10

I need to prove that $$I = \int^{\infty}_{-\infty}u(x,y) \,dy$$ is independent of $x$ and find its value, where $$u(x,y) = \frac{1}{2\pi}\exp\left(+x^2/2-y^2/2\right)K_0\left(\sqrt{(x-y)^2+(-x^2/2+y^2/2)^2}\right)$$

and $K_0$ is the modified Bessel function of the second kind with order zero. Evaluating the integral numerically with Mathematica for different values of $x$ gives the result of $2.38$, but I want to know if it is possible to show analytically.

Increasing $x$ results in an increase of the exponential term on the left, but it also then strongly increases the argument of modified Bessel function, thus reducing its value.

To show that integral is independant of $x$, it is sufficient to show that $\int^{\infty}_{-\infty}\frac{\, d}{\, dx}u(x,y) = 0$ but any differentiation looks more and more ugly.

EDIT Mathematica test:

 x = 100
    NIntegrate[
    (1/(2 Pi))* Exp[x*x/2 - y*y/2] BesselK[0, 
       Sqrt[(x - y)*(x - y) + (x*x/2 - y*y/2)*(x*x/2 - 
            y*y/2 )]], {y, -Infinity, x, Infinity}, MaxRecursion -> 22]

This gives an answer of $0.378936$ independent of the choice of $x$. In the earlier calculation I missed the factor $\frac{1}{2\pi}$.

KStarGamer
  • 5,089
  • 1
  • 18
  • 50
chatur
  • 1,132

3 Answers3

15

Although I'm about 7 years late, here is an answer anyway for anyone interested:

Claim $$I = \frac{e}{2} \sqrt{\pi} \, \text{erfc} (1)$$ and is thus independent of $x$.

Proof.

By https://dlmf.nist.gov/10.32#E10

$$K_0 (z) = \frac{1}{2} \int_{0}^{\infty} \exp \left(-t-\frac{z^2}{4t}\right) \, \frac{dt}{t}$$

This allows us to write $$\begin{align}I &= \int_{0}^{\infty} u(x,y) \, dy + \int_{-\infty}^{0} u(x,y) \, dy \\&=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_0^\infty e^{-v^2/2}\int_0^\infty\frac{e^{xv}e^{-t-v^2[1+(x-v/2)^2]/(4t)}+e^{-xv}e^{-t-v^2[1+(x+v/2)^2]/(4t)}}t\,dt\,dv\\ &=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_0^\infty\int_0^\infty \frac{\cosh\left(xv\left(\frac{v^2}{4t}+1\right)\right)}{t}\exp\left(-t-\frac{1+2t+x^2}{4t}v^2-\frac{v^4}{16t}\right)\,dv\,dt\end{align}$$

We now enforce the substitution $t = s v^2 \implies dt = v^2 \,ds$: $$\begin{align}I&=\frac{1}{2\pi} \int_{0}^{\infty} \int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{\cosh\left(x v \left(\frac{1}{4s}+1\right)\right)}{s} \exp\left(-sv^2-\frac{1+2sv^2+x^2}{4s}-\frac{v^2}{16s}\right) \, dv \, ds\\&=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{0}^{\infty}\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{\cosh\left(xv\left(\frac{1}{4s}+1\right)\right)}{s}\exp\left(-\frac{1+x^2}{4s}\right)\exp\left(-v^2 \frac{(1+4s)^2}{16s}\right)\,dv\,ds\end{align}$$

Since $$\int_{0}^{\infty}\cosh(a v)\exp\left(-v^2 b^2\right) \, dv=\frac{\sqrt{\pi}}{2b}\exp\left(\frac{a^2}{4b^2}\right)$$

$$\implies I = \frac{1}{2\pi} \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{\exp \left(-\frac{1+x^2}{4s}\right)}{s} \cdot \frac{\sqrt{\pi}}{2\left(\frac{1+4s}{4\sqrt{s}}\right)}\exp \left(\frac{4s x^2 \left(\frac{1}{4s}+1\right)^2}{(1+4s)^2}\right)\, ds$$ This results in the integral being independent as we wanted since the $x^2$ terms cancel.

$$\implies I = \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi}} \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{\exp\left(-\frac{1}{4s}\right)}{\sqrt{s} (1+4s)} \, ds\stackrel{s\,\mapsto\frac{1}{s}}{=}\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi}} \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{\exp\left(-\frac{s}{4}\right)}{\sqrt{s} (4+s)} \, ds=\frac{e}{2} \sqrt{\pi} \, \text{erfc} (1)=0.378\cdots$$

$\square$

KStarGamer
  • 5,089
  • 1
  • 18
  • 50
1

Are you sure that there is no typo in your equation ?

With : \begin{eqnarray} u(x,y) = \frac{1}{2\pi}\exp\left(+x^2/2-y^2/2\right)K_0\left(\sqrt{(x-y)^2+(-x^2/2+y^2/2)^2}\right) \end{eqnarray}

I do not find $I=\int^{\infty}_{-\infty}u(x,y) \,d y \simeq 2.38$ and $I(x)$ is not constant.

For example : Case $x=0$ :

$$u(0,y) = \frac{1}{2\pi}\exp\left(-y^2/2\right)K_0\left(\sqrt{(-y)^2+(y^2/2)^2}\right)$$ $$I = \int^{\infty}_{-\infty}u(0,y) \,d y \simeq 0.64965$$ Note : this numerical result is not valid because some precautions where not taken at that time. More recent numerical results confirmes the value $0.378936$ given by chatur.

In the radical, are the powers not on the same order ?

