I don't know if this has already been discussed.
Integrate[BesselJ[2 m + 1, x], {x, 0, ∞}, Assumptions -> m ϵ Integers]
ConditionalExpression[1, Re[m] > -1]
Integrate[BesselJ[2 m, x], {x, 0, ∞}, Assumptions -> m ϵ Integers]
ConditionalExpression[1, Re[m] > -(1/2)]
Assuming[m ∈ Integers, Integrate[BesselJ[2 m + 1, x], {x, 0, ∞}]]
ConditionalExpression[1, m > -1]
Assuming[m ∈ Integers, Integrate[BesselJ[2 m, x], {x, 0, ∞}]]
ConditionalExpression[1, m > -(1/2)]
Why doesn't Mathematica consider the evenness or oddness of the 1st argument (i.e., 2 m or 2 m + 1)?
Assuming[{k ∈ Integers}, Integrate[ Exp[ I k t], {t, -π, π}]]returns an incorrect result whereasIntegrate[ Exp[ I k t], {t, -π, π},Assumptions->k ∈ Integers]returns the correct one. Here it seams that Integrate simply ignores (or cannot take into account) theAssumptionsand proceed to its evaluation of the integrand without anyAssumptionsfor both of the cases. – Dimitris Oct 16 '15 at 12:10Simplify[Integrate[Exp[I k t], {t, -\[Pi], \[Pi]}, Assumptions -> k \[Element] Integers], k \[Element] Integers]. – Michael E2 Oct 16 '15 at 13:03Integratecannot utilize the includedAssumptionsso it treatsIntegrate[BesselJ[2 m, x], {x, 0, ∞}, Assumptions -> m ϵ Integers]as simpleIntegrate[BesselJ[2 m, x], {x, 0, ∞}]. Am I correct? – Dimitris Oct 16 '15 at 14:57Assumingresult should be like the one in which youSimplifytheAssumptionsresult like this:With[{res = Integrate[BesselJ[2 m + 1, x], {x, 0, ∞}, Assumptions -> m ∈ Integers]}, Assuming[m ∈ Integers, Simplify[res]]], which it is. (If$Assumptionsis used elsewhere in computing the integral, one might get other differences, too, I suppose.) See also this, which coincidentally came up a little after your question. – Michael E2 Oct 17 '15 at 02:31