Matrix-valued analytic function?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter AxiomOfChoice
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
2 replies · 3K views
AxiomOfChoice
Messages
531
Reaction score
1
Consider the matrix-valued function [itex]T(\beta): \mathbb C \to \mathscr L(\mathbb C^2)[/itex], the bounded linear operators on [itex]\mathbb C^2[/itex], given by

[tex] T(\beta) = \begin{bmatrix} 1 & \beta \\ \beta & -1 \end{bmatrix}.[/tex]

According to Reed-Simon, Volume 4, this is a "matrix-valued analytic function" with singularities at [itex]\beta = \pm i[/itex]. I'm confused as to how...
  1. ...we are supposed to show that [itex]T(\beta)[/itex] is analytic. The claim made in the book is that it is easier (in general) to show that a vector-valued analytic function is weakly analytic than strongly analytic, but I don't see how that is the case here.
  2. ...we are supposed to see that this function has singularities at [itex]\pm i[/itex].
Can anyone help with either of the above? Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Update

It seems [itex]T(\beta)[/itex] is actually an entire matrix-valued analytic function of [itex]\beta[/itex]; it is the eigenvalues [itex]\lambda_\pm (\beta) = \pm \sqrt{\beta^2 + 1}[/itex] that have singularities at [itex]\pm i[/itex]. My question still stands, though...why are [itex]\pm i[/itex] singularities of this function? What's wrong with taking the square root of zero, which is what one winds up doing at those values?
 
AxiomOfChoice said:
What's wrong with taking the square root of zero, which is what one winds up doing at those values?

Nothing. But there is a problem with evaluating the derivative of the square root function at zero, and that's what causes [itex]\sqrt{\beta^2 + 1}[/itex] to fail to be analytic at [itex]\beta = \pm i[/itex].