Contour Integration and Branch Cuts












13












$begingroup$


I have a embarrassingly simple question. For some reason I haven't really studied complex before and I'm suffering under this now. I need to evaluate contour integrals of multi-valued functions and I'm confused about a few details (the standard examples in the textbooks avoid the difficulties I encounter with my integrals). Let me take some examples from the paper arXiv:1008.5194 (see pages 53-54).



There they want to evaluate the integral
$$oint_{|omega|=x}domega:(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4}$$
enter image description here



where $xin]0,1[$ and they get
$$(-1+e^{-ifrac{3pi}2})int_0^xdomega:(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4}.$$
(Which is essentially the integral representation of hypergeometric functions). Since the integrand is multi-valued and has branch points at $omega = 0, x, 1$ we should probably make a branch cut on the positive real axis. If I naively deform the contour into a line from $x$ to $0$ above the real axis and a line from $0$ to $x$ below the real axis, I seem to get the right result. But that can't be correct; due to the branch cut the circle is not closed and we need to cross the cut several times to get back to the original Riemann sheet and close the contour. But when I do this, taking into account the phases accumulated while going around the Riemann surface, I don't get the correct result. How is this done right?



Another example is
$$oint_{|omega|=1}domega:(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4} = (1-e^{-ifrac{3pi}2})int_1^{infty}domega:(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4}.$$
Here I don't get the result, even with the "naive way" and I don't understand why the integration should be over the interval $]1,infty[$.





UPDATE: Sasha gave a very good answer and his solution seems to be correct, it agrees with numerical calculation. But it's different from what the paper finds and I think the paper is correct, so is there another non-equivalent way of interpreting the contour? Or might there be a problem in this (and lots of other) papers...?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    The general idea is to ensure your contour doesn't cross the cut. Have your contour start and finish at the cut. For instance, if you're taking a circular contour and the cut is the negative real axis, $-rexp(it)$ would be the contour to use along with the interval $(0,2pi)$.
    $endgroup$
    – J. M. is not a mathematician
    Nov 4 '11 at 17:19


















13












$begingroup$


I have a embarrassingly simple question. For some reason I haven't really studied complex before and I'm suffering under this now. I need to evaluate contour integrals of multi-valued functions and I'm confused about a few details (the standard examples in the textbooks avoid the difficulties I encounter with my integrals). Let me take some examples from the paper arXiv:1008.5194 (see pages 53-54).



There they want to evaluate the integral
$$oint_{|omega|=x}domega:(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4}$$
enter image description here



where $xin]0,1[$ and they get
$$(-1+e^{-ifrac{3pi}2})int_0^xdomega:(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4}.$$
(Which is essentially the integral representation of hypergeometric functions). Since the integrand is multi-valued and has branch points at $omega = 0, x, 1$ we should probably make a branch cut on the positive real axis. If I naively deform the contour into a line from $x$ to $0$ above the real axis and a line from $0$ to $x$ below the real axis, I seem to get the right result. But that can't be correct; due to the branch cut the circle is not closed and we need to cross the cut several times to get back to the original Riemann sheet and close the contour. But when I do this, taking into account the phases accumulated while going around the Riemann surface, I don't get the correct result. How is this done right?



Another example is
$$oint_{|omega|=1}domega:(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4} = (1-e^{-ifrac{3pi}2})int_1^{infty}domega:(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4}.$$
Here I don't get the result, even with the "naive way" and I don't understand why the integration should be over the interval $]1,infty[$.





UPDATE: Sasha gave a very good answer and his solution seems to be correct, it agrees with numerical calculation. But it's different from what the paper finds and I think the paper is correct, so is there another non-equivalent way of interpreting the contour? Or might there be a problem in this (and lots of other) papers...?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    The general idea is to ensure your contour doesn't cross the cut. Have your contour start and finish at the cut. For instance, if you're taking a circular contour and the cut is the negative real axis, $-rexp(it)$ would be the contour to use along with the interval $(0,2pi)$.
    $endgroup$
    – J. M. is not a mathematician
    Nov 4 '11 at 17:19
















13












13








13


4



$begingroup$


I have a embarrassingly simple question. For some reason I haven't really studied complex before and I'm suffering under this now. I need to evaluate contour integrals of multi-valued functions and I'm confused about a few details (the standard examples in the textbooks avoid the difficulties I encounter with my integrals). Let me take some examples from the paper arXiv:1008.5194 (see pages 53-54).



