How Do You Evaluate Complex Contour Integrals with Sinusoidal Functions?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on evaluating complex contour integrals involving sinusoidal functions, specifically the integral I(x) defined as I(x)=lim_{T→∞}(1/2πi)∫_{γ-iT}^{γ+iT}sin(nπs)(x^s/s)ds, where n is an integer and γ > 1. The participants analyze two cases based on the value of x: for x > 1, the contour is closed to the left, while for x < 1, it is closed to the right, both yielding I(x) = 0 according to Cauchy's theorem. The challenge lies in demonstrating that three of the integral components tend to zero as T approaches infinity, allowing the fourth component to converge to I(x).

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of complex analysis, particularly contour integration.
  • Familiarity with Cauchy's theorem and its applications in complex integrals.
  • Knowledge of sinusoidal functions and their behavior in complex domains.
  • Experience with limits and asymptotic analysis in mathematical contexts.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of Cauchy's theorem in complex analysis.
  • Learn about the properties of sinusoidal functions in complex integration.
  • Explore techniques for bounding integrals involving complex variables.
  • Investigate the relationship between contour integrals and Laplace transforms.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physicists, and students specializing in complex analysis or those working on advanced calculus problems involving contour integrals and sinusoidal functions.

riemannian
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
greetings , we have the following integral :

[tex]I(x)=\lim_{T\rightarrow \infty}\frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_{\gamma-iT}^{\gamma+iT}\sin(n\pi s)\frac{x^{s}}{s}ds[/tex]

n is an integer . and [itex]\gamma >1[/itex]

if [itex]x>1[/itex] we can close the contour to the left . namely, consider the contour :

[tex]C_{a}=C_{1}\cup C_{2}\cup C_{3}\cup C_{4}[/tex]

where :

[tex]C_{1}=\left [ \gamma-iT,\gamma+iT \right ][/tex]

[tex]C_{2}=\left [ \gamma+iT,-U+iT \right ][/tex]

[tex]C_{3}=\left [ -U+iT ,-U-iT \right ][/tex]

[tex]C_{4}=\left [ -U-iT ,\gamma-iT \right ][/tex]

and [itex]U>>\gamma[/itex]
then by couchy's theorem :

[tex]I(x)=I_{1}+I_{2}+I_{3}+I_{4}=0[/tex]

if [itex]x<1[/itex], we can close the contour to the right via the following contour :

[tex]C_{b}=C_{1}\cup C_{2}\cup C_{3}\cup C_{4}[/tex]

[tex]C_{1}=\left [ \gamma-iT,\gamma+iT \right ][/tex]

[tex]C_{2}=\left [ \gamma+iT,U+iT \right ][/tex]

[tex]C_{3}=\left [ U+iT ,U-iT \right ][/tex]

[tex]C_{4}=\left [ U-iT ,\gamma-iT \right ][/tex]

then also by couchy's theorem :

[tex]I(x)=0[/tex]

the plan is to give an estimate of the integrals along the segments of the rectangular contour, and calculate [itex]I_{1}[/itex] in both cases via the result obtained by cauchy's theorem . however, i don't have the first clue on how to do that, hence the quest !
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
riemannian said:
then by couchy's theorem :
[tex]I(x)=I_{1}+I_{2}+I_{3}+I_{4}=0[/tex]
I don't think you mean that. Yes, by Cauchy, [tex]I_{1}+I_{2}+I_{3}+I_{4}=0[/tex], but the challenge is to show that three of these tend to 0 as T tends to infinity, and therefore the fourth (the one that tends to I(x)) does too.
I got stuck trying to put some bound on sin(s). When s = c+id has a large imaginary component, id, this grows like exp(d). I tried pairing up the negative imaginary points with the positive ones, e.g. doing C3 as the integral from -U to -U+iT of {f(s) - f(complex conjugate of s)}.dt, hoping to get some cancellation. No luck.
 
haruspex said:
I don't think you mean that. Yes, by Cauchy, [tex]I_{1}+I_{2}+I_{3}+I_{4}=0[/tex], but the challenge is to show that three of these tend to 0 as T tends to infinity, and therefore the fourth (the one that tends to I(x)) does too.
I got stuck trying to put some bound on sin(s). When s = c+id has a large imaginary component, id, this grows like exp(d). I tried pairing up the negative imaginary points with the positive ones, e.g. doing C3 as the integral from -U to -U+iT of {f(s) - f(complex conjugate of s)}.dt, hoping to get some cancellation. No luck.

yes, sorry .. it was a typo . and i was trying to do exactly the same , no luck :cry:

remark : the integral of question bears resemblance to the perron's integral, and could be thought of as a laplace inverse of [itex]\frac{\sin(n\pi s)}{s}[/itex], with [itex]\ln x[/itex] as the variable in the 'time' domain.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 71 ·
3
Replies
71
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K