Integral of real part of z around the unit circle












2












$begingroup$


question 1



What is the result of integrating the real part of z (a complex number) anti clockwise around the unit circle?



At first glance, I couldn't identify any points within the circle where analyticity breaks down. So it seemed to me that the integral should vanish and the answer should be 0. Since the real part of a complex number is differentiable everywhere right? It seems smooth.



But I tried using parameterization and got the answer to be i$pi$. So I am guessing there is a residue of 0.5 at 0 maybe?



my attempt



So my question is, can we use Cauchy residue theorem to solve this? If so how? Is there a more elegant solution for this problem?






residue-calculus complex-integration analyticity analytic-functions







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    That’s the right answer, by a correct method.
    $endgroup$
    – Lubin
    1 hour ago
















2












$begingroup$


question 1



What is the result of integrating the real part of z (a complex number) anti clockwise around the unit circle?



At first glance, I couldn't identify any points within the circle where analyticity breaks down. So it seemed to me that the integral should vanish and the answer should be 0. Since the real part of a complex number is differentiable everywhere right? It seems smooth.



But I tried using parameterization and got the answer to be i$pi$. So I am guessing there is a residue of 0.5 at 0 maybe?



my attempt



So my question is, can we use Cauchy residue theorem to solve this? If so how? Is there a more elegant solution for this problem?






residue-calculus complex-integration analyticity analytic-functions







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    That’s the right answer, by a correct method.
    $endgroup$
    – Lubin
    1 hour ago














2












2








2





$begingroup$


question 1



What is the result of integrating the real part of z (a complex number) anti clockwise around the unit circle?



At first glance, I couldn't identify any points within the circle where analyticity breaks down. So it seemed to me that the integral should vanish and the answer should be 0. Since the real part of a complex number is differentiable everywhere right? It seems smooth.



But I tried using parameterization and got the answer to be i$pi$. So I am guessing there is a residue of 0.5 at 0 maybe?



my attempt



So my question is, can we use Cauchy residue theorem to solve this? If so how? Is there a more elegant solution for this problem?






residue-calculus complex-integration analyticity analytic-functions







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




question 1



What is the result of integrating the real part of z (a complex number) anti clockwise around the unit circle?



At first glance, I couldn't identify any points within the circle where analyticity breaks down. So it seemed to me that the integral should vanish and the answer should be 0. Since the real part of a complex number is differentiable everywhere right? It seems smooth.



But I tried using parameterization and got the answer to be i$pi$. So I am guessing there is a residue of 0.5 at 0 maybe?



my attempt



So my question is, can we use Cauchy residue theorem to solve this? If so how? Is there a more elegant solution for this problem?






residue-calculus complex-integration analyticity analytic-functions




residue-calculus complex-integration analyticity analytic-functions






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked 2 hours ago









AdityaAditya

278314




278314








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    That’s the right answer, by a correct method.
    $endgroup$
    – Lubin
    1 hour ago














  • 2




    $begingroup$
    That’s the right answer, by a correct method.
    $endgroup$
    – Lubin
    1 hour ago








2




2




$begingroup$
That’s the right answer, by a correct method.
$endgroup$
– Lubin
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
That’s the right answer, by a correct method.
$endgroup$
– Lubin
1 hour ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

The real part of $z$ is not a complex-differentiable function anywhere. So, what can we do instead in order to apply complex analysis techniques? We can find an analytic function that agrees with it on the circle - even if it's completely different everywhere else.



First, we note that $text{Re}(z) = frac12(z+overline{z})$. Since the conjugate isn't analytic, that isn't good enough yet. But then, for $|z|=1$, $overline{z}=frac1z$. So, on the circle $|z|=1$ we care about,
$$text{Re}(z) = frac12left(z+frac1zright)$$
That's something we can work with. (Of course, it's a bit absurd to apply the residue theorem to the literal integral $frac az$ around a circle - we needed that integral to prove the theorem in the first place)






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thanks a lot, just what I wanted.
    $endgroup$
    – Aditya
    1 hour ago



















