How do I differentiate complex numbers in complex analysis?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the differentiation of complex numbers in complex analysis, specifically focusing on the expression for the derivative of the complex conjugate and the implications of varying complex numbers.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions a step in their textbook regarding the derivative of the complex conjugate, seeking clarification on how to arrive at a specific expression.
  • Another participant suggests considering the complex number in polar form (r*exp{iArg(z)}) to simplify the differentiation process.
  • A participant challenges the notion of immediacy in the transformation, asking about the independence of varying the modulus and argument of the complex number.
  • It is noted that the limit in question is not well defined, as it depends on the manner in which the change in z approaches zero, drawing a parallel to concepts in multivariable calculus.
  • A later reply indicates a realization that the properties discussed apply to any complex number, reinforcing the understanding of the variation in complex analysis.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the clarity and definition of the limit involved in differentiating complex numbers, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to understanding the differentiation of the complex conjugate.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the dependence on how the limit is approached and the potential ambiguity in varying the components of complex numbers, which may not be straightforward as in real analysis.

Wiemster
Messages
70
Reaction score
0
I can't follow a vertain step in my book in complex analysis (Kwok):

[tex]\frac{d \bar{z}}{dz} = lim _{\Delta z \rightarrow 0} \frac{\Delta \bar{z}}{\Delta z} = lim _{\Delta z \rightarrow 0} e^{-2i Arg \Delta z}[/tex]

I can't see how you could arrive at this last expression, could anyone give me a hint as how to do this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I guess you're thinking about this in the form z=x+iy. If you can't get that to work, think of z as r*exp{iArg(z)} instead, because then it is immediate.
 
How is it then immediate? I can't unambiguously see what happens when I vary z as in real analysis, do you vary r and argz independently in some way?
 
For any complex number w*/w (* for conjugate), is precisely exp{-2iArg(w)}. That is why I said it was immediate.

The point is that that limit is not well defined. It depends on how delta(z) tends to zero. Just as in real analysis you need limits to be independent of the way you let things tend to zero (or some point). This is multivariable calc with some extra structure.
 
Last edited:
Aha, now I see... and because this is so for any complex number it also holds in the variation of this number. Great, thx!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K