Solve the following integral without complex analysis:

In summary, an integral is a mathematical concept used to find the area under a curve on a graph and solve problems related to quantity and rate of change. Complex analysis is a branch of mathematics that deals with functions of complex variables, specifically the properties and behavior of complex numbers. Integrals can be solved without complex analysis using techniques such as substitution, integration by parts, and trigonometric identities. Solving integrals without complex analysis can be useful in simpler situations, but there are limitations as some functions may require the use of complex analysis for accurate and efficient solutions.
  • #1
alyafey22
Gold Member
MHB
1,561
1
\[\int^{\infty}_{0} \frac{\cos(x) }{1+x^2}\,dx\]

I know it can be solved by Fourier transform and also by residues , but my teacher
asked me to solve it by not using transformation or complex analysis (Happy)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
ZaidAlyafey said:
$\int^{\infty}_{0} \frac{\cos(x) }{1+x^2}$

I know it can be solved by Fourier transform and also by residues , but my teacher
asked me to solve it by not using transformation or complex analysis (Happy)
Try integration by parts twice.

Warning: There are some limits that come up which I think can be removed. But I didn't check that in detail.

-Dan
 
  • #3
topsquark said:
Try integration by parts twice.

-Dan

Is this just a suggestion , or does it really work because it doesn't get any simper ?

topsquark said:
Warning: There are some limits that come up which I think can be removed. But I didn't check that in detail.

-Dan

I don't get what you mean ?
 
  • #4
ZaidAlyafey said:
$\displaystyle \int^{\infty}_{0} \frac{\cos(x) }{1+x^2}\;{dx}$

Let $\displaystyle I(\lambda) = \int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{\sin(\lambda x)}{x(1+x^2)}\;{dx} ~~ (\lambda > 0). $ Differentiating this w.r.t. $\lambda$ we have $\displaystyle I'(\lambda) = \int^{\infty}_{0} \frac{\cos(\lambda x) }{1+x^2}\;{dx}.$

Also $\displaystyle I''(\lambda) = -\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{x\sin(\lambda x)}{1+x^2}\;{dx}$ thus $\displaystyle I(\lambda)-I''(\lambda) =\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{(1+x^2) \sin( \lambda x)}{x(1+x^2)}\;{dx} = \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{\sin(\lambda x)}{x}\;{dx}.$

Letting $\displaystyle t = \lambda x$ we have $\displaystyle \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{\sin(\lambda x)}{x}\;{dx} = \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{\sin{t}}{t}\;{dt} = \frac{\pi}{2}$ (well-known). Hence $\displaystyle I(\lambda)-I''(\lambda) = \frac{\pi}{2}$.
Solving $ I''(\lambda)-I(\lambda)+\frac{\pi}{2} =0$ we get $ I(\lambda) = \mathcal{C}_{1}e^x+\mathcal{C}_{2}e^{-x}+\frac{\pi}{2}$. From the integral we observe that $I(0) = 0$, thus we have $ 0 = \mathcal{C}_{1}+\mathcal{C}_{2}+\frac{\pi}{2}$ so $\mathcal{C}_{1}+\mathcal{C}_{2} = -\frac{\pi}{2}$ (1). But also by differentiating we get $I'(\lambda) = \mathcal{C}_{1}e^x-\mathcal{C}_{2}e^{-x}$. From our integral we observe that $I'(0) = \frac{\pi}{2}$, and thus we have $ \mathcal{C}_{1}-\mathcal{C}_{2} = \frac{\pi}{2}$ (2). Adding (1) and (2) we have $\mathcal{C}_{1} = 0$ and/so $\mathcal{C}_{2} = -\frac{\pi}{2}$. Hence $\displaystyle I'(\lambda) = \frac{\pi}{2e^{\lambda}}$, thus:

$$\displaystyle \int^{\infty}_{0} \frac{\cos(x) }{1+x^2} = \frac{\pi}{2e}. $$
 
Last edited:
  • #5
Sherlock said:
Let $\displaystyle I(\lambda) = \int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{\sin(\lambda x)}{x(1+x^2)}\;{dx} ~~ (\lambda > 0). $. Differentiating this w.r.t. $\lambda$ we have $\displaystyle I'(\lambda) = \int^{\infty}_{0} \frac{\cos(\lambda x) }{1+x^2}\;{dx}.$

Also $\displaystyle I''(\lambda) = -\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{x\sin(\lambda x)}{1+x^2}\;{dx}$ thus $\displaystyle I(\lambda)-I''(\lambda) =\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{(1+x^2) \sin( \lambda x)}{x(1+x^2)}\;{dx} = \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{\sin(\lambda x)}{x}\;{dx}.$

