Exponential integral over removeable singularity gives wrong result

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the evaluation of a specific integral involving exponential integrals and the challenges faced in obtaining consistent analytical and numerical results. The integral includes a removable singularity and is analyzed in the context of complex variables and numerical integration techniques.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents an integral involving exponential integrals and expresses a belief about the expected analytical result.
  • The participant notes discrepancies between analytical results using exponential integrals and numerical evaluations performed in MATLAB, with some values differing significantly.
  • There is mention of undefined values occurring when certain parameters take specific values, which raises concerns about the validity of the analytical approach.
  • Another participant suggests that the expression under the integral may involve a sinc function, implying a potential oversight in the original formulation.
  • The original poster acknowledges the presence of the sinc function but remains uncertain about the source of the mismatch between analytical and numerical results.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants have not reached a consensus on the cause of the discrepancies in results. There are multiple viewpoints regarding the interpretation of the integral and the implications of the removable singularity.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights potential limitations related to the treatment of singularities in the integral and the assumptions made about the behavior of the exponential integral functions near those points.

divB
Messages
85
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I am struggling for some time to solve the following integral:

$$
\int_{-n}^{N-n} \left( \frac{e^{-j\pi(\alpha-1)\tau}}{\tau} - \frac{e^{-j\pi(\alpha+1)\tau}}{\tau} \right) d\tau
$$

N is a positive integer, n is an integer, \alpha can be a negative or positive rational number.

I want to express it analytically using exponential integrals E_1(z):

$$
\mathrm{E}_1(z) = \int_z^\infty \frac{e^{-t}}{t}\, dt,\qquad|{\rm Arg}(z)|<\pi
$$

In my opinion, the result should just be

$$
E_1(i\pi(\alpha-1)n) - E_1(-i\pi(\alpha-1)(N-n)) - E_1(-i\pi(\alpha+1)n) + E_1(-i\pi(\alpha+1)(N-n))
$$

I compare my analytical results against a numerical evaluation in MATLAB.
I calculate my analytical results by using E_1(z) (expint in MATLAB) and the numerical version by creating a vector and using trapezoidal rule for integration.

Both match for approximately half of my values but the rest is different by absolute values of 1 or 0.5. Sometimes I even get NaN (undefined) values because \alpha will be -1 and 1 at some point and n will be zero at some point. Still, practically this makes no sense and should not happen (it does not happen with the numerical integration too and the result of the numerical integrations is exactly what I expect).

In order to match the results with my numerical integration, I split the integration and leave out the problematic point around zero (\epsilon\rightarrow 0):

$$
E_1(i\pi(\alpha-1)n) - E_1(-i\pi(\alpha-1)\epsilon) + E_1(i\pi(\alpha-1)\epsilon) - E_1(-i\pi(\alpha-1)(N-n))
-E_1(-i\pi(\alpha+1)n)+E_1(-i\pi(\alpha+1)\epsilon)-E_1(i\pi(\alpha+1)\epsilon)+E_1(-i\pi(\alpha+1)(N-n))
$$

I would expect -E_1(-i\pi(\alpha-1)\epsilon) + E_1(i\pi(\alpha-1)\epsilon) and E_1(-i\pi(\alpha+1)\epsilon)-E_1(i\pi(\alpha+1)\epsilon) to be zero. If they would be, numerical and analytical results would match.However, depending on n, they are \pm i\pi (which ultimately results in the wrong result).

Despite the fact the it is a removeable singularity, do I need to care about something special here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm sorry you are not finding help at the moment. Is there any additional information you can share with us?
 
Didn’t get into details, but… you apparently forgot to say that “ j ” is the imaginary unit. If my guess is correct, then the expression under the integral certainly contains sinc function as a factor.
 
Hi Incnis,
Yes, j is the imaginary unit. And yes, it contains some sort of the sinc function. To be precise, I want to integrate parts of the sinc function (this is where my formula comes from in the first place).

I still have no idea why and where I get my mismatch from :( :(

divB
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
6K