2












$begingroup$

${1 over 2 pi i} int_0^{2 pi} cos t ie^{it} dt = {1 over 2 pi} int_0^{2 pi} {1 over 2 } (e^{it} + e^{-it}) e^{it} dt = {1 over 2}$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Not true - $dz$ isn't real.
    $endgroup$
    – jmerry
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    I don't know what I was thinking.
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    That was embarrassing.
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    Here $dz = ie^{it}$ right? And we can write $Re(z) = cos t = frac{(e^{it}+ e^{-it})}{2} $ all of this makes sense. So we have $int_0^{2pi} e^{2it} + 1 = 2pi$ because $cos 0 = cos 2pi$. So I don't see why this is wrong just because $dz$ is not real? This is almost the same way I solved it above in the question details, like I did via the trigonometric route, it was much longer. This is super fast. Isn't this correct too?
    $endgroup$
    – Aditya
    1 hour ago












  • $begingroup$
    I edited out my embarrassing mistake. The answer above is correct. For real measures we have $operatorname{re} (int f d mu) = int operatorname{re}(f) d mu$, but that does not apply here.
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    59 mins ago













Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3097060%2fintegral-of-real-part-of-z-around-the-unit-circle%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









3












$begingroup$

The real part of $z$ is not a complex-differentiable function anywhere. So, what can we do instead in order to apply complex analysis techniques? We can find an analytic function that agrees with it on the circle - even if it's completely different everywhere else.



First, we note that $text{Re}(z) = frac12(z+overline{z})$. Since the conjugate isn't analytic, that isn't good enough yet. But then, for $|z|=1$, $overline{z}=frac1z$. So, on the circle $|z|=1$ we care about,
$$text{Re}(z) = frac12left(z+frac1zright)$$
That's something we can work with. (Of course, it's a bit absurd to apply the residue theorem to the literal integral $frac az$ around a circle - we needed that integral to prove the theorem in the first place)






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thanks a lot, just what I wanted.
    $endgroup$
    – Aditya
    1 hour ago
















3












$begingroup$

The real part of $z$ is not a complex-differentiable function anywhere. So, what can we do instead in order to apply complex analysis techniques? We can find an analytic function that agrees with it on the circle - even if it's completely different everywhere else.



First, we note that $text{Re}(z) = frac12(z+overline{z})$. Since the conjugate isn't analytic, that isn't good enough yet. But then, for $|z|=1$, $overline{z}=frac1z$. So, on the circle $|z|=1$ we care about,
$$text{Re}(z) = frac12left(z+frac1zright)$$
That's something we can work with. (Of course, it's a bit absurd to apply the residue theorem to the literal integral $frac az$ around a circle - we needed that integral to prove the theorem in the first place)






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thanks a lot, just what I wanted.
    $endgroup$
    – Aditya
    1 hour ago














3












3








3





$begingroup$

The real part of $z$ is not a complex-differentiable function anywhere. So, what can we do instead in order to apply complex analysis techniques? We can find an analytic function that agrees with it on the circle - even if it's completely different everywhere else.



First, we note that $text{Re}(z) = frac12(z+overline{z})$. Since the conjugate isn't analytic, that isn't good enough yet. But then, for $|z|=1$, $overline{z}=frac1z$. So, on the circle $|z|=1$ we care about,
$$text{Re}(z) = frac12left(z+frac1zright)$$
That's something we can work with. (Of course, it's a bit absurd to apply the residue theorem to the literal integral $frac az$ around a circle - we needed that integral to prove the theorem in the first place)






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



The real part of $z$ is not a complex-differentiable function anywhere. So, what can we do instead in order to apply complex analysis techniques? We can find an analytic function that agrees with it on the circle - even if it's completely different everywhere else.



First, we note that $text{Re}(z) = frac12(z+overline{z})$. Since the conjugate isn't analytic, that isn't good enough yet. But then, for $|z|=1$, $overline{z}=frac1z$. So, on the circle $|z|=1$ we care about,
$$text{Re}(z) = frac12left(z+frac1zright)$$
That's something we can work with. (Of course, it's a bit absurd to apply the residue theorem to the literal integral $frac az$ around a circle - we needed that integral to prove the theorem in the first place)







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered 1 hour ago









jmerryjmerry

6,457718




6,457718












  • $begingroup$
    Thanks a lot, just what I wanted.
    $endgroup$
    – Aditya
    1 hour ago


















  • $begingroup$
    Thanks a lot, just what I wanted.
    $endgroup$
    – Aditya
    1 hour ago
















$begingroup$
Thanks a lot, just what I wanted.
$endgroup$
– Aditya
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
Thanks a lot, just what I wanted.
$endgroup$
– Aditya
1 hour ago











