2

It is known that: $$ (\nabla^2+k^2)(-\frac{e^{ikr}}{4\pi r})=\delta(\vec{r}) $$ where $k>0$ and $\delta(\vec{r})$ is the three dimensional Dirac delta function.

My question is, is it possible to find a function $f(\vec{r})$ that satisfies the following relation: $$ \left[\frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2}+\frac{\partial^2}{\partial y^2}-(\frac{\partial}{\partial z}+i\alpha)^2-k^2\right] f(\vec{r})=\delta(\vec{r}) $$

Where $\alpha>0,k>0$.

1 Answers1

3

Fourier transforming your equation, you can check that the function $f({\bf r})$ is given by $$f({\bf r}) = \int \frac{d^3 q}{(2\pi)^3} \frac{e^{i {\bf q} \cdot {\bf r}}}{(q_3+\alpha)^2 - q_1^2 -q_2^2 -k^2 }$$ with ${\bf q} = (q_1,q_2,q_3)$. You can still impose boundary conditions on $f({\bf r})$ which corresponds to shifting the position of the poles below or above the real axis (here, I will choose outgoing wave Green's function).

The integrand has poles at $q_3 = -\alpha \pm \sqrt{k^2 +q_1^2+q_2^2}$. We perform the integral over $q_3$ by closing the contour on the upper complex plane and taking the pole with $+$ inside the contour. We obtain $$f({\bf r}) = -\frac{i e^{i \alpha r_3}}{2} \int\frac{d^2 q}{(2\pi)^2} \frac{e^{i q_1 r_1 + i q_2 r_2 +i (k^2 + q_1^2 + q_2^2)^{1/2}r_3}}{\sqrt{k^2+q_1^2 + q_2^2}} .$$

For the remaining integral, we introduce $\rho = \sqrt{r_1^2+r_2^2}$ and $q_1 = q \cos \phi, q_2= q \sin\phi$, where $\phi$ is the angle measured with respect to $(r_1,r_2)$. We obtain $$\int\frac{d^2 q}{(2\pi)^2} \frac{e^{i q_1 r_1 + i q_2 r_2+i (k^2 + q_1^2 + q_2^2)^{1/2}r_3}}{\sqrt{k^2+q_1^2 + q_2^2}} = \int_0^\infty \!\frac{dq}{2\pi}\,\int_{0}^{2\pi}\!\frac{d\phi}{2\pi}\frac{q e^{iq \rho \cos\phi + i (k^2+q^2)^{1/2} r_3}}{\sqrt{k^2+q^2}}\\=\int_0^\infty \!\frac{dq}{2\pi} \frac{q e^{i (k^2+q^2)^{1/2} r_3} J_0(\rho q)}{\sqrt{k^2+q^2}} = -\frac{i e^{ik (r_3^2 -\rho^2)^{1/2}} }{2\pi \sqrt{r_3^2 -\rho^2}}. $$

So, we obtain the final result $$ f({\bf r}) =- \frac{ e^{-i \alpha r_3 +ik (r_3^2 -r_1^2-r_2^2)^{1/2}}}{4 \pi\sqrt{r_3^2 -r_1^2-r_2^2}}.$$

Edit:

There is an alternative much more conceptual way to arrive at the final result. It is obtained by using ideas of analytical continuation. In physics it is also known as Wick rotation. We are interested in a solution to $$\left[\partial_1^2+\partial_2^2-(\partial_3+i\alpha)^2-k^2\right] f({\bf r})=\delta({\bf r}).\tag{1}$$ For convenience, we first introduce a new function $\tilde f({\bf r}) = e^{-i \alpha r_3} f({\bf r})$ in terms of which (1) assumes the (homogeneous) form $$ (\partial_1^2+ \partial_2^2 - \partial_3^2 -k^2) \tilde f({\bf r}) =\delta({\bf r}).$$

Let us instead study the family of equations $$(-e^{i\theta}\partial_1^2-e^{i\theta} \partial_2^2 - \partial_3^2 -k^2) g_\theta({\bf r}) = \delta({\bf r}).$$ For $\theta=0$ we have $g_0({\bf r}) =e^{i k |{\bf r}|}/(4\pi |{\bf r}|)$ according to the question. We obtain $\tilde f$ from $g_\theta$ by analytical continuation as $\theta \uparrow \pi$ or $\theta \downarrow -\pi$.

