Inconsistency in Mathematica of whether integral diverges or not?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
3
down vote

favorite












Consider the following integral



Integrate[(1 - x)^a x^b, x, 0, 1]



ConditionalExpression[(Gamma[1 + a] Gamma[1 + b])/Gamma[2 + a + b], Re[b]>-1&&Re[a]>-1]




The above general case states that the integral only converges when Re[b]>-1 and Re[a]>-1. However, if we plug the following explicit constants into the integral, we get:



Integrate[(1 - x)^(-(1/2) - 2 I) x^(-2 + 7 I), x, 0, 1]



(Gamma[-1 + 7 I] Gamma[1/2 - 2 I])/Gamma[-(1/2) + 5 I]




In which case mathematica seems to return a perfectly finite result that is the same as the general result above, except the parameters have been chosen such that the general case would not converge.



Now I am a bit confused and would like to ask:




Is the explicit result obtained above a bug in Mathematica and the integral actually should not converge at all?
Or maybe the result and convergence is fine, and the constraints in the general case are wrong?




Which one is it?






calculus-and-analysis







share|improve this question



























    up vote
    3
    down vote

    favorite












    Consider the following integral



    Integrate[(1 - x)^a x^b, x, 0, 1]



    ConditionalExpression[(Gamma[1 + a] Gamma[1 + b])/Gamma[2 + a + b], Re[b]>-1&&Re[a]>-1]




    The above general case states that the integral only converges when Re[b]>-1 and Re[a]>-1. However, if we plug the following explicit constants into the integral, we get:



    Integrate[(1 - x)^(-(1/2) - 2 I) x^(-2 + 7 I), x, 0, 1]



    (Gamma[-1 + 7 I] Gamma[1/2 - 2 I])/Gamma[-(1/2) + 5 I]




    In which case mathematica seems to return a perfectly finite result that is the same as the general result above, except the parameters have been chosen such that the general case would not converge.



    Now I am a bit confused and would like to ask:




    Is the explicit result obtained above a bug in Mathematica and the integral actually should not converge at all?
    Or maybe the result and convergence is fine, and the constraints in the general case are wrong?




    Which one is it?






    calculus-and-analysis







    share|improve this question

























      up vote
      3
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      3
      down vote

      favorite











      Consider the following integral



      Integrate[(1 - x)^a x^b, x, 0, 1]



      ConditionalExpression[(Gamma[1 + a] Gamma[1 + b])/Gamma[2 + a + b], Re[b]>-1&&Re[a]>-1]




      The above general case states that the integral only converges when Re[b]>-1 and Re[a]>-1. However, if we plug the following explicit constants into the integral, we get:



      Integrate[(1 - x)^(-(1/2) - 2 I) x^(-2 + 7 I), x, 0, 1]



      (Gamma[-1 + 7 I] Gamma[1/2 - 2 I])/Gamma[-(1/2) + 5 I]




      In which case mathematica seems to return a perfectly finite result that is the same as the general result above, except the parameters have been chosen such that the general case would not converge.



      Now I am a bit confused and would like to ask:




      Is the explicit result obtained above a bug in Mathematica and the integral actually should not converge at all?
      Or maybe the result and convergence is fine, and the constraints in the general case are wrong?




      Which one is it?






      calculus-and-analysis







      share|improve this question















      Consider the following integral



      Integrate[(1 - x)^a x^b, x, 0, 1]



      ConditionalExpression[(Gamma[1 + a] Gamma[1 + b])/Gamma[2 + a + b], Re[b]>-1&&Re[a]>-1]




      The above general case states that the integral only converges when Re[b]>-1 and Re[a]>-1. However, if we plug the following explicit constants into the integral, we get:



      Integrate[(1 - x)^(-(1/2) - 2 I) x^(-2 + 7 I), x, 0, 1]



      (Gamma[-1 + 7 I] Gamma[1/2 - 2 I])/Gamma[-(1/2) + 5 I]




      In which case mathematica seems to return a perfectly finite result that is the same as the general result above, except the parameters have been chosen such that the general case would not converge.



      Now I am a bit confused and would like to ask:




      Is the explicit result obtained above a bug in Mathematica and the integral actually should not converge at all?
      Or maybe the result and convergence is fine, and the constraints in the general case are wrong?




