Why is preferable the line integral than the area integral over C plan

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion clarifies the preference for line integrals over area integrals in the context of complex analysis. Line integrals are utilized for integrating over contours and curves, while area integrals apply to surface regions. The geometric interpretation of complex line integrals involves complex multiplication, which accounts for both angles and magnitudes. Additionally, line integrals facilitate the extraction of information about analytic functions, a capability not present in real analysis.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of complex analysis concepts, particularly analytic functions.
  • Familiarity with line integrals and their applications in complex planes.
  • Knowledge of Stokes' theorem and its implications for integration.
  • Basic grasp of real and complex multiplication and their geometric interpretations.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties and applications of complex line integrals in detail.
  • Explore Stokes' theorem and its role in connecting line and surface integrals.
  • Learn about the branches of the complex logarithm and their significance in complex analysis.
  • Investigate the implications of analytic functions and their derivatives in complex integration.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of complex analysis, and anyone interested in the applications of line integrals in understanding analytic functions and their properties.

Jhenrique
Messages
676
Reaction score
4
Why is preferable to use the line integral than the area integral over the complex plane?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't know what you mean by "preferable" here. Both are used for different purposes.
 
Line integrals are used when you ( or anyone! ) integrates over contours/curves. When you integrate
over a surface, you ( or anyone!) integrates over a region , you use surface integrals, tho you may be able
to use Stokes' thm. to integrate over a curve if the conditions are right.
 
When you do a line integral in real euclidean space you it is defined using real number multiplication, when you do a line integral in the complex case it uses complex multiplication, which takes account of angles as well as magnitudes. So there is a different geometric interpretation.

Furthermore, just as in the real case, complex line integrals let you create local inverses of your functions. For example, ##e^z## has period ##2\pi i##, so it is not 1-1. If it has an inverse ##f(x)## near ##0##, then ##f(1)=0## and ##e^{f(z)}=z## near ##z=0##. Taking derivatives gives ##1=f^{\prime}(z)e^{f(z)}=f^{\prime}(z)z##. So ##f^{\prime}(z)=\frac{1}{z}##. The analogue of the fundamental theorem of calculus shows that ##f(z)=\int_{1}^{z}\frac{1}{t}dt## no matter which path you take in ##\mathbb{C}## from ##1## to ##z## as long as your path doesn't go "too far" away from ##1##. In this case, ##f## is one of the branches of the complex logarithm.

As final example, line integrals in ##\mathbb{C}## allow you to extract information about an analytic function (including its derivatives) due to my first point. This is not possible in ##\mathbb{R}##.

In summary, analytic functions are very rigid, and continuous paths allow you to take data about them at one location and propagate it elsewhere. This is not possible in the reals, since knowing information about a smooth real function at one location can give you no information about how it behaves elsewhere. Just as a path let's you carry the information, an integral can allow you to see its cumulative effect or average it out.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
969
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
896
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K