Showing Alternative Methods for Solving Problems

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Shevchenko
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around alternative methods for solving a specific integral problem without using Fourier transformation techniques. Participants explore various mathematical approaches, including complex contour integration and other potential methods.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant requests a solution to an integral problem without using Fourier transformation methods.
  • Another participant inquires about the use of complex contour integration as a potential method.
  • A participant expresses unfamiliarity with complex contour integration and asks for a solution, indicating a lack of prior knowledge.
  • One participant offers hints instead of a complete solution, emphasizing the importance of showing effort and prior work in problem-solving.
  • A participant describes their approach using the cosine function expressed in terms of exponential functions and mentions difficulty in evaluating the resulting integral.
  • Another participant states that the indefinite integral cannot be expressed in terms of elementary functions and suggests that contour integration might be the only viable method, while also mentioning uncertainty about Fourier transforms.
  • A further reply suggests changing the limits of integration and using properties of even functions, proposing a connection to Fourier transform pairs while questioning the restriction against using Fourier techniques.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing levels of familiarity with the methods discussed, and there is no consensus on the best approach to solve the integral without using Fourier transformation techniques. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the most effective method to proceed.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the applicability of Fourier transforms and contour integration, indicating limitations in their understanding of these methods. There are also unresolved mathematical steps related to the integral evaluation.

Shevchenko
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
show that (don't use Fourier-Transformation method):
 

Attachments

  • integration.JPG
    integration.JPG
    2.8 KB · Views: 442
Physics news on Phys.org
Do you know complex contour integration?
 
i don't know about complex contour integration
can u show me the solution
 
No, I'll give you hints but I can't give the complete solution. What method are you supposed to use?
 
Shevchenko said:
i don't know about complex contour integration

What do you know then?

Shevchenko said:
can u show me the solution

We don't just give out solutions here. You have to show some work. Show us what you've tried, where you are stuck and why. You'll get much more help if we are convinced you're putting effort into this.
 
i used
cos ax=.(e^ajx + e^-ajx)/2 ,where lambda=a
then i put
jax=u at the first positive part
i got the following integration
a/2j int[(e^u)/(a^4-u^2)] respect to u
i stopped here : i can't evaluate this integral by parts
give me the name of method here only
thanks for helping
 
The indefinite integral cannot be (finitely) expressed in terms of elementary functions. I can't really think of a way to do this besides contour integration. Fourier transforms might work, although I'm not exactly sure how, and I can't imagine why you wouldn't be allowed to use them if they did give the answer. Maybe someone else has some ideas.
 
Your integrand is even, so you can change the limits of integration to (-infinity,infinity) and take half this value. Then replace cos(lambda*x) with exp(i*lambda*x), the imaginary part will be zero from symmetry. You can then write this in terms of a common Fourier transfom pair that could be looked up on a table or derived, see the "Exponential Function" on the table in http://mathworld.wolfram.com/FourierTransform.html.

One direction can be derived easily with some basic calculus(going from f(x) to F(k) in the table), but the other direction is the one you need unless you can invoke something to do with inverse Fourier transforms. I'm not sure how to derive this direction without using contour integration (or inverting Fourier transforms). Why must you avoid Fourier transform techniques?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
12K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K