1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
|
\def\Re{\mathop{\rm Re}\nolimits}
\def\Im{\mathop{\rm Im}\nolimits}
\let\rule\hrule
\def\hrule{\medskip\rule\medskip}
%page 70
\noindent{\bf 1.}
\noindent{\it (a)}
If $f(z) = \overline z = x - yi,$ $U_x = 1$ and $V_y = -1.$ $U_x\neq V_y,$
so because the Cauchy-Riemann equations are dissatisfied, the derivative
does not exist.
\noindent{\it (b)}
If $f(z) = z-\overline z = x + yi - (x - yi) = 2yi,$ $U_x = 0,$ and $V_y
= 2i.$ Again, $U_x\neq V_y.$
\noindent{\it (c)}
If $f(z) = 2x+ixy^2,$
$U_x = 2.$ $V_y = 2ix.$
$U_x = V_y \to 2 = 2ix \to x = 1/i = -i.$ $x\in R,$ so this is false,
and the function is not analytic.
\noindent{\it (d)}
If $f(z) = e^xe^{-iy},$
$$U_x = e^xe^{-iy}.$$
$$V_y = -ie^xe^{-iy} \neq U_x.$$
\noindent{\bf 3.}
% only info from secs 21 and 23
\noindent{\it (a)}
$f(z) = 1/z = \overline z/|z|^2 = (a-bi)/(a^2+b^2).$
The partial derivatives are $U_x = (y^2-x^2)/(x^2+y^2)^2,$
$V_y = (y^2-x^2)/(x^2+y^2)^2,$ $U_y = (-2xy)/(x^2+y^2)^2,$ and $V_x =
(2xy)/(x^2+y^2)^2.$ These satisfy the Cauchy-Riemann equations except
where they are undefined, $x^2+y^2 = 0 \to z = 0.$ Using the power rule
on $f(z) = z^{-1},$ $f'(z) = -z^{-2}.$
\noindent{\it (b)}
$f(z) = x^2+iy^2.$
The partial derivatives are $U_x = 2x,$ $U_y = 0,$ $V_y = 2y,$ and $V_x
= 0.$ $0 = 0$ at all points, but $2y = 2x$ only for $x = y$ or
$z = x+ix.$
Its derivative is, from these partial derivatives, $2x.$
\noindent{\it (c)}
$f(z) = z\Im z = (x+iy)y = xy + iy^2.$
$U_x = y = V_y = 2y \to y = 0.$ $U_y = x = -V_x = 0 \to x = 0.$
Therefore, $z = 0 + i0 = 0.$ From these partial derivatives, its
derivative on this domain is $0.$
\hrule
%page 76
\noindent{\bf 4.}
\noindent{\it (a)}
$$f(z) = {2z+1\over z(z^2+1)}$$
$f(z)$ is not analytic on $z=0$ or $z^2+1=0 \to z = \pm i.$ It is,
however, analytic on the remainder of the plane because, using the chain
rule and the product rule, its derivative can be constructed from its
component polynomials (which are entire functions).
\noindent{\it (b)}
$$f(z) = {z^3+i\over z^2-3z+2}$$
This is not analytic on $z^2-3z+2 = 0 = (z-1)(z-2) \to z = 1,2.$ It is
analytic on the remainder of the plane for the same reason as (a).
\noindent{\it (c)}
$$f(z) = {z^2+1\over (z+2)(z^2+2z+2)}.$$
This is not analytic on $z+2 = 0 \to z = -2$ or $z^2+2z+2 = 0 =
(z+(1-i))(z+(1+i)) \to z = 1\pm i.$ It is analytic for the same reason
as (a).
\hrule
%page 79
\noindent{\bf 4.}
See addendum.
\hrule
%page 89
\noindent{\bf 2.}
$$f(z) = 2z^2 - 3 - ze^z + e^{-z}.$$
If the component functions $f$ and $g$ are analytic on the plane (have a
defined derivative), $f+g$ is also analytic on the plane.
A similar rule exists for the product of entire functions.
$2z^2$ follows the power rule, and has a derivative over the entire
plane, and $-3$ follows the constant rule, having a derivative of 0.
$-z$ is entire, also from the power rule, and $e^z$ has been shown to
have a derivative in chapter 3. Using the product rule, $-ze^z$ is
entire.
$e^{-z}$ is a composition of $e^z$ and $-z,$ which each are analytic
over the plane, so their composition is also analytic over the plane.
This means $f(z)$ is entire.
\noindent{\bf 8.}
\noindent{\it (a)}
$e^z = -2.$ $e^x = |z| = |-2| = 2 \to x = \ln 2,$ and
$\arg z = \pi + 2n\pi,$ so $z = \ln2 + i(\pi+2n\pi).$
\noindent{\it (b)}
$e^z = 1 + i.$ $e^x = |z| = |1+i| = \sqrt 2 \to x = (1/2)\ln2,$ and
$\arg z = \pi/4 + 2n\pi.$ Therefore, $z = (1/2)\ln2 + i(\pi/4+2n\pi).$
\noindent{\it (c)}
If $\exp(2z-1) = 1,$ $\exp(2z)e^{-1} = 1 \to e^{2z} = e.$ This gives
$e^{2x} = |e| = e \to 2x = 1 \to x = 1/2,$ and $\arg(2z) = 2n\pi \to
\arg z = n\pi,$ so $z = 1/2 + in\pi.$
\hrule
%page 95
\noindent{\bf 2.}
\noindent{\it (a)}
$$\log e = 1 + 2n\pi i$$
$\ln e = 1,$ and $\arg e = 2n\pi.$ This proves the above identity (with
$n = 0,\pm1,\pm2,\ldots$)
\noindent{\it (b)}
$$\log i = \left(2n + {1\over2}\right)\pi i$$
$\ln|i| = \ln1 = 0,$ and $\arg i = \pi/2 + 2n\pi.$ This makes $\log i =
(2n+1/2)\pi i.$
\noindent{\it (c)}
$$\log(-1+\sqrt3i) = \ln2 + 2\left(n + {1\over3}\right)\pi i$$
$\ln|-1+\sqrt3i| = \ln2,$ and $\arg(-1+\sqrt3i) = 2\pi/3 + 2n\pi,$ which
corresponds to the given identity ($\log(-1+\sqrt3i) = (2n\pi+2\pi/3)i +
\ln2.$)
\bye
|
