MHB Why is the integral of $\frac{1}{z+2}$ over $\gamma(0;1)$ equal to zero?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The integral of the function $\frac{1}{z+2}$ over the contour $\gamma(0;1)$ is equal to zero because the singularity at $z=-2$ lies outside the contour. According to Cauchy's Integral Theorem, if a function is holomorphic on and inside a closed curve, its integral around that curve is zero. Since $\frac{1}{z+2}$ is holomorphic everywhere on and inside $\gamma(0;1}$, the integral evaluates to zero.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of complex analysis concepts, specifically Cauchy's Integral Theorem.
  • Familiarity with contour integration and holomorphic functions.
  • Knowledge of singularities and their impact on integrals in complex analysis.
  • Basic understanding of complex function notation and integration techniques.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study Cauchy's Integral Theorem in detail to understand its implications for contour integrals.
  • Learn about singularities and their classifications in complex analysis.
  • Explore examples of contour integrals involving poles and how they affect the integral's value.
  • Investigate the application of residue theory in evaluating integrals with singularities.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, particularly those focusing on complex analysis, as well as anyone interested in understanding contour integration and its applications.

shen07
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
Hello i would like to know why this integral is Zero:

$$\int_{\gamma(0;1)}\frac{1}{z+2} \mathrm{d}z$$

Well i know by a fundamental result that:
$$\int_{\gamma(a;r)}\frac{1}{z-a} \mathrm{d}z=2\pi\imath$$

But here the point $$z=-2$$ lies outside $$\gamma(0;1)$$ so what is the reasoning behind could you help me please?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Re: Reason why Integral Zero

Hi shen07! :)

shen07 said:
But here the point $$z=-2$$ lies outside $$\gamma(0;1)$$ so what is the reasoning behind could you help me please?

I believe you already said it: the "pole" lies outside the closed curve.
In that case the circular integral is zero.
If the curve were around a pole, it would be $2\pi i$.
 
Re: Reason why Integral Zero

shen07 said:
Hello i would like to know why this integral is Zero:

$$\int_{\gamma(0;1)}\frac{1}{z+2} \mathrm{d}z$$

Well i know by a fundamental result that:
$$\int_{\gamma(a;r)}\frac{1}{z-a} \mathrm{d}z=2\pi\imath$$

But here the point $$z=-2$$ lies outside $$\gamma(0;1)$$ so what is the reasoning behind could you help me please?

Cauchy's Integral Theorem states that for any complex function which is closed and holomorphic everywhere in and on the boundary, its contour integral is equal to 0. As your function only has a singular point at z = -2, which is not in the boundary, your function satisfies the conditions and so Cauchy's Integral Theorem applies.

Proof of the Theorem
 
Re: Reason why Integral Zero

shen07 said:
Well i know by a fundamental result that:
$$\int_{\gamma(a;r)}\frac{1}{z-a} \mathrm{d}z=2\pi\imath$$

By using $$\gamma(a;r)$$ you are making sure that the pole at $$z=a$$ is included in your curve by letting it the center of the disk since the radius is nonzero .
 
Re: Reason why Integral Zero

What if i use Cauchy's Theorem, since $$f(z)=\frac{1}{z+2}$$ is holomorphic on and inside $$\gamma(0;1)$$, using Cauchy's Theorem
$$\int_{\gamma(0;1)}\frac{1}{z+2} \mathrm{d}z=0$$
 
Re: Reason why Integral Zero

shen07 said:
What if i use Cauchy's Theorem, since $$f(z)=\frac{1}{z+2}$$ is holomorphic on and inside $$\gamma(0;1)$$, using Cauchy's Theorem
$$\int_{\gamma(0;1)}\frac{1}{z+2} \mathrm{d}z=0$$

Yes , since the only pole is at $z=-2$ which is out of the circular curve .
 
As shown by this animation, the fibers of the Hopf fibration of the 3-sphere are circles (click on a point on the sphere to visualize the associated fiber). As far as I understand, they never intersect and their union is the 3-sphere itself. I'd be sure whether the circles in the animation are given by stereographic projection of the 3-sphere from a point, say the "equivalent" of the ##S^2## north-pole. Assuming the viewpoint of 3-sphere defined by its embedding in ##\mathbb C^2## as...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K