There they want to evaluate the integral
$$oint_{|omega|=x}domega:(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4}$$
enter image description here



where $xin]0,1[$ and they get
$$(-1+e^{-ifrac{3pi}2})int_0^xdomega:(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4}.$$
(Which is essentially the integral representation of hypergeometric functions). Since the integrand is multi-valued and has branch points at $omega = 0, x, 1$ we should probably make a branch cut on the positive real axis. If I naively deform the contour into a line from $x$ to $0$ above the real axis and a line from $0$ to $x$ below the real axis, I seem to get the right result. But that can't be correct; due to the branch cut the circle is not closed and we need to cross the cut several times to get back to the original Riemann sheet and close the contour. But when I do this, taking into account the phases accumulated while going around the Riemann surface, I don't get the correct result. How is this done right?



Another example is
$$oint_{|omega|=1}domega:(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4} = (1-e^{-ifrac{3pi}2})int_1^{infty}domega:(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4}.$$
Here I don't get the result, even with the "naive way" and I don't understand why the integration should be over the interval $]1,infty[$.





UPDATE: Sasha gave a very good answer and his solution seems to be correct, it agrees with numerical calculation. But it's different from what the paper finds and I think the paper is correct, so is there another non-equivalent way of interpreting the contour? Or might there be a problem in this (and lots of other) papers...?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




I have a embarrassingly simple question. For some reason I haven't really studied complex before and I'm suffering under this now. I need to evaluate contour integrals of multi-valued functions and I'm confused about a few details (the standard examples in the textbooks avoid the difficulties I encounter with my integrals). Let me take some examples from the paper arXiv:1008.5194 (see pages 53-54).



There they want to evaluate the integral
$$oint_{|omega|=x}domega:(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4}$$
enter image description here



where $xin]0,1[$ and they get
$$(-1+e^{-ifrac{3pi}2})int_0^xdomega:(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4}.$$
(Which is essentially the integral representation of hypergeometric functions). Since the integrand is multi-valued and has branch points at $omega = 0, x, 1$ we should probably make a branch cut on the positive real axis. If I naively deform the contour into a line from $x$ to $0$ above the real axis and a line from $0$ to $x$ below the real axis, I seem to get the right result. But that can't be correct; due to the branch cut the circle is not closed and we need to cross the cut several times to get back to the original Riemann sheet and close the contour. But when I do this, taking into account the phases accumulated while going around the Riemann surface, I don't get the correct result. How is this done right?



Another example is
$$oint_{|omega|=1}domega:(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4} = (1-e^{-ifrac{3pi}2})int_1^{infty}domega:(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4}.$$
Here I don't get the result, even with the "naive way" and I don't understand why the integration should be over the interval $]1,infty[$.





UPDATE: Sasha gave a very good answer and his solution seems to be correct, it agrees with numerical calculation. But it's different from what the paper finds and I think the paper is correct, so is there another non-equivalent way of interpreting the contour? Or might there be a problem in this (and lots of other) papers...?







complex-analysis






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Nov 7 '11 at 16:14







Heidar

















asked Nov 4 '11 at 17:13









HeidarHeidar

21538




21538












  • $begingroup$
    The general idea is to ensure your contour doesn't cross the cut. Have your contour start and finish at the cut. For instance, if you're taking a circular contour and the cut is the negative real axis, $-rexp(it)$ would be the contour to use along with the interval $(0,2pi)$.
    $endgroup$
    – J. M. is not a mathematician
    Nov 4 '11 at 17:19




















  • $begingroup$
    The general idea is to ensure your contour doesn't cross the cut. Have your contour start and finish at the cut. For instance, if you're taking a circular contour and the cut is the negative real axis, $-rexp(it)$ would be the contour to use along with the interval $(0,2pi)$.
    $endgroup$
    – J. M. is not a mathematician
    Nov 4 '11 at 17:19


















$begingroup$
The general idea is to ensure your contour doesn't cross the cut. Have your contour start and finish at the cut. For instance, if you're taking a circular contour and the cut is the negative real axis, $-rexp(it)$ would be the contour to use along with the interval $(0,2pi)$.
$endgroup$
– J. M. is not a mathematician
Nov 4 '11 at 17:19






$begingroup$
The general idea is to ensure your contour doesn't cross the cut. Have your contour start and finish at the cut. For instance, if you're taking a circular contour and the cut is the negative real axis, $-rexp(it)$ would be the contour to use along with the interval $(0,2pi)$.
$endgroup$
– J. M. is not a mathematician
Nov 4 '11 at 17:19












2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















6












$begingroup$

Consider $f(omega) = omega^{-3/4} (x-omega)^{-3/4} (1-omega)^{-3/4}$ and $ I(x) = oint_{vert omega vert = x} f(omega) mathrm{d} omega$.



