Results 1 to 11 of 11

Math Help - The zeros of an analytic function (Complex Analysis)

  1. #1
    Member
    Joined
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    99

    The zeros of an analytic function (Complex Analysis)

    Determine the number of zeros of f in the first quadrant.

    (1) f(z)=z^4-3z^2+3

    (2) f(z)=z^2+iz+2+i

    (3) f(z) = z^7+6z^3+7

    I really can't follow along in the book of how they do this. I was wondering if there was a simpler way of figuring out these problems. Any help would be appreciated, thanks!
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    Member
    Joined
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    99
    Here is the example they give me to follow:

    Find the number of zeros of the function f(z)=z^3-2z^2+4 in the first quadrant

    Solution: On the segment 0\leq x\leq R, f(x) = x^3-2x^2+4 is real and greater than 2. On the quartercircle z=Re^{it}, 0\leq t\leq \frac{\pi}{2},

    f(Re^{it}) = R^3e^{3it}(1-\frac{2}{Re^{it}}+\frac{4}{R^3e^{3it}})=R^3e^{it}(  1+\zeta),

    where |\zeta|\leq \frac{6}{R} <\epsilon for R large. Thus, arg f(Re^{it}) is approx. arg (e^{3it}) = 3t for large R, so arg f(Re^{it}) increases from 0 to about \frac{3\pi}{2} as t increases from 0 to \frac{\pi}{2}

    On the segment z=iy, R\geq y\geq 0,

    f(iy)=-iy^3+2y^2+4

    For R\geq y > 0, this point lies in the fourth quadrant, since

    Re (f(iy))=4+2y^2 > 0
    Im (f(iy))=-y^3 < 0

    Hence, as y decreases from R to 0, f(iy) lies in the fourth quadrant and moves toward the point w=4. COnsequently, as z traverses the contour, arg f(z) increases by exactly 2 \pi, so f(z)=z^3-2z^2+4 has precisely one zero in the first quadrant.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------

    I can follow these steps up until where |\zeta| \leq \frac{6}{R} < \epsilon.

    Thanks
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    Super Member
    Joined
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    903
    That's a nice analysis Shadow. Thanks. This is how I'd interpret it: We're of course using the Argument Principle: \Delta_C \text{arg} f(z)=2\pi(N-P).

    In the case of the quarter circle C_2=\left\{z=Re^{it},\; 0\leq t\leq \pi/2\right\} you have:

    <br />
f(Re^{it}) = R^3e^{3it}(1-\frac{2}{Re^{it}}+\frac{4}{R^3e^{3it}})=R^3e^{3it}  (1+\zeta)<br />


    Now: \left|\frac{2}{Re^{it}}+\frac{4}{R^3e^{3it}}\right  |\leq \frac{2}{R}+\frac{4}{R^3}\leq \frac{2}{R}+\frac{4}{R}=\frac{6}{R} and so for large R,we have in parenthesis, one minus a very small number which approaches one in the limit so that we have \Delta_{C_2}\text{arg}f(z)=\Delta_{C_2}\text{arg}R  e^{3it} over the quarter circle which is just 3\pi/2.

    On the leg going down the imaginary axis you noted:
    \text{Re} f(iy)=4+2y^2>0
    \text{Im} f(iy)=-y^3<0
    So for very large R, the argument of this point tends to -\pi/2 since it's in the 4th quad and the -y^3 term dominates for large y. As we go towards the origin, f(0)=4 so the change in argument is 0-(-\pi/2)=\pi/2.

    Then the total change in argument is 2\pi which implies there is only one root in the first quadrant.

    You might be interested to know that Riemann did a similar, albeit slightly more complicated, analysis of the zeta function around a square contour encircling the critical region and likewise using the argument principle, conjectured all the (non-trivial) zeros of zeta were on the critical line.
    Last edited by shawsend; October 23rd 2008 at 03:09 PM.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    Member
    Joined
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    99
    Thanks a lot! I'm going to try these on my own. Is there any chance you could tell me the answer to at least one of these so I can see if I'm going on the right track? Just the answer is fine, no ned to explain if you don't want to.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    Super Member
    Joined
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    903
    Quote Originally Posted by shadow_2145 View Post
    Thanks a lot! I'm going to try these on my own. Is there any chance you could tell me the answer to at least one of these so I can see if I'm going on the right track? Just the answer is fine, no ned to explain if you don't want to.
    You mean the other two right? You just did the first one. I struggle with them too. As far as the answers well, got Mathematica?

    Code:
    In[69]:= N[Solve[z^2 + I*z + 2 + I == 0, z], 4] 
    N[Solve[z^7 + 6*z^3 + 7 == 0, z], 4]
    
    
    Out[69]= {{z -> -0.3257 + 1.0350 I}, {z -> 
       0.326 - 2.035 I}}
    
    Out[70]= {{z -> -1.000}, {z -> -1.122 - 
        1.201 I]}, {z -> -1.122 + 1.201 I}, {z -> 
       0.4644 - 0.9559 I}, {z -> 
       0.4644 + 0.9559 I]}, {z -> 
       1.157 - 0.978 I}, {z -> 1.157 + 0.978 I}}
    Yea, yea I know it's cheezy to do that. I ain't proud. It does provide a check of the work we do using the Argument Principle though.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  6. #6
    Member
    Joined
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    99
    Actually, the first one is different from the example I provided. What is this mathematica?! I don't understand it, lol.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  7. #7
    Member
    Joined
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by shawsend View Post
    You mean the other two right? You just did the first one. I struggle with them too. As far as the answers well, got Mathematica?

