Cauchy integral theorem question

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of the Cauchy Integral Theorem (CIT) in the context of a contour integral that yields a total integral of zero due to the presence of residues. Participants explore the implications of this result on the analyticity of the function within the contour, particularly in relation to the concept of simply connected regions and the conditions under which the theorem applies.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that the integral around a contour with two residues summing to zero suggests the function should be analytic inside the contour, questioning why the CIT seems not to apply.
  • Another participant challenges the assumption that the CIT implies the function is analytic, suggesting a potential misunderstanding of Morera's theorem.
  • A different participant references the Cauchy-Riemann relations in the context of the Cauchy Integral Formula, asserting that if the CIT holds, the function should be analytic in the region.
  • One participant points out that the region in question is not simply connected due to the presence of poles, which may affect the applicability of the CIT.
  • Another participant clarifies that the Cauchy-Goursat Theorem indicates that while the integral of an analytic function over a closed contour is zero, the converse does not hold, emphasizing the need for zero integrals over all closed contours to establish analyticity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of the CIT and the conditions under which it applies. There is no consensus on whether the function can be considered analytic given the presence of poles and the nature of the region.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the importance of the region's topology (simply connected vs. not) in determining the applicability of the CIT and related theorems. There are also unresolved questions regarding the necessary conditions for a function to be analytic based on the results of contour integrals.

JohnSimpson
Messages
89
Reaction score
0
I recently did a problem in which the integral around a contour contained two residues, the sum of which was zero, so the total integral around the entire path was zero?

By the CIT, the function should then be analytic (holomorphic, if you like) inside that contour, but it isn't obviously since there are poles.

Why doesen't the CIT apply? Is the region no longer simply connected or something?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why would the CIT imply that the function is analytic?

It looks to me that you're trying to use Morera's theorem, but incorrectly.
 
the cauchy riemann relations are used in the derivation (that I have) of the cauchy integral formula. unless I'm really missing something, this means that if the cauchy integral theorem is satisfied, in that the line integral around a simply closed curve C in a simply connected region is zero, then the function should be analytic within that region.

?
 
The region is not simply connected: it has two holes at the poles. (Rhyme unintentional.)
 
I think you are just confused about the Cauchy-Goursat Theorem, it is a one sided implication which states that the integral of an analytic function over a closed contour is 0, but the converse is not generally true.

You actually don't need a simply connected region to apply Morera's Theorem. However, you need to get zero for every integral around a closed contour to prove that the function is analytic . So if you integrate over just one of the residues, you probably won't get zero, hence the function will fail to be analytic
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K