Continuity of an arc in the complex plane

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
4 replies · 2K views
Bashyboy
Messages
1,419
Reaction score
5
Hello everyone,

I have a rather simple question. I have the curve

##
C(t) =
\begin{cases}
1 + it & \text{if}~ 0 \le t \le 2 \\
(t-1) + 2i & \text{if }~ 2 \le t \le 3
\end{cases}
##

which is obviously formed from the two curves. This curve is regarded as an arc if the functions ##x(t)## and ##y(t)## are continuous real mappings. Clearly each individual curve has continuous real mappings. But here is my concern: what if the two curves did not coincide somewhere in the complex plane, that is, they were not joined somewhere? Would the curve ##C(t)## no longer be an arc?
 
on Phys.org
Another question I have relates to an arc being a simple arc. The definition of this concept is the following:

An arc is simple arc if, on ##a < t < b##, ##t_1 \ne t_2## implies ##C(t_1) \ne C(t_2)##, e.g. the function is one-to-one.

So, according to this definition, if a curve is composed of smaller curves, such as the one given in the first post, then no individual curve can cross itself, but it is possible for one of the other curves to cross another curve. Is this right?
 
Bashyboy said:
Would the curve ##C(t)## no longer be an arc?
Right, an arc cannot have "gaps".
Bashyboy said:
then no individual curve can cross itself
Why not? C(t)=sin(2t) + i sin(3t) for 0<t<2pi
In fact, those cases ("define it in two parts") are just used for notation - they have no special mathematical meaning.
 
Doesn't the condition ##t_1 \ne t_2 \implies C(t_1) \ne C(t_2)## means that the curve never crosses itself?