How Do You Find the Residues of Poles?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter spaghetti3451
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Poles
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the residues of poles in the context of a function defined by the equation ##\mathcal{F}(\lambda)=0##, particularly focusing on the behavior of the derivative of the logarithm of this function. Participants explore methods for expanding the expression and determining the residues at specific points, which are suggested to be eigenvalues.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that the expression ##\frac{d}{d\lambda}\ \ln\mathcal{F}(\lambda)## has poles of order 1 at ##\lambda_{n}##, suggesting that the residue at these poles is 1.
  • Another participant expands the expression around ##\lambda = \lambda_{n}## and claims that the residue at all eigenvalues is 1, but expresses uncertainty about the use of Taylor series in their expansion.
  • A different participant challenges the clarity of the term "eigenvalues" in this context and provides a definition of residues in relation to poles, emphasizing the importance of the Laurent series expansion.
  • Another participant explains the relationship between zeros of a holomorphic function and the residues of its derivative over itself, indicating that if the zeros are of order one, the residue would indeed be one.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the definitions and implications of eigenvalues and residues, with some uncertainty about the expansions used. There is no consensus on the clarity of terms or the methods employed.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved questions regarding the assumptions about the order of zeros and the definitions of eigenvalues in the context of complex functions. The discussion includes various approaches to expanding functions and determining residues, but lacks a unified method or agreement on terminology.

spaghetti3451
Messages
1,311
Reaction score
31
Consider the equation ##\mathcal{F}(\lambda)=0\ \ \ \forall\ \lambda = \lambda_{n},\ n \in \mathbb{N}##.

I understand that the expression ##\frac{d}{d\lambda}\ \ln\mathcal{F}(\lambda)=\frac{\mathcal{F'(\lambda)}}{\mathcal{F}(\lambda)}## has poles of order 1 exactly at ##\lambda_{n}## because ##\frac{\mathcal{F'(\lambda)}}{\mathcal{F}(\lambda)}=\frac{\mathcal{F'(\lambda)}}{(\lambda- \lambda_{1})...(\lambda-\lambda_{n})}##.

I wonder how I might expand the expression ##\frac{d}{d\lambda}\ \ln\mathcal{F}(\lambda)=\frac{\mathcal{F'(\lambda)}}{\mathcal{F}(\lambda)}## about ##\lambda_{n}## to find out that the residue of the poles is 1.

Any ideas?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I've found out that, expanding about ##\lambda = \lambda_{n}##, with ##\mathcal{F'}(\lambda_{n})\neq0##, we obtain

##\frac{\mathcal{F'}(\lambda)}{\mathcal{F}(\lambda)}=\frac{\mathcal{F'}(\lambda-\lambda_{n}+\lambda_{n})}{\mathcal{F}(\lambda-\lambda_{n}+\lambda_{n})} = \frac{\mathcal{F'}(\lambda_{n})+(\lambda-\lambda_{n})\mathcal{F''}(\lambda_{n})+...}{(\lambda-\lambda_{n})\mathcal{F'}(\lambda_{n})+(\lambda-\lambda_{n})^{2}\mathcal{F''}(\lambda_{n})+...} = \frac{1}{\lambda - \lambda_{n}}+...##,

so that the residue at all eigenvalues is 1.

I took this evaluation out from a paper, so I am not really sure about a couple of things I have written - have we used the Taylor series to expand each of ##\mathcal{F'}(\lambda-\lambda_{n}+\lambda_{n})## and ##\mathcal{F}(\lambda-\lambda_{n}+\lambda_{n})## about ##\lambda=\lambda_{n}##?
 
Frankly, I don't understand what you mean by "expanding about [itex]\lambda= \lambda_n[/itex] because you haven't said what you mean by [itex]\lambda_n[/itex]! Apparently you mean "eigenvalues" but then what do you mean by "eigenvalues" for a function of the complex numbers?

The simplest way to define residues of pole is this: A function, f(z), of a complex variable, has a "pole of order n" at [itex]z= z_0[/itex] if and only if expanding it in a Laurent series in [itex](z- z_0)[/itex], the lowest power if [itex](z- z_0)^{-n}[/itex]. In that case, the residue is the coefficient of [itex](z- z_0)^{-1}[/itex].
 
a holomorphic function f(z) with a zero of order n at z=p, equals (z-p)^n times a holomorphic function which is non zero at p, say with value a≠0. Its derivative then has a zero of order n-1 at p, and equals (z-p)^(n-1) times a function with value na at p. hence the quotient f'/f looks like 1/(z-p) times a function with value n at p. + a holomorphic function. Hence the residue at p of f'/f is n, the iorder of the zero at p.

In your case you seem to be assuming the zeroes at the positive integers have order one, so the residue is one at each of them. i.e. you are dividing f' by f = a(z-p) + b(z-p)^2+..., where a≠0. youn can compute this.
 

Similar threads

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