The function $f(omega)$ is discontinuous at $omega = -x$ along $vert omega vert = x$ and has integrable singularity at $omega = x$. Making a change of variables, $omega = x z$:
$$
I(x) = frac{1}{sqrt{x}} oint_{vert z vert = 1} z^{-3/4} (1-z)^{-3/4} (1-x z)^{-3/4} mathrm{d} z = frac{1}{sqrt{x}} oint_{vert z vert = 1} hleft(zright) , mathrm{d} z
$$



Let $mathcal{C}$ denote the circle $vert z vert = 1$. Let $C_{-1, delta}$ denote segment of $mathcal{C}$ which crosses the negative axis and of length $2 pi delta$, with $pi delta$ above and $pi delta$ below the negative axis.



It is clear that integral along $mathcal{C}_{-1,delta}$ is vanishing as $delta to 0$:
$$ begin{eqnarray}
leftvert int_{mathcal{C}_{-1,delta}} z^{-3/4} (1-z)^{-3/4} (1-x z)^{-3/4} mathrm{d} z rightvert &le& (2(1+x))^{-3/4} leftvert int_{mathcal{C}_{-1,delta}} z^{-3/4} mathrm{d} z rightvert \
&=& left(2 (1+x) right)^{-3/4} frac{8sqrt{2}}{7} sinleft(frac{7 delta}{8}right) left( cosleft(frac{7 delta}{8}right) - sinleft(frac{7 delta}{8}right) right)
\ &le& sqrt{2} delta left(2 (1+x) right)^{-3/4}
end{eqnarray}
$$



Let's complete $mathcal{C} backslash mathcal{C}_{-1,delta}$ with integration along $(-1,0)$ above the axis and then along $(0,-1)$ below the axis so as to complete the contour, and call the completed contour $mathcal{L}$. Then
$$
begin{eqnarray}
oint_{mathcal{C}} hleft(zright) , mathrm{d} z &=& oint_{mathcal{L}} hleft(zright) , mathrm{d} z + int_0^1 left( hleft(-y - i epsilon right) - hleft(-y + i epsilon right) right), mathrm{d} y \
&=& oint_{mathcal{L}} hleft(zright) , mathrm{d} z + left( mathrm{e}^{i frac{3 pi}{4}} - mathrm{e}^{-i frac{3 pi}{4}} right) int_0^1 y^{-3/4}(1+y)^{-3/4}(1+x y)^{-3/4} mathrm{d} y
end{eqnarray}
$$
The claim is that the principal value of $oint_mathcal{L} h(z) mathrm{d} z = 0$, so we get
$$
I(x) = frac{2 i sinleft( 3/4 pi right)}{sqrt{x}} int_0^1 y^{-3/4}(1+y)^{-3/4}(1+x y)^{-3/4} mathrm{d} y
$$



Now, let's check this with quadratures:



enter image description here



Notice that the purported answer you gave in your post can not be correct, as it is not purely imaginary.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Sorry for the late response. Thanks a lot, I really like your solution and It makes very good sense to me. But I am very confused now, the solution I gave should be the correct one (as it is used in several papers), but your solution and numerical calculations disagree. Is it possible that there is an ambiguity in how the contour should be interpreted? And the correct contour is slightly different from what you have used...?
    $endgroup$
    – Heidar
    Nov 7 '11 at 16:07










  • $begingroup$
    @Heidar I do not see how. If the result was also mentioned in different article, can you isolate the common source, i.e. where the purported result was first obtained ? By the way, $I(x)$ in my post has not expression in terms of Gauss's hypergeometric function, rather in terms of Appell's $F_1$, $I(x) = frac{4 i sqrt{2}}{sqrt{x}} cdot F_1left(frac{1}{4};frac{3}{4},frac{3}{4};frac{5}{4};-1,-xright)$.
    $endgroup$
    – Sasha
    Nov 7 '11 at 16:45










  • $begingroup$
    Yeah, I need to look into it. There are just many integrals of the same type in this field and all of them gives hypergeometric functions (this can we shown to be the correct solution by other independent methods). I think the conclusion is that I'm misunderstanding some details in what these papers do. I am now pretty convinced that the way I understood the integrals to begin with, cannot be correct. Thanks for your nice answer, it has been very helpful.
    $endgroup$
    – Heidar
    Nov 7 '11 at 23:52





















0












$begingroup$

enter image description here



I think the authors get the answer just by contour deformation from the circle to the green line. Suppose above the branch cut $(0,x)$, the integrated function is
$$(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4}$$
When the contour rotates around $omega=0$, we have
$$omegarightarrow omega e^{2pi i}$$
and the integrated function becomes
$$e^{-3pi i/2}(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4}$$






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f78993%2fcontour-integration-and-branch-cuts%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    6












    $begingroup$

    Consider $f(omega) = omega^{-3/4} (x-omega)^{-3/4} (1-omega)^{-3/4}$ and $ I(x) = oint_{vert omega vert = x} f(omega) mathrm{d} omega$.



