Is the Analytic Function e^{ikz}/z Upper or Lower Half Plane for k>0?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter matematikuvol
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the analytic properties of the function \( \frac{e^{ikz}}{z} \) in relation to the upper and lower half-planes for \( k > 0 \). Participants explore the implications of contour integration and the behavior of the function in different regions of the complex plane.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the analytic nature of the function \( \frac{e^{ikz}}{z} \) in the upper half-plane for \( k > 0 \) and the reasoning behind choosing contours in this region.
  • Others suggest using the Residue Theorem and power series expansions to analyze the integral, noting that \( e^{ikz} \) is entire and thus analytic everywhere except at \( z = 0 \).
  • A participant expresses confusion about the choice of contour and the implications of closing the contour in the upper half-plane for \( k > 0 \).
  • Some participants clarify that the integral over a closed curve in the upper half-plane will yield zero if the function is analytic there, while also discussing the behavior of the integral as the contour approaches infinity.
  • There are discussions about the limit of \( e^{ikR\cos t} \) as \( R \to \infty \) and its implications for the integral's convergence.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the analytic properties of the function in relation to the choice of contour. There is no consensus on the reasoning behind the choice of the upper half-plane for \( k > 0 \), and multiple interpretations of the integral's behavior are presented.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the contour integral is a number rather than a function, which raises questions about the analytic nature of the integral itself. The discussion also highlights the dependence on the choice of contour and the conditions under which the integral converges.

matematikuvol
Messages
190
Reaction score
0
\oint dz\frac{e^{ikz}}{z}

How we know for k>0 is function analytic in upper or in lower half plane?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I am assuming you want to calculate:
\int_{\gamma}\frac{exp(ikz)}{z} \, \mathrm{d}z
where \gamma is some closed loop such that 0 \in \mathrm{Int}(\gamma).

If this is the case, you can the integral using the Residue Theorem. That is, write exp(ikz) as a power series. Divide each term of the power series by z to obtain a meromorphic function. You can then perform the integration and the only term that contributes to the value of the integral is the residue.
 
I asked what I want to know. I don't understand why if I have

\oint \frac{e^{ikz}}{z}, k>0 function is analytic in upper half plane if I k<0 function is analytic in lower half plane? Why?
 
The contour integral is a number, not a function. So asking if the integral is analytic in the upper/lower half-plane doesn't seem to make much sense. If you want to consider the function all of whose values are equal to the contour integral, then this is just a constant function and is obviously analytic on the upper and lower half-plane.

So, unless your question is about trivialities, I think you need to be more precise.
 
jgens said:
The contour integral is a number, not a function. So asking if the integral is analytic in the upper/lower half-plane doesn't seem to make much sense. If you want to consider the function all of whose values are equal to the contour integral, then this is just a constant function and is obviously analytic on the upper and lower half-plane.

So, unless your question is about trivialities, I think you need to be more precise.

My mistake. Why function \frac{e^{ikz}}{z} is analytic in upper half plane for k>0?
 
Well, exp(ikz) is entire and therefore analytic on the whole plane. If we divide the power series of exp(ikz) by z, we see that exp(ikz)/z has a simple pole at k = 0 but is well-defined everywhere else. Which means that our series expansion for exp(ikz)/z is valid on the upper half-plane.
 
Why we close counture in upper half plane for k>0?
 
What do you mean by 'close counture'?
 
When we calculate integral which I wrote we use contour in upper half plane for k>0. Why?
 
  • #10
I do not know why you would choose to do this. Since the contour will be chosen over a closed curve and since exp(ikz)/z is analytic in the upper half-plane, this means if we integrate along any closed curve which lies entirely in the upper half-plane, the integral will necessarily be zero.
 
  • #11
I will also take a small conture around zero.
 
  • #12
Understand now?
 

Attachments

  • conture.JPG
    conture.JPG
    6 KB · Views: 344
  • #13
I want to calculate integral \int^{\infty}_{-\infty}\frac{sinkx}{x} use integration which I wrote. Why for k>0 in upper plane? Tnx.
 
  • #14
Ah! That is not a contour in the upper half-plane; the upper half-plane excludes the real axis. And you take the integral that way because you know exp(ikz)/z is analytic everywhere except 0 and there is a theorem that involves evaluating real integrals using complex integrals like the one you have.
 
  • #15
matematikuvol said:
I want to calculate integral \int^{\infty}_{-\infty}\frac{sinkx}{x} use integration which I wrote. Why for k>0 in upper plane? Tnx.

Need to be more clear mate. We choose the upper half-contour for k>0 in that integral because we wish the integral over the large semi-circle to tend to zero as R goes to infinity. Consider the expression:

e^{ikz}

for z=Re^{it}

thats:

e^{ikR(\cos(t)+i\sin(t))}

Now consider it's absolute value:

e^{-kR\sin(t)}

In the upper half-plane, sine is positive so that will tend to zero for k>0. And if k<0, they we'd have to divert the contour to the lower half-plane because then sin(t)<0.
 
  • #16
Thanks mate. Sorry again. Is there some easy way to see that that integral will go to zero? When you see

\oint\frac{e^{ikz}}{z}?
 
  • #17
matematikuvol said:
Thanks mate. Sorry again. Is there some easy way to see that that integral will go to zero? When you see

\oint\frac{e^{ikz}}{z}?

Ok, that one "looks" like you're just going around the origin but really you mean the half-disc contour in either half-plane. Around the origin, the integral is 2pi i. Otherwise if it's around the discs. You could be more specific like:

\mathop\oint\limits_{|z|=1} \frac{e^{ikz}}{z}dz

that's really clear or in the other case:

\mathop\oint\limits_{D} \frac{e^{ikz}}{z}dz

then clearly specify in the text what D is. In regards to you question about the integral over the upper half-disc around the semi-circle, well, you just need to plug it all in and analyze it to see what happens as R goes to infinity.
 
  • #18
Thanks. What about

\lim_{R\to\infty}e^{ikR\cos t}?
 
  • #19
matematikuvol said:
Thanks. What about

\lim_{R\to\infty}e^{ikR\cos t}?

How about you answer that assuming k, R and t are real numbers. Use the Euler identity:

e^{ix}=\cos(x)+i\sin(x)

What is the maximum in absolute value that expression attains? Does it ever settle down to a limit no matter how large x gets?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K