Complex Analysis: Proving Bounds for |e^z-1|

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on proving bounds for |e^z - 1| for |z| ≤ 1, specifically establishing that (3-e)|z| ≤ |e^z - 1| ≤ (e-1)|z|. The upper bound is derived using the series expansion of e^z, showing that |e^z - 1| can be bounded by (e-1)|z|. For the lower bound, the approach involves manipulating the expression |e^z - 1| = |z + (e^z - z - 1)| and applying the triangle inequality to estimate |b| as small, leading to the conclusion that |e^z - 1| is at least (3-e)|z|. The discussion highlights the importance of choosing appropriate terms in the Taylor series to achieve the desired bounds.
the1ceman
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
Hi.
I need to show that for all |z|\leq1:

(3-e)|z|\leq|e^{z}-1|\leq(e-1)|z|
Now
|e^{z}-1|=\left|\sum^{\infty}_{n=1}\frac{z^{n}}{n!}\right|\leq\sum^{\infty}_{n=1}\left|\frac{z^{n}}{n!}\right|=|z|\sum^{\infty}_{n=1}\frac{\left|z\right|^{n-1}}{n!}\leq|z|\sum^{\infty}_{n=1}\frac{1}{n!}=\left(\sum^{\infty}_{n=0}\frac{1}{n!}-1\right)|z|=(e-1)|z|

So the upper bound is done. I have no idea how to do the lower bound. I have tried different techniques but just can't seem to get it.
Please someone help!
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Start with
|e^z-1| = |z + (e^z-z-1)| \ge \ldots
 
AHHh

|e^z-1| = |z + (e^z-z-1)|=|z-(1+z-e^z)|\ge|z|-\left|-\sum^{\infty}_{n=2}\frac{z^n}{n!}\right|= |z|-|z|\left|\sum^{\infty}_{n=2}\frac{z^{n-1}}{n!}\right|\ge\left(1-\sum^{\infty}_{n=2}\frac{|z|^{n-1}}{n!}\right)|z|
\ge\left(1-\sum^{\infty}_{n=2}\frac{1}{n!}\right)|z|=(1-(e-2))|z|=(3-e)|z|

Brilliant how did you come up with the initial inequality:

|e^z-1| = |z + (e^z-z-1)|
 
I'm not sure I can explain where I got the idea from. The first step was to guess that you have to start by using the inequality |a+b| \ge |a| - |b|, because that's one of the few inequalities I know that give a lower bound of the absolute vale of something. Then the trick is to choose a and b properly. To get something useful, |b| had better be small. And 1+z are the first two terms of the Taylor series for e^z, so |e^z-z-1| is small (if z is close to zero). Furthermore, b=e^z-z-1 implies that a=z, so you get a term |z| which looked promising.
 
Last edited:
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top