MathGroup Archive 2006

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: hadamard finite part

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg68074] Re: hadamard finite part
  • From: Paul Abbott <paul at physics.uwa.edu.au>
  • Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 17:36:26 -0400 (EDT)
  • Organization: The University of Western Australia
  • References: <e9ibvc$52e$1@smc.vnet.net>
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

In article <e9ibvc$52e$1 at smc.vnet.net>, dimmechan at yahoo.com wrote:

> I work in the field of applied mathematics and I am interested in the
> symbolical/numerical integration of integrals in the Hadamard sense
> (that is, the finite part of divergent integrals).
> My integrals are much more complicated but here I use some trivial
> examples to show the point.

Actually, it would be helpful if you could give some of your complicated 
examples.

> Next, suppose the integral
> 
> Integrate[1/x^2,{x,-1,2}]

In the Hadamard sense, I would compute this as follows:

  Assuming[0 < e < 1, 
     Integrate[1/x^2, {x, -1, -e}] + Integrate[1/x^2, {x, e, 2}] ]

 -3/2 + 2/e

followed by

  Coefficient[%, e, 0]

  -3/2

> My first question now:
> Is it a way to get the finite part of a divergent integral through
> performing numerical integration (e.g. using NIntegrate) in Mathematica?
> I have seen some papers presenting some propper algorithms dealing with
> numerical integration of Hadamard finite part integrals but I cannot
> find any related work in connection with Mathematica.

I expect that the general answer is no. To obtain the  Hadamard finite 
part one must first locate the singular points, including the 
end-points, and then determine the behavior near these points.

> Mathematica 3.0 and 4.0 suceeds in providing this result:
> 
> Integrate[1/x,{x,0,2},GenerateConditions->False]  (*version 3.0 and
> 4.0*)
> 
> Log[2]
> 
> However Mathematica 5.1 and 5.2 gives the result
> 
> Integrate[1/x,{x,0,2},GenerateConditions->False]  (*version 5.1 and
> 5.2*)
> 
> Infinity
> 
> Why exists this difference?

Mathematica is now more careful. In general, I would not trust 
GenerateConditions->False to do Hadamard integration. For simple cases 
you can always use indefinite integration.

> I can trust that for divergent integrals
> Integrate[integrand,{x,a,b},GenerateConditions->False]
> provides the desirable result in the Hadamard sense?

I don't understand: you've shown above that it does not?

> Is it a way to get Integrate to give always the finite part of a
> divergent integral?

Yes -- if you locate the singularities first. At

  http://physics.uwa.edu.au/pub/Mathematica/MathGroup/Hadamard.nb

you will find a Notebook that implements one class of Hadamard integrals.

> Are there any other alternative methods (such as the implementation of
> aymptotic techniques in mathematica) to get the finite part of a
> divergent integral?

You can use series expansions about the singular points.

> P.S. The finite part of a divergent integral is of great importance in
> the area of applied mathematics. 

I think that that is an exaggeration. It is not even mentioned in

  Handbook of Applied Mathematics: selected results and methods, 
  edited by Carl E. Pearson

which is over 1300 pages long. 

Cheers,
Paul

_______________________________________________________________________
Paul Abbott                                      Phone:  61 8 6488 2734
School of Physics, M013                            Fax: +61 8 6488 1014
The University of Western Australia         (CRICOS Provider No 00126G)    
AUSTRALIA                               http://physics.uwa.edu.au/~paul


  • Prev by Date: Re: Applying a list of 2D paramters to a mathematica function
  • Next by Date: Re: Reasonable integration speed? (24 hrs and counting)
  • Previous by thread: Re: hadamard finite part
  • Next by thread: writing ASCII-files in UNIX-format from Windows