MHB Two questions, one on harmonic functions

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on evaluating the differentiability of the function f(re^{iθ}) and the application of Cauchy-Riemann (C-R) equations. It is suggested that C-R equations can be derived in polar coordinates, with specific derivatives provided for the function components. The first question emphasizes the need to consider the domain where r ≠ 0, while the second question highlights the importance of harmonic functions and their properties in relation to analytic functions. Key theorems, including the Cauchy Integral Formula, are mentioned as relevant to the evaluation of harmonic functions. Overall, the thread provides insights into the mathematical approaches for analyzing the given functions.
nacho-man
Messages
166
Reaction score
0
Could I get some hints on how to evaluate these question.
The question asking to find where $f(re^{i\theta})$ is differentiable doesn't seem to involved,
however would I use C-R equations, or would it just be for wherever $r \neq 0$. Although that is given in the domain, so I'm assuming they want us to use C-R equations.
If i were to use C-R equations, then I would have to convert to cartesian coordinates, correct?
How would I do that.As for the second question,
could I get any hints on what theorems may be relevant. I am not sure how to approach this.

Thanks
 

Attachments

  • q2.png
    q2.png
    5.8 KB · Views: 130
  • q1.png
    q1.png
    4.7 KB · Views: 128
Physics news on Phys.org
In the first question you are asked to find the domain of differentiability of the function

$$f(z)=\log(z^2) $$

Hint : choose a suitable branch cut .
 
nacho said:
Could I get some hints on how to evaluate these question.
The question asking to find where $f(re^{i\theta})$ is differentiable doesn't seem to involved,
however would I use C-R equations, or would it just be for wherever $r \neq 0$. Although that is given in the domain, so I'm assuming they want us to use C-R equations.
If i were to use C-R equations, then I would have to convert to cartesian coordinates, correct?
How would I do that.As for the second question,
could I get any hints on what theorems may be relevant. I am not sure how to approach this.

Thanks

Question 1: with a little of patience You can derive the C-R equations in polar coordinates...

$\displaystyle \frac{\partial{u}}{\partial{r}} = \frac{1}{r}\ \frac {\partial {v}}{\partial{\theta}} $

$\displaystyle \frac{\partial{v}}{\partial{r}} = - \frac{1}{r}\ \frac {\partial {u}}{\partial{\theta}} \ (1)$

Here $\displaystyle u(r, \theta) = \ln r^{2}$ and $v(r, \theta) = 2\ \theta$, so that is...

$\displaystyle \frac{\partial{u}}{\partial{r}} = \frac{2}{r},\ \frac{\partial{u}}{\partial{\theta}} = 0,\ \frac{\partial{v}}{\partial{r}} = 0,\ \frac{\partial{v}}{\partial{\theta}} = 2$ so that the (1) are satisfied everywhere with the only exception of the point r = 0... Kind regards $\chi$ $\sigma$
 
nacho said:
Could I get some hints on how to evaluate these question.
The question asking to find where $f(re^{i\theta})$ is differentiable doesn't seem to involved,
however would I use C-R equations, or would it just be for wherever $r \neq 0$. Although that is given in the domain, so I'm assuming they want us to use C-R equations.
If i were to use C-R equations, then I would have to convert to cartesian coordinates, correct?
How would I do that.As for the second question,
could I get any hints on what theorems may be relevant. I am not sure how to approach this.

Thanks

Question 2: a function u(x,y) is said to be harmonic if its second derivatives are continuous and is...

$\displaystyle u_{xx} = - u_{yy}\ (1)$

An important theorem extablishes that if u is harmonic in a simply connected domain G, then it exist a function v(x,y) so that f(x + i y) = u(x,y) + i v(x,y) is analytic in G [v is said to be the harmonic coniugate of u...].

If we suppose that G is a disk centered in w with radious r and call $\gamma$ its contour, the the Cauchy Integral Formula extablishes that...

$\displaystyle f(w) = \frac{1}{2\ \pi\ i}\ \int_{\gamma} \frac{f (z)}{z - w}\ d z\ (2)$

With the substitution $z - w = r\ e^{i\ \theta}$ the (2) becomes... $\displaystyle f(w) = \frac{1}{2\ \pi}\ \int_{0}^{2\ \pi} f(w + r\ e^{i\ \theta})\ d \theta\ (3)$

... and, taking the real part of f we have...

$\displaystyle u(w) = \frac{1}{2\ \pi}\ \int_{0}^{2\ \pi} u (w + r\ e^{i\ \theta})\ d \theta\ (4)$

Kind regards

$\chi$ $\sigma$
 
We all know the definition of n-dimensional topological manifold uses open sets and homeomorphisms onto the image as open set in ##\mathbb R^n##. It should be possible to reformulate the definition of n-dimensional topological manifold using closed sets on the manifold's topology and on ##\mathbb R^n## ? I'm positive for this. Perhaps the definition of smooth manifold would be problematic, though.

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K