Use C-R eqns to determine points whose fn's are analytic

  • Thread starter Thread starter bugatti79
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Points
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of the Cauchy-Riemann equations to determine the points at which the function \( f(z) = x^2 - y^2 - x + iy(2x + 1) \) is analytic. Participants are exploring the conditions for analyticity in the context of complex functions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to apply the Cauchy-Riemann equations to the given function and are questioning the implications of their findings regarding analyticity. Some express uncertainty about the requirement to determine specific points of analyticity.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the relationship between differentiability and analyticity. Some participants have suggested that the function does not satisfy the Cauchy-Riemann equations, while others are considering specific conditions under which the function might be analytic. Multiple interpretations of the problem are being discussed, particularly regarding the implications of the equations and the nature of the function.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the distinction between differentiability and analyticity, with some noting the importance of continuity of partial derivatives. There is also mention of potential confusion regarding the use of complex conjugates in the analysis.

bugatti79
Messages
786
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement



Use the Cauchy Riemann equations to those points whose functions are analytic

##f(z)=x^2-y^2-x+iy(2x+1)##



Homework Equations



C-R eqn's

##u_x=v_y, u_y=-v_x, z(x,y)=x+i y##

The Attempt at a Solution



##u(x,y)=x^2-y^2-x##
##v(x,y)=y(2x+1)##

##u_x=2x-1##
##u_y=-2y=-v_x##
##v_y=2x+1 \therefore u_x \ne v_y \implies##

the function f(z) is not analytic...Not sure what the question is asking regarding 'determining those points'


Can some shed some light if I need to do more?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Surely there are some x and y such that

[tex]y(2x+1)=2x+1[/tex]

These are the points in which the function is analytic. (don't forget to check the second Cauchy-Riemann equation)...
 
micromass said:
Surely there are some x and y such that

[tex]y(2x+1)=2x+1[/tex]

These are the points in which the function is analytic. (don't forget to check the second Cauchy-Riemann equation)...
If y=1 then the equation holds.

Not sure I understand you at all. If the function doesn't satisfy the C-R equations then is it not analytic? How can one proceed?

Although I have noticed that ##u_{xx}+u_{yy}=0## if this is anything to do with it..?
 
bugatti79 said:

Homework Statement



Use the Cauchy Riemann equations to those points whose functions are analytic

##f(z)=x^2-y^2-x+iy(2x+1)##



Homework Equations



C-R eqn's

##u_x=v_y, u_y=-v_x, z(x,y)=x+i y##

The Attempt at a Solution



##u(x,y)=x^2-y^2-x##
##v(x,y)=y(2x+1)##

##u_x=2x-1##
##u_y=-2y=-v_x##
##v_y=2x+1 \therefore u_x \ne v_y \implies##

the function f(z) is not analytic...Not sure what the question is asking regarding 'determining those points'


Can some shed some light if I need to do more?

Thanks

You need to distinguish analyticity and differentiability. A function is analytic at a point z0 if it's differentiable in a neighborhood of that point and it's differentiable at z0 if it satisfies the CR equation and the partials are continuous. Yours don't so it's not differentiable anywhere. Also, can check if it's a function of [itex]\overline{z}[/itex] and if
[tex]\frac{df}{d\overline{z}}\neq 0[/tex]
then it's not differentiable. Note your function equals [itex]z^2-\overline{z}[/itex].
 
jackmell said:
You need to distinguish analyticity and differentiability. A function is analytic at a point z0 if it's differentiable in a neighborhood of that point and it's differentiable at z0 if it satisfies the CR equation and the partials are continuous. Yours don't so it's not differentiable anywhere.

So we have established that this function is not analytic because it is not complex differentiable since it does not satisfy the C-R equations, hence we cannot determine those points? Right?

jackmell said:
Also, can check if it's a function of [itex]\overline{z}[/itex] and if [tex]\frac{df}{d\overline{z}}\neq 0[/tex] then it's not differentiable. Note your function equals [itex]z^2-\overline{z}[/itex].

Is this interpretation correct?

##\displaystyle \frac{df}{dz}=\frac{d}{dz}(z^2-\overline{z})= 2z## where ##\frac{d}{d\overline{z} }(-\overline{z})## does not exist..right?

What about this final one ##h(z)=\cos(2x)\cosh(2y)-i \sin(2x)\sinh(2y)##

This is not analytic either since it does not satisfy the C-R equations, ie

##u_y=-\frac{1}{2} \cos(2x)\sinh(2y) \ne -v_x##...?
 
bugatti79 said:
Is this interpretation correct?

##\displaystyle \frac{df}{dz}=\frac{d}{dz}(z^2-\overline{z})= 2z## where ##\frac{d}{d\overline{z} }(-\overline{z})## does not exist..right?

I probably should not have brought up the conjugate thing. That just makes is more confussing. It's also confusing to me too. If the derivative exists, then you can use the ordinary rules of differentiation and conclude:
[tex]\frac{d}{dz} z^2=2z[/tex]

but the derivative of [itex]z^2-\overline{z}[/itex] does not exists so you can't just differentiate it with respect to z and conclude that is the complex derivative. Probably best for now to just focus on f=u+iv and work through the CR equations without considering if f can be represented in terms of z and it's conjugate.

What about this final one ##h(z)=\cos(2x)\cosh(2y)-i \sin(2x)\sinh(2y)##

This is not analytic either since it does not satisfy the C-R equations, ie

##u_y=-\frac{1}{2} \cos(2x)\sinh(2y) \ne -v_x##...?

I think this one satisfies the CR equations. Ain't that just cos(2z)?
 
bugatti79 said:
What about this final one ##h(z)=\cos(2x)\cosh(2y)-i \sin(2x)\sinh(2y)##

This is not analytic either since it does not satisfy the C-R equations, ie

##u_y=-\frac{1}{2} \cos(2x)\sinh(2y) \ne -v_x##...?

jackmell said:
I think this one satisfies the CR equations. Ain't that just cos(2z)?

Sorry, I had a brain cramp assuming the derivative of cosh is -sinh.

Ok, this function satisfies the C-R hence it is complex differentiable and hence it is analytic.
Not sure what to do next though regarding determining the 'points'...?

Thanks
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K