Cauchy-Reimann from first principles

  • Thread starter Thread starter gtfitzpatrick
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The function f(z) = \overline{z}^2 is proven to be non-differentiable at any point where z ≠ 0 using first principles. The proof involves demonstrating that the limit \(\lim_{h\rightarrow0} \frac{f(z+h)-f(z)}{h}\) does not exist. By applying the epsilon-delta definition of differentiability and evaluating the limit along two different sequences, x_n = 1/n and y_n = i/n, it is established that the function yields two distinct limits, confirming its non-differentiability.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of complex functions and their properties
  • Familiarity with the epsilon-delta definition of limits
  • Knowledge of sequences in complex analysis
  • Basic comprehension of the Cauchy-Riemann equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the epsilon-delta definition of limits in detail
  • Explore the Cauchy-Riemann equations and their implications for differentiability
  • Learn about complex sequences and their convergence properties
  • Investigate other functions that are non-differentiable in the complex plane
USEFUL FOR

Students of complex analysis, mathematicians focusing on differentiability, and educators teaching advanced calculus concepts.

gtfitzpatrick
Messages
372
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Prove from first principles that f(z) = \overline{z}^2 is not differentiable at any point z ≠ 0

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



So i guess i Have to show \stackrel{lim}{h\rightarrow0} \frac{f(z+h)-f(z)}{h} is equal to zero right?

\frac{\overline{z+h}^2-\overline{z}^2}{h} but not sure where to go from here.
Do i use z=(x+iy) then \overline{z} = x-iy and so \overline{z}^2 = x^2-y^2-i2xy
 
Physics news on Phys.org
gtfitzpatrick said:
i Have to show \stackrel{lim}{h\rightarrow0} \frac{f(z+h)-f(z)}{h} is equal to zero right?

No, you need to prove that it does not exist. Start by formulating "limit does not exist" in the epsilon-delta language.
 
You could assume the limit exists (and hence f is differentiable), and calculate it twice using two sequences which converge to zero, and find that you get two different limits. In this case, your assumption becomes false, so f isn't differentiable.

You do know that the definition of differentiability you have is equivalent to having the limit
\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\frac{f(z+x_n)-f(z)}{x_n}
exist for every (complex!) sequence x_n\rightarrow 0, right?

In this case, I recommend you work with the definition you have, and see what happens when you approach zero along these two sequences:
x_n=1/n
y_n=i/n.

In general, such an approach is usually the best way to show that something -isn't- differentiable. Unless of course you have the Cauchy-Riemann equations :)
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K