    The function $f(omega)$ is discontinuous at $omega = -x$ along $vert omega vert = x$ and has integrable singularity at $omega = x$. Making a change of variables, $omega = x z$:
    $$
    I(x) = frac{1}{sqrt{x}} oint_{vert z vert = 1} z^{-3/4} (1-z)^{-3/4} (1-x z)^{-3/4} mathrm{d} z = frac{1}{sqrt{x}} oint_{vert z vert = 1} hleft(zright) , mathrm{d} z
    $$



    Let $mathcal{C}$ denote the circle $vert z vert = 1$. Let $C_{-1, delta}$ denote segment of $mathcal{C}$ which crosses the negative axis and of length $2 pi delta$, with $pi delta$ above and $pi delta$ below the negative axis.



    It is clear that integral along $mathcal{C}_{-1,delta}$ is vanishing as $delta to 0$:
    $$ begin{eqnarray}
    leftvert int_{mathcal{C}_{-1,delta}} z^{-3/4} (1-z)^{-3/4} (1-x z)^{-3/4} mathrm{d} z rightvert &le& (2(1+x))^{-3/4} leftvert int_{mathcal{C}_{-1,delta}} z^{-3/4} mathrm{d} z rightvert \
    &=& left(2 (1+x) right)^{-3/4} frac{8sqrt{2}}{7} sinleft(frac{7 delta}{8}right) left( cosleft(frac{7 delta}{8}right) - sinleft(frac{7 delta}{8}right) right)
    \ &le& sqrt{2} delta left(2 (1+x) right)^{-3/4}
    end{eqnarray}
    $$



    Let's complete $mathcal{C} backslash mathcal{C}_{-1,delta}$ with integration along $(-1,0)$ above the axis and then along $(0,-1)$ below the axis so as to complete the contour, and call the completed contour $mathcal{L}$. Then
    $$
    begin{eqnarray}
    oint_{mathcal{C}} hleft(zright) , mathrm{d} z &=& oint_{mathcal{L}} hleft(zright) , mathrm{d} z + int_0^1 left( hleft(-y - i epsilon right) - hleft(-y + i epsilon right) right), mathrm{d} y \
    &=& oint_{mathcal{L}} hleft(zright) , mathrm{d} z + left( mathrm{e}^{i frac{3 pi}{4}} - mathrm{e}^{-i frac{3 pi}{4}} right) int_0^1 y^{-3/4}(1+y)^{-3/4}(1+x y)^{-3/4} mathrm{d} y
    end{eqnarray}
    $$
    The claim is that the principal value of $oint_mathcal{L} h(z) mathrm{d} z = 0$, so we get
    $$
    I(x) = frac{2 i sinleft( 3/4 pi right)}{sqrt{x}} int_0^1 y^{-3/4}(1+y)^{-3/4}(1+x y)^{-3/4} mathrm{d} y
    $$



    Now, let's check this with quadratures:



    enter image description here



    Notice that the purported answer you gave in your post can not be correct, as it is not purely imaginary.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      Sorry for the late response. Thanks a lot, I really like your solution and It makes very good sense to me. But I am very confused now, the solution I gave should be the correct one (as it is used in several papers), but your solution and numerical calculations disagree. Is it possible that there is an ambiguity in how the contour should be interpreted? And the correct contour is slightly different from what you have used...?
      $endgroup$
      – Heidar
      Nov 7 '11 at 16:07










    • $begingroup$
      @Heidar I do not see how. If the result was also mentioned in different article, can you isolate the common source, i.e. where the purported result was first obtained ? By the way, $I(x)$ in my post has not expression in terms of Gauss's hypergeometric function, rather in terms of Appell's $F_1$, $I(x) = frac{4 i sqrt{2}}{sqrt{x}} cdot F_1left(frac{1}{4};frac{3}{4},frac{3}{4};frac{5}{4};-1,-xright)$.
      $endgroup$
      – Sasha
      Nov 7 '11 at 16:45










    • $begingroup$
      Yeah, I need to look into it. There are just many integrals of the same type in this field and all of them gives hypergeometric functions (this can we shown to be the correct solution by other independent methods). I think the conclusion is that I'm misunderstanding some details in what these papers do. I am now pretty convinced that the way I understood the integrals to begin with, cannot be correct. Thanks for your nice answer, it has been very helpful.
      $endgroup$
      – Heidar
      Nov 7 '11 at 23:52


















    6












    $begingroup$

    Consider $f(omega) = omega^{-3/4} (x-omega)^{-3/4} (1-omega)^{-3/4}$ and $ I(x) = oint_{vert omega vert = x} f(omega) mathrm{d} omega$.



