Skip to main content

Timeline for A particular contour integral

Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0

9 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Sep 29, 2013 at 13:56 history edited Alexandre Eremenko CC BY-SA 3.0
added 114 characters in body
Sep 29, 2013 at 4:54 comment added Alexandre Eremenko @Carlo: Yes, for t>0.
Sep 28, 2013 at 13:48 comment added Carlo Beenakker I'm a bit confused: for $t>0$ the integrand is indeed zero, but why would it be zero for $t<0$? Then the contour has to be closed in the lower half-plane, resulting in this sum over residues $r_j$ (which converges for $t<0$).
Sep 28, 2013 at 2:11 comment added Alexandre Eremenko There is no "pole at infinity". Infinity is an essential singularity. But the function under the integral decreases sufficiently fast in the upper half-plane to close the contour.
Sep 28, 2013 at 2:10 comment added Alexandre Eremenko Sorry, 0 is indeed removable. Therefore, the integral is 0.
Sep 28, 2013 at 2:09 history edited Alexandre Eremenko CC BY-SA 3.0
deleted 156 characters in body
Sep 27, 2013 at 19:36 comment added DieLuftDerFreiheit I agree that the contour should be closed in the upper half plane. I now realize that there is a pole at infinity of order 1/2. How do I account for this pole at infinity when summing residues?
Sep 27, 2013 at 19:35 comment added DieLuftDerFreiheit I disagree (or I'm wrong and am confused): the origin is not a pole because $$\lim_{x\to0} \hat F(x) = \frac{-i x e^{i x t}}{1-\sqrt{-i x} \coth(\sqrt{-i x})} = 3$$ Furthermore, in the Taylor series expansion of $\hat F(x)$, the root in the denominator at the origin cancels.
Sep 27, 2013 at 17:16 history answered Alexandre Eremenko CC BY-SA 3.0