Integration above or below axis

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter TheCanadian
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Axis Integration
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
2 replies · 2K views
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: 644
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