Complex Analysis or Complex Variables?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the choice between two courses: Complex Variables and Complex Analysis I, focusing on their content, difficulty, and relevance to physics students. Participants share their experiences and considerations regarding the theoretical versus computational aspects of each course.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that Complex Analysis may be more rigorous and theory-focused, potentially including more proofs than necessary for physics applications.
  • Others argue that Complex Variables might be more beneficial for practical computations relevant to physics, emphasizing its focus on calculus with complex numbers.
  • A participant notes that while Complex Analysis may not cover more topics, it could provide a deeper theoretical understanding, which may be useful in advanced physics topics like general relativity.
  • Concerns are raised about the potential conflict between course schedules, particularly with a graduate optics course, which may influence the decision on which course to take.
  • One participant mentions that a rigorous complex analysis course could better prepare students for studying Riemann surfaces, relevant in string theory.
  • A later reply indicates that familiarity with complex variables is often a prerequisite for complex analysis, suggesting that students might be able to transition directly into the analysis course if they have the necessary background.
  • Another participant introduces a separate topic related to fracture mechanics, seeking help with a specific equation and its physical interpretation, which diverges from the main course discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing opinions on the utility and focus of the two courses, with no consensus on which course is definitively better for physics students. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best choice for the original poster.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the differences in focus between the two courses, with Complex Analysis potentially being more abstract and theoretical, while Complex Variables may prioritize computational skills. There are also concerns about course scheduling conflicts that could affect enrollment decisions.

PhyConnected
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone,

I'm a Physics student going into my Junior year and I'm currently registering for my courses for the following semester and I have two options for my "complex" course, namely:

---------------------------------------------------
Complex Variables

Theory of functions of one complex variable, analytic and meromorphic functions. Cauchys theorem, residue calculus, conformal mappings, introduction to analytic continuation and harmonic functions.

OR

Complex Analysis I

Complex numbers, the complex plane and Riemann sphere, Mobius transformations, elementary functions and their mapping properties, conformal mapping, holomorphic functions, Cauchys theorem and integral formula. Taylor and Laurent series, maximum modulus principle, Schwarzs lemma, residue theorem and residue calculus.
---------------------------------------------------

The second course is a requirement for Honors Maths program, while the first one is open to all Physics students and Maths Minors.
I was wondering whether it would be worthy of taking Complex Analysis over Complex variables? (based on the course description or any similar experience)

Thanks! :smile:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That depends on you. "Complex Analysis" will be harder and include more theory and "proofs" than you really need for physics. But if you are sure you can do it and enjoy that kind of thing, go for it.
 
HallsofIvy said:
That depends on you. "Complex Analysis" will be harder and include more theory and "proofs" than you really need for physics. But if you are sure you can do it and enjoy that kind of thing, go for it.
I certainly wouldn't mind doing more proofs, but does the material or extra rigor in Complex Analysis add any extra utility for a Physics major in the long-run?

For instance I took Honors multivariable Cal (Calculus on Manifolds) last year thinking that there would be limited applications, but then I eventually realized that the material played a crucial role in GR, which is a senior year course. So it seems like certain "rigorous" topics tend to become useful later.

For this case, I looked up Wiki and it says that Riemann spheres have applications in quantum mechanics.

The issue is Complex Analysis partly conflicts with a graduate optics course I'd really like to take, and in case their final exam also conflicts I'll be forced to drop the Optics course.
If the extra training isn't worthy of much, I might as well not take the risk.

Thanks again.
 
Last edited:
For this situation, I'd say the difference between these two classes is different than the difference between regular and honors multivar calc. Here, there won't necessarily be more topics or applications or whatnot in the complex analysis class (actually, for computation/applications, there will likely be more useful topics in the in the complex variables class, if they do it the way I imagine they do).

The impression I have is that the Complex Variables class is more concerned with computation and calculus using complex numbers (something that as a physicist you may have to do a lot). And the Complex Analysis class will be more about developing the theory of complex numbers and their use in calculus and whatnot. A complex analysis course will mostly be concerned with proving things, while I imagine the complex variables class will be all about using complex numbers to help with computation.

Like...have you ever taken a Real Analysis course? It'll be just like that that, but with complex numbers instead of real numbers. The difference between these two classes will be similar to the difference between Calc 1&2 and Real Analysis.
 
I took Cal1&2 instead of Hon Cal. in first year, but it still involved a good deal of Epsilon-Delta, proving properties of abstract functions and evaluating the convergence of integrals.

(my favorite one was to determine for what r this integral converges..)
\int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{x^r}{e^x} dx

I'd imagine this would be the same case for complex variables, with Complex Analysis offering even more rigor.
For instance, Stein's book was used for Complex Analysis last year and I've heard that it's a rigorous book.

I'm aware that doing more theoretical courses sacrifice a bit of the computational aspect but I believe that it'd be fairly easy to pick up those skills as you go along and there's plenty of material out there for that, while it's harder to learn pure theory all by yourself.

My primary concern is whether the extra abstraction in Complex Analysis would become significant in more advanced topics in Physics. (as Cal on Manifolds for GR and Linear Algebra for QM)

Thanks:smile:
 
Last edited:
The rigorous complex analysis course may be better preparation to study Riemann surfaces, which are very important in string theory (if that's the kind of thing that floats your boat).
 
In my grad complex analysis class, we reviewed the entire complex variables course in a day and a half. In other words, the variables course is sort of a prereq for the analysis course. Depending on your familiarity with the complex plane, some topology, and calculus, you could probably go into the analysis class directly. It's certainly more enjoyable.
 
Complex Analysis or Complex Variables? Somethings wrong here

I work in the field of fracture mechanics. Recently, I am trying to verify the solution presented in the handbook or bible of my subject. However, I have extended my brains completely to analytically develop the equation which also makes sense physically (after all it is physics of the equation which should make sense or not). I can't understand how did the author get his solution, and so was wondering if anyone can help me?

I am putting the equation and answer below

equation : (1/i)*( (z0/(z^2-z0^2)) - (z0'/(z^2-z0'^2))

where, i = iota, z0 = x0+i*y0, z = x+i*y, z0' = conjugate(z0)

The author says equation = (y0/((z - x0)^2 + y0^2)) + (y0/((z + x0)^2 - y0^2))

Now, I have tried everything i knew, using factorization, expanding and all, but still can't develop the steps to understand this. Any help would be appreciated...

Kind regards
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K