    Code:
    In[69]:= N[Solve[z^2 + I*z + 2 + I == 0, z], 4] 
    N[Solve[z^7 + 6*z^3 + 7 == 0, z], 4]
     
     
    Out[69]= {{z -> -0.3257 + 1.0350 I}, {z -> 
       0.326 - 2.035 I}}
     
    Out[70]= {{z -> -1.000}, {z -> -1.122 - 
        1.201 I]}, {z -> -1.122 + 1.201 I}, {z -> 
       0.4644 - 0.9559 I}, {z -> 
       0.4644 + 0.9559 I]}, {z -> 
       1.157 - 0.978 I}, {z -> 1.157 + 0.978 I}}
    Yea, yea I know it's cheezy to do that. I ain't proud. It does provide a check of the work we do using the Argument Principle though.

    So [69] is 2 zeros and [70] is 7 zeros? :/
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  8. #8
    Super Member
    Joined
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    903
    Quote Originally Posted by shadow_2145 View Post
    Actually, the first one is different from the example I provided. What is this mathematica?! I don't understand it, lol.
    Ok, I didn't notice. That's good though. Gives us more practice. Also, can use Rouche's Theorem to find the roots. But to be honest, the lot of them would take me a while unless I really get the hang of it. Guess that's a bit of a contradiction since I added that bit about Riemann but I digress. Don't wait on me. Try and apply what we did above to those three. Mathematica is a program for doing math. Just like I typed in those commands and it output the roots. Tons more. Do a search on the web for Mathematica and also look down in the computer forum below. We have mathematica (and Matlab) problems that are solved. Everyone who does math should do Mathematica:

    Code:
    In[81]:= N[Solve[z^4 - 3 z^2 + 3 == 0, z], 4]
    N[Solve[z^2 + I*z + 2 + I == 0, z], 4] 
    N[Solve[z^7 + 6*z^3 + 7 == 0, z], 4]
    
    
    Out[81]= {{z -> -1.2712 + 0.3406 I}, {z -> 
       1.2712 - 0.3406 I}, {z -> -1.2712 - 
        0.3406 I}, {z -> 1.2712 + 0.3406 I}}
    
    Out[82]= {{z -> -0.3257 + 1.0350 I}, {z -> 
       0.326 - 2.035 I}}
    
    Out[83]= {{z -> -1.000}, {z -> -1.122 - 
        1.201 I}, {z -> -1.122 + 1.201 I}, {z -> 
       0.4644 - 0.9559 I}, {z -> 
       0.4644 + 0.9559 I}, {z -> 
       1.157 - 0.978 I}, {z -> 1.157 + 0.978 I}}
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  9. #9
    Super Member
    Joined
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    903
    Quote Originally Posted by shadow_2145 View Post
    So [69] is 2 zeros and [70] is 7 zeros? :/
    Ok, I'm sorry. If you don't know Mathematica, than that output I'm showing is probably very cryptic. The input lines in my post above solved for the roots of the three equations. These roots are given in the form {{r1},{r2},...{rn}} for each Solve I executed. So the first output for the first equation yielded four roots:

    {{z -> -1.2712 + 0.3406 I}, {z ->
    1.2712 - 0.3406 I}, {z -> -1.2712 -
    0.3406 I}, {z -> 1.2712 + 0.3406 I}}

    First is -1.2712+0.3406i (given by that z-> notation)
    Second is: 1.2712-0.3406i
    Third is -1.2712-0.3406i
    Fourth: 1.2712+0.3406i

    You can interpret the rest.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  10. #10
    Member
    Joined
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by shawsend View Post
    Ok, I'm sorry. If you don't know Mathematica, than that output I'm showing is probably very cryptic. The input lines in my post above solved for the roots of the three equations. These roots are given in the form {{r1},{r2},...{rn}} for each Solve I executed. So the first output for the first equation yielded four roots:

    {{z -> -1.2712 + 0.3406 I}, {z ->
    1.2712 - 0.3406 I}, {z -> -1.2712 -
    0.3406 I}, {z -> 1.2712 + 0.3406 I}}

    First is -1.2712+0.3406i (given by that z-> notation)
    Second is: 1.2712-0.3406i
    Third is -1.2712-0.3406i
    Fourth: 1.2712+0.3406i

    You can interpret the rest.


    First is -1.2712+0.3406i (given by that z-> notation)
    Second is: 1.2712-0.3406i
    Third is -1.2712-0.3406i
    Fourth: 1.2712+0.3406i

    So, it seems to me that the Fourth root is the only one in the first quadrant, so we have one zