Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I am reading a computation that $\int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{1 - \cos x}{x^{2}}\, dx = \frac{\pi}{2}.$ They integrate over the indented semicircle. Let $R_{\varepsilon}$ be the semicircle in the upper half plane of radius epsilon around the origin going from $-\varepsilon$ to $\varepsilon$. My question is: what is the reasoning behind the following statement:

$$\int_{R_{\varepsilon}}\frac{1 - e^{iz}}{z^{2}}\, dz \rightarrow \int_{\pi}^{0}(-ii)\, d\theta = -\pi$$

as $\varepsilon \rightarrow 0$.

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 4 down vote accepted

Since $z = -\epsilon \mathrm{e}^{-i \phi}$, where $\phi$ varies from $0$ to $\pi$. Then $\mathrm{d} z = i \epsilon \, \mathrm{e}^{-i \phi} \mathrm{d} \phi$, so

$$ \int_{R_\epsilon} \frac{1 - \mathrm{e}^{i z}}{z^2} \mathrm{d} z = \int_0^\pi \frac{ 1-\exp( -i \epsilon \mathrm{e}^{-i \phi} )}{ \epsilon^2 \mathrm{e}^{-2 i \phi}} (i \epsilon \, \mathrm{e}^{-i \phi} ) \mathrm{d} \phi = \int_0^\pi \frac{ 1-\exp( -i \epsilon \mathrm{e}^{-i \phi} )}{ \epsilon} (i \, \mathrm{e}^{i \phi} ) \mathrm{d} \phi $$ Now, as $\epsilon \to 0$, $\frac{ 1-\exp( -i \epsilon \mathrm{e}^{-i \phi} )}{ \epsilon} \sim i \, \mathrm{e}^{-i \phi} + o(\epsilon) $, thus $$ \int_0^\pi \frac{ 1-\exp( -i \epsilon \mathrm{e}^{-i \phi} )}{ \epsilon} (i \, \mathrm{e}^{i \phi} ) \mathrm{d} \phi \to \int_0^\pi \left( i \, \mathrm{e}^{-i \phi} \right) ( i \, \mathrm{e}^{i \phi}) \mathrm{d} \phi = \int_0^\pi (i)^2 \mathrm{d} \phi = -\pi $$

share|cite|improve this answer

Consider the Laurent series $$ \frac{1-e^{iz}}{z^2}=-\frac{i}{z}+\frac{1}{2}+\frac{iz}{6}-\frac{z^2}{24}-\dots $$ The only part that doesn't vanish as $\epsilon\to0$ is $-\frac{i}{z}$. The integral of $\frac{1}{z}$ is $\log(z)=\log|z|+i\arg(z)$. Since $\arg(z)$ drops by $\pi$ over $R_\epsilon$ (and $|z|$ doesn't change), we get that the integral is $(-i)(-i\pi)=-\pi$. In the statement you cite, it looks as if they have converted the integral of $-\frac{i}{z}$ to polar coordinates: $$ \begin{align} \int_{R_\epsilon}-\frac{i}{z}\;\mathrm{d}z &=\int_\pi^0\frac{-i}{r}e^{-i\theta}\;\mathrm{d}re^{i\theta}\\ &=\int_\pi^0-ie^{-i\theta}ie^{i\theta}\;\mathrm{d}\theta\\ &=\int_\pi^0-ii\;\mathrm{d}\theta\\ \end{align} $$

share|cite|improve this answer
Why does the constant $\frac{1}{2}$ vanish as $\epsilon \rightarrow 0$? – jwalk May 16 '15 at 20:08
Because the length of the contour is $2\pi\epsilon$ and so the absolute value of the integral is at most $\frac12\cdot2\pi\epsilon=\pi\epsilon\to0$. – robjohn May 17 '15 at 1:27
Of course, thanks! – jwalk May 17 '15 at 15:05

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.