Note :

The numerical computation is hazarduous because $K_0(0)=\infty$.

The integral is not convergent in the usual sens. But it can be convergent if we consider the Cauchy principal value.

During numerical computation, $y$ varies from a low value $<x$ to an high value $>x$. Proceeding by steps, it can happend that $y$ comes very close to $x$ and the argument of $K_0$ be very close to $0$. In that case, the numerical calculus involves transitorily some differences between very big numbers.

All depends how the sofware detect the singular point and how he manage to treat it as a Cauchy principal value integration. I do not know how Mathematica proceed. Presently, I cannot say if the numerical values obtained are significant or not. If it was poved that the results from Mathematica are correct, I would take my hat off !

NOTE 2 :

As pointed out by GEdgard, the singularity at $x=y$ i.e. at $K_0(0)$ is logarithmic. So, there is no major difficulty for numerical computation, in so far some precautions are taken. I made a few numerical tests on this point.

What is more, for several values of $x$ , I computed the derivative $\frac{dI}{dx}$, which is the integral of $\frac{du}{dx}$ . The results are very close to $0$.

This draw to think that the chatur's conjecture $I(x)=$constant might be exact. Of course, this is note a prove.

JJacquelin
  • 66,221
  • 3
  • 37
  • 87
  • I had made mistake of a constant prefactor in the previous calculation. Please see the edit – chatur Feb 22 '15 at 15:31
  • What do you find with $x=0$ ? – JJacquelin Feb 22 '15 at 16:06
  • same as for $x=100$, i.e. $0.378936$ – chatur Feb 22 '15 at 16:14
  • In fact, numerical computation enconters a difficulty because there is a singular point for $K_0(0)=\infty$; The integral is not convergent in the usual sens. But it can be convergent if we consider the Cauchy principal value. I try two different softwares and they do not give the same result (one gave 0.378936 as you got). Actually I cannot conclude. But you should mention in the wording of the question that the integral have to be taken in the sens of Cauchy principal value. I will add a note on this point in my answer. – JJacquelin Feb 22 '15 at 16:57
  • The singularity at zero is only logarithmic, so the integral converges. – GEdgar Feb 22 '15 at 17:56
  • @ GEdgar : Well, that is a good point and an encouragement for further analytical work. But the numetical integration is still hazarduous. – JJacquelin Feb 22 '15 at 18:03
  • @JJacquelin, thanks for the Note-2, this is also what I did to see if $\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}$ is indeed zero. on side note, Do you know how to divide the bounty between two answers? yours and other answer is helpful and it is better to divide it. – chatur Feb 23 '15 at 10:39
  • I don't known if it can be divided. For me, it doesn't matter for the bounty. Give it to anyone you want. – JJacquelin Feb 23 '15 at 10:57
-1

I think there is a typo somewhere. I tell you why. First of allI write your equation as folllow \begin{equation} u(x,y)=g(x,y) K_0(\rho(x,y)) \end{equation} where \begin{equation} g(x,y) =\frac{1}{2\pi}\exp\left(+x^2/2-y^2/2\right) \end{equation} And \begin{equation} \rho(x,y) =\sqrt{(x-y)^2+(-x^2/2+y^2/2)^2} \end{equation} Now please note that when differentiating $g(x,y)$ with respect to $x$ we have \begin{equation} g_x(x,y) =x g(x,y) \end{equation} Then \begin{equation} \frac{d}{dx} u(x,y)=g(x,y) \left(x K_0(\rho(x,y))-K_1(\rho(x,y)) \rho_x(x,y)\right)=0 \end{equation} Differentiating $u(x,y)$ a second time we have: \begin{equation} \frac{d}{dx} u_x(x,y)=g_x(x,y) \left(x K_0(\rho(x,y))-K_1(\rho(x,y)) \right)+g(x,y) \left(K_0(\rho(x,y))-x K_1(\rho(x,y)) \rho_x(x,y)- K_1(\rho(x,y)) \rho_{xx}(x,y) +\frac{\rho^2_x(x,y)}{2} \left(K_0(\rho(x,y))+K_2(\rho(x,y)) \right)\right )=0 \end{equation} Setting the first and second derivative to 0, using the equation $g_x(x,y)= x g(x,y)$ and the property of the modified Bessel function of second kind: \begin{equation} \rho(x,y) \left(K_2(\rho(x,y))-K_0(\rho(x,y)) \right)=2 K_1(\rho(x,y)) \end{equation} It is possible to write the following expression: \begin{equation} \rho(x,y) \rho_x^3(x,y)+x \rho_x^2(x,y)+ \rho_x(x,y) \rho(x,y)(1-x^2)-\rho_{xx}\rho(x,y)=0 \end{equation} This equation must be satisfied by $\rho(x,y)$ defined above. If I dind't do any error (please check because I filled few pages and I'm not completely sure) the $\rho(x,y)$ as define above doesn't satisfy the differential equation for $\rho$.

Upax
  • 2,073
  • 13
  • 18
  • Is it obvious that the derivative and integral can be exchanged? It looks like you gain a singularity which makes it non integrable. – Alex R. Feb 22 '15 at 21:22
  • Thanks a lot Upax for your effort. Note that $\int^{b}{a}f(x) dx = 0$ does not imply f(x) = 0. I checked the differentiation and double differentiation of $u(x,y)$ wrt x and indeed the numerical integral $\int u_x(x,y) =0 $ but not $u_x(x,y) = 0$ or $u{xx}(x,y) = 0$ – chatur Feb 23 '15 at 00:00