    The function $f(omega)$ is discontinuous at $omega = -x$ along $vert omega vert = x$ and has integrable singularity at $omega = x$. Making a change of variables, $omega = x z$:
    $$
    I(x) = frac{1}{sqrt{x}} oint_{vert z vert = 1} z^{-3/4} (1-z)^{-3/4} (1-x z)^{-3/4} mathrm{d} z = frac{1}{sqrt{x}} oint_{vert z vert = 1} hleft(zright) , mathrm{d} z
    $$



    Let $mathcal{C}$ denote the circle $vert z vert = 1$. Let $C_{-1, delta}$ denote segment of $mathcal{C}$ which crosses the negative axis and of length $2 pi delta$, with $pi delta$ above and $pi delta$ below the negative axis.



    It is clear that integral along $mathcal{C}_{-1,delta}$ is vanishing as $delta to 0$:
    $$ begin{eqnarray}
    leftvert int_{mathcal{C}_{-1,delta}} z^{-3/4} (1-z)^{-3/4} (1-x z)^{-3/4} mathrm{d} z rightvert &le& (2(1+x))^{-3/4} leftvert int_{mathcal{C}_{-1,delta}} z^{-3/4} mathrm{d} z rightvert \
    &=& left(2 (1+x) right)^{-3/4} frac{8sqrt{2}}{7} sinleft(frac{7 delta}{8}right) left( cosleft(frac{7 delta}{8}right) - sinleft(frac{7 delta}{8}right) right)
    \ &le& sqrt{2} delta left(2 (1+x) right)^{-3/4}
    end{eqnarray}
    $$



    Let's complete $mathcal{C} backslash mathcal{C}_{-1,delta}$ with integration along $(-1,0)$ above the axis and then along $(0,-1)$ below the axis so as to complete the contour, and call the completed contour $mathcal{L}$. Then
    $$
    begin{eqnarray}
    oint_{mathcal{C}} hleft(zright) , mathrm{d} z &=& oint_{mathcal{L}} hleft(zright) , mathrm{d} z + int_0^1 left( hleft(-y - i epsilon right) - hleft(-y + i epsilon right) right), mathrm{d} y \
    &=& oint_{mathcal{L}} hleft(zright) , mathrm{d} z + left( mathrm{e}^{i frac{3 pi}{4}} - mathrm{e}^{-i frac{3 pi}{4}} right) int_0^1 y^{-3/4}(1+y)^{-3/4}(1+x y)^{-3/4} mathrm{d} y
    end{eqnarray}
    $$
    The claim is that the principal value of $oint_mathcal{L} h(z) mathrm{d} z = 0$, so we get
    $$
    I(x) = frac{2 i sinleft( 3/4 pi right)}{sqrt{x}} int_0^1 y^{-3/4}(1+y)^{-3/4}(1+x y)^{-3/4} mathrm{d} y
    $$



    Now, let's check this with quadratures:



    enter image description here



    Notice that the purported answer you gave in your post can not be correct, as it is not purely imaginary.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      Sorry for the late response. Thanks a lot, I really like your solution and It makes very good sense to me. But I am very confused now, the solution I gave should be the correct one (as it is used in several papers), but your solution and numerical calculations disagree. Is it possible that there is an ambiguity in how the contour should be interpreted? And the correct contour is slightly different from what you have used...?
      $endgroup$
      – Heidar
      Nov 7 '11 at 16:07










    • $begingroup$
      @Heidar I do not see how. If the result was also mentioned in different article, can you isolate the common source, i.e. where the purported result was first obtained ? By the way, $I(x)$ in my post has not expression in terms of Gauss's hypergeometric function, rather in terms of Appell's $F_1$, $I(x) = frac{4 i sqrt{2}}{sqrt{x}} cdot F_1left(frac{1}{4};frac{3}{4},frac{3}{4};frac{5}{4};-1,-xright)$.
      $endgroup$
      – Sasha
      Nov 7 '11 at 16:45










    • $begingroup$
      Yeah, I need to look into it. There are just many integrals of the same type in this field and all of them gives hypergeometric functions (this can we shown to be the correct solution by other independent methods). I think the conclusion is that I'm misunderstanding some details in what these papers do. I am now pretty convinced that the way I understood the integrals to begin with, cannot be correct. Thanks for your nice answer, it has been very helpful.
      $endgroup$
      – Heidar
      Nov 7 '11 at 23:52
















    6












    6








    6





    $begingroup$

    Consider $f(omega) = omega^{-3/4} (x-omega)^{-3/4} (1-omega)^{-3/4}$ and $ I(x) = oint_{vert omega vert = x} f(omega) mathrm{d} omega$.



