Integrating Complicated Vector Integral using the Residue Theorem

  • Thread starter Thread starter MadMax
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integral Vector
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a complex vector integral involving the residue theorem, specifically focusing on the integration of a function with a complicated numerator and denominator. The original poster expresses difficulty in simplifying the integral using spherical polar coordinates and is exploring alternative methods, including contour integration.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to simplify the integral using spherical coordinates but encounters complications with partial fractions and singularities. They consider using contour integration as an alternative approach. Other participants suggest examining the numerator and denominator for common factors and discuss the transformation to a contour integral, raising questions about the properties of the contour, such as its radius and orientation.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring various methods and raising questions about the application of the residue theorem and contour integration. Some guidance has been offered regarding the transformation to a contour integral, but no consensus has been reached on the best approach.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of the integral and the implications of using different integration techniques. There is an acknowledgment of potential singularities and the need for careful consideration of the contour used in the integration process.

MadMax
Messages
98
Reaction score
0
How would you tackle this?

[tex]\int \frac{db^3}{(2 \pi)^3} \frac{2K^4 - a^2 b^2 + (a \cdot b)^2}{2K^2 b^2 + b^4 + b^2a^2 / 2 - (a \cdot b)^2 + A}[/tex]

The way I tried was expressing the whole thing in spherical polar coords, setting a_z parallel to b, and then carrying out the angular parts of the integration. Unfortunately this involved quite a few partial fractions... This in turn led to complicated logs popping up all over the place. Also there were some obvious singularities which came out, (which would be canceled out by singularities hidden in the log terms). Then would come the scary task of integrating that mess over the non angular dimension... In a word "yuck"...

Can't help thinking that I'm missing a trick, or that there is a better way to tackle it.

EDIT: Hmmm I've just had an idea. I'll try to tackle the angular integral not as a standard integral, but instead using contour integration... I'll keep you posted.

Still any ideas/hints/suggestions would be much appreciated. Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
hmm nevermind...
 
Last edited:
numerator and denominator might have some common facton if you go into binomial expressions

can't get it though...
 
OK I think I found a method in some textbooks by which it can be done: "The residue theorem".

An example relevant for the angular part of the integration I'm considering is

[tex]\int^{2 \pi} _{0} F(\cos{\theta}, \sin{\theta}) d \theta[/tex]

We use the subtitution

[tex]z=e^{i \theta}[/tex]

But why does the integral become a contour integral, where the contour is the unit circle centred around the origin?

Presumably if we were integrating from 0 to pi, the contour would be a cemi-circle? But which plane would we use? Upper or lower, or is it right hand or left hand? Also why is it of unit radius? Why would it be incorrect to have the radius of the contour larger or smaller?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
5K