Can the Laplacian Determine Analyticity of Complex Functions?

  • Thread starter unchained1978
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Conditions
In summary: I understand that. It seems that the latter condition is easier to verify for an arbitrary complex function, assuming the function doesn't have to be written in f(z)=u(x,y)+iv(x,y) form to satisfy laplace's equation. Is this true? Could you have a particular analytic function that satisfies laplace's equation without being written in u+iv form?The basic definition of "f is an analytic function" in a given region is "At every point in the region the Taylor's series of f exists and, in some neighborhood of that point converges to the value of f". Of course, the whole point of the Cauchy-Riemann conditions is that they are much easier to
  • #1
unchained1978
93
0
Are there other ways of determining whether or not a function of a complex variable is analytic without using the Cauchy Riemann conditions? It seems for more complicated functions it's too difficult to decompose an arbitrary function into its real and imaginary parts, so it would be nice if there was another way to determine if the function possesses this property.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
unchained1978 said:
Are there other ways of determining whether or not a function of a complex variable is analytic without using the Cauchy Riemann conditions? It seems for more complicated functions it's too difficult to decompose an arbitrary function into its real and imaginary parts, so it would be nice if there was another way to determine if the function possesses this property.


Google "Morera's Theorem": if a function is continuous in a domain and if its line integral over any simple closed piecewise smooth path contained fully in the domain is zero, then the function is analytin in that domain.

DonAntonio
 
  • #3
Couldn't we also say that if a complex function f(z)=f(x+iy) obeys laplace's equation for x and y, i.e [itex]\nabla^{2}=(\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial x^{2}}+\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial y^{2}})[/itex] then the function f(z) is analytic over the specified domain?
 
  • #4
unchained1978 said:
Couldn't we also say that if a complex function f(z)=f(x+iy) obeys laplace's equation for x and y, i.e [itex]\nabla^{2}=(\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial x^{2}}+\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial y^{2}})[/itex] then the function f(z) is analytic over the specified domain?



Well, yes: but this is just the Cauchy-Riemann equations in disguise...:)

DonAntonio
 
  • #5
I understand that. It seems that the latter condition is easier to verify for an arbitrary complex function, assuming the function doesn't have to be written in f(z)=u(x,y)+iv(x,y) form to satisfy laplace's equation. Is this true? Could you have a particular analytic function that satisfies laplace's equation without being written in u+iv form?
 
  • #6
The basic definition of "f is an analytic function" in a given region is "At every point in the region the Taylor's series of f exists and, in some neighborhood of that point converges to the value of f". Of course, the whole point of the Cauchy-Riemann conditions is that they are much easier to show that finding the Taylor's series at every point!

Oh, and a function is analytic on a region if and only if it is differentiable at every point in the region. But, again, it is typically easier to show the Cauchy-Riemann conditions.
 
  • #7
I'm just curious though as to whether or not there are conditions that are easier to verify for some functions. It's not always easy to decompose a function in the form u+iv and verify the Cauchy Riemann conditions so I was wondering if instead we could just compute the laplacian of the function without writing it as f(z)=u+iv and see whether or not it equals zero.
 

1. What is the definition of regularity?

Regularity refers to the state of being consistent or following a pattern. In scientific terms, it can refer to the stable and predictable behavior of a system or process.

2. Why is regularity important in scientific research?

Regularities allow scientists to make predictions and draw conclusions based on patterns and trends. Without regularity, it would be difficult to understand or explain phenomena and make reliable predictions.

3. What are some examples of regularities in science?

Regularities can be found in many areas of science, such as in the laws of physics (e.g. gravity), chemical reactions, weather patterns, and biological processes. They can also be observed in human behavior and social interactions.

4. How do scientists determine if a regularity is valid?

Scientists use the scientific method to test and verify regularities. This involves making observations, formulating hypotheses, conducting experiments, and analyzing data. If a regularity consistently holds true under different conditions, it can be considered valid.

5. Can regularities change over time?

Yes, regularities can change over time as new evidence and information is discovered. This is why scientific theories and laws are constantly being revised and updated as our understanding of the natural world evolves.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
910
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
27
Views
740
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top