Contour Integration: Branch cuts

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around evaluating a contour integral of the positive branch of ##z^{-1/2}##. The original poster believes the integral should yield zero based on Cauchy's theorem, but encounters non-zero results due to their parameterization methods.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster describes several parameterizations for the contour integral, expressing concern that they may be integrating across a branch cut. Participants suggest modifying the parameterization to avoid the cut, including adjusting the limits of integration and rethinking the contour's shape.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively discussing how to adjust the parameterization to avoid the branch cut, with some suggesting specific modifications. There is a recognition of the need to work with limits approaching zero to simplify the integral's evaluation. The conversation reflects a collaborative effort to clarify the setup and approach without reaching a definitive conclusion.

Contextual Notes

There is an emphasis on avoiding the branch cut in the contour integration, with specific angles and parameterizations being debated. The original poster's attempts and the suggested adjustments indicate a complex setup that may require careful consideration of the contour's path.

WWCY
Messages
476
Reaction score
15

Homework Statement


I am supposed to evaluate the contour integral of the positive branch of ##z^{-1/2}## over the following contour:
Screen Shot 2017-10-29 at 2.08.33 AM.png


I believe the answer should be 0, by Cauchy's theorem (loop encloses no poles), but my methods of parameterization have led to non-zero answers.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution



Here are the following parameterizations I have tried so far,

A) Loop parameterized by ##z = R_A e^{i\theta}## from ##\theta = -\pi## to ## \pi##
B) Line parameterized by ##z = Re^{i\pi}## from ##-R_A## to ##-R_C##
C) Loop parameterized by ##z = R_C e^{i\theta}## from ##\theta = \pi## to ## -\pi##
D) Line parameterized by ##z = Re^{-i\pi}## from ##-R_C## to ##-R_A##

I believe that I am actually doing integrals on the cut by using this method (hence an incorrect answer), but I can't seem to find a way to avoid the cut and am therefore stuck.

Any advice is greatly appreciated
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2017-10-29 at 2.08.33 AM.png
    Screen Shot 2017-10-29 at 2.08.33 AM.png
    21.9 KB · Views: 1,790
Physics news on Phys.org
To stay away from the cut, the first arc mustn't go from ##-\pi## to ##\pi## but from ##\epsilon-\pi## to ##\pi-\epsilon##, where ##\epsilon ## is a small angle.
Then you can parameterise B and D as horizontal lines at heights ##\pm y_B## that are trig functions of ##R_A## and ##\epsilon## and starting and ending at horizontal coordinates ##x_A,x_C## that are respectively functions of ##(R_A,\epsilon)## and ##(R_C,y_B)##. Finally, you need to work out a new angle ##\psi## that is a function of ##(R_C,y_B)## so that ##\pm \psi## are the integration limits for curve C.

Write a formula for the total integral, which will be a function of ##R_A,R_C## and ##\epsilon##. Then work out the limit of that formula as ##\epsilon\to 0##.

EDIT: We can simplify the process by getting rid of the parameter ##R_C## and instead having the loop C go around the origin at radius ##y_B##, joining to the lines B and D tangentially rather than with a kink. Then ##x_C=0## so that loop C and lines B, D all end neatly on the y axis.
 
Last edited:
andrewkirk said:
To stay away from the cut, the first arc mustn't go from ##-\pi## to ##\pi## but from ##\epsilon-\pi## to ##\pi-\epsilon##, where ##\epsilon ## is a small angle.
Then you can parameterise B and D as horizontal lines at heights ##\pm y_B## that are trig functions of ##R_A## and ##\epsilon## and starting and ending at horizontal coordinates ##x_A,x_C## that are respectively functions of ##(R_A,\epsilon)## and ##(R_C,y_B)##. Finally, you need to work out a new angle ##\psi## that is a function of ##(R_C,y_B)## so that ##\pm \psi## are the integration limits for curve C.

Write a formula for the total integral, which will be a function of ##R_A,R_C## and ##\epsilon##. Then work out the limit of that formula as ##\epsilon\to 0##.

EDIT: We can simplify the process by getting rid of the parameter ##R_C## and instead having the loop C go around the origin at radius ##y_B##, joining to the lines B and D tangentially rather than with a kink. Then ##x_C=0## so that loop C and lines B, D all end neatly on the y axis.
Thanks very much! I'll give it a shot. Appreciate the help.

Would I be right in saying that working in terms of ##\pi## instead of ##\pi + \epsilon## means working on the cut?
 
WWCY said:
Would I be right in saying that working in terms of ##\pi## instead of ##\pi + \epsilon## means working on the cut?
Yes.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
32
Views
4K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K