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
    59 mins 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
    59 mins 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 1 hour ago









AdityaAditya

278314




278314








  • 2




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














  • 2




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








2




2




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




$begingroup$
That’s the right answer, by a correct method.
$endgroup$
– Lubin
59 mins 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
    38 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
    58 mins 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
    30 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
    28 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
    38 mins 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
    38 mins 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
    38 mins ago


















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
















$begingroup$
Thanks a lot, just what I wanted.
$endgroup$
– Aditya
38 mins ago




$begingroup$
Thanks a lot, just what I wanted.
$endgroup$
– Aditya
38 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
    58 mins 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
    30 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
    28 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
    58 mins 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
    30 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
    28 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
    58 mins 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
    30 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
    28 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
    58 mins 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
    30 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
    28 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
58 mins ago




$begingroup$
That was embarrassing.
$endgroup$
– copper.hat
58 mins 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
30 mins 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
30 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
28 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
28 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

Knooppunt Holsloot

Image
Knooppunt Holsloot Kenmerken Wegen A37 × N34 Type knooppunt klaverblad Portaal     Verkeer & Vervoer Knooppunt Holsloot is een verkeersknooppunt op de kruising van de autosnelweg A37 en de N34 in Drenthe, tussen Emmen en Coevorden. Oorspronkelijk was deze aansluiting een afritconstructie van het type Haarlemmermeeraansluiting, zoals bij Knooppunt Hooipolder. Sinds 2002 is het knooppunt omgebouwd tot een volledig klaverblad. Als noviteit werd hier voor het eerst gebruikgemaakt van dimbare verlichting in plaats van de normale vaste tijden waarop de verlichting aan en uit gaat, wat een grote kostenbesparing opleverde. [1] Dat Holsloot als volwaardig knooppunt is uitgevoerd, waarbij alle verkeersstromen en afbuigingen ononderbroken kunnen doorgaan, is uitzonderlijk. Het betreft hier namelijk een aansluiting tussen een autosnelweg en niet-snelweg. Een vergelijkbare situatie treft men nabij Hoensbroek bij het knooppunt Ten Esschen.     Aa
Read more

Altaar (religie)

Image
Deel van de serie over kerkelijk gerei waaronder paramenten en liturgisch vaatwerk gebruikt in de liturgie Liturgisch vaatwerk Vasa sacra Miskelk · Pateen Kelklepeltje Ciborie · Monstrans Pyxis · Custodiale Vasa non sacra Ampullen · Wijwatervat Olievaatje Wierookvat · Ablutievat Paramenten Amict · Albe · Baarkleed · Cingel Tuniek · Dalmatiek · Fanon Kazuifel · Manipel · Stola Gremiale · Benedictievelum Mijter Koorkledij Rochet · Superplie Koorkap · Cappa magna Kovel Kelkgerei Bursa · Kelkvelum Ciborievelum Kerklinnen Corporale · Kelkdoekje Lavabodoekje · Palla Altaardwaal Kerkinterieur Altaar · Ambo Biechtstoel · Communiebank Doksaal · Doopvont Faldistorium Godslamp · Hoogaltaar Heilig Kruisaltaar Katheder · Preekstoel Sedilia Tabernakel · Volksaltaar Liturgische boeken Altaarmissaal Benedictionale · Brevier Evangeliarium · Evangelistarium Graduale · Kyriale Lectionarium Psalter · Rituaal Sacramentarium · Volksmissaal Overige Flambou
Read more

Gregoriusmis

Image
Een afbeelding van de Gregoriusmis uit een getijdenboek gemaakt in de zuidelijke Nederlanden tussen 1500 en 1525 Gregoriusmis, Meester van het Akense Altaar, ca. 1500-1525. Collectie Museum Catharijneconvent De Gregoriusmis of de Mis van Sint Gregorius is een motief in katholieke kunst, dat het eerst verscheen in de late Middeleeuwen en dat nog steeds werd gebruikt tijdens de contrareformatie. Paus Gregorius I (ca. 540-604) is afgebeeld, de H. Mis opdragend, terwijl Christus als de Man van Smarten verschijnt op het altaar dat voor Sint Gregorius staat. Volgens de legende had St. Gregorius gebeden om een teken voor een betwijfelaar van de transsubstantiatieleer, waarop de lijdende Christus tijdens het opdragen van de Mis verscheen om hem te overtuigen en waarbij zijn bloed in de altaarkelk liep. Vaak zijn ook de passiewerktuigen afgebeeld. Zie de categorie Mass of Saint Gregory van Wikimedia Commons voor mediabestanden over dit onderwerp. This page is onl
Read more