Residue Theorem, Contour Integration, and the Cauchy Principal Value

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of the residue theorem and contour integration, specifically focusing on the Cauchy Principal Value for two integrals. The original poster presents two parts: one involving an integral over the real line and another over a closed contour in the complex plane. The context includes exploring the correctness of their solutions and seeking clarification on certain aspects of the methods used.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to evaluate two integrals using contour integration and the residue theorem, raising questions about the correctness of their solutions and the application of the theorem. Participants discuss the necessity of converting the second integral into a closed contour and the implications of the integration limits on the contour's direction.

Discussion Status

Some participants provide feedback on the original poster's approaches, indicating that the first integral appears correct while suggesting a different method for the second integral. There is an exploration of the contour integration technique, particularly regarding how to handle poles and the principal value. The discussion is ongoing, with participants clarifying concepts and confirming understanding.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of excluding poles from the contour and the implications of the integration limits on the contour's direction. There is mention of the need for careful consideration of the residues involved in the calculations.

DivGradCurl
Messages
364
Reaction score
0
Hi Folks,

I worked out a couple of problems on finding the Cauchy Principal Value, and I would like to check whether my solutions are correct and also take the opportunity to ask a couple of general questions about the residue theorem, contour integration, and the Cauchy principal value. The post looks long, but there are just a few, small questions. I did most of the work. Please help! Many thanks.

Homework Statement



Part (a) Integrate:

[tex]{\mathcal P.V.} \int_{-\infty} ^{\infty} \frac{ \exp( -2\pi\, i\, \xi \, x ) }{4\pi ^2 \xi ^2 - k^2} \, d\xi[/tex]

Part (b) Integrate:

[tex]{\mathcal P.V.} \int_{-\pi} ^{\pi} \frac{e^{in\theta} }{\cos \theta} \, d\theta[/tex]

Homework Equations



N/A

The Attempt at a Solution



Part (a) Integrate:


[tex]{\mathcal P.V.} \int_{-\infty} ^{\infty} \frac{ \exp( -2\pi\, i\, \xi \, x ) }{4\pi ^2 \xi ^2 - k^2} \, d\xi[/tex]

Choosing a semicircle contour of radius R and taking the limit as R goes to infinity, and also letting

[tex]\xi = R\, e^{i\theta}[/tex]

gives:

[tex]{\mathcal P.V.} \int_{-\infty} ^{\infty} \frac{ \exp( -2\pi\, i\, \xi \, x ) }{4\pi ^2 \left( \xi - \frac{k}{2\pi} \right) \left( \xi + \frac{k}{2\pi} \right) } \, d\xi = \left( \pi i \mbox{ }\sum _j \mbox{ Res}_j \right) + \lim _{R \to \infty} \int _0 ^\pi \left( d\theta i\, R \, e^{i\theta} \right) \frac{\displaystyle e^{-i\, 2\pi \, x \, R \, \cos \theta} e^{2\pi \, x \, R \, \sin \theta} }{\displaystyle 4\pi ^2 \left( R^2 e^{i\, 2\, \theta} - \frac{k^2}{4\pi^2} \right)}[/tex]

[tex]= \pi i \left[ \frac{\displaystyle \left( \frac{1}{4\pi^2} \right) \, e^{-ikx} }{\displaystyle \frac{k}{\pi}} + \frac{\displaystyle \left( \frac{1}{4\pi^2} \right) \, e^{ikx} }{\displaystyle \left( -\frac{k}{\pi} \right) } \right] + 0 = \frac{1}{2k} \sin (kx)[/tex]

As there is always a decaying exponential associated with R, regardless of whether x > 0 or x < 0; and 1/R behaviour is observed for x = 0.

3a. My Questions

- Is the above correct?
- Why do we multiply the residues by (pi * i) instead of (2*pi * i) as prescribed by the residue theorem? It seems to be the correct approach to do when the integration is along the real line, but I don't understand why.

Part (b) Integrate:

[tex]{\mathcal P.V.} \int_{-\pi} ^{\pi} \frac{e^{in\theta} }{\cos \theta} \, d\theta[/tex]

[tex]= {\mathcal P.V.} \int_{-\pi} ^{\pi} \frac{ \left( e^{i\theta} \right) ^n }{ \displaystyle \frac{1}{2} \left( e^{i\theta} + \frac{1}{e^{i\theta}} \right) } \, d\theta = {\mathcal P.V.} \mbox{ }\frac{2}{i} \, \int_{-\pi} ^{\pi} \frac{ z ^n }{ \displaystyle \frac{1}{2} \left( z + \frac{1}{z } \right)} \frac{dz}{iz} = {\mathcal P.V.} \mbox{ }\frac{2}{i} \, \int_{-\pi} ^{\pi} \frac{ z ^n }{z^2 + 1} \, dz[/tex]

[tex]= \frac{2}{i} \, \left( \pi i \mbox{ }\sum _j \mbox{ Res}_j \right) + \frac{2}{i} \, \lim _{R \to \infty} \int _0 ^{\pi} \frac{ \left( R \, e^{i\theta} \right) ^n }{ \left( R \, e^{i\theta} \right) ^2 + 1 } \, \left( i\, R \, e^{i\theta} \, d\theta \right)[/tex]

