Find a linear transformation such that it maps the disk onto

Shackleford
Messages
1,649
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement



Find a linear transformation w = f(z) such that it maps the disk Δ(2) onto the right half-plane {w | Re(w) > 0} satisfying f(0) = 1 and arg f'(0) = π/2

Homework Equations



w = f(z) = \frac{az+b}{cz+d}

z = f^{-1}(w) = \frac{dw-b}{-cw+a}

The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]
z = f^{-1}(1) = \frac{d(1)-b}{-c(1)+a} = \frac{d-b}{-c+a} = 0 ⇒ d=b

I don't think I'm quite yet finished. I've seen another method online that would start with the observation that the boundary of the open disk would necessarily map to the boundary of the right half-plane which is the imaginary axis. What's the best way to approach this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You are saying that if the point on the edge of the disk, say point ##(r, \theta)## will necessarily have real part = 0, and as you close in on zero, you will be moving at toward real part = 1, and in some way you should push out to infinity.
Start by thinking about which parts will map to which locations, then find the function that meets those needs.
 
Shackleford said:

Homework Statement



Find a linear transformation w = f(z) such that it maps the disk Δ(2) onto the right half-plane {w | Re(w) > 0} satisfying f(0) = 1 and arg f'(0) = π/2

Homework Equations



w = f(z) = \frac{az+b}{cz+d}

z = f^{-1}(w) = \frac{dw-b}{-cw+a}

The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]
z = f^{-1}(1) = \frac{d(1)-b}{-c(1)+a} = \frac{d-b}{-c+a} = 0 ⇒ d=b

I don't think I'm quite yet finished. I've seen another method online that would start with the observation that the boundary of the open disk would necessarily map to the boundary of the right half-plane which is the imaginary axis. What's the best way to approach this?

Please do not call these transformations "linear"---they are not. They are "fractional linear" or maybe "linear fractional", but that is usually much different from straight "linear" (the exception being when the denominator is constant).
 
Ray Vickson said:
Please do not call these transformations "linear"---they are not. They are "fractional linear" or maybe "linear fractional", but that is usually much different from straight "linear" (the exception being when the denominator is constant).

I've stated the problem verbatim, but I do understand the distinction.
 
Okay. I used another method.

[z, 0, 2, -2] = [w, 1, i, 0]

\frac{(w-q_1)(r_1-s_1)}{(w-s_1)(r_1-q_1)} =\frac{(z-q)(r-s)}{(z-s)(r-q)}

Plugging in the respective coordinates, I get w = \frac{2i(2+z)}{(-2zi + 4i -4z)}
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top