Solve Delta Integral: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} ln(x+3) \delta (x+2) dx

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter SpY]
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Delta Integral
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the evaluation of integrals involving the Dirac delta function, specifically focusing on the integral of the logarithmic function multiplied by the delta function. Participants explore the properties of the delta function, its implications in integrals, and raise questions about more complex scenarios involving delta functions.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the evaluation of the integral \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} ln(x+3) \delta (x+2) \, dx and suggests that without the delta function, the integral is straightforward using substitution.
  • Another participant argues that the integral without the delta function lacks meaning due to the logarithm being undefined for certain values of x, but states that the delta function simplifies the evaluation to log(-2 + 3) = 0.
  • Questions arise about the treatment of integrals when the delta function is involved, particularly when factors of x differ between the function and the delta function.
  • Participants discuss the implications of finite limits on integrals involving the delta function, stating that if the point x_0 lies within the limits, the integral evaluates to f(x_0), otherwise it is zero.
  • There is a discussion about the general form of integrals involving the delta function and how to relate variables when the delta function is expressed in a different form.
  • One participant introduces the concept of higher-order delta functions and questions their evaluation, leading to a clarification that multiplying delta functions is not well-defined and can lead to meaningless results.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the interpretation and evaluation of integrals involving the delta function, particularly regarding the treatment of limits and the implications of higher-order delta functions. No consensus is reached on some of the more complex scenarios presented.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the limitations of the delta function and its properties, emphasizing that the delta function is a distribution rather than a conventional function, which complicates certain mathematical manipulations.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and practitioners in physics and mathematics who are exploring the properties of the Dirac delta function and its applications in integrals.

SpY]
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
I'm not even sure if that's the right name, but my question is when you have a [tex]\delta[/tex] under the integral.

For example,
[tex]\int\limits_{-\infty}^{\infty} ln(x+3) \delta (x+2) \, dx[/tex]

Without the [tex]\delta[/tex] the integral is easy enough (I think) using a u-substitution (u=x+3) then it is [tex](x+3) \ln (x+3) - (x+3) +C[/tex] but I don't know between the limits..
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Actually, without the delta-function, the integral is not "simple", because it doesn't have meaning! (the logarithm is not defined for x < -3). Ignoring this, the integral would be even more simple: the delta-function has the property:

[tex]\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}f(x)\delta(x-x_0)=f(x_0)[/tex]

so your integral is log(-2 + 3) = 0.
 
So in general you just take the function f of the sum of the things in brackets, where the second must be in the form [tex](x-x_0)[/tex] and ignore the x. But that brings two questions:

1. If you have a factor for x which are different for the f and the delta, like say nx or [tex]x^m[/tex] ?

2. It looks like the integral limits don't affect anything except as a definition of the above property, but what happens if you have finite limits? For example

[tex] \int_{a}^{b}f(x)\delta(x-x_0)= ?[/tex]
 
Last edited:
1) I don't understand this question.

2) if x_0 belongs to the interval [a,b], then the integral is f(x_0), otherwise it's zero.
 
SpY];2842300 said:
So in general you just take the function f of the sum of the things in brackets, where the second must be in the form [tex](x-x_0)[/tex] and ignore the x. But that brings two questions:

1. If you have a factor for x which are different for the f and the delta, like say nx or [tex]x^m[/tex] ?
Do you mean something like [itex]\int x^n \delta(x- a)dx[/itex]. That's no different. x- a= 0 when x= a so the integeral is [itex]a^n[/itex]. If you have, say [itex]\int f(x)\delta(g(x))dx[/itex], where f(x) and g(x) can be any reasonable functions, then its a bit more complicated. The integral will be [itex]\sum f(x_i)[/itex] where the sum over all [itex]x_i[/itex] within the interval of integration such that [itex]g(x_i)= 0[/itex].

2. It looks like the integral limits don't affect anything except as a definition of the above property, but what happens if you have finite limits? For example

[tex] \int_{a}^{b}f(x)\delta(x-x_0)= ?[/tex]
[itex]\int_a^b f(x)\delta(x-x_0)dx= f(x_0)[/itex] if [itex]a\le x_0\le b[/itex], 0 otherwise.
 
