Integration above or below axis

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter TheCanadian
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Axis Integration
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the integration of functions with complex poles along contours in the upper or lower half-plane. It is established that the choice of contour affects the outcome of the integral, particularly when applying Jordan's lemma. Specifically, for functions of the form ##f(z) = e^{iaz} g(z)##, where ##a## is a non-zero real constant, the sign of ##a## dictates which semicircle to close. Additionally, the behavior of the function ##g(z)## is crucial in determining whether the integral over the semicircular arc vanishes.

PREREQUISITES
  • Complex analysis fundamentals
  • Understanding of contour integration
  • Jordan's lemma application
  • Properties of functions with complex poles
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of Jordan's lemma in various contexts
  • Explore the behavior of functions with complex poles
  • Learn about residue theorem and its implications in contour integration
  • Investigate the conditions under which integrals over arcs vanish
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physicists, and students of complex analysis seeking to deepen their understanding of contour integration and the implications of complex poles on integral outcomes.

TheCanadian
Messages
361
Reaction score
13
If you are trying to find the integral of a function with a complex pole on the real axis (i.e. ##[-\infty,\infty]##) via analytic continuation, does it matter if you integrate along a contour either in the upper-half plane or lower-half plane? I was under the assumption that either approach was equivalent. For example, if you have a pole at ## a + ib##, where ##a## and ##b## are positive constants, and take your contour to be a semicircle with radius out to infinity, so that by Jordan's lemma that component of the integral goes to 0, then shouldn't either approach (i.e. top half or bottom half of a circle) give you the same answer? It seems that I am missing or incorrectly assuming something obvious here.

(I've attached an image that attempts to depict what I tried to explain above.)
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2017-12-17 at 6.14.33 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2017-12-17 at 6.14.33 PM.png
    69.2 KB · Views: 633
Physics news on Phys.org
The integral over your arcs doesn’t vanish with that function unless f(x) has some special properties (that will lead to additional poles).

1/x (here: 1/r) is not sufficient as the length of the arcs scales with r and r/r=1 doesn’t converge to 0 for r to infinity.
 
To be more specific, Jordan’s lemma applies to functions that can be written on the form ##f(z) = e^{iaz} g(z)## with ##a## real and non zero. The sign of ##a## determines which half circle you close and the behaviour of ##g## determines whether or not the integral over that half circle vanishes.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: TheCanadian and mfb

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K