NanakiXIII
- 391
- 0
I'm trying to show that the propagator for spacelike separation decays like e^{-m r} and I'm stuck. At some point I hit the integral
<br /> \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{dk}{\sqrt{k^2 + m^2}} e^{i k r}.<br />
Integration of complex functions not being my forte, I only managed to get to this point using provided answers, but I don't understand the next step. Apparently the above integral is equal to
<br /> 2 \int_0^{\infty} dy e^{-(y+m) r} \frac{1}{\sqrt{(y+m)^2 - m^2}},<br />
where the substitution k = i(m+y) has been made. Now there are several things I don't understand. Firstly, I see how the integrand has changed, but since the integrand is not an even function of k or y, how is it possible to change the integration limits to 0 and \infty? Secondly, shouldn't the integration now be along the complex axis, i.e. shouldn't the upper limit be i \infty, due to the i in the substitution? Finally, there is also a bit of text where the author says the integrand has a branch cut going from i m to i \infty, and one has to fold the contour of the integral around this cut. I don't see what that cut has to do with anything whatsoever, or exactly what contour he is using.
Could someone help me along with this? I think I understand the rest of the derivation, this is the last link I need.
<br /> \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{dk}{\sqrt{k^2 + m^2}} e^{i k r}.<br />
Integration of complex functions not being my forte, I only managed to get to this point using provided answers, but I don't understand the next step. Apparently the above integral is equal to
<br /> 2 \int_0^{\infty} dy e^{-(y+m) r} \frac{1}{\sqrt{(y+m)^2 - m^2}},<br />
where the substitution k = i(m+y) has been made. Now there are several things I don't understand. Firstly, I see how the integrand has changed, but since the integrand is not an even function of k or y, how is it possible to change the integration limits to 0 and \infty? Secondly, shouldn't the integration now be along the complex axis, i.e. shouldn't the upper limit be i \infty, due to the i in the substitution? Finally, there is also a bit of text where the author says the integrand has a branch cut going from i m to i \infty, and one has to fold the contour of the integral around this cut. I don't see what that cut has to do with anything whatsoever, or exactly what contour he is using.
Could someone help me along with this? I think I understand the rest of the derivation, this is the last link I need.