Pole expansion of meromorphic functions

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the pole expansion of meromorphic functions as presented in Arfken's section 7.2, which is based on Mittag-Leffler's theorem. The function f(z) is analytic except at isolated simple poles located at z=a_n with residues b_n. The contour integral I_n is evaluated using the residue theorem, leading to the expression I_n = (2πi)^{-1}∫_{C_n} f(w)/(w(w-z)) dw, which simplifies to a sum of residues. The participants clarify the conditions under which the residue theorem applies and address the boundedness of f(z) near its poles.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of meromorphic functions and their properties
  • Familiarity with the residue theorem in complex analysis
  • Knowledge of contour integration techniques
  • Basic concepts of analytic functions and poles
NEXT STEPS
  • Study Mittag-Leffler's theorem and its applications in complex analysis
  • Learn advanced techniques in contour integration, focusing on residue calculations
  • Explore the properties of meromorphic functions in greater detail
  • Investigate the implications of boundedness for functions with poles
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of complex analysis, and researchers interested in the properties and applications of meromorphic functions and contour integration techniques.

LAHLH
Messages
405
Reaction score
2
Hi,

I was hoping someone may be able to help me understand what Arfken is doing in sec 7.2 when he does the pole expansion of meromorphic functions (he says this proof is due to Mittag-Leffler).

So he starts off with a function f(z) that is analytic except at some isolated poles. These poles are at isolated z=a_n with 0<|a_1|<|a_2|<... and are all simple with residues b_n. He then considers a series of concentric circles C_n about the origin so that C_n contains poles a_1,a_2,...a_n but no others. Finally he assumes that |f(z)|<\epsilon R_n where R_n is radius of C_n and \epsilon>0 is small constant. He says then that:

f(z)=f(0)+\sum_0^{\infty} b_n\{(z-a_n)^{-1}+a_n^{-1}\}

converges to f(z).

To prove this he says to prove this we use residue theorem to evaluate the contour integral for z inside C_n:

I_n:=(2\pi i)^{-1}\int_{C_n}\,\frac{f(w)}{w(w-z)}\mathrm{d}w

I_n=\sum_{m=1}^{n}\frac{b_m}{a_m(a_m-z)}+\frac{f(z)-f(0)}{z}

My first question is how to prove this second equality using the residue theorem? I just don't seem to be able to get it out..
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Suppose we have two functions f and g that are holomorphic inside some circle ##\gamma## except for poles a_1, ..., a_n for f and b_1, ..., b_m for g. Also suppose that no a_i is equal to a b_j. Then the residue theorem yields
$$ (2\pi i)^{-1} \int_\gamma f(z)g(z) dz = \sum_{i=1}^n \text{Res}(f,a_i)g(a_i) + \sum_{j=1}^m \text{Res}(g,b_j)f(b_j). $$

In our case g(w)=1/w(w-z), which has poles at 0 and z with residues -1/z and 1/z, resp. So
$$\begin{align} (2\pi i)^{-1} \int_{C_n} \frac{f(w)}{w(w-z)} dw &= (2\pi i)^{-1} \int_{C_n} f(w) g(w) dw \\ &= \sum_{m=1}^n b_m g(a_m) + \text{Res}(g,0)f(0) + \text{Res}(g,z)f(z) & \\ &= \sum_{m=1}^n \frac{b_m}{a_m(a_m-z)} + \frac{f(z)-f(0)}{z}, \end{align}$$
as desired.

[Note that this only holds if ##a_m,z\neq0## and ##z\neq a_m## for all m; this is consistent with the requirement that the poles of f and g be distinct.]
 


morphism said:
Suppose we have two functions f and g that are holomorphic inside some circle ##\gamma## except for poles a_1, ..., a_n for f and b_1, ..., b_m for g. Also suppose that no a_i is equal to a b_j. Then the residue theorem yields
$$ (2\pi i)^{-1} \int_\gamma f(z)g(z) dz = \sum_{i=1}^n \text{Res}(f,a_i)g(a_i) + \sum_{j=1}^m \text{Res}(g,b_j)f(b_j). $$

In our case g(w)=1/w(w-z), which has poles at 0 and z with residues -1/z and 1/z, resp. So
$$\begin{align} (2\pi i)^{-1} \int_{C_n} \frac{f(w)}{w(w-z)} dw &= (2\pi i)^{-1} \int_{C_n} f(w) g(w) dw \\ &= \sum_{m=1}^n b_m g(a_m) + \text{Res}(g,0)f(0) + \text{Res}(g,z)f(z) & \\ &= \sum_{m=1}^n \frac{b_m}{a_m(a_m-z)} + \frac{f(z)-f(0)}{z}, \end{align}$$
as desired.

[Note that this only holds if ##a_m,z\neq0## and ##z\neq a_m## for all m; this is consistent with the requirement that the poles of f and g be distinct.]

Ah, thank you very much, very helpful!
 


"he assumes that |f(z)|<ϵRn where R_n is radius of C_n and ϵ>0 is small constant. "

how can a function with poles be bounded?
 


Presumably that inequality is for points z on C_n.
 
Relativistic Momentum, Mass, and Energy Momentum and mass (...), the classic equations for conserving momentum and energy are not adequate for the analysis of high-speed collisions. (...) The momentum of a particle moving with velocity ##v## is given by $$p=\cfrac{mv}{\sqrt{1-(v^2/c^2)}}\qquad{R-10}$$ ENERGY In relativistic mechanics, as in classic mechanics, the net force on a particle is equal to the time rate of change of the momentum of the particle. Considering one-dimensional...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K