    The function $f(omega)$ is discontinuous at $omega = -x$ along $vert omega vert = x$ and has integrable singularity at $omega = x$. Making a change of variables, $omega = x z$:
    $$
    I(x) = frac{1}{sqrt{x}} oint_{vert z vert = 1} z^{-3/4} (1-z)^{-3/4} (1-x z)^{-3/4} mathrm{d} z = frac{1}{sqrt{x}} oint_{vert z vert = 1} hleft(zright) , mathrm{d} z
    $$



    Let $mathcal{C}$ denote the circle $vert z vert = 1$. Let $C_{-1, delta}$ denote segment of $mathcal{C}$ which crosses the negative axis and of length $2 pi delta$, with $pi delta$ above and $pi delta$ below the negative axis.



    It is clear that integral along $mathcal{C}_{-1,delta}$ is vanishing as $delta to 0$:
    $$ begin{eqnarray}
    leftvert int_{mathcal{C}_{-1,delta}} z^{-3/4} (1-z)^{-3/4} (1-x z)^{-3/4} mathrm{d} z rightvert &le& (2(1+x))^{-3/4} leftvert int_{mathcal{C}_{-1,delta}} z^{-3/4} mathrm{d} z rightvert \
    &=& left(2 (1+x) right)^{-3/4} frac{8sqrt{2}}{7} sinleft(frac{7 delta}{8}right) left( cosleft(frac{7 delta}{8}right) - sinleft(frac{7 delta}{8}right) right)
    \ &le& sqrt{2} delta left(2 (1+x) right)^{-3/4}
    end{eqnarray}
    $$



    Let's complete $mathcal{C} backslash mathcal{C}_{-1,delta}$ with integration along $(-1,0)$ above the axis and then along $(0,-1)$ below the axis so as to complete the contour, and call the completed contour $mathcal{L}$. Then
    $$
    begin{eqnarray}
    oint_{mathcal{C}} hleft(zright) , mathrm{d} z &=& oint_{mathcal{L}} hleft(zright) , mathrm{d} z + int_0^1 left( hleft(-y - i epsilon right) - hleft(-y + i epsilon right) right), mathrm{d} y \
    &=& oint_{mathcal{L}} hleft(zright) , mathrm{d} z + left( mathrm{e}^{i frac{3 pi}{4}} - mathrm{e}^{-i frac{3 pi}{4}} right) int_0^1 y^{-3/4}(1+y)^{-3/4}(1+x y)^{-3/4} mathrm{d} y
    end{eqnarray}
    $$
    The claim is that the principal value of $oint_mathcal{L} h(z) mathrm{d} z = 0$, so we get
    $$
    I(x) = frac{2 i sinleft( 3/4 pi right)}{sqrt{x}} int_0^1 y^{-3/4}(1+y)^{-3/4}(1+x y)^{-3/4} mathrm{d} y
    $$



    Now, let's check this with quadratures:



    enter image description here



    Notice that the purported answer you gave in your post can not be correct, as it is not purely imaginary.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    Consider $f(omega) = omega^{-3/4} (x-omega)^{-3/4} (1-omega)^{-3/4}$ and $ I(x) = oint_{vert omega vert = x} f(omega) mathrm{d} omega$.



    The function $f(omega)$ is discontinuous at $omega = -x$ along $vert omega vert = x$ and has integrable singularity at $omega = x$. Making a change of variables, $omega = x z$:
    $$
    I(x) = frac{1}{sqrt{x}} oint_{vert z vert = 1} z^{-3/4} (1-z)^{-3/4} (1-x z)^{-3/4} mathrm{d} z = frac{1}{sqrt{x}} oint_{vert z vert = 1} hleft(zright) , mathrm{d} z
    $$



    Let $mathcal{C}$ denote the circle $vert z vert = 1$. Let $C_{-1, delta}$ denote segment of $mathcal{C}$ which crosses the negative axis and of length $2 pi delta$, with $pi delta$ above and $pi delta$ below the negative axis.



