Can You Take the Inverse of an Integral in Complex Analysis?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter moo5003
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integration Inverse
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the question of whether it is possible to take the inverse of an integral in the context of complex analysis, specifically regarding an integral over a closed curve in the complex plane. The scope includes theoretical reasoning and application to a homework problem involving analytic functions.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the possibility of taking the inverse of an integral involving an analytic function and a singularity at zero, seeking clarification on the reasoning behind it.
  • Another participant suggests that if the integral has bounds, then an inverse cannot be taken; otherwise, differentiation may be an option.
  • A different participant proposes the use of the residue theorem as a potential method to address the integral.
  • A later reply references Cauchy's integral formula, explaining that the integral can be related to derivatives of the function at a point inside the closed path, and discusses the implications of integrating a Taylor series term by term.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the possibility of taking the inverse of the integral, with some suggesting differentiation or the residue theorem while others reference established results like Cauchy's integral formula. No consensus is reached on a definitive method or conclusion.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes assumptions about the nature of the integral and the analytic function involved, as well as the implications of singularities. The specific conditions under which the integral can be manipulated are not fully resolved.

Who May Find This Useful

Students and practitioners interested in complex analysis, particularly those dealing with integrals and singularities in analytic functions.

moo5003
Messages
202
Reaction score
0
Question:

In my homework problem, I'm trying to get rid of an integration over a close curve on the complex plane. I was wondering if its possible to somehow take the inverse of the integral on other side of the following equatin.

Please explain the reasoning of why or why not so that I can understand it for future problems :P.

2ipif'(0) = Integral over alpha (Any circle containing 0 on the interior) of f(x)/x^2.

Where f(x) is an analytic function from c to c.

Obviously f(x)/x^2 is not analytic on all c, since 0 is a critical point, I was still wondering if there is a way to get rid of the integral by doing something on both sides of the equation. Thanks for any help you can provide.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Does the integral have bounds? If so, no inverse. Otherwise, differentiate.
 
Use the residue theorem.
 
moo5003 said:
Question:

In my homework problem, I'm trying to get rid of an integration over a close curve on the complex plane. I was wondering if its possible to somehow take the inverse of the integral on other side of the following equatin.

Please explain the reasoning of why or why not so that I can understand it for future problems :P.

2ipif'(0) = Integral over alpha (Any circle containing 0 on the interior) of f(x)/x^2.

Where f(x) is an analytic function from c to c.

Obviously f(x)/x^2 is not analytic on all c, since 0 is a critical point, I was still wondering if there is a way to get rid of the integral by doing something on both sides of the equation. Thanks for any help you can provide.

What you have is a special case of Cauchy's integral formula:
[tex]2\pi i f^{(n)}(z_0)= \int \frac{f(z)}{(z-z_0)^{n+1}}dz[/tex]
where the integration is over any closed path (not necessarily a circle) with z0[/sup] in its interior and f(z) is analytic inside the path. You can prove it by writing f as a Taylor's series, dividing each term by (z- z0)n+1 and then integrating term by term. It is easy to show that [itex]\int (z-z_0)^n dz[/itex] over a closed path containing z0 is 0 for any n other than -1 and is [itex]2\pi i[/itex] when n= -1.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K