Proof of Lemma 2.1, Part (vi) in Palka's Ch.4: Explaining Inequality

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integrals Section
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the proof of Lemma 2.1, part (vi) from Bruce P. Palka's book "An Introduction to Complex Function Theory," specifically in Chapter 4, Section 2.2 regarding properties of contour integrals. The key inequality discussed is $$\int_a^b \text{ Re} \{ u f[ \gamma (t) ] \dot{ \gamma } (t) \} \ dt \le \int_a^b \lvert u f[ \gamma (t) ] \dot{ \gamma } (t) \rvert \ dt$$, which is derived from the mathematical fact that the real part of any complex number is less than or equal to its absolute value. This foundational concept is crucial for understanding the properties of contour integrals in complex analysis.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of complex functions and their properties
  • Familiarity with contour integrals in complex analysis
  • Knowledge of the concepts of real and imaginary parts of complex numbers
  • Basic grasp of inequalities in mathematical analysis
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of contour integrals in complex analysis
  • Learn about the implications of the Cauchy-Riemann equations
  • Explore the relationship between real and imaginary parts of complex functions
  • Review the proofs of inequalities in complex analysis
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in mathematics, particularly those focusing on complex analysis, as well as educators teaching complex function theory and its applications.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading Bruce P. Palka's book: An Introduction to Complex Function Theory ...

I am focused on Chapter 4: Complex Integration, Section 2.2 Properties of Contour Integrals ...

I need some further help with some other aspects of the proof of Lemma 2.1, part (vi), Section 2.2, Chapter 4 ...

Lemma 2.1, Chapter 4 reads as follows:View attachment 7433
View attachment 7434In the above text from Palka, near the end of the proof of part (vi), we read the following:" ... ... $$\int_a^b \text{ Re} \{ u f[ \gamma (t) ] \dot{ \gamma } (t) \} \ dt$$ $$\le \int_a^b \lvert u f[ \gamma (t) ] \dot{ \gamma } (t) \rvert \ dt$$ ... ... "
Can some please explain why/how we have $$\int_a^b \text{ Re} \{ u f[ \gamma (t) ] \dot{ \gamma } (t) \} \ dt $$ $$\le \int_a^b \lvert u f[ \gamma (t) ] \dot{ \gamma } (t) \rvert \ d$$t ... ... ?
Help will be much appreciated ...

Peter
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It follows from the fact that $\operatorname{Re}(z) \le \lvert z\rvert$ for all $z$.
 
Euge said:
It follows from the fact that $\operatorname{Re}(z) \le \lvert z\rvert$ for all $z$.
Oh ... should have seen that ...

... thanks Euge ...

Peter
 

Similar threads

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