    It is clear that integral along $mathcal{C}_{-1,delta}$ is vanishing as $delta to 0$:
    $$ begin{eqnarray}
    leftvert int_{mathcal{C}_{-1,delta}} z^{-3/4} (1-z)^{-3/4} (1-x z)^{-3/4} mathrm{d} z rightvert &le& (2(1+x))^{-3/4} leftvert int_{mathcal{C}_{-1,delta}} z^{-3/4} mathrm{d} z rightvert \
    &=& left(2 (1+x) right)^{-3/4} frac{8sqrt{2}}{7} sinleft(frac{7 delta}{8}right) left( cosleft(frac{7 delta}{8}right) - sinleft(frac{7 delta}{8}right) right)
    \ &le& sqrt{2} delta left(2 (1+x) right)^{-3/4}
    end{eqnarray}
    $$



    Let's complete $mathcal{C} backslash mathcal{C}_{-1,delta}$ with integration along $(-1,0)$ above the axis and then along $(0,-1)$ below the axis so as to complete the contour, and call the completed contour $mathcal{L}$. Then
    $$
    begin{eqnarray}
    oint_{mathcal{C}} hleft(zright) , mathrm{d} z &=& oint_{mathcal{L}} hleft(zright) , mathrm{d} z + int_0^1 left( hleft(-y - i epsilon right) - hleft(-y + i epsilon right) right), mathrm{d} y \
    &=& oint_{mathcal{L}} hleft(zright) , mathrm{d} z + left( mathrm{e}^{i frac{3 pi}{4}} - mathrm{e}^{-i frac{3 pi}{4}} right) int_0^1 y^{-3/4}(1+y)^{-3/4}(1+x y)^{-3/4} mathrm{d} y
    end{eqnarray}
    $$
    The claim is that the principal value of $oint_mathcal{L} h(z) mathrm{d} z = 0$, so we get
    $$
    I(x) = frac{2 i sinleft( 3/4 pi right)}{sqrt{x}} int_0^1 y^{-3/4}(1+y)^{-3/4}(1+x y)^{-3/4} mathrm{d} y
    $$



    Now, let's check this with quadratures:



    enter image description here



    Notice that the purported answer you gave in your post can not be correct, as it is not purely imaginary.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered Nov 4 '11 at 18:17









    SashaSasha

    60.7k5108180




    60.7k5108180












    • $begingroup$
      Sorry for the late response. Thanks a lot, I really like your solution and It makes very good sense to me. But I am very confused now, the solution I gave should be the correct one (as it is used in several papers), but your solution and numerical calculations disagree. Is it possible that there is an ambiguity in how the contour should be interpreted? And the correct contour is slightly different from what you have used...?
      $endgroup$
      – Heidar
      Nov 7 '11 at 16:07










    • $begingroup$
      @Heidar I do not see how. If the result was also mentioned in different article, can you isolate the common source, i.e. where the purported result was first obtained ? By the way, $I(x)$ in my post has not expression in terms of Gauss's hypergeometric function, rather in terms of Appell's $F_1$, $I(x) = frac{4 i sqrt{2}}{sqrt{x}} cdot F_1left(frac{1}{4};frac{3}{4},frac{3}{4};frac{5}{4};-1,-xright)$.
      $endgroup$
      – Sasha
      Nov 7 '11 at 16:45










    • $begingroup$
      Yeah, I need to look into it. There are just many integrals of the same type in this field and all of them gives hypergeometric functions (this can we shown to be the correct solution by other independent methods). I think the conclusion is that I'm misunderstanding some details in what these papers do. I am now pretty convinced that the way I understood the integrals to begin with, cannot be correct. Thanks for your nice answer, it has been very helpful.
      $endgroup$
      – Heidar
      Nov 7 '11 at 23:52




















    • $begingroup$
      Sorry for the late response. Thanks a lot, I really like your solution and It makes very good sense to me. But I am very confused now, the solution I gave should be the correct one (as it is used in several papers), but your solution and numerical calculations disagree. Is it possible that there is an ambiguity in how the contour should be interpreted? And the correct contour is slightly different from what you have used...?
      $endgroup$
      – Heidar
      Nov 7 '11 at 16:07










    • $begingroup$
      @Heidar I do not see how. If the result was also mentioned in different article, can you isolate the common source, i.e. where the purported result was first obtained ? By the way, $I(x)$ in my post has not expression in terms of Gauss's hypergeometric function, rather in terms of Appell's $F_1$, $I(x) = frac{4 i sqrt{2}}{sqrt{x}} cdot F_1left(frac{1}{4};frac{3}{4},frac{3}{4};frac{5}{4};-1,-xright)$.
      $endgroup$
      – Sasha
      Nov 7 '11 at 16:45










    • $begingroup$
      Yeah, I need to look into it. There are just many integrals of the same type in this field and all of them gives hypergeometric functions (this can we shown to be the correct solution by other independent methods). I think the conclusion is that I'm misunderstanding some details in what these papers do. I am now pretty convinced that the way I understood the integrals to begin with, cannot be correct. Thanks for your nice answer, it has been very helpful.
      $endgroup$
      – Heidar
      Nov 7 '11 at 23:52


















