[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Re: Re: Re-defining Log over it's branch cut
*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
*Subject*: [mg77539] Re: [mg77507] Re: Re-defining Log over it's branch cut
*From*: Carl Woll <carlw at wolfram.com>
*Date*: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 01:25:30 -0400 (EDT)
*References*: <200706110821.EAA20128@smc.vnet.net>
chuck009 wrote:
>Hello Dimitris,
>
>Is there a way to have Mathematica do this substitution internally when evaluating powers such as z^s? The reason I ask is that I'm working on the contour integral expressions for Zeta and Polylog which use the Hankel contour. This contour requires the substitutions z=rExp[pi i] and z=r Exp[-pi i]. However, Mathematica assigns the "standard convention" of pi to the argument for both cases. For example if I specify:
>
>In[248]:=
>N[z^(s-1)/.z->r Exp[-Pi I]]
>
>Mathematica return an answer that is actually:
>
>Exp[(s-1)(Log[r]+pi i]
>
>and not:
>
>Exp[(s-1)(Log[r]-pi i]
>
>
>I realize that's the standard convention. Just would make my code a little less messy if I didn't have to do the expansion myself and "manually" insert the -pi i factor.
>
>
One possibility is to use Limit:
In[45]:= Limit[z^(s - 1) /. z -> r Exp[-I (Pi - eps)], eps -> 0,
Assumptions -> r > 0]
Out[45]= E^((-1 + s)*((-I)*Pi + Log[r]))
Carl Woll
Wolfram Research
Prev by Date:
**Re: questions**
Next by Date:
**Re: NIntegrate with change of variables**
Previous by thread:
**Re: Re-defining Log over it's branch cut**
Next by thread:
**Re: Re-defining Log over it's branch cut**
| |