      Which one is it?






      calculus-and-analysis




      calculus-and-analysis






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 3 hours ago









      Henrik Schumacher

      39.5k254118




      39.5k254118










      asked 3 hours ago









      Kagaratsch

      4,34031246




      4,34031246




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          4
          down vote



          accepted










          Use:



          Integrate[(1 - x)^(-(1/2) - 2 I) x^(-2 + 7 I), x, m, 1]



          ConditionalExpression[(Gamma[-1 + 7 I] Gamma[1/2 - 2 I])/
          Gamma[-(1/2) + 5 I] + (1/50 + (7 I)/50) m^(-1 + 7 I)
          Hypergeometric2F1[-1 + 7 I, 1/2 + 2 I, 7 I, m],
          0 < Re[m] < 1 && Im[m] == 0]




          and note that the first term is the result from your second integral, while the second, Hypergeometric2F1 term diverges for $m to 0$ due to the factor $m^(-1+7i)$. So, the second example looks like a bug in Integrate.



          Addendum



          Consider the Series expansion about the origin:



          Series[(1 - x)^a x^b, x, 0, 1] //TeXForm



          $x^b left(1-a x+Oleft(x^2right)right)$




          So, the integral will only converge at the origin if $Re(b)>-1$. Similarly, consider the Series expansion about $x=1$:



          Series[(1 - x)^a x^b, x, 1, 1] //TeXForm



          $(1-x)^a left(1+b (x-1)+Oleft((x-1)^2right)right)$




          This integral will converge at $x=1$ only if $Re(a)>-1$.






          share|improve this answer


















          • 1




            To clarify: it's not the hypergeometric function that causes the divergence in the second term, it's the factor m^(-1 + 7 I).
            – J. M. is somewhat okay.♦
            3 hours ago










          • @J.M.issomewhatokay. Agreed, my original wording was confusing.
            – Carl Woll
            3 hours ago










          • The result is certainly confusing, but is it absolutely wrong in all cases? With a suitable (non-standard) branch cut, I think you might be able to choose a spiral path (in the complex plane) to reach x=0 without the integrand diverging.
            – mikado
            3 hours ago










          Your Answer




          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          );
          );
          , "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "387"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: false,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathematica.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f182667%2finconsistency-in-mathematica-of-whether-integral-diverges-or-not%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest

















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          up vote
          4
          down vote



          accepted










          Use:



          Integrate[(1 - x)^(-(1/2) - 2 I) x^(-2 + 7 I), x, m, 1]



          ConditionalExpression[(Gamma[-1 + 7 I] Gamma[1/2 - 2 I])/
          Gamma[-(1/2) + 5 I] + (1/50 + (7 I)/50) m^(-1 + 7 I)
          Hypergeometric2F1[-1 + 7 I, 1/2 + 2 I, 7 I, m],
          0 < Re[m] < 1 && Im[m] == 0]




          and note that the first term is the result from your second integral, while the second, Hypergeometric2F1 term diverges for $m to 0$ due to the factor $m^(-1+7i)$. So, the second example looks like a bug in Integrate.



          Addendum



          Consider the Series expansion about the origin:



          Series[(1 - x)^a x^b, x, 0, 1] //TeXForm



          $x^b left(1-a x+Oleft(x^2right)right)$




          So, the integral will only converge at the origin if $Re(b)>-1$. Similarly, consider the Series expansion about $x=1$:



          Series[(1 - x)^a x^b, x, 1, 1] //TeXForm



          $(1-x)^a left(1+b (x-1)+Oleft((x-1)^2right)right)$




          This integral will converge at $x=1$ only if $Re(a)>-1$.






          share|improve this answer


















          • 1




            To clarify: it's not the hypergeometric function that causes the divergence in the second term, it's the factor m^(-1 + 7 I).
            – J. M. is somewhat okay.♦
            3 hours ago










          • @J.M.issomewhatokay. Agreed, my original wording was confusing.
            – Carl Woll
            3 hours ago










          • The result is certainly confusing, but is it absolutely wrong in all cases? With a suitable (non-standard) branch cut, I think you might be able to choose a spiral path (in the complex plane) to reach x=0 without the integrand diverging.
            – mikado
            3 hours ago














          up vote
          4
          down vote



          accepted










          Use:



          Integrate[(1 - x)^(-(1/2) - 2 I) x^(-2 + 7 I), x, m, 1]



          ConditionalExpression[(Gamma[-1 + 7 I] Gamma[1/2 - 2 I])/
          Gamma[-(1/2) + 5 I] + (1/50 + (7 I)/50) m^(-1 + 7 I)
          Hypergeometric2F1[-1 + 7 I, 1/2 + 2 I, 7 I, m],
          0 < Re[m] < 1 && Im[m] == 0]




          and note that the first term is the result from your second integral, while the second, Hypergeometric2F1 term diverges for $m to 0$ due to the factor $m^(-1+7i)$. So, the second example looks like a bug in Integrate.



