Confused about computing Laurent series

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the computation of Laurent series for analytic functions, particularly focusing on the mechanics of determining coefficients and the relationship between Laurent and Taylor series. Participants explore the conditions under which these series are derived and the implications of poles in the functions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about the process of computing Laurent series, particularly how to derive the coefficients a_n from the integral formula.
  • Another participant points out that the function 1/z is already in a form suitable for Laurent series, indicating that a_{-1} = 1 and all other coefficients are 0.
  • A participant questions the role of Taylor series in the context of Laurent series, seeking clarity on their relationship.
  • One participant explains that a function is analytic at a point if its Taylor series converges to the function in a neighborhood of that point, and describes how to derive a Laurent series from a Taylor series by considering poles.
  • A later reply suggests that checking the analyticity of the function and identifying poles is a necessary step before using Taylor series to compute the Laurent series and find residues.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding the computation of Laurent series and the use of Taylor series. There is no consensus on the best approach to start the computation, and some confusion remains about the relationship between the two types of series.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention the need for further exploration of the theory behind Laurent series and the computational aspects, indicating that their understanding may depend on additional study and practice.

quasar_4
Messages
273
Reaction score
0
I am very confused about how to actually compute a Laurent series. Given an analytic function, we can write down its poles. Then, if I understand correctly, we have to write a Laurent series for each pole. What I'm confused about is the actual mechanics of writing one down. I know that for f(z) with pole at f(z0) that we can write

f(z) = (a_p)/(z-z0)^p + ...+ a_1/(z-z0) + a0 + a1(z-z0) + ...

what I don't understand is how to get the a[tex]^{n}[/tex] coefficients. I know we have the formula a[tex]_{n}[/tex] = (1/2*[tex]\pi[/tex]*i) * [tex]\oint[/tex][tex]\frac{f(z)}{(z-z0)^{n+1}}[/tex] dz, but all the examples I have just pop out the series (no one is doing any integrals). I must be missing something obvious!

If I can put it into the form f(z) = 1/(1+z) then I can use a geometric series to write this out...

but what if it's something like 1/z?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
?? 1/z is already of that form! 1/z = z-1 so a-1= 1 and all the other ans are 0.
 
oh no, then I am really confused about what's going on. In general, how is a Taylor series used in a Laurent series? Maybe that will help me get started. In the meantime, I guess I'm going to go read through that chapter again... :(
 
A function is "analytic" at a point if and only if its Taylor's series at that point exists and converges to the function in some neighborhood of that point. A function, f(z), has a "pole of order n at z0" if and only if (z- z0)nf(z) is analytic at z0 but no lower power of z is. Write znf(z) as a Taylor's series and divide each term by zn to get the Laurent series for f(z).

For example, if f(z)= z-1, then zf(z)= 1 is analytic (and that IS its "Taylor's series: 1+ 0z+ 0z2+ ...) so f(z) has a pole of order 1 at 0 and the Laurent series for f(z) is 1/z+ 0+ 0z+...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
oh, I see. Then when I am starting a problem of this type, it should perhaps be necessary tp start by checking analycity of the function. Once I've found the poles, I should be able to use a Taylor series exp. to write the Laurent series, then find the residue...

I think it is beginning to make sense, at least computationally. It might take a few days of computing these things before the theory part all sinks in.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K