then please comment and I will try to explain it). So the integral I will use is (cosx)/(x^2+1), where we rewrite it as f(z)=(e^iz)/(z^2+1) and use a semi-circular contour made up of two integrals, the semi-circle and the real axis. So we want to prove that the semi-circle integral goes to zero and that the real axis integral is the original integral(which I won't do here since you already know that). So we can rewrite (absolute value f(z) is |f(z)|, still not good with the math formatting, wanted to clarify) |f(z)| as |f(x+iy)| which is equal to (|e^ix*e^-y|)/|z^2+1| which is equal to (e^-y)/|z^2+1|, and in the upper half plane (y is greater than or equal to 0) we get |f(z)|=1/|z^2+1|.
Now with this what we want to do is bound the absolute value of the integral of the larger semi-circle (the circle from -R to R, with radius R) with a function that will include the singularity within our contour, for this example that singularity is i, so the function will become (pi)R/(R^2-1) where R is greater than 1. Now as R goes to infinity the new function we just made will go to zero and then, as a result, the semi-circle integral will go to zero as well because of the inequality.
All this being said hopefully I was able to help you out a little with this problem.
New contributor
Alejandro Jimenez Tellado is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
Oh my bad I didn't even think to explain that part, but for example, if we have a slightly different integral such as the integral of (e^ix)/x from negative infinity to positive infinity we can rewrite it as f(z)=(e^iz)/z, which has a simple pole at the origin but is analytic everywhere else. So let's say we used the same contour as you did for your original integral (so the smaller semi-circle within the larger semi-circle) for this one.
Then the sum of all the individual contours that define this closed contour would be equal to zero, because there are no singularities within the closed contour in order for us to use residue theory with.
Now this is somewhat obvious but your original integral has a singularity within the closed contour, and as such the sum of all the individual contours will equal 2(pi)i*(sum of the residues).
So now it is just a matter of proving that your two semi-circle integrals go to zero, and to start with the larger one from -R to R, we can make use of Jordan's Lemma.
And actually, I am going to give a different example for this in order to show that the larger semi-circle goes to zero, and let you try to figure out the smaller semi-circle with some of the intuition you might pick up here(though if you are still stumped on the smaller circle then please comment and I will try to explain it). So the integral I will use is (cosx)/(x^2+1), where we rewrite it as f(z)=(e^iz)/(z^2+1) and use a semi-circular contour made up of two integrals, the semi-circle and the real axis. So we want to prove that the semi-circle integral goes to zero and that the real axis integral is the original integral(which I won't do here since you already know that). So we can rewrite (absolute value f(z) is |f(z)|, still not good with the math formatting, wanted to clarify) |f(z)| as |f(x+iy)| which is equal to (|e^ix*e^-y|)/|z^2+1| which is equal to (e^-y)/|z^2+1|, and in the upper half plane (y is greater than or equal to 0) we get |f(z)|=1/|z^2+1|.
Now with this what we want to do is bound the absolute value of the integral of the larger semi-circle (the circle from -R to R, with radius R) with a function that will include the singularity within our contour, for this example that singularity is i, so the function will become (pi)R/(R^2-1) where R is greater than 1. Now as R goes to infinity the new function we just made will go to zero and then, as a result, the semi-circle integral will go to zero as well because of the inequality.
All this being said hopefully I was able to help you out a little with this problem.
New contributor
Alejandro Jimenez Tellado is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Alejandro Jimenez Tellado is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered Mar 17 at 15:54
Alejandro Jimenez TelladoAlejandro Jimenez Tellado
1
1
New contributor
Alejandro Jimenez Tellado is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Alejandro Jimenez Tellado is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Alejandro Jimenez Tellado is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3149517%2fcomplex-contour-integral-evaluation%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
$begingroup$
HINT: $$frace^iz-1-izz^2(z^2+4)$$ has a removable singularity at $z=0$, hence it is bounded locally at $z=0$. This proves that the limit is zero as $r to 0$.
$endgroup$
– Crostul
Mar 15 at 16:44
$begingroup$
Look at page 102 (section "Third type") in books.google.com/…. Also, it's not clear to me why not work with the function $$ f(z) = (e^iz + e^-iz)/2 - 1 over z(z^2+1). $$
$endgroup$
– avs
Mar 15 at 16:47
1
$begingroup$
@avs I have no idea why there is a strange $iz$ term but I was instructed to do so on the paper. Also, thanks for the book! I'm reading it to try to find some hints.
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 15 at 16:54
$begingroup$
@Crostul Thanks for the hint. What about the case when $Rtoinfty$?
$endgroup$
– Jamie Carr
Mar 15 at 16:56