2












$begingroup$

${1 over 2 pi i} int_0^{2 pi} cos t ie^{it} dt = {1 over 2 pi} int_0^{2 pi} {1 over 2 } (e^{it} + e^{-it}) e^{it} dt = {1 over 2}$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Not true - $dz$ isn't real.
    $endgroup$
    – jmerry
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    I don't know what I was thinking.
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    That was embarrassing.
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    Here $dz = ie^{it}$ right? And we can write $Re(z) = cos t = frac{(e^{it}+ e^{-it})}{2} $ all of this makes sense. So we have $int_0^{2pi} e^{2it} + 1 = 2pi$ because $cos 0 = cos 2pi$. So I don't see why this is wrong just because $dz$ is not real? This is almost the same way I solved it above in the question details, like I did via the trigonometric route, it was much longer. This is super fast. Isn't this correct too?
    $endgroup$
    – Aditya
    1 hour ago












  • $begingroup$
    I edited out my embarrassing mistake. The answer above is correct. For real measures we have $operatorname{re} (int f d mu) = int operatorname{re}(f) d mu$, but that does not apply here.
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    59 mins ago


















2












$begingroup$

${1 over 2 pi i} int_0^{2 pi} cos t ie^{it} dt = {1 over 2 pi} int_0^{2 pi} {1 over 2 } (e^{it} + e^{-it}) e^{it} dt = {1 over 2}$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Not true - $dz$ isn't real.
    $endgroup$
    – jmerry
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    I don't know what I was thinking.
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    That was embarrassing.
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    Here $dz = ie^{it}$ right? And we can write $Re(z) = cos t = frac{(e^{it}+ e^{-it})}{2} $ all of this makes sense. So we have $int_0^{2pi} e^{2it} + 1 = 2pi$ because $cos 0 = cos 2pi$. So I don't see why this is wrong just because $dz$ is not real? This is almost the same way I solved it above in the question details, like I did via the trigonometric route, it was much longer. This is super fast. Isn't this correct too?
    $endgroup$
    – Aditya
    1 hour ago












  • $begingroup$
    I edited out my embarrassing mistake. The answer above is correct. For real measures we have $operatorname{re} (int f d mu) = int operatorname{re}(f) d mu$, but that does not apply here.
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    59 mins ago
















2












2








2





$begingroup$

${1 over 2 pi i} int_0^{2 pi} cos t ie^{it} dt = {1 over 2 pi} int_0^{2 pi} {1 over 2 } (e^{it} + e^{-it}) e^{it} dt = {1 over 2}$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



${1 over 2 pi i} int_0^{2 pi} cos t ie^{it} dt = {1 over 2 pi} int_0^{2 pi} {1 over 2 } (e^{it} + e^{-it}) e^{it} dt = {1 over 2}$.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited 1 hour ago

























answered 1 hour ago









copper.hatcopper.hat

127k559160




127k559160












  • $begingroup$
    Not true - $dz$ isn't real.
    $endgroup$
    – jmerry
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    I don't know what I was thinking.
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    That was embarrassing.
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    Here $dz = ie^{it}$ right? And we can write $Re(z) = cos t = frac{(e^{it}+ e^{-it})}{2} $ all of this makes sense. So we have $int_0^{2pi} e^{2it} + 1 = 2pi$ because $cos 0 = cos 2pi$. So I don't see why this is wrong just because $dz$ is not real? This is almost the same way I solved it above in the question details, like I did via the trigonometric route, it was much longer. This is super fast. Isn't this correct too?
    $endgroup$
    – Aditya
    1 hour ago












  • $begingroup$
    I edited out my embarrassing mistake. The answer above is correct. For real measures we have $operatorname{re} (int f d mu) = int operatorname{re}(f) d mu$, but that does not apply here.
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    59 mins ago




















  • $begingroup$
    Not true - $dz$ isn't real.
    $endgroup$
    – jmerry
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    I don't know what I was thinking.
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    That was embarrassing.
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    Here $dz = ie^{it}$ right? And we can write $Re(z) = cos t = frac{(e^{it}+ e^{-it})}{2} $ all of this makes sense. So we have $int_0^{2pi} e^{2it} + 1 = 2pi$ because $cos 0 = cos 2pi$. So I don't see why this is wrong just because $dz$ is not real? This is almost the same way I solved it above in the question details, like I did via the trigonometric route, it was much longer. This is super fast. Isn't this correct too?
    $endgroup$
    – Aditya
    1 hour ago












