Can I Use Substitution to Prove the Residue Theorem Integral?

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around using substitution to prove that a specific integral equals zero, referencing techniques from previous equations. The user expresses a preference for a method similar to their professor's approach rather than using an anti-derivative. Cauchy's Integral Theorem is cited to support that certain integrals are zero due to the absence of singularities. The conversation includes attempts to clarify the integration technique and its application to the problem at hand. Ultimately, the user seeks validation of their method while adhering to their professor's style.
MatinSAR
Messages
673
Reaction score
204
Homework Statement
Prove Residue theorem.
Relevant Equations
Please see the following.
1719052715934.png

Integral 7.2 is ok. I must employ the integration technique used in 7.2 to prove that integral equation 7.1 equals zero. For n<0 we have : $$\sum_{n=- \infty}^{-2} a_n \oint (z-z_0)^ndz$$For n>0 we have : $$\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} a_n \oint (z-z_0)^ndz$$
According to Cauchy's Integral Theorem, since there are no singularities within contour C, the value of the second integral is zero. But for n<0 , ##(z-z_0)^n## isn't an analytic function so it can be unzero.

How can I show that this integral is also equal to zero? Can I show it by using the substitution ##z-z_0=re^{i\theta}## like 7.2? Or I should do sth more than this...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why don't you use the given anti-derivative?
 
fresh_42 said:
Why don't you use the given anti-derivative?
Thank you for tour reply @fresh_42
Do you mean the anti-derivative term in equation 7.1?
If so, I prefer not to use that method because my professor used a different method, and I intend to use a similar approach to his. I recall that his method was similar to the approach in 7.2.
 
MatinSAR said:
Thank you for tour reply @fresh_42
Do you mean the anti-derivative term in equation 7.1?
Yes.
MatinSAR said:
If so, I prefer not to use that method because my professor used a different method, and I intend to use a similar approach to his. I recall that his method was similar to the approach in 7.2.
I don't think that would be a big difference, but let's see. I did the same as in 7.2. which you suggested in

\begin{align*} \oint_\gamma \dfrac{1}{z-z_0}\,dz&=\int_0^{2\pi}\dfrac{1}{re^{it}} \cdot ire^{it} \,dt=i\cdot \int_0^{2\pi}dt=2\pi i\\ \oint_\gamma \left(z-z_0\right)^p\,dz&\stackrel{(p\neq -1)}{=}\int_0^{2\pi} r^p e^{i p t} \cdot ire^{it}\,dt=ir^{p+1}\int_0^{2\pi} e^{i(p+1)t}\,dt\\ &=ir^{p+1}\left[\dfrac{e^{i(p+1)t}}{i(p+1)}\right]_0^{2\pi}=\dfrac{r^{p+1}}{p+1}(e^{2(p+1)\pi i t}-e^0)=0\,. \end{align*}

Reference: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/an-overview-of-complex-differentiation-and-integration/

Was that what you meant?

Edit: The path here was
##\gamma(t)=z_0+re^{i t}\, , \,0\leq t\leq 2\pi##
and the path integral
\begin{align*} \int_\gamma f(z)\,dz &=…\text{ (substitution }z=\gamma(t)\, , \,dz=\gamma’\,dt) \\ …&=\int_a^b (f\circ \gamma )(t)\cdot \gamma’\,dt =\int_a^b f(\gamma (t))\cdot \gamma'(t)\,dt \end{align*}
 
Last edited:
MatinSAR said:
my professor used a different method, and I intend to use a similar approach
But you aren't going to tell us what it is, hoping we hit on it by accident? That seems...inefficient and likely slow.
 
fresh_42 said:
Yes.

I don't think that would be a big difference, but let's see. I did the same as in 7.2. which you suggested in

\begin{align*} \oint_\gamma \dfrac{1}{z-z_0}\,dz&=\int_0^{2\pi}\dfrac{1}{re^{it}} \cdot ire^{it} \,dt=i\cdot \int_0^{2\pi}dt=2\pi i\\ \oint_\gamma \left(z-z_0\right)^p\,dz&\stackrel{(p\neq -1)}{=}\int_0^{2\pi} r^p e^{i p t} \cdot ire^{it}\,dt=ir^{p+1}\int_0^{2\pi} e^{i(p+1)t}\,dt\\ &=ir^{p+1}\left[\dfrac{e^{i(p+1)t}}{i(p+1)}\right]_0^{2\pi}=\dfrac{r^{p+1}}{p+1}(e^{2(p+1)\pi i t}-e^0)=0\,. \end{align*}

Reference: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/an-overview-of-complex-differentiation-and-integration/

Was that what you meant?
It seems similar enough to my professor's method for me to use in the exam. I wrote something similar to this as well. Thank you for your time @fresh_42
Vanadium 50 said:
But you aren't going to tell us what it is, hoping we hit on it by accident? That seems...inefficient and likely slow.
Hello. I wasn't expecting mind reading. I was just looking for a similar approach, like what was mentioned above.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K