What is the role of the principal value in the Cauchy principal value integral?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter McLaren Rulez
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cauchy Value
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the role of the principal value in the Cauchy principal value integral, particularly in the context of complex integrals involving exponential functions. Participants explore theoretical implications, mathematical formulations, and applications in physics.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the origin and meaning of the principal value in the context of the integral involving the complex exponential, noting that the function appears well-defined.
  • Another participant references Plemelj formulas and emphasizes the importance of limits in the interpretation of the integral, suggesting that the equation is symbolic and requires careful handling of limits.
  • A third participant provides a detailed mathematical derivation involving distributions and justifies the use of regularization techniques, mentioning dominated convergence and Fubini's theorem.
  • A later post introduces a new integral problem involving a delta function and an imaginary part, expressing concern over the behavior of the integral as it approaches infinity and questioning how the imaginary part is resolved.
  • Participants express appreciation for the insights shared, indicating that the discussion is helpful in understanding the complexities of the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is no clear consensus on the interpretation of the principal value or the resolution of the imaginary integral. Multiple competing views and interpretations are present, with participants providing different perspectives and approaches.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes unresolved mathematical steps and assumptions regarding the behavior of integrals at infinity, particularly concerning the principal part and its implications in physical contexts.

McLaren Rulez
Messages
289
Reaction score
3
Hi,

I came across this for the first time today.

\int_0^\infty e^{i\omega t}dt = \pi\delta(\omega)+iP(\frac{1}{\omega})

Here P(\frac{1}{\omega}) is the so called principal value. I haven't seen this term normally so can I ask where we get it from?

Googling principal value showed me a very different thing. It said that the principal value of an integral of a function is to take a sum of integrals such that we skip over those values where the function is not well defined. But here, the complex exponential is always well defined so what exactly is the reason for the second term?

Thank you :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Anyone at all?
 
these types of relations are usually referred to as Plemelj formulas. See the end of the article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokhotski–Plemelj_theorem

to understand what it means. Your equation is symbolic, and is missing the fact that you are taking the limit as the imaginary part of \omega goes to zero. These types of relations are used frequently in plasma physics. A more usual form is found by integrating the exponential first to yield:
<br /> \lim_{\epsilon \rightarrow 0^{+}} \frac{1}{x \pm i \epsilon} = P\left(\frac{1}{x}\right) - \pm i \pi \delta(x)<br />

Again, this is symbolic and what it really means is found in the equation under "Version for the real line" in the article I linked.

hope that helped.

jason
 
The equality is meant in the sense of distributions. For \varphi \in C^\infty_c(\mathbf{R}) the equality should be read as
\int_0^\infty \left(\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{\mathrm{i}\omega t}\varphi(\omega)\, \mathrm{d} \omega \right)\mathrm{d} t = \lim_{\epsilon\rightarrow 0} \int_{|\omega|&gt;\epsilon} \mathrm{i}\varphi(\omega)\, \mathrm{d}\omega + \pi \varphi(0).
The result follows from a simple calcuation:
\int_0^\infty \left(\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{\mathrm{i}\omega t}\varphi(\omega)\, \mathrm{d} \omega \right)\mathrm{d} t \overset{1}{=} \lim_{\epsilon\rightarrow 0} \int_0^\infty \left(\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{\mathrm{i}\omega t-\epsilon t}\varphi(\omega)\, \mathrm{d} \omega \right)\mathrm{d} t \overset{2}{=} \lim_{\epsilon\rightarrow 0} \int_{-\infty}^\infty \left( \int_0^\infty e^{\mathrm{i}\omega t-\epsilon t}\, \mathrm{d} t \right) \varphi(\omega)\, \mathrm{d}\omega = \lim_{\epsilon\rightarrow 0} \int_{-\infty}^\infty \frac{\mathrm{i}\varphi(\omega)}{\omega+ \mathrm{i} \epsilon}\, \mathrm{d}\omega.
Now apply Plemelj. In 1 we used a regularisation, which can be justified by dominated convergence (the Fourier transform of a smooth function of compact support is Schwartz, so integrable). In 2 we used Fubini, justified since the double integrable is absolutely integrable for each \epsilon&gt;0.
 
Thank you jasonRF and Anthony. Your replies have been very helpful.
 
Hi,

I wanted to bring this thread back up because I encountered this again. Okay, here's the full problem.

Suppose we have \int^{\infty}_{-\infty}d\omega \int^{\infty}_{0}dt\ e^{-i(\omega-\omega_{a})t}


Here, \omega_{a} is a constant. We write this as \lim_{\epsilon\to 0} \int^{\infty}_{-\infty}d\omega \int^{\infty}_{0}dt\ e^{-i(\omega-\omega_{a}-i\epsilon)t}


Now the time integral yields, \lim_{\epsilon\to 0}\frac{\epsilon}{\epsilon^{2}+(\omega - \omega_{a})^{2}} - i\frac{(\omega-\omega_{a})}{(\omega-\omega_{a})^{2}+\epsilon^{2}}


The first part is a delta function and that part I have no trouble with. The imaginary part however is still troubling me. I still have to do the omega integral. The main problem is that it blows up. One author has even expressed it as \int^{\infty}_{-\infty}d\omega\frac{1}{\omega-\omega_{a}}

Doesn't this principal part blow up? Yet, there is an expression (and a physical Lamb shift) associated with this part of the integral. How is the imaginary integral solved?

Thank you for your help!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K