MHB The Controversy Surrounding the Definition of Logarithm for Complex Numbers

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the complexities of defining logarithms for complex numbers, particularly addressing two key equations: log(i) + log(-1+i) ≠ log(i(-1+i)) and log(i^2) = 2log(i). It emphasizes that the standard definition of the complex logarithm, log(z) = log|z| + iarg(z), leads to different results than expected from real logarithmic properties. Participants highlight that the argument function's multi-valued nature complicates the application of logarithmic rules, particularly in cases involving branch cuts. The conversation also touches on the validity of the standard definition, with some arguing it can lead to erroneous results in certain integrals. The topic underscores the need for careful consideration when dealing with complex logarithms.
Suvadip
Messages
68
Reaction score
0
In the context of complex number, how to prove that

1. $$log i +log(-1+i) \neq log i(-1+i)$$
2. $$log i^2 =2log i$$
 
Physics news on Phys.org
suvadip said:
In the context of complex number, how to prove that

1. $$log i +log(-1+i) \neq log i(-1+i)$$
2. $$log i^2 =2log i$$

It depends how you depend a complex logarithm. The standard definition is, for $z\not = 0$,
$$ \log z = \log |z| + i\arg z$$
Where $\arg z$ angle in interval $(-\pi,\pi]$.

Note, many rules for logarithms you are used to need not work for complex logarithms.
 
ThePerfectHacker said:
It depends how you depend a complex logarithm. The standard definition is, for $z\not = 0$,
$$ \log z = \log |z| + i\arg z$$
Where $\arg z$ angle in interval $(-\pi,\pi]$.

Note, many rules for logarithms you are used to need not work for complex logarithms.

You mean the principle logarithm ? It is actually customary to denote that with capital A for the argument hence $Arg(z) \in (-\pi , \pi ]$.
 
suvadip said:
In the context of complex number, how to prove that

1. $$log i +log(-1+i) \neq log i(-1+i)$$
2. $$log i^2 =2log i$$

Generally we have the following

$$\log(z_1 z_2) = \log(z_1)+\log(z_2) $$ where $\log$ defines the multiple valued function

$$\log(z) = \ln|z|+i arg(z) $$

The proof is not difficult especially when we prove that

$$arg(z_1 z_2)= arg(z_1) +arg(z_2)$$

But remember that

$$Arg(z_1 z_2) \neq Arg(z_1) +Arg(z_2) $$

Can you give counter examples ?
 
$ \text{Log} (z_{1}z_{2}) = \text{Log}(z_{2}) + \text{Log}(z_{2})$ iff $ - \pi < \text{Arg}(z_{1}) + \text{Arg} (z_{2}) \le \pi$

$\text{Log}(z_{1}^{n}) = n \text{Log}(z_{1})$ iff $ -\frac{\pi}{n} < \text{Arg}(z_{1}) \le \frac{\pi}{n} $
 
The so called 'standard definition' of the logarithm of a complex variable z is, in my opinion of course, wrong and the reason of that is explained in the following example... http://mathhelpboards.com/calculus-10/improper-integral-involving-ln-6103.html#post28032

... where the application of such a definition conducts to an erroneous computation of a definite integral which is solvable with elementary method. I realize however that that is a 'delicate' question and it must be discussed 'with calm and reason'... Kind regards $\chi$ $\sigma$
 
chisigma said:
The so called 'standard definition' of the logarithm of a complex variable z is, in my opinion of course, wrong and the reason of that is explained in the following example... http://mathhelpboards.com/calculus-10/improper-integral-involving-ln-6103.html#post28032

... where the application of such a definition conducts to an erroneous computation of a definite integral which is solvable with elementary method. I realize however that that is a 'delicate' question and it must be discussed 'with calm and reason'... Kind regards $\chi$ $\sigma$

I don't understand how is that definition questionable. If we use the branch cut for $z>0$ then having the definition

[math]Log(z) = \ln |z|+i Arg(z) [/math] where $z \in (0,2\pi ] $

Then approaching the integral from above gives $Log(z) = \ln (x) $ and $Log(z) = \ln (x) +2\pi i $ when approaching it from below .
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
883
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K