How Can \dot{\gamma}(0) Fail to Exist in Palka's Example 1.3?

In summary, the conversation is about a specific section in Bruce P. Palka's book on Complex Function Theory. The person is seeking help with a problem in Example 1.3, where they need to prove that $\dot{\gamma}(0)$ does not exist. Another person named Peter helps by suggesting to use the difference quotient and explains how the conclusion can be reached. The conversation ends with Peter thanking Opalg for the straightforward explanation.
  • #1
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
3,998
48
I am reading Bruce P. Palka's book: An Introduction to Complex Function Theory ...

I am focused on Chapter 4: Complex Integration, Section 1.2 Smooth and Piecewise Smooth Paths ...

I need help with some aspects of Example 1.3, Section 1.2, Chapter 4 ...

Example 1.3, Section 1.2, Chapter 4 reads as follows:View attachment 7419In the above text from Palka, we read the following:

"... ... Since \(\displaystyle \dot{ \gamma } ( 0 )\) fails to exist, \(\displaystyle \gamma\) is not smooth ... ... "I wish to rigorously demonstrate that \(\displaystyle \dot{ \gamma } ( 0 )\) fails to exist ... but do not know how to proceed ...

Can someone please show me how to rigorously prove that \(\displaystyle \dot{ \gamma } ( 0 )\) fails to existHelp will be much appreciated ...

Peter
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Form the difference quotient $\dfrac{\gamma(t) - \gamma(0)}t$. If $t<0$, this is $1-i$. If $t>0$, it is $1+i$. The derivative $\dot{\gamma}(0)$, if it exists, is the limit as $t\to0$ of the difference quotient. If the limit exists, it would have to be both $1-i$ and $1+i$. So the conclusion is that it does not exist.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
Opalg said:
Peter said:
Form the difference quotient $\dfrac{\gamma(t) - \gamma(0)}t$. If $t<0$, this is $1-i$. If $t>0$, this is $1+i$. The derivative $\dot{\gamma}(0)$, if it exists, is the limit as $t\to0$ of the difference quotient. If the limit exists, it would have to be both $1-i$ and $1+i$. So the conclusion is that it does not exist.


Thanks Opalg ...

... straightforward when you see how ...

Peter
 

FAQ: How Can \dot{\gamma}(0) Fail to Exist in Palka's Example 1.3?

1. What is the definition of a smooth path in complex analysis?

A smooth path in complex analysis is a continuous function from a closed interval of the real line to the complex plane. It is also differentiable at every point in its domain except for possibly finitely many points.

2. How is a smooth path different from a piecewise smooth path?

A smooth path is continuously differentiable at every point in its domain, while a piecewise smooth path may have finitely many points where it is not differentiable. Additionally, a smooth path has a continuous derivative, while a piecewise smooth path may not.

3. What is the significance of smooth paths in complex analysis?

Smooth paths in complex analysis are important because they allow for the study of complex-valued functions along a single path. This can be useful in understanding the behavior of functions and in proving theorems in complex analysis.

4. What is the example given in Palka's book for a smooth path in complex analysis?

In Example 1.3, Section 1.2 in Chapter 4 of Palka's book, the function f(t) = e^(it) is given as an example of a smooth path. This function maps the interval [0,2π] to the unit circle in the complex plane, and is continuously differentiable with a continuous derivative.

5. How are smooth paths used in contour integration?

In contour integration, smooth paths are used to define the contour along which the integration is performed. This allows for the use of the Cauchy integral theorem and the Cauchy integral formula, which rely on the smoothness of the path to compute the integral. Smooth paths also help in proving the convergence of the contour integral.

Back
Top