2
$\begingroup$

We consider the hypergeometric function $ _2F_1 [\dfrac{1}{2}(1+k+l+\omega), \dfrac{1}{2}(1+k-l+\omega), 1+k, -r^2]$, and use its expansion as given in [1] in terms of the rising Pochhammer symbols. Here $k$ is a positive real, $l$ is a positive integer and $\omega$ is a real. So we can say that the poles of the above function are given by $\omega = -2n - l - k - 1$ and $\omega = -2n + l - k - 1$ in the $\omega$ plane, using the same expansion given in [1], as these are the points at which the Gamma functions in the rising Pochhammer symbols blow up. Here $n$ is a positive integer. Is it correct upto this stage?

Now consider Eqn[4.1.5] of [2], which is the same function I have written above with factors of r in front. If the previous step is correct, then why

  1. are the poles of the function as in the Eqn[4.1.8] of [2] different from the above-mentioned one
  2. how do we obtain Eqn[4.1.6] and Eqn[4.1.7] in limit $r \rightarrow \infty$, and how does one get Eqn[4.1.8] from them?

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypergeometric_function#The_hypergeometric_series

[2] - https://arxiv.org/pdf/0812.2909.pdf

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I would like to know your feedback on the answer I gave. $\endgroup$ – G Cab Jun 29 '17 at 16:58
1
$\begingroup$

So you are analizing the Hypergeometric function $$ \bbox[lightyellow] { \eqalign{ & {}_2F_{\,1} \left( {1/2\left( {1 + k + l + \omega } \right),1/2\left( {1 + k - l + \omega } \right);\;k + 1;\; - r^{\,2} \,} \right) = \cr & = \sum\limits_{0\, \le \,j} {{{\left( {1/2\left( {1 + k + l + \omega } \right)} \right)^{\,\overline {\,j\,} } \left( {1/2\left( {1 + k - l + \omega } \right)} \right)^{\,\overline {\,j\,} } } \over {\left( {k + 1} \right)^{\,\overline {\,j\,} } 1^{\,\overline {\,j\,} } }}\left( { - r^{\,2} } \right)^{\,j} } \cr} } \tag{1}$$ where

  • ${x^{\,\overline {\,j\,} } }$ denotes the Rising Factorial, i.e. the (rising) Pochammer symbol, and so ${1^{\,\overline {\,j\,} } }=j!$

  • $0<k\in \mathbb{R}$, $ l \in \mathbb{N}$, $\omega \in \mathbb{R}$

and you are concerned about its poles, in terms of the variable parameter $\omega$.

On this subject, there are various points to pay attention to and clarify:

  1. The above series expression for the Hypergeometric function is the standard expression valid in general for $z$, here $(-r^2)$, inside the unit circle $|z|<1$.
  2. For $1 \le |z|$ , and so for $1 \le |r|$, the hypergeometric function shall be computed by analytical continuation of the expression above (re. e.g. to this Mathworld article).
  3. Because of the alternating sign introduced by $(-r^2)^j$ it might be possible that for special values of the parameters the sum in (1) be convergent for any value of $r$, but we are not going to investigate this special case.
  4. For $ |r| < 1$, the expression in (1) does not have any finite pole in $\omega$ .
    Consider in fact that the rising factorial, for non-negative integer exponent (as it is the $j$ in the sum), is defined as $$ \bbox[lightyellow] { z^{\,\overline {\,n\,} } \quad \left| {\;0 \le {\rm integer}\,n} \right.\quad = \prod\limits_{0\, \le \,k\, \le \,n - 1\,} {\left( {z + k} \right)} = {{\Gamma \left( {z + n} \right)} \over {\Gamma \left( z \right)}} }$$ which is a polynomial in $z$ of degree $n$ defined in all $\mathbb C$, and thus has $n$ zeros and no finite pole.
    The definition of the rising factorial through the ratio of the Gamma, is to be taken in the limit when approaching a pole of the Gamma in the numerator, which - if $n$ is non-negative - cancels with the pole at the denominator, leaving the ratio of the residuals, since both poles are simple.
    That is $$ \bbox[lightyellow] { \left( { - m} \right)^{\,\overline {\,n\,} } \quad \left| {\;0 \le {\rm integers}\,n,m} \right.\quad = \prod\limits_{0\, \le \,k\, \le \,n - 1\,} {\left( {k - m} \right)} = \mathop {\lim }\limits_{z\; \to \; - m} {{\Gamma \left( {z + n} \right)} \over {\Gamma \left( z \right)}} }$$

Having cleared the above points, then the expression provided in [4.1.6] of your ref. [2], is said to be "for large$r$", thus it should involve an asymptotic expansion of the hypergeometric, which cannot be that indicated in the Mathworld article cited above because in present case the condition $a-b = l \notin \,\mathbb{Z}$ is not satisfied.

I am not going here to investigate which expansion has been used.

Yet, if that is correct, then in eq. [4.1.7] it is the digamma function inside $\beta(\omega,k,l)$ that has poles, while the function $\alpha(\omega,k,l)$ has no poles, but zeros, which are located differently than the digamma poles. Either the zeros of $\alpha$ and poles of $\beta$ are simple . So in the product $\alpha(\omega,k,l) \beta(\omega,k,l)$ the poles are those given by the digamma which are not cancelled by a zero in $\alpha$.

$\endgroup$

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.