Cauchy,s theorem on real plane?(R^2)

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter eljose
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Theorem
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the application of Cauchy's theorem in the context of the real plane (R²), exploring the conditions under which it may be applicable, particularly focusing on differential forms and their properties. Participants examine the implications of singularities and the use of generalized theorems such as Green's theorem.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that Cauchy's theorem can be applied to R² with specific restrictions, such as requiring the differential form to be invariant under rotation and to derive from a gradient.
  • Others argue that the integral over a curve in R² with a singularity at a specific distance from the origin can be expressed in terms of the normal component of the differential form evaluated at that point.
  • A participant introduces Green's theorem as a relevant theorem for the discussion, noting its relationship to the proof of similar equations in complex analysis.
  • Concerns are raised about the formulation of the problem, particularly regarding the singularity of the integrand along the entire circle of radius a centered on the origin.
  • Another participant discusses the integration over two curves and the implications of the radial part of the differential form being invariant under rotations, linking it to concepts in surface integrals and the divergence theorem.
  • One participant clarifies the structure of the boundary of a ring in 2-space, distinguishing between the outer and inner boundaries in the context of the integral.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the applicability of Cauchy's theorem in R², with no consensus reached on the correct formulation or implications of the theorem in this context. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the conditions and interpretations of the integrals involved.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on the definitions of singularities and the specific forms of the differential equations being discussed, as well as unresolved mathematical steps related to the integration process.

eljose
Messages
484
Reaction score
0
could actually the Cauchy theorem be applied to [tex]R^{2}[/tex] of course with some restrictions..namely

-The differential form must be invariant under rotation in the plane
-The differential form must come from a gradient [tex]\nabla{S}=f/(|r|-a)[/tex]

with this using the same techniques by Cuachy we could se the equality:

[tex]\Int_{C}dq.F(x,y)//(|r|-a)=2\piF_{r}(a)[/tex]

this means somehow that the integral over a curve on RxR is equal to the normal component evaluated at the point r=a where r is the modulus of the vector (x,y,z)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Of course i meant the formula:

[tex]\int_{C}dq.F(x,y)/(|r|-a)=2\pi{F_{r}(a)}[/tex]

where the integral along a curve of a 2-differential form with a singularity at the point whose distance from the origin is equal to "a", is set to be the normal component (invariant under rotations in RxR) of the differential form F..the derivation would be the same..we set a circle of radius [tex]\epsilon[/tex] and make this epsilon tend to zero...
 
By the way, you can use that button "Edit" to edit your posts to fix the LaTeX. (You will have to reload the page to get the updated image)


Anyways, you want to do differential geometry! The key theorem you want to use here is the generalized Stoke's theorem. A special case is Green's theorem:

If D is a region of R², and C is the boundary of D, and P and Q are scalar fields with continuous partial derivatives, then:

[tex] \oint_C P \, dx + Q \, dy = \iint_D \left( \frac{\partial Q}{\partial x} - \frac{\partial P}{\partial y} \right) \, dA[/tex]

Notice that if the vector field (P, Q) is the gradient of some scalar field, then the right hand side is zero.


The proof idea for what you want to show is similar to the proof of the similar equation in complex analysis, but with Green's theorem being the theorem that you use to justify changing the curve.



Now, I suspect you haven't stated your problem right. Did you really intend for your integrand to be singular along the entire circle of radius a centered on the origin?
 
Last edited:
-No Hurkyl..i perform the integration about two curves in the form:

[tex]\oint_{C}F.dq-\oint_{\epsilon}{Pdx+Qdy}[/tex]

the first curve encloses the area marked by the curve except a 2-D "ball" of leghnt [tex]\epsilon{2\pi}[/tex] in which the point (x0,y0) is and note that:

[tex]a^{2}=(x_{0})^{2}+(y_{0})^{2}[/tex] of course on the contrary to Cauchy,s theorem in which "a" was a complex number the corresponding value of a must be somehow an scalar, expressed as a distance from the origin of the point (x0,y0) and we must impose that at least the "radial" part of the differential Form F must be invariant under rotations on x-y plane..by the way generalizing to Surface integrals and using divergence theorem (Gauss) we could express the "charge of monopoles" as the result of a singularity of the form [tex]a/r^{2}[/tex] for the Magnetic field B (vector)

-a is some kind of distance (note that there are no 2-D real number)
 
Last edited:
If R is a ring in 2-space, then the boundary of R consists (which I'll call C) of the two curves: C_1, the outer boundary, and C_2, the inner boundary. By definition:

[tex] \oint_C \omega = \oint_{C_1} \omega - \oint_{C_2} \omega[/tex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K