[tex]= \frac{2}{i} \, \left\{ \pi i \left[ \frac{i^n}{2i} + \frac{(-i)^n}{(-2i)} \right] \right\} + \frac{2}{i} \, \lim _{R \to \infty} \int _0 ^{\pi} \frac{ \left( R \, e^{i\theta} \right) ^n }{ \left( R \, e^{i\theta} \right) ^2 + 1 } \, \left( i\, R \, e^{i\theta} \, d\theta \right)[/tex]

[tex]= \frac{\pi}{i} \left[ i^n - (-i)^n \right] + 0[/tex]

3b. My Questions and comments

- Mathematica can integrate the one above; it matches my answer upon evaluation as a function of n, but it is cast in a slightly different way:
Code:
2 \[Pi] Sin[(n \[Pi])/2] + (HarmonicNumber[1/4 (-3 + n)] - HarmonicNumber[1/4 (-1 + n)]) Sin[n \[Pi]]
- How can I claim the second integral indeed goes to 0? Here is my best shot:

[tex]\lim _{R \to \infty} \frac{ \left( R \, e^{i\theta} \right) ^n }{ \left( R \, e^{i\theta} \right) ^2 + 1 } \, \left( i\, R \, e^{i\theta} \right) = \lim _{R \to \infty} \frac{ \left( R \, e^{i\theta} \right) ^n }{ \left( R \, e^{i\theta} \right) ^2 + 1 } \, \left( i\, R \, e^{i\theta} \right) = i \, \lim _{R \to \infty} \frac{R^{n+1} \, e^{i\theta} }{R^2 \, e^{i\, 2\theta} + 1} = i \, \lim _{R \to \infty} \frac{1}{\displaystyle \frac{R^2 \, e^{i\, 2\theta}}{R^{n+1} \, e^{i\theta}} + \frac{1}{R^{n+1} \, e^{i\theta}}} = i \, \lim _{R \to \infty} \frac{1}{\displaystyle \frac{A}{B} + C }[/tex]

I take 3 cases for the above, namely:

i) (n+1) < 2, where I get

[tex]C = 0[/tex]
[tex](A/B) \to \infty[/tex]

making the fraction go to zero

ii) (n+1) > 2, where I get

[tex]C = 0[/tex]
[tex](A/B) \to 0[/tex]

making the fraction go to 1/0 = undefined

iii) (n+1) = 2, where I get

[tex]C = 0[/tex]
[tex]A/B = e^{i(2-n)\theta}[/tex]

making the integrand go to

[tex]ie^{i(n-2)\theta}[/tex]


So, it appears that only for (n+1) < 2 the integral can be done. I might have something wrong; can someone help?

THANKS!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
First one looks ok. In regards to an integral over an indentation around a simple pole and the radius goes to zero, that's equal to [itex]\theta i r[/itex] where [itex]\theta[/itex] is the angle substended and r is the residue. So if you go around it in a half-cirlcle in the positive sense, it's just [itex]\pi i r[/itex]. Need to check out the theorem about that in the book.

I think the second one should be converted to a closed contour. Don't know where you're getting that infinite integral but don't need it. This is how I'd do it:

[tex] P.V\int_{-\pi}^{\pi} \frac{e^{itn}}{\cos(t)}dt=-2i\; P.V \mathop\oint\limits_{|z|=1} \frac{z^n}{z^2+1}[/tex]

Now, to extract the principal value from that, I'll indent the contour inward, around each pole so that the contour does not include them. That means we're going around the poles in the negative sense so that:

[tex]P.V \oint \frac{z^n}{z^2+1}=\pi i(r_1+r_2)[/tex]

Finding the residues, I get:

[tex] \begin{align*}<br /> P.V\int_{-\pi}^{\pi} \frac{e^{itn}}{\cos(t)}dt&=-2i\; P.V \mathop\oint\limits_{|z|=1} \frac{z^n}{z^2+1}\\<br /> &=2\pi\left[\frac{i^{n-1}}{2}\left(1-(-1)^{n-1}\right)\right]\\<br /> &=\begin{cases}<br /> 0 && n=0\\<br /> 0 && n \quad\text{even} \\<br /> 2\pi i^{n-1} && n\quad\text{odd}<br /> \end{cases}<br /> \end{align*}[/tex]
 
Last edited:
Thanks for your response, jackmell. I think I understand what you said
jackmell said:
I think the second one should be converted to a closed contour. Don't know where you're getting that infinite integral but don't need it.

Please correct me if I'm wrong:

Because the integration limits are [itex]-\pi[/itex] to [itex]\pi[/itex], we have a counter-clockwise directed, closed contour that is an indented unit circle to exclude poles at [itex]\pm i[/itex]. That's why we only have one integral to analyze, were its value is [itex]\pi i \sum (\mbox{ residues at } z = \pm i)[/itex]. From that point, I get the same numerical answer as you.
 
DivGradCurl said:
Thanks for your response, jackmell. I think I understand what you said


Please correct me if I'm wrong:

Because the integration limits are [itex]-\pi[/itex] to [itex]\pi[/itex], we have a counter-clockwise directed, closed contour that is an indented unit circle to exclude poles at [itex]\pm i[/itex]. That's why we only have one integral to analyze, were its value is [itex]\pi i \sum (\mbox{ residues at } z = \pm i)[/itex]. From that point, I get the same numerical answer as you.

Correct. Same concept for an equilateral triangle at the origin:

[tex]P.V.\mathop\oint\limits_{\begin{array}{c}\text{my}\\ \text{triangle}\end{array}} \frac{dz}{(z-1)(z+1)(z-i\sqrt{3})}=\pi/3 i(r_1+r_2+r_3)[/tex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K