Talk:Watson's lemma

Statement of the lemma
There is a problem with T, in some cases there shoud be an ∞ instead of T — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.247.242.252 (talk) 16:31, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

The example
I have replaced the previous example which used Watson's lemma unnecessarily with a new one. A-R-Vargas (talk) 23:44, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

In the statement of the lemma, bounding the function phi by an exponential is useful for growing functions but it doesn't allow for phi to have integrable singularities in the interval of integration. I've added the alternative assumption that phi is just integrable which covers this possibility. This case is proved in Miller's text cited below the statement of the lemma. A-R-Vargas (talk) 18:10, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Motivation
The introduction of the article could use some motivation for why Watson's lemma is useful. Maybe some applications in physics could be mentioned. --A-R-Vargas (talk) 10:05, 24 October 2017 (UTC)