Complex simplification example, do not see how it follows

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheFerruccio
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Complex Example
Click For Summary
The discussion centers around understanding a complex integration example from Kreyszig Advanced Engineering Mathematics, specifically regarding the integral of the function 1/z^m. The main confusion arises from the transition to the contour integral involving (z-z_0)^m and the equality (z-z_0)^m = ρ^m e^{imt}. Participants clarify that when integrating around a circle of radius ρ centered on z_0, the expression simplifies due to the fixed radius, leading to the realization that the integration process is consistent with the properties of conformal functions. The discussion concludes with a participant expressing relief at grasping the simplification, highlighting the importance of understanding parameterization in complex integration.
TheFerruccio
Messages
216
Reaction score
0
This is an example in Kreyszig Advanced Engineering Mathematics section 14.1, example 6. There are two things I do not understand about the book's example.

Homework Statement



They are integrating around a loop containing z_0 with radius \rho of the complex function \frac{1}{z^m}.

Would it be helpful for me to just copy the book's example? It's more my attempt to understand the steps that they are taking that is giving me such a hard time. While the title of the problem says "Integral of \frac{1}{z^m} with Integer Power m" the final contour integral they are taking ends up being \oint_{c}(z-z_0)^m dz I do not see how this, at all, relates to the title of the problem.

Furthermore, I do not understand this equality:

(z-z_0)^m=p^m e^{imt}I apologize for not following the mandated format for this, but it is not really me trying to solve the problem, so much as it is me trying to understand what the heck the textbook is trying to tell me.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
TheFerruccio said:
They are integrating around a loop containing z_0 with radius \rho of the complex function \frac{1}{z^m}.
:
I do not understand this equality:
(z-z_0)^m=p^m e^{imt}
At this point, it's not just any old loop containing z0, but rather a circle radius ρ centred on z0. So z-z0 will have modulus ρ. (ρ
, not p.) How did they get to there? For a conformal function, such as zm, integrating around a closed loop containing no poles gives 0. An integral around an arbitrary loop around a pole therefore depends only on the pole - any loop around it will produce the same integral (as long as no other poles get included). So you can replace the original loop with a circle centred on the pole, if that makes things easier.
That said, I can't make much sense of z-m in this. I would have expected the original function to be (z-z0)-m.
 
haruspex said:
At this point, it's not just any old loop containing z0, but rather a circle radius ρ centred on z0. So z-z0 will have modulus ρ. (ρ
, not p.) How did they get to there? For a conformal function, such as zm, integrating around a closed loop containing no poles gives 0. An integral around an arbitrary loop around a pole therefore depends only on the pole - any loop around it will produce the same integral (as long as no other poles get included). So you can replace the original loop with a circle centred on the pole, if that makes things easier.
That said, I can't make much sense of z-m in this. I would have expected the original function to be (z-z0)-m.

So, for the equation (z-z_0)^m I would understand if it equaled \rho^m Though, I do not quite understand where they got the e^{imt}

They started out as... z(t)=z_0+\rho\left(\cos{t}+i\sin{t}\right)=z_0+ \rho e^{it} And, that makes perfect sense to me. They are saying that the curve is represented as the parameterized function z(t) and they are integrating along a circle around z_0 with a radius \rho with the shape of the general circle equation \cos{t}+i\sin{t}. From here, they are using Euler's identity to reduce it to z_0+\rho e^{it}. Great, that makes sense.

I am still not quite understanding the specific step where they replaced \left(z-z_0\right)^m with \rho^m e^{imt}. Is it because \left(z-z_0\right)^m, in this case is a fixed radius? Maybe I am starting to understand, but I might also be misunderstanding...
 
z(t)=z_0+ \rho e^{it}
z-z_0 = \rho e^{it}
(z-z_0)^m = (\rho e^{it})^m = \rho^m (e^{it})^m = \rho^m e^{itm}
 
haruspex said:
z(t)=z_0+ \rho e^{it}
z-z_0 = \rho e^{it}
(z-z_0)^m = (\rho e^{it})^m = \rho^m (e^{it})^m = \rho^m e^{itm}

Oh, wow, that was dreadfully simple. How did I not see that? :P

Thanks! Makes perfect sense. That's embarrassing.
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
32
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
868