Solution

ID: past-exam-of-the-mathematics-course-of-the-year-2-of-the-natural-sciences-course-of-the-university-of-cambridge/2012/paper-2/3/solution

The terms cancel in . For a ball , the product rule and divergence theorem give Green's second identity in the form
Thus the whole-space integral vanishes when this boundary term tends to zero. For example, uniform bounds and , with , make it .
Pointwise vanishing alone, as stated in the source, is insufficient. Smooth fields agreeing with and outside a ball both tend to zero, but their distant boundary integral is . One may smooth them inside the ball without changing that flux. The requested zero identity therefore needs sufficient decay or boundary/radiation conditions that actually eliminate the boundary term.
For the generalized plane wave eigenfunctions, their orthogonality is distributional:
Here is the Fourier representation of the Dirac delta function. These eigenfunctions are not ordinary square-integrable functions or decaying test fields.
Expand and define . Since , projection of the source equation gives . Formally dividing and substituting back gives
At the shell , a pole prescription is required; homogeneous solutions can otherwise be added. The formula is an inverse of the Helmholtz equation with that convention still to be selected.
Let denote the kernel in this source formula, so . Put and align the Fourier polar axis with . Angular integration gives
Consequently the radial Fourier representation of the Helmholtz Green function gives
The last Green function written in the PDF has the opposite denominator. It is obtained by setting , the common convention :
Thus the two displayed source and Green formulas are consistent only when this minus sign is retained; cannot also be the positive-delta inverse kernel.
Finally the integral is not an ordinary improper integral across . A Cauchy principal value yields . The outgoing prescription yields the outgoing Green function for the three-dimensional Helmholtz equation, ; the opposite sign gives the incoming wave. The Sokhotski–Plemelj formula accounts for their difference. The source does not specify which prescription is intended, so the boxed radial expression must be read with one chosen consistently.

New to topics? Read the docs here!