Question about Contour Integration

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Apogee
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integration
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

This discussion focuses on contour integration within the context of complex analysis, specifically examining the integral of (1/z) over the unit circle. Participants explore different methods of evaluation, including Cauchy's Integral Formula and parameterization, while addressing the implications of substitutions in complex integrals.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant calculates the contour integral of (1/z) over the unit circle using Cauchy's Integral Formula and finds it equals 2*pi*i.
  • Another participant asserts that using the parameterization z(t)=e^(it) also yields the same result of 2*pi*i.
  • A participant questions the validity of a substitution u=e^(it), claiming that it leads to limits of integration both becoming 1, resulting in an integral of 0.
  • One participant challenges the claim of the integral being zero after substitution, suggesting that the substitution should return to the original integral and invites the first participant to show their working.
  • Another participant explains that the multivalued nature of the logarithm function in complex analysis means that the integral can yield different values even when limits appear the same, emphasizing the importance of considering the path taken in the complex plane.
  • A later reply confirms understanding of the multivalued nature of log(z) and acknowledges that the integral can still yield 2*pi*i despite the limits being the same.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of the substitution in complex integrals, with some asserting that it leads to a zero result while others argue that it does not. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the interpretation of the substitution's effect.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the complexity of evaluating integrals in complex analysis, particularly regarding the multivalued nature of certain functions and the significance of the chosen path in the complex plane. There are unresolved aspects related to the assumptions made during substitution.

Apogee
Messages
45
Reaction score
1
This question deals specifically with complex analysis.

Let C be the unit circle in the complex plane (|z| = 1). If you calculate the contour integral of (1/z)dz over C using Cauchy's Integral Formula, you get 2*pi*i. If you calculate it using the path z(t)=e^(it), t in [0,2pi], you also receive 2*pi*i.

However, if I do the second method, but make the substitution u = e^(it), the limits of integration (specifically 0 and 2pi) both become 1. Hence, after substitution, the integral is 0. Why is this the case? I imagine that u-substitutions work differently with complex integrals, but I'm trying to understand what is wrong with making this substitution.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you use the second method you end up with the integral ##\int_0^{2\pi}i\,dt## which gives ##2\pi i##. If you substitute ##u=e^{it}## in there you'll just get back to the original integral ##\int_C\frac{dz}z##, since ##u=z##. It's not clear why you believe that gives an integral of zero. If you show your working we may be able to show where it goes wrong.
 
Apogee said:
However, if I do the second method, but make the substitution u = e^(it), the limits of integration (specifically 0 and 2pi) both become 1. Hence, after substitution, the integral is 0. Why is this the case?

I assume you mean the following situation:

##\displaystyle\biggr. \oint \frac{1}{z}dz= log(z)\biggr |_1^1=(0+2\pi i)-0=2\pi i##

And that is because the antiderivative is a multi-valued function. So in Complex Analysis, it is not always the case that the integral is zero when the limits "appear" to be the same. One must consider the (analytically-continuous) path along a multivalued antiderivative (if antiderivatives are used) which in general does not return to the same spot over the antiderivative when the path is closed. Now, if you plot the real or imaginary component of the log(z) function and plot an analytically-continuous path along it starting from z=1, wrap around the origin ##2\pi## and go back to 1, you'll see that you end up at a point on the function equal to ##0+2\pi i## or if you just plot the imaginary part of log(z), you'll see that you end up at the point ##2\pi##. So that if you understand this, you can explain why, if the winding number is 2, then we have:

##\displaystyle\biggr. \oint \frac{1}{z}dz= log(z)\biggr |_1^1=4\pi i##

But this is tough to understand I know when seeing for the first time. Better for now to just use the substitution ##z(t)=e^{it}## which is of course an analytically continuous path, then the integral becomes

##\displaystyle \oint \frac{1}{z}dz=\int_0^{2\pi} i dt=2\pi i##
 
Thank you very much! I understand what the issue is now. logz is multivalued. So, though the limits of integration are the same, each results in two different values of the antiderivative. So, the result 2*pi*I is still recovered. :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K