          Addendum



          Consider the Series expansion about the origin:



          Series[(1 - x)^a x^b, x, 0, 1] //TeXForm



          $x^b left(1-a x+Oleft(x^2right)right)$




          So, the integral will only converge at the origin if $Re(b)>-1$. Similarly, consider the Series expansion about $x=1$:



          Series[(1 - x)^a x^b, x, 1, 1] //TeXForm



          $(1-x)^a left(1+b (x-1)+Oleft((x-1)^2right)right)$




          This integral will converge at $x=1$ only if $Re(a)>-1$.






          share|improve this answer


















          • 1




            To clarify: it's not the hypergeometric function that causes the divergence in the second term, it's the factor m^(-1 + 7 I).
            – J. M. is somewhat okay.♦
            3 hours ago










          • @J.M.issomewhatokay. Agreed, my original wording was confusing.
            – Carl Woll
            3 hours ago










          • The result is certainly confusing, but is it absolutely wrong in all cases? With a suitable (non-standard) branch cut, I think you might be able to choose a spiral path (in the complex plane) to reach x=0 without the integrand diverging.
            – mikado
            3 hours ago












          up vote
          4
          down vote



          accepted







          up vote
          4
          down vote



          accepted






          Use:



          Integrate[(1 - x)^(-(1/2) - 2 I) x^(-2 + 7 I), x, m, 1]



          ConditionalExpression[(Gamma[-1 + 7 I] Gamma[1/2 - 2 I])/
          Gamma[-(1/2) + 5 I] + (1/50 + (7 I)/50) m^(-1 + 7 I)
          Hypergeometric2F1[-1 + 7 I, 1/2 + 2 I, 7 I, m],
          0 < Re[m] < 1 && Im[m] == 0]




          and note that the first term is the result from your second integral, while the second, Hypergeometric2F1 term diverges for $m to 0$ due to the factor $m^(-1+7i)$. So, the second example looks like a bug in Integrate.



          Addendum



          Consider the Series expansion about the origin:



          Series[(1 - x)^a x^b, x, 0, 1] //TeXForm



          $x^b left(1-a x+Oleft(x^2right)right)$




          So, the integral will only converge at the origin if $Re(b)>-1$. Similarly, consider the Series expansion about $x=1$:



          Series[(1 - x)^a x^b, x, 1, 1] //TeXForm



          $(1-x)^a left(1+b (x-1)+Oleft((x-1)^2right)right)$




          This integral will converge at $x=1$ only if $Re(a)>-1$.






          share|improve this answer














          Use:



          Integrate[(1 - x)^(-(1/2) - 2 I) x^(-2 + 7 I), x, m, 1]



          ConditionalExpression[(Gamma[-1 + 7 I] Gamma[1/2 - 2 I])/
          Gamma[-(1/2) + 5 I] + (1/50 + (7 I)/50) m^(-1 + 7 I)
          Hypergeometric2F1[-1 + 7 I, 1/2 + 2 I, 7 I, m],
          0 < Re[m] < 1 && Im[m] == 0]




          and note that the first term is the result from your second integral, while the second, Hypergeometric2F1 term diverges for $m to 0$ due to the factor $m^(-1+7i)$. So, the second example looks like a bug in Integrate.



          Addendum



          Consider the Series expansion about the origin:



          Series[(1 - x)^a x^b, x, 0, 1] //TeXForm



          $x^b left(1-a x+Oleft(x^2right)right)$




          So, the integral will only converge at the origin if $Re(b)>-1$. Similarly, consider the Series expansion about $x=1$:



          Series[(1 - x)^a x^b, x, 1, 1] //TeXForm



          $(1-x)^a left(1+b (x-1)+Oleft((x-1)^2right)right)$




          This integral will converge at $x=1$ only if $Re(a)>-1$.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 1 hour ago

























          answered 3 hours ago









          Carl Woll

          58.7k276150




          58.7k276150







          • 1




            To clarify: it's not the hypergeometric function that causes the divergence in the second term, it's the factor m^(-1 + 7 I).
            – J. M. is somewhat okay.♦
            3 hours ago










          • @J.M.issomewhatokay. Agreed, my original wording was confusing.
            – Carl Woll
            3 hours ago










