Taylor Series: Can't quite work it out

wizard147
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Hi Guys,

Looking at some notes i have on conformal mapping and I have the following

where z is complex and z* denotes its conjugate, R is a real number


z* = -iR + R^2/(z-iR)

and my lecturer says that using the taylor series we get,

z* = -iR + iR(1+ z/iR + ...)

I've been trying for ages but I can't get this, I'm probably doing something stupid.

Anybody point me in the right direction? I'm getting confused with all these expansions!

I'm doing the following:

z* = -iR + R^2/z(1-iR/z)

and using the formula (1-x)^-1 = 1 + x^2 + x^3 (reference to wiki)

but it's not quite working! Hope you can help

C
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
hi wizard147! :smile:

(try using the X2 button just above the Reply box :wink:)
wizard147 said:
z* = -iR + R2/(z-iR)

and my lecturer says that using the taylor series we get,

z* = -iR + iR(1+ z/iR + ...)

you just have to fiddle around with it a little :wink:

z* = -iR + R2/(z-iR)

= -iR + R/(z/R - i)

= -iR + iR/(z/iR - 1) …​

hmm, there's a sign wrong somewhere :redface:
 
Hi Tim,

Thanks, I think when you factored out your i, and then multiplied top and bottom by i you would get

-iR + iR/(1-z/iR)

I could be wrong though! lol
 
yup! …

i think i got confused about whether the last "i" was on the top or the bottom of iR/z/iR ! :biggrin:

thanks! :smile:
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top