MHB Cauchy Integral Theorem with partial fractions

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around evaluating the integral of the function 1/(z² + z) using Cauchy's Integral Theorem in a multiply connected region. Participants clarify that direct application of the theorem is not permitted due to the presence of two singularities, z=0 and z=-1, which necessitates the use of Cauchy's Integral formula instead. The integral is correctly computed as zero for both specified contour paths, confirming the calculations. Additionally, an alternative approach using the substitution z=Re^(iθ) is explored, with suggestions to modify contours to maintain the integral's value. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the implications of singularities in complex integration.
ognik
Messages
626
Reaction score
2
(Wish there was a solutions manual...). Please check my workings below

Show $ \int \frac{dz}{{z}^{2} + z} = 0 $ by separating integrand into partial fractions and applying Cauchy's Integral theorem for multiply connected regions. For 2 paths (i) |z| = R > 1 (ii) A square with corners $ \pm 2 \pm 2i $

They also say direct use of Cauchy's Integral theorem is 'illegal' - am I right, that is because the 2 singularities make it multiply connected, so instead we use Cauchy's Integral formula?

$ \int \frac{dz}{{z}^{2} + z} = \int \frac{dz}{z - 0} - \int\frac{dz}{z-(-1)} $
Both singularities - z=0 and z=-1 - are interior, for both contours. (Is it OK to have z-0 like I have? I think I saw something about ${z}_{0} \: must\ne 0$?

$ \therefore \int \frac{dz}{{z}^{2} + z} = 2\pi i - 2\pi i = 0$ for both paths. Is that correct?

--------------------------------
I wondered if I could do it without p/fractions, so for path(i) set $ z=Re^{i\theta}, dz=iRe^{i\theta} d\theta $

I simplified that to $ i\oint\frac{d\theta}{Re^{i\theta}+1} $ ... would appreciate a hint for the next step?
(I think I shouldn't have that R, just $\theta - 0 \le \theta \le 2\pi $ ?)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ognik said:
(Wish there was a solutions manual...). Please check my workings below

Show $ \int \frac{dz}{{z}^{2} + z} = 0 $ by separating integrand into partial fractions and applying Cauchy's Integral theorem for multiply connected regions. For 2 paths (i) |z| = R > 1 (ii) A square with corners $ \pm 2 \pm 2i $

They also say direct use of Cauchy's Integral theorem is 'illegal' - am I right, that is because the 2 singularities make it multiply connected, so instead we use Cauchy's Integral formula?

Right. However, you could use the theorem indirectly by modifying the given contours in such a way that you can retain the original values. Could you see how to do that?

$ \int \frac{dz}{{z}^{2} + z} = \int \frac{dz}{z - 0} - \int\frac{dz}{z-(-1)} $
Both singularities - z=0 and z=-1 - are interior, for both contours. (Is it OK to have z-0 like I have? I think I saw something about ${z}_{0} \: must\ne 0$?

That should be fine. I don't think $z_0\not=0$ is required. The statement of the theorem mentions nothing about the value of $z_0$.

$ \therefore \int \frac{dz}{{z}^{2} + z} = 2\pi i - 2\pi i = 0$ for both paths. Is that correct?

Looks good to me!

--------------------------------
I wondered if I could do it without p/fractions, so for path(i) set $ z=Re^{i\theta}, dz=iRe^{i\theta} d\theta $

I simplified that to $ i\oint\frac{d\theta}{Re^{i\theta}+1} $ ... would appreciate a hint for the next step?
(I think I shouldn't have that R, just $\theta - 0 \le \theta \le 2\pi $ ?)

Maybe. I'm not entirely sure where to go next.
 
Ackbach said:
Right. However, you could use the theorem indirectly by modifying the given contours in such a way that you can retain the original values. Could you see how to do that?

I would deform the R>1 disc with a thin intrusion from the left (looks a bit like a left-facing pacman :-)), that left both singularities exterior to the now simply connected region. This creates a new 'internal' path, from the beginning to the end of the break in C, same direction, I will call that C2

Then, by Cauchy's Integral Theorem, $ \int_{C}^{} f(z)\,dz = \int_{C_2}^{} f(z)\,dz $,
IE $ \int_{C}^{} f(z)\,dz - \int_{C_2}^{} f(z)\,dz = 0$
-------------

Can anyone suggest a next step with my earlier attempt at using $ Re^{i\theta} $? I considered using a power series, but that included R and theta, and didn't converge...
 
We all know the definition of n-dimensional topological manifold uses open sets and homeomorphisms onto the image as open set in ##\mathbb R^n##. It should be possible to reformulate the definition of n-dimensional topological manifold using closed sets on the manifold's topology and on ##\mathbb R^n## ? I'm positive for this. Perhaps the definition of smooth manifold would be problematic, though.

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
846
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K