          • The result is certainly confusing, but is it absolutely wrong in all cases? With a suitable (non-standard) branch cut, I think you might be able to choose a spiral path (in the complex plane) to reach x=0 without the integrand diverging.
            – mikado
            3 hours ago












          • 1




            To clarify: it's not the hypergeometric function that causes the divergence in the second term, it's the factor m^(-1 + 7 I).
            – J. M. is somewhat okay.♦
            3 hours ago










          • @J.M.issomewhatokay. Agreed, my original wording was confusing.
            – Carl Woll
            3 hours ago










          • The result is certainly confusing, but is it absolutely wrong in all cases? With a suitable (non-standard) branch cut, I think you might be able to choose a spiral path (in the complex plane) to reach x=0 without the integrand diverging.
            – mikado
            3 hours ago







          1




          1




          To clarify: it's not the hypergeometric function that causes the divergence in the second term, it's the factor m^(-1 + 7 I).
          – J. M. is somewhat okay.♦
          3 hours ago




          To clarify: it's not the hypergeometric function that causes the divergence in the second term, it's the factor m^(-1 + 7 I).
          – J. M. is somewhat okay.♦
          3 hours ago












          @J.M.issomewhatokay. Agreed, my original wording was confusing.
          – Carl Woll
          3 hours ago




          @J.M.issomewhatokay. Agreed, my original wording was confusing.
          – Carl Woll
          3 hours ago












          The result is certainly confusing, but is it absolutely wrong in all cases? With a suitable (non-standard) branch cut, I think you might be able to choose a spiral path (in the complex plane) to reach x=0 without the integrand diverging.
          – mikado
          3 hours ago




          The result is certainly confusing, but is it absolutely wrong in all cases? With a suitable (non-standard) branch cut, I think you might be able to choose a spiral path (in the complex plane) to reach x=0 without the integrand diverging.
          – mikado
          3 hours ago

















           

          draft saved


          draft discarded















































           


          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathematica.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f182667%2finconsistency-in-mathematica-of-whether-integral-diverges-or-not%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest
































































          Comments

          Post a Comment

          Popular posts from this blog

          Long meetings (6-7 hours a day): Being “babysat” by supervisor

          Image
          Clash Royale CLAN TAG #URR8PPP .everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0; up vote 31 down vote favorite 4 I hold a PhD in mechanical engineering with a 7 year background in self-guided, self-paced research including 2 years as a graduate level course instructor and a subject matter expert for various engineering projects in a university setting in the United States. For the last 10-11 months, I am working in a research industry in France where my task is to debug C++ spaghetti code written over a period of several years by my current supervisor. It is a team of 2: just I and my supervisor. Diurnally, I am posed with a "bug of the day" to get out of this C++ code. My supervisor generally gives me about 15-30 minutes to solve it and then accosts me about whether or not the task is completed and then rinses and repeats this until the end of the day. Off-late, my supervisor has been holding 6-7 hour long "meetin
          Read more

          Is the Concept of Multiple Fantasy Races Scientifically Flawed? [closed]

          Image
          Clash Royale CLAN TAG #URR8PPP up vote 2 down vote favorite Many fantasy worlds have multiple humanoid species (elves, orcs, humans, etc) living in the same world, in addition to that, they often have the ability to interbreed. And I can't help but question their believability... fantasy-races reproduction interspecies-relations share | improve this question edited Aug 9 at 14:46 Michael Kjörling ♦ 21.1k 10 85 161 asked Aug 9 at 13:13 Chlodio 118 6 closed as unclear what you're asking by MichaelK, Gryphon, John, Vincent, Frostfyre Aug 9 at 15:25 Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question. 3 Stack Exchange exist to
          Read more

          Confectionery

          Image
          Prepared foods made with a lot of sugar or other cabohydrates "Sweetmeat" redirects here. For the racehorse, see Sweetmeat (horse). Not to be confused with Sweetbread. This Kransekake is a traditional Scandinavian baker's confection. Confectionery is the art of making confections , which are food items that are rich in sugar and carbohydrates. Exact definitions are difficult. [1] In general, though, confectionery is divided into two broad and somewhat overlapping categories, bakers' confections and sugar confections. [2] Bakers' confectionery, also called flour confections , includes principally sweet pastries, cakes, and similar baked goods. Sugar confectionery includes candies ( sweets in British English), candied nuts, chocolates, chewing gum, bubble gum, pastillage, and other confections that are made primarily of sugar. In some cases, chocolate confections (confections made of chocolate) are treated as a separate category, as are sugar-free versions of
          Read more