Meaning of Gauss' mean value theorem?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the interpretation of Gauss' mean value theorem, specifically why the theorem states that the value of a function at a point is equal to the average of the function's values around a circle centered at that point. The conversation explores the mathematical reasoning behind the theorem, particularly in the context of complex analysis.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the average value of the function is derived from integrating over the angle rather than the circumference of the circle.
  • Others clarify that the integral of a function analytic over a circle results in a value of ##2 \pi f(z)##, indicating that the average is not strictly analogous to the mean value theorem for real functions.
  • A participant notes that while the term "average" is used, it does not align perfectly with the traditional mean value concept.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the interpretation of the average in the context of the theorem, with no consensus reached on whether it aligns with traditional definitions of averages.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the complexity of defining averages in the context of complex functions and the specific conditions under which the theorem applies.

GGGGc
TL;DR
Why does Gauss mean value theorem means f(z
0) is equal to the average of f(z) around the rim of any circle in R centre at z0? The denominator is 2pi instead of 2pi * radius which is the circumference of the circle.
IMG_0081.png
 
Physics news on Phys.org
GGGGc said:
TL;DR Summary: Why does Gauss mean value theorem means f(z
0) is equal to the average of f(z) around the rim of any circle in R centre at z0? The denominator is 2pi instead of 2pi * radius which is the circumference of the circle.

View attachment 335776
The short answer is because we are integrating over the angle, not over the circumference.

The slightly longer answer is that we are concerned primarily with the integral over the phases of the complex numbers surrounding z, not so much with r which, as you may note, is irrelevant due to Cauchy's integral formula.

-Dan
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: fresh_42
topsquark said:
The short answer is because we are integrating over the angle, not over the circumference.

The slightly longer answer is that we are concerned primarily with the integral over the phases of the complex numbers surrounding z, not so much with r which, as you may note, is irrelevant due to Cauchy's integral formula.

-Dan
Thanks for replying. Does that mean the average of f(z) is equal to f(z)/2pi since we are integrating it from 0-2pi?
 
GGGGc said:
Thanks for replying. Does that mean the average of f(z) is equal to f(z)/2pi since we are integrating it from 0-2pi?
No, the integral of a function f(z) (analytic over a circle of radius a about the point z) over a circle in the complex plane of radius r (r < a) about the point z is ##2 \pi f(z)##. It is an "average" in the sense that we are looking at the sum over the values of a region and that the points in the region of integration that aren't equal to z are essentially meaningless, except for a constant normalizing factor of ##2 \pi##.

Putting it a different way, to find the average of a real function:
##\displaystyle \overline{f} = \dfrac{1}{b - a} \int_a^b f(x) \, dx##

and the "average" of a complex function:
##\displaystyle \overline{f}(z) = \dfrac{1}{2 \pi} \int f(z + r e^{i \theta}) \, d \theta##

There are similarities to an average, so you can actually call it that (hey, that's what the formula is called!) but it isn't quite the same as an average in the sense of the mean value theorem.

-Dan
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: fresh_42
topsquark said:
No, the integral of a function f(z) (analytic over a circle of radius a about the point z) over a circle in the complex plane of radius r (r < a) about the point z is ##2 \pi f(z)##. It is an "average" in the sense that we are looking at the sum over the values of a region and that the points in the region of integration that aren't equal to z are essentially meaningless, except for a constant normalizing factor of ##2 \pi##.

Putting it a different way, to find the average of a real function:
##\displaystyle \overline{f} = \dfrac{1}{b - a} \int_a^b f(x) \, dx##

and the "average" of a complex function:
##\displaystyle \overline{f}(z) = \dfrac{1}{2 \pi} \int f(z + r e^{i \theta}) \, d \theta##

There are similarities to an average, so you can actually call it that (hey, that's what the formula is called!) but it isn't quite the same as an average in the sense of the mean value theorem.

-Dan
Many thanks for the explanation! I understand now. Thank you 🙏🏻
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K