MHB Why Does Theorem 1.9 Use f(t) Instead of f(γ(t))?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on understanding the application of Theorem 1.9 from John B. Conway's "Functions of a Complex Variable I" in the context of complex integration. The confusion arises from the notation used in the theorem, specifically the use of f(t) instead of f(γ(t)), as seen in the example involving the integral of 1/z. It is clarified that dz represents the differential along the path γ, and in this case, dz equals dγ, which is derived from the parametrization of the unit circle. The integral simplifies to show that the function being integrated, 1/z, is independent of the specific path taken. Overall, the key point is that the function f(t) in Theorem 1.9 is a general representation that applies regardless of the path of integration.
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading John B. Conway's book, "Functions of a Complex Variable I" (Second Edition) ...

I am currently focussed on Chapter IV: Complex Integration ... Section 1: Riemann-Stieljes Integral ... ...

I need help in fully understanding the first example on page 63 ... ...

The the first example on page 63 read as follows:

https://www.physicsforums.com/attachments/7447My question is as follows:

In the example we are supposed to be following Theorem 1.9 (see below) where$$\int_a^b f \ d \gamma = \int_a^b f(t) \gamma' (t) \ dt$$... BUT ... (my confusion ...) ... ... Conway writes ...$$\int_{ \gamma } \frac{1}{z} \ dz = \int_0^{ 2 \pi } e^{ -it } ( i e^{ it} ) \ dt$$ but ... ? ... apart from the fact that $$dz$$ does not appear in Theorem 1.9 ... ( I know it appears in the notation for a line integral ... but ...? )... it seems to me that $$e^{ -it} = f( \gamma (t) )$$ ... ... but $$f( \gamma (t) )$$ does not appear in Theorem 1.9 ... ?... but instead $$f(t)$$ appears in Theorem 1.9 ...
Can someone clarify the above by explaining in some detail what is actually going on in the above example from Conway ...Help will be much appreciated ...

Peter=========================================================================

The above post mentions Theorem 1.9 (Ch.4) and the definition of a line integral ... so I am providing MHB readers with access to both ... as follows:View attachment 7448

View attachment 7449Peter
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Peter said:
I am reading John B. Conway's book, "Functions of a Complex Variable I" (Second Edition) ...

I am currently focussed on Chapter IV: Complex Integration ... Section 1: Riemann-Stieljes Integral ... ...

I need help in fully understanding the first example on page 63 ... ...

The the first example on page 63 read as follows:

My question is as follows:

In the example we are supposed to be following Theorem 1.9 (see below) where$$\int_a^b f \ d \gamma = \int_a^b f(t) \gamma' (t) \ dt$$... BUT ... (my confusion ...) ... ... Conway writes ...$$\int_{ \gamma } \frac{1}{z} \ dz = \int_0^{ 2 \pi } e^{ -it } ( i e^{ it} ) \ dt$$ but ... ? ... apart from the fact that $$dz$$ does not appear in Theorem 1.9 ... ( I know it appears in the notation for a line integral ... but ...? )
The "dz" is the differential of z over the path [math]\gamma[/math] so [math]dz= d\gamma[/math]. Here, the path of integration is given as [math]z= \gamma(t)= e^{it}[/math]. Every complex number, z, can be written [math]z= re^{i\theta}[/math] with modulus r and argument [math]\theta[/math]. On this path, the unit circle, r= 1 and [math]z= e^{it}[/math]. [math]dz= d\gamma= ie^{it}dt[/math]. Of course, since [math]z= e^{it}[/math], [math]\frac{1}{z}= \frac{1}{e^{it}}= e^{-it}[/math] so the integral becomes [math]\oint_0^{2\pi}\frac{1}{z}dz= \int_0^{2\pi}e^{-it}e^{it}dt= \int_0^{2\pi} dt= 2\pi[/math][/quote]... it seems to me that $$e^{ -it} = f( \gamma (t) )$$ ... ... but $$f( \gamma (t) )$$ does not appear in Theorem 1.9 ... ?... but instead $$f(t)$$ appears in Theorem 1.9 ...[/quote]
"f" is the function to be integrated, here 1/z. The function to be integrated is completely independent of the path of integration.
Can someone clarify the above by explaining in some detail what is actually going on in the above example from Conway ...Help will be much appreciated ...

Peter=========================================================================

The above post mentions Theorem 1.9 (Ch.4) and the definition of a line integral ... so I am providing MHB readers with access to both ... as follows:

Peter
 
HallsofIvy said:
The "dz" is the differential of z over the path [math]\gamma[/math] so [math]dz= d\gamma[/math]. Here, the path of integration is given as [math]z= \gamma(t)= e^{it}[/math]. Every complex number, z, can be written [math]z= re^{i\theta}[/math] with modulus r and argument [math]\theta[/math]. On this path, the unit circle, r= 1 and [math]z= e^{it}[/math]. [math]dz= d\gamma= ie^{it}dt[/math]. Of course, since [math]z= e^{it}[/math], [math]\frac{1}{z}= \frac{1}{e^{it}}= e^{-it}[/math] so the integral becomes [math]\oint_0^{2\pi}\frac{1}{z}dz= \int_0^{2\pi}e^{-it}e^{it}dt= \int_0^{2\pi} dt= 2\pi[/math]
... it seems to me that $$e^{ -it} = f( \gamma (t) )$$ ... ... but $$f( \gamma (t) )$$ does not appear in Theorem 1.9 ... ?... but instead $$f(t)$$ appears in Theorem 1.9 ...[/quote]
"f" is the function to be integrated, here 1/z. The function to be integrated is completely independent of the path of integration.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for the help, HallsofIvy ...

Appreciate your assistance ...

Peter
 
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 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K