Modified Bessel function with imaginary index is purely real?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on whether the modified Bessel function K_{i β}(x) is purely real when both β and x are real. The initial reasoning suggests that the complex conjugate of K_{i β}(x) equals K_{i β}(x), indicating it should be real. However, Mathematica indicates that K is imaginary for x < 0, leading to confusion. The participant realizes that their first equality, asserting that the complex conjugate is simply K_{-i β}(x), is incorrect. This indicates a need for a deeper understanding of the properties of the modified Bessel functions in relation to their arguments.
perishingtardi
Messages
21
Reaction score
1
I'm trying to decide if the modified Bessel function K_{i \beta}(x) is purely real when \beta and x are purely real. I think that is ought to be. My reasoning is the following:

\left (K_{i \beta}(x)\right)^* = K_{-i \beta}(x) = \frac{\pi}{2} \frac{I_{i \beta}(x) - I_{-i \beta}(x)}{\sin(-i \beta\pi)} = \frac{\pi}{2} \frac{I_{i \beta}(x) - I_{-i \beta}(x)}{-\sin(i \beta\pi)} = \frac{\pi}{2} \frac{I_{-i \beta}(x) - I_{i \beta}(x)}{\sin(i \beta\pi)} = K_{i \beta}(x).

I have used here the fact that sine is an odd function and the definition of the K function in terms of the I function. So it seems that the complex conjugate of K is K itself in this case.However, Mathematica is telling me that K is imaginary if x&lt;0. Have I made a mistake somewhere? Thanks
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I think I know what the problem is. The first equality is wrong, i.e., \left( K_{i \beta}(x) \right)^* is not simply K_{-i\beta}(x).
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top