Partial differentiation & complex analysis

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of partial differentiation and complex analysis, specifically in the context of the Laplace equation and the relationship between functions of complex variables.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of the Cauchy-Riemann equations and the chain rule in the context of the Laplace equation. There is an inquiry about the derivation of a specific term in the attempted solution, as well as clarification on the notation used (specifically "Mod").

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights regarding the term in question, suggesting that it may not contribute to the proof when applying the Cauchy-Riemann equations. There is an ongoing exploration of the implications of these equations in the context of the problem.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating through complex analysis concepts and their application to partial derivatives, with some noting potential gaps in understanding specific terms and their relevance to the overall proof.

la0s
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Let Δf= d^2f/dx^2+ d^g/dy^2 (laplace equation - Partial Derivatives) Show Δ(f(g(z))= Mod(g'(z))^2 * Δf(w,v) where g(z)=w(x,y)+v(x,y)i


Homework Equations


we propably need to use cauchy riemman equations: dw/dx = dv/dy and dw/dy = - dv/dx
and chain rule


The Attempt at a Solution


∆f(g(x,y)) = d^2 f/dw^2*((dw/dx)^2 + (dw/dy)^2) + d^2f/dv^2*((dv/dx)^2 + (dv/dy)^2) + 2*d^2f/dwdv*(dw/dx dv/dx + dw/dy dv/dy) + df/dw*(d^2w/dx^2 + d^2w/dy^2) + df/dv*(d^2v/dx^2 + d^2 v/dy^2).

If you use the C-R equations this reduces to the identity you stated

Someone gave me this solution but i can't understand where the term 2*d^2f/dwdv*(dw/dx dv/dx + dw/dy dv/dy) came from?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What's Mod ?

marlon
 
mod is the absolute value
ie lg'(z)l
 
Hi

The term you cannot understand how to get does not contribute anything to the proof and with the CR equations it quals zero.

P.s are you a UCL maths student?
 

Similar threads

Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K