  • $begingroup$
    I edited out my embarrassing mistake. The answer above is correct. For real measures we have $operatorname{re} (int f d mu) = int operatorname{re}(f) d mu$, but that does not apply here.
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    59 mins ago


















$begingroup$
Not true - $dz$ isn't real.
$endgroup$
– jmerry
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
Not true - $dz$ isn't real.
$endgroup$
– jmerry
1 hour ago












$begingroup$
I don't know what I was thinking.
$endgroup$
– copper.hat
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
I don't know what I was thinking.
$endgroup$
– copper.hat
1 hour ago












$begingroup$
That was embarrassing.
$endgroup$
– copper.hat
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
That was embarrassing.
$endgroup$
– copper.hat
1 hour ago












$begingroup$
Here $dz = ie^{it}$ right? And we can write $Re(z) = cos t = frac{(e^{it}+ e^{-it})}{2} $ all of this makes sense. So we have $int_0^{2pi} e^{2it} + 1 = 2pi$ because $cos 0 = cos 2pi$. So I don't see why this is wrong just because $dz$ is not real? This is almost the same way I solved it above in the question details, like I did via the trigonometric route, it was much longer. This is super fast. Isn't this correct too?
$endgroup$
– Aditya
1 hour ago






$begingroup$
Here $dz = ie^{it}$ right? And we can write $Re(z) = cos t = frac{(e^{it}+ e^{-it})}{2} $ all of this makes sense. So we have $int_0^{2pi} e^{2it} + 1 = 2pi$ because $cos 0 = cos 2pi$. So I don't see why this is wrong just because $dz$ is not real? This is almost the same way I solved it above in the question details, like I did via the trigonometric route, it was much longer. This is super fast. Isn't this correct too?
$endgroup$
– Aditya
1 hour ago














$begingroup$
I edited out my embarrassing mistake. The answer above is correct. For real measures we have $operatorname{re} (int f d mu) = int operatorname{re}(f) d mu$, but that does not apply here.
$endgroup$
– copper.hat
59 mins ago






$begingroup$
I edited out my embarrassing mistake. The answer above is correct. For real measures we have $operatorname{re} (int f d mu) = int operatorname{re}(f) d mu$, but that does not apply here.
$endgroup$
– copper.hat
59 mins ago




















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3097060%2fintegral-of-real-part-of-z-around-the-unit-circle%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







-

Popular posts from this blog

SQL Server 17 - Attemping to backup to remote NAS but Access is denied

Image
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0; } 0 I was attemping to use Ola Hallengrens scripts to backup to a remote NAS, but it was failing and not giving any direct errors, so I tried doing it manually using Server Management Studio and got the following error: TITLE: Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio Failed to retrieve data for this request. (Microsoft.SqlServer.Management.Sdk.Sfc) For help, click: http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink?ProdName=Microsoft%20SQL%20Server&LinkId=20476 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: An exception occurred while executing a Transact-SQL statement or batch. (Microsoft.SqlServer.ConnectionInfo) The operating system returned the error '0x80070005(Access is denied.)&#
Read more

Always On Availability groups resolving state after failover - Remote harden of transaction...

Image
0 My explanation will be opinion based as it is based on my findings. If more information is needed, I am always happy to add it. The setup We have 4 SQL Server 2016 Instances, and all 4 underlying servers are in a WSFC (In my eyes a strange setup since Always On AG's are 2 by 2. But that is a different question.) 4 nodes + Fileshare witness Version: 13.0.5026.0 (all nodes) The instances that are having the failover issues are instances 1 & 2. They have 3 AG's between them. AG1 is primary on instance 1 and is having the issue. AG2 and AG3 are primary on instance 2. Instances 3 and 4 have their own separate AG's (2). AG1's settings The week before Last week, after checking for long running queries (none) and the synchronization state (green accross the board) we initiated a
Read more

Restoring from pg_dump with foreign key constraints

Image
5 2 In restoring a database from a pg_dump , a number of errors are being generated and the whole table is subsequently being ignored. An example: ERROR: insert or update on table "channelproducts" violates foreign key constraint "fk_rails_dfaae373a5" DETAIL: Key (channel_id)=(1) is not present in table "channels". Interestingly enough, I've noted that all these instances are popping up because of the sequence of loading. channels is after channelproducts both alphabetically and in the file and thus I can understand why postgres complains about having to create a child without a parent. caveat: the foreign key is being generated automatically by rails 4.2: I could remove the problem at the source but that still does not really solve the problem... version: PostgreSQL
Read more