Regularizing a divergent integral with a test function or convergence factor

graphicsRat
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I'm trying to understand a paper in which the authors use a number of test functions (are they the same as convergence factors) to make integrate unintegrable functions. Now here is my ignorant question: why is this acceptable? The product of the original function and the test function or convergence factor surely is an entirely new function. Why is the integral of this new function the same as the integral of the old function which I recall was unintegrable? In layperson terms, can we be sure that the integral of the new function is valid and or correct?

Thanks
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
graphicsRat said:
… why is this acceptable?

In layperson terms, can we be sure that the integral of the new function is valid and or correct?

Hi graphicsRat! :smile:

It depends on the context …

usually this is done to a subsidiary integral in the middle of a much larger integration …

there are theorems that tell you whether it's justified or not …

doesn't the paper give any references?
 
tiny-tim said:
It depends on the context …

usually this is done to a subsidiary integral in the middle of a much larger integration …

there are theorems that tell you whether it's justified or not …

doesn't the paper give any references?

Thanks Tim.

No the paper didn't give any references. Which theorems are you referring to? I'd like to look them up. What do you mean by a "subsidiary integral in the middle of a much larger integration"?

I'm sorry to ask so many annoying questions.
 
graphicsRat said:
Which theorems are you referring to?

dunno … i wasn't really concentrating when they went over that boring stuff :redface:
What do you mean by a "subsidiary integral in the middle of a much larger integration"?

in quantum field theory, there are really long integrals, and you can rearrange the order of the variables so as to get some easy integrals in the middle :smile:

(btw, this rearranging involves combinatorial additions of integrals, and Feynman diagrams are what keep track of the different combinations)

but those easy integrals are of functions (technically called "distributions", such as the Dirac delta "function" … see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_(mathematics)) which don't actually converge on their own, because they oscillate, but are ok in the larger integral because the oscillations are "damped down" by the rest of the long integral
 
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...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top