    $begingroup$
    Sorry for the late response. Thanks a lot, I really like your solution and It makes very good sense to me. But I am very confused now, the solution I gave should be the correct one (as it is used in several papers), but your solution and numerical calculations disagree. Is it possible that there is an ambiguity in how the contour should be interpreted? And the correct contour is slightly different from what you have used...?
    $endgroup$
    – Heidar
    Nov 7 '11 at 16:07




    $begingroup$
    Sorry for the late response. Thanks a lot, I really like your solution and It makes very good sense to me. But I am very confused now, the solution I gave should be the correct one (as it is used in several papers), but your solution and numerical calculations disagree. Is it possible that there is an ambiguity in how the contour should be interpreted? And the correct contour is slightly different from what you have used...?
    $endgroup$
    – Heidar
    Nov 7 '11 at 16:07












    $begingroup$
    @Heidar I do not see how. If the result was also mentioned in different article, can you isolate the common source, i.e. where the purported result was first obtained ? By the way, $I(x)$ in my post has not expression in terms of Gauss's hypergeometric function, rather in terms of Appell's $F_1$, $I(x) = frac{4 i sqrt{2}}{sqrt{x}} cdot F_1left(frac{1}{4};frac{3}{4},frac{3}{4};frac{5}{4};-1,-xright)$.
    $endgroup$
    – Sasha
    Nov 7 '11 at 16:45




    $begingroup$
    @Heidar I do not see how. If the result was also mentioned in different article, can you isolate the common source, i.e. where the purported result was first obtained ? By the way, $I(x)$ in my post has not expression in terms of Gauss's hypergeometric function, rather in terms of Appell's $F_1$, $I(x) = frac{4 i sqrt{2}}{sqrt{x}} cdot F_1left(frac{1}{4};frac{3}{4},frac{3}{4};frac{5}{4};-1,-xright)$.
    $endgroup$
    – Sasha
    Nov 7 '11 at 16:45












    $begingroup$
    Yeah, I need to look into it. There are just many integrals of the same type in this field and all of them gives hypergeometric functions (this can we shown to be the correct solution by other independent methods). I think the conclusion is that I'm misunderstanding some details in what these papers do. I am now pretty convinced that the way I understood the integrals to begin with, cannot be correct. Thanks for your nice answer, it has been very helpful.
    $endgroup$
    – Heidar
    Nov 7 '11 at 23:52






    $begingroup$
    Yeah, I need to look into it. There are just many integrals of the same type in this field and all of them gives hypergeometric functions (this can we shown to be the correct solution by other independent methods). I think the conclusion is that I'm misunderstanding some details in what these papers do. I am now pretty convinced that the way I understood the integrals to begin with, cannot be correct. Thanks for your nice answer, it has been very helpful.
    $endgroup$
    – Heidar
    Nov 7 '11 at 23:52













    0












    $begingroup$

    enter image description here



    I think the authors get the answer just by contour deformation from the circle to the green line. Suppose above the branch cut $(0,x)$, the integrated function is
    $$(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4}$$
    When the contour rotates around $omega=0$, we have
    $$omegarightarrow omega e^{2pi i}$$
    and the integrated function becomes
    $$e^{-3pi i/2}(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4}$$






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$


















      0












      $begingroup$

      enter image description here



      I think the authors get the answer just by contour deformation from the circle to the green line. Suppose above the branch cut $(0,x)$, the integrated function is
      $$(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4}$$
      When the contour rotates around $omega=0$, we have
      $$omegarightarrow omega e^{2pi i}$$
      and the integrated function becomes
      $$e^{-3pi i/2}(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4}$$






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$
















        0












        0








        0





        $begingroup$

        enter image description here



        I think the authors get the answer just by contour deformation from the circle to the green line. Suppose above the branch cut $(0,x)$, the integrated function is
        $$(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4}$$
        When the contour rotates around $omega=0$, we have
        $$omegarightarrow omega e^{2pi i}$$
        and the integrated function becomes
        $$e^{-3pi i/2}(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4}$$






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$



        enter image description here



        I think the authors get the answer just by contour deformation from the circle to the green line. Suppose above the branch cut $(0,x)$, the integrated function is
        $$(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4}$$
        When the contour rotates around $omega=0$, we have
        $$omegarightarrow omega e^{2pi i}$$
        and the integrated function becomes
        $$e^{-3pi i/2}(1-omega)^{-3/4}(x-omega)^{-3/4}omega^{-3/4}$$







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Dec 11 '18 at 13:06

























        answered Dec 7 '18 at 13:47









        Craig ThoneCraig Thone

        1727




        1727






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f78993%2fcontour-integration-and-branch-cuts%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Ellipse (mathématiques)

            Quarter-circle Tiles

            Mont Emei