Letting $\displaystyle t = \lambda x$ we have $\displaystyle \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{\sin(\lambda x)}{x}\;{dx} = \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{\sin{t}}{t}\;{dt} = \frac{\pi}{2}$ (well-known). Hence $\displaystyle I(\lambda)-I''(\lambda) = \frac{\pi}{2}$.
Solving $ I''(\lambda)-I(\lambda)+\frac{\pi}{2} =0$ we get $ I(\lambda) = \mathcal{C}_{1}e^x+\mathcal{C}_{2}e^{-x}+\frac{\pi}{2}$. From the integral we observe that $I(0) = 0$, thus we have $ 0 = \mathcal{C}_{1}+\mathcal{C}_{2}+\frac{\pi}{2}$ so $\mathcal{C}_{1}+\mathcal{C}_{2} = -\frac{\pi}{2}$ (1). But also by differentiating we get $I'(\lambda) = \mathcal{C}_{1}e^x-\mathcal{C}_{2}e^{-x}$. From our integral we observe that $I'(0) = \frac{\pi}{2}$, and thus we have $ \mathcal{C}_{1}-\mathcal{C}_{2} = \frac{\pi}{2}$ (2). Adding (1) and (2) we have $\mathcal{C}_{1} = 0$ and/so $\mathcal{C}_{2} = -\frac{\pi}{2}$. Hence $\displaystyle I'(\lambda) = \frac{\pi}{2e^{\lambda}}$, thus:

$$\displaystyle \int^{\infty}_{0} \frac{\cos(x) }{1+x^2} = \frac{\pi}{2e}. $$

Feynman would be proud - differentiating under the integral sign!
 
  • #6
ZaidAlyafey said:
I don't get what you mean ?
Well, I like Sherlock's method better, but here's a bit more on the integration by parts.

Obviously
[tex]\int_a^b p~dq = pq |_a^b - \int_a^b q~dp[/tex]

There will be two limits [tex]cos(x)atan(x)|_0^{\infty}[/tex] and [tex]sin(x)atan(x)|_0^{\infty}[/tex]

I didn't check these limits to see if they actually cancel out. (I still didn't. Lazy again.)

-Dan

Ach-choo: You say that like it's a bad thing...
 
  • #7
Ok , I will show the other two methods .

First : By residues :

[tex]\int^{\infty}_0 \frac{\cos(x) }{x^2+1}=\frac{1}{2}\int^{\infty}_{-\infty} \frac{\cos(x) }{x^2+1}=\mathcal{Re}( \frac{1}{2}\int^{\infty}_{-\infty} \frac{e^{iz} }{z^2+1})[/tex]

By drawing a sermi-circle in the upper half plane we get the following :

[tex]\frac{1}{2}\int^{\infty}_{-\infty} \frac{e^{ix} }{x^2+1}= \pi i \mathcal{Rez}(f(z) ,i )[/tex]

[tex]\pi i (\frac{e^{iz}}{2z}|_{z=i})= \pi i \frac{e^{-1}}{2i}= \frac{\pi}{2e}[/tex]
 
  • #8
I'm looking forward to the Fourier transform method (unless you meant Laplace (Giggle)).
 
  • #9
Second by the Fourier integral :

[tex]f(x)= \int^{\infty}_0 A(\lambda) \cos(\lambda x)d\lambda +\int^{\infty}_0 B(\lambda) \sin(\lambda x)d\lambda[/tex] -----(1)

[tex]f(x) = \begin{cases}e^{-x} &; \mbox{if } x > 0 \\e^{x} &; \mbox{if } x<0 \\1 &; \mbox{if } x=0\end{cases}[/tex]

[tex]A(\lambda)= \frac{1}{\pi}\int^{\infty}_{-\infty}\, f(x)\, \cos(\lambda x)dx[/tex]

Now since f(x) is an even function :

[tex]A(\lambda)= \frac{2}{\pi}\int^{\infty}_{0}\, e^{-x}\, \cos(\lambda x)dx =\frac{ 2\mathcal{L}(\cos(\lambda x))}{\pi}= \frac{2}{\pi(x^2+\lambda^2)}[/tex]

[tex]B(\lambda)=\int^{\infty}_{-\infty} f(x) \sin(\lambda x)dx=0[/tex]

By evenness the upper integral is zero .

substituting in ---(1) we get the following : [tex]e^{-x}= \int^{\infty}_0 \frac{2\cos(\lambda x)}{\pi(x^2+\lambda^2)}d\lambda \,\, \, x>0[/tex]

Now putting x =1 we get the following :

[tex]e^{-1}= \frac{2}{\pi}\int^{\infty}_0 \frac{\cos(\lambda)}{(1+\lambda^2)}d\lambda[/tex]

[tex]\int^{\infty}_0 \frac{\cos(x)}{(1+x^2)}dx= \frac{\pi}{2e}[/tex]
 
Last edited:
  • #10
Sherlock said:
I'm looking forward to the Fourier transform method (unless you meant Laplace (Giggle)).

I always think that Laplace transform is a special case of the general Fourier transform .
 

FAQ: Solve the following integral without complex analysis:

What is an integral?

An integral is a mathematical concept that represents the area under a curve on a graph. It is used to solve problems related to finding the total value or quantity of something based on its rate of change over time.

What is complex analysis?

Complex analysis is a branch of mathematics that deals with functions of complex variables. It involves the study of the properties and behavior of complex numbers, which are numbers that can be expressed in the form a + bi, where a and b are real numbers and i is the imaginary unit.

How is an integral solved without complex analysis?

Integrals can be solved without complex analysis by using various techniques such as substitution, integration by parts, and trigonometric identities. These techniques rely on algebra and calculus principles to solve the integral.

Why would someone want to solve an integral without complex analysis?

Solving integrals without complex analysis can be useful in situations where the function being integrated is not complex or when the use of complex numbers may not be necessary. It also allows for a simpler and more straightforward approach to solving the integral.

Are there any limitations to solving integrals without complex analysis?

Yes, there are limitations to solving integrals without complex analysis. Some functions may require the use of complex analysis to be integrated, and without it, the integral cannot be solved. Additionally, complex analysis can provide more accurate and efficient solutions to certain integrals.

Similar threads

Back
Top