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













0












$begingroup$


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.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 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















0












$begingroup$


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.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 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













0












0








0





$begingroup$


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.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




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






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








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












  • 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










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















1












$begingroup$

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






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    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


















0












$begingroup$

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.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    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



















0












$begingroup$

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.






share|cite|improve this answer








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.






$endgroup$












    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
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    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









    1












    $begingroup$

    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






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      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















    1












    $begingroup$

    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






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      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













    1












    1








    1





    $begingroup$

    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






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    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







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    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
















    • $begingroup$
      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











    0












    $begingroup$

    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.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      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
















    0












    $begingroup$

    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.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      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














    0












    0








    0





    $begingroup$

    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.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    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.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    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

















    • $begingroup$
      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












    0












    $begingroup$

    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.






    share|cite|improve this answer








    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.






    $endgroup$

















      0












      $begingroup$

      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.






      share|cite|improve this answer








      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.






      $endgroup$















        0












        0








        0





        $begingroup$

        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.






        share|cite|improve this answer








        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.







        share|cite|improve this answer








        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.









        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer






        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.



























            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            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.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            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





















































            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







            Popular posts from this blog

            Moe incest case Sentencing See also References Navigation menu"'Australian Josef Fritzl' fathered four children by daughter""Small town recoils in horror at 'Australian Fritzl' incest case""Victorian rape allegations echo Fritzl case - Just In (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)""Incest father jailed for 22 years""'Australian Fritzl' sentenced to 22 years in prison for abusing daughter for three decades""RSJ v The Queen"

            Who is our nearest planetary neighbor, on average?Santa Claus flies to the South PoleSeven Spheres of Unequal Mass, a weighing problem with a twistDescribe a large integerFast Mental Calculation of $7.5^7$Math in Space (without the help of celebrities)Find the value of $bigstar$: Puzzle 8 - InequalityWho drinks beer while running anyway?A Crucial DeliveryRanking And AverageHow long will my money last at roulette?

            Daza language Contents Vocabulary Phonology References External links Navigation menudaza1242Daza"Dazaga"eeee178086576