Complex Analysis: Show RHS=LHS for Real r?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a complex analysis problem involving the equality of two expressions, specifically focusing on whether the variable r can be complex or must be real. The original poster attempts to show that the real part of a complex fraction equals a specific expression, questioning the implications of r being complex.

Discussion Character

  • Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of r being real versus complex, with some questioning the necessity of specifying the nature of r. The original poster expresses concern about the validity of the statement for non-real values of r, while others provide insights on notation and assumptions.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants examining the assumptions regarding the variable r. Some guidance has been offered regarding the typical notation used in complex analysis, and there is a recognition that the original poster's concerns about the validity of the statement for complex r are shared by others.

Contextual Notes

The problem does not specify whether r is real or complex, leading to uncertainty in the interpretation of the problem. Participants are navigating this ambiguity while discussing the implications of different assumptions.

jjou
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
[SOLVED] Complex Analysis

Show that [tex]\mbox{Re}\left(\frac{Re^{i\theta}+r}{Re^{i\theta}-r}\right)=\frac{R^2-r^2}{R^2-2Rr\cos\theta+r^2}[/tex] where R is the radius of a disc.

I was able to show this for all real values of r. However, the problem doesn't specify whether r is real or complex. After expanding the left side using [tex]Re^{i\theta}=R\cos\theta+iR\sin\theta[/tex] and [tex]r=a+ib[/tex], I got

[tex]\frac{R^2-a^2-b^2}{R^2-2R(a\cos\theta+b\sin\theta)+a^2+b^2}[/tex]

which, as far as I know, is not equal to the right hand side of the above equation.

Intuitively, I also believe that this statement is not correct for non-real values of r since the LHS is a real value and the RHS has, at least, [tex]r^2[/tex] in the numerator and [tex]r^2[/tex] is, in general, not real for r not real.

Am I right in assuming this only holds for real-valued r?

Thanks. :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I can't see why r would denote a complex number considering the universal notation is z. Obviously the r's would be replaced by |r|'s in such a case and [itex]\theta[/itex] would be replaced with something like [itex]\theta + \angle r[/itex] (as you found using rectangular form).
 
Last edited:
Right, but the question didn't specify, so I was worried...
Is that not necessary? Is it okay to assume that r always denotes a real number?

In any case, am I correct in saying that the statement is false for non-real values of r?

Thanks.
 
You showed it was false. Just by inspection of the numerator, [itex]r^2 \neq a^2 + b^2 = |r|^2[/itex] for complex r
 
Thanks. :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K