We have the general relation $$ g_\theta({\bf r}) = \int\!\frac{d^3q}{(2\pi)^3} \frac{e^{i{\bf q}\cdot{\bf r}}}{q_3^3 + e^{i\theta} (q_1^2 + q_2^2) -k^2}. $$ Introducing new integration variable $ \tilde{\bf q}= (e^{i\theta/2}q_1,e^{i\theta/2}q_2,q_3)$, we obtain the alternative expression (here we have to be careful that there is no contribution from the arc at infinity) $$ g_\theta({\bf r}) = e^{-i\theta}\int\!\frac{d^3 \tilde q}{(2\pi)^3} \frac{e^{i\tilde{\bf q}\cdot\tilde{\bf r}}}{\tilde {\bf q}^2 -k^2} =e^{-i\theta}g_0(\tilde{\bf r}) $$ with $$\tilde{\bf r}= (e^{-i\theta/2} r_1,e^{-i\theta/2} r_2 ,r_3).$$ Letting $\theta \to \pi$, we obtain the result $$ \tilde f({\bf r}) = g_\pi({\bf r}) = -g_0(-i r_1, -i r_2,r_3)= - \frac{e^{i k (r_3^2-r_1^2-r_2^2)^{1/2}}}{4\pi \sqrt{r_3^2-r_1^2-r_2^2}}$$

Fabian
  • 24,230
  • Thanks for your answer! My concern is, is there any trouble when $r_3^2-r_1^2-r_2^2=0$ and when $r_3^2<r_1^2+r_2^2$ ? – an offer can't refuse Aug 29 '16 at 15:25
  • For $r_3^2 < r_1^2 + r_2^2$ the solution will be exponentially decaying (you can analytically continue it). There is a divergence at $r_3^2 = r_1^2 +r_2^2$. But the divergence is mild in the sense that it is integrable and thus $f({\bf r})$ can be interpreted as density (or similar). – Fabian Aug 29 '16 at 20:21
  • The last step integral over q is not clear to me, could you elaborate this? – an offer can't refuse Aug 30 '16 at 02:25
  • The integral over $q$ is solved by substituting $x=(1+q^2/k^2)^{1/2}$ and then using Formula 6.616.1 of Gradshteyn and Ryzhik. – Fabian Aug 30 '16 at 05:36
  • You are amazing, I happen to have that book on my desk! – an offer can't refuse Aug 30 '16 at 05:58
  • It seems that you choose $\sqrt{-1}=-i$ in the last step, any reasons? If I choose it to be $i$, the answer should be different. – an offer can't refuse Aug 30 '16 at 07:27
  • To be honest, I did not do the analytical continuation too carefully. You can observe that (for $\alpha=0$) and ${\bf r} \propto {\bf e}_3$ (such that only the $\partial_3$ term is important, your equation reduces essentially to the Helmholtz equation in your question. So I tried to choose the factors in such a way, that the function $-e^{i k r}/(4\pi r)$ results in this limit. – Fabian Aug 30 '16 at 07:37
  • I have two additional concerns: 1) when you integrate $q_3$, you actually manually subtract an infinitesimal constant in the denominator, it should still be present at the denominator in equation-2 in your answer. You seems have dropped it and continued to work on $\phi$ and $q$. Does this has any side effects? – an offer can't refuse Aug 30 '16 at 09:57
  • This might related to the first equation. In the last step you have used an equation from the table of integrals, in our case $\alpha$ is purely imaginary, does this equation still holds? see the second point of this post...http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1908181/how-to-integrate-int-1-infty-mathrmdx-e-alpha-xj-0-beta-sqrtx2-1
  • – an offer can't refuse Aug 30 '16 at 09:59
  • Irrespective of the integral, you can check that my final formula fulfils the differential equation you have posed initially. Some of the problems are connected to analytical continuation but such problems just reflect the fact that there are different results to the problem posed (depending on boundary conditions which you might impose). – Fabian Aug 30 '16 at 12:02
  • I checked that if the formula wants to satisfies the differential equation, the following condition must be satisfied: $$\int\mathrm{d}^3r\left[(\partial_1^2+\partial_2^2-\partial_3^2)\frac{1}{\sqrt{r_3^2-r_1^2-r_2^2}}\right]=1$$, but is this condition really holds? – an offer can't refuse Sep 05 '16 at 04:15