Sorry I didn't give an example for 1, but what I meant is if you have a general form [tex]\int_{a}^{b} f(x) \delta (mx^n + c)[/tex]
how do you relate your [tex]x[/tex] and [tex]x - x_0[/tex]?

Will the integral be non-zero if [tex]-c \in \[ a,b \][/tex] and the result just be [tex]f(mx^n)[/tex]?

So that's basically asking if its also linear; if
[tex]\delta (x+2) = \delta x \plus \delta 2[/tex] and
[tex]\delta 3x = 3 \delta x[/tex]
 
Last edited:
HallsofIvy said:
If you have, say [itex]\int f(x)\delta(g(x))dx[/itex], where f(x) and g(x) can be any reasonable functions, then its a bit more complicated. The integral will be [itex]\sum f(x_i)[/itex] where the sum over all [itex]x_i[/itex] within the interval of integration such that [itex]g(x_i)= 0[/itex].

You missed writing a factor of [itex]1/|g'(x_i)|[/itex] in the sum. It should be

[tex]\int_a^b dx f(x)\delta(g(x)) = \sum_i \frac{f(x_i)}{|g'(x_i)|}[/tex]
where the x_i are the values of x in the interval [itex]a \leq x \leq b[/itex] such that [itex]g(x_i) = 0[/itex], so long as g'(x_i) is non-zero.

For the OP, this answers your question: g(x) = mx^n + c, so the x_i are [itex]x_i = (-c/m)^{1/n}[/itex] when they are real. g'(x) = mnx^(n-1), so for all real x_i in the inteval, you get

[tex]\sum_i \frac{f(x_i)}{|mn x_i^{n-1}|}[/tex]
 
Looks to me the OP is missing the whole concept of the delta function. It's a limiting process of a set of functions which tend to a particular form as some parameter is varied. First study the Wikipedia reference:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_delta_function

then re-interpret your integral from that perspective. In fact I think it would be a good exercise to numerically compute the integral for various cases, say let a go from 1 to 1/20 for appropriate choice of the sequence of functions which tend to delta and then show how the integral tends to f(x_0): I'll leave interpretation of the following Mathematica code to the interested reader where I used log(x+5) so it's different from zero.

Code:
mydelta[a_, x_] := Exp[-(x^2/a^2)]/
    (a*Sqrt[Pi]); 

mytable = Table[
   {a, Re[NIntegrate[Log[x + 5]*
       mydelta[a, x + 2], {x, -100, -5, 
       100}, Method -> 
       "PrincipalValue"]]}, 
   {a, 1/20, 1, 1/20}]

myval = Log[3]; 

Show[{ListPlot[mytable, Joined -> True], 
   Graphics[{Red, Line[{{0, myval}, 
       {1, myval}}]}]}]
 
Last edited:
Thanks that helps a lot

My only other question is a solution for higher order delta function integrals
[tex]\int f(x) {\delta}^3 d^3 x[/tex]
 
  • #10
SpY];2843085 said:
Thanks that helps a lot

My only other question is a solution for higher order delta function integrals
[tex]\int f(x) {\delta}^3 d^3 x[/tex]
And that is simply f(0, 0, 0).
 
  • #11
SpY];2843085 said:
Thanks that helps a lot

My only other question is a solution for higher order delta function integrals
[tex]\int f(x) {\delta}^3 d^3 x[/tex]

What do you mean by "[itex]\delta^3[/itex]"? You need to write the arguments. Typically one uses the notation [itex]\delta^3(\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{x}_0)[/itex] to mean the 3d dirac delta function [itex]\delta(x-x_0)\delta(y-y_0)\delta(z-z_0)[/itex]. This is what HallsofIvy took your question to mean. However, it seems to me like you're asking about the actual cube of a delta function: [itex][\delta(x-x_0)]^3[/itex]. The answer to this interpretation is that the delta function is not an actual function. It is a "distribution" or "generalized function", and multiplying distributions is typically not well defined. So, the answer to your question is that your integral has no meaning. If you use the property of the delta function on your integral you find

[tex]\int dx f(x)[\delta(x-x_0)]^3 = f(x_0)[\delta(0)]^2[/tex]
which is meaningless unless regulated somehow (e.g., using a limiting process like jackmell described, in which case the integral would likely diverge). The delta function really only exists properly inside of integrals.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K