Help with a geometric interpretation of the following

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the geometric interpretation of the Cauchy-Riemann equations, specifically the condition (du/dx)(du/dy) + (dv/dx)(dv/dy) = 0. This condition indicates that the gradient vectors of the real part u(x,y) and the imaginary part v(x,y) of a complex function w(z) are orthogonal. To visualize this, one can construct normal vectors to the curves defined by u(x,y)=c1 and v(x,y)=c2, which are perpendicular to their tangent lines. The orthogonality of these gradients signifies that the complex function is differentiable and thus analytic. Understanding this relationship is crucial for studying the properties of analytic functions in complex analysis.
Ed Quanta
Messages
296
Reaction score
0
When I use d, I am referring to a partial derivative here.

So where w(z)=u(x,y) + iv(x,y), and the derivative of w(z) exists, I have shown that

(du/dx)(du/dy) + (dv/dx)(dv/dy) = 0

But I have to give a geometric interpretation of this which is somewhat confusing to me. I am not sure what do here. Should I start by constructing vectors normal to the curve u(x,y)=c1 and v(x,y)=c2? And if so, how do I do this? Thanks for reading and wasting your time on me.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, that is correct. You may consider the vectors normal to the curve u(x,y)=c1 and v(x,y)=c2. To construct normal vectors you just take the gradients of the functions u(x,y) and v(x,y). The condition (du/dx)(du/dy) + (dv/dx)(dv/dy) = 0 means that the two sets of normal vectors are orthogonal. What does this say about the curves u(x,y)=c1 and v(x,y)=c2 themselves?
 


The equation (du/dx)(du/dy) + (dv/dx)(dv/dy) = 0 represents the Cauchy-Riemann equations, which are necessary conditions for a complex function to be analytic. In geometric terms, this equation can be interpreted as the orthogonality of the gradient vectors of the real and imaginary parts of the complex function.

To understand this, let's start by considering the real and imaginary parts of the complex function w(z). The real part, u(x,y), can be thought of as a surface in 3-dimensional space, with the x and y axes representing the independent variables and the z-axis representing the dependent variable. Similarly, the imaginary part, v(x,y), can also be thought of as a surface in 3-dimensional space.

Now, the partial derivatives (du/dx) and (du/dy) represent the slopes of the surface u(x,y) in the x and y directions respectively. Similarly, (dv/dx) and (dv/dy) represent the slopes of the surface v(x,y) in the x and y directions.

The Cauchy-Riemann equations state that these slopes must be perpendicular to each other, or in other words, the gradient vectors of u(x,y) and v(x,y) must be orthogonal. This can be visualized by constructing vectors normal to the curves u(x,y)=c1 and v(x,y)=c2, which would be perpendicular to the tangent lines of these curves.

By satisfying the Cauchy-Riemann equations, we ensure that the complex function w(z) is differentiable, and hence analytic. This is important in complex analysis, as analytic functions have many useful properties that make them easier to study and work with.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Trying to understand the logic behind adding vectors with an angle between them'
My initial calculation was to subtract V1 from V2 to show that from the perspective of the second aircraft the first one is -300km/h. So i checked with ChatGPT and it said I cant just subtract them because I have an angle between them. So I dont understand the reasoning of it. Like why should a velocity be dependent on an angle? I was thinking about how it would look like if the planes where parallel to each other, and then how it look like if one is turning away and I dont see it. Since...
Back
Top