I am particularly interested in how Ron Gordon came up with the parametrization in his anser to this question: Inverse Laplace transform $\mathcal{L}^{-1}\left \{ \ln \left ( 1+\frac{w^{2}}{s^{2}}\right ) \right \}$

EDIT: Do we have to incorporate four branch cuts, if for example we wanted to integrate the function $$f\left ( z \right )=\frac{\sqrt{z}}{\ln\left ( z^{4}+1 \right )}$$ Is there a generalization for choosing the parametrization for multiple branch cuts?

EDIT #2: My understanding on how to approach integration of a complex function with one branch cut is clear, and I state this very boldly, I feel like I understand it intuitively(keeping the Riemann surfaces in mind). I am also very comfortable with recognizing when a function has multiple branch cuts, realizing why they are there, and that we must avoid them in order for the domain to stay simply connected. What I don't understand, is how to integrate along a branch cut which isn't necessarily along the real axis(e.g. along the line $\phi=\frac{\pi}{3}$. In the question linked, this paragraph confuses me :

The reader should note that there is a fourfold split here: when $z$ is to the left or right of the imaginary axis, and when $z$ is above or below the real axis. In each of these cases, the log has a negative argument, but the log of the negative argument takes on a different value along each section of the dog-bone. When $z$ is to the left and right of the imaginary axis we respectively parametrize $z=+iy$and $z=-iy$. However, we subtract $2i\pi$ from the log term upon crossing the imaginary axis and add $2i\pi$ upon crossing the real axis.

  • $\begingroup$ What parametrization? $\endgroup$
    – davidlowryduda
    Dec 10 '15 at 0:02
  • $\begingroup$ @The one along the imaginary axis. For example, why did he use $z=iy$ when $z$ is to the left of the imaginary axis, and $z=-iy$ when to the right? $\endgroup$ Dec 10 '15 at 8:22

I think you mean how they chose their curve, yes? Like, which path we should integrate around. Their choice is pretty standard. Whenever you have points to dodge along the x or y axis you should almost always handle it the way they did, putting small circles around them and then joining them up.

The choice of $z=\pm iy$ is slightly arbitrary in the sense that there are other choices that would work too. The point is to avoid the multivalued aspect of the $\log(z)$ "function." It's fine to use log as a function while you stay within a small region, but because of it's periodic multivaluedness, if you let your curve be too large $\log$ will lose it's functionness and then things start falling apart.

  • $\begingroup$ That is clear to me. However, I don't see why he chose $z=-y$ along the y axis on the left side, and $z=iy$ to the right of thr imaginary axis $\endgroup$
    – Shemafied
    Dec 11 '15 at 17:57

Not quite sure what you're asking, but I wanted to post a picture to possibly clear up the confusion.

In the question you've linked there was an explicit integral to compute... To do this, Ron used the residue theorem in conjunction with a contour avoiding singularities in the path and restricted the path to "one sheet" of the complex plane. See the picture below and try to visualize the cut along the negative $x$-axis.

With the cut Ron choose, the domain is still simply connected. Thus the Residue Theorem applied and along with a few limits he was able to compute the integral.

  • $\begingroup$ But how do we visualize the other branch cut, connecting the points $z=i\omega$ and $z=-i\omega$? Do you have any suggestions on how to make the question more clear. I just wanted to be able to solve complex integrals with multiple branch cuts, and hoped someone would give help here. $\endgroup$ Dec 9 '15 at 20:24
  • $\begingroup$ oh, have a look at robjohns answer from this post math.stackexchange.com/questions/472166/… The main reason why we need the cut is to make the integral have 1 value... and log is multivalued at the origin. We take the almost full circles since $z= \pm iw$ is like $\ln z $ at $z =0$, so we can't loop around them. $\endgroup$
    – Jeb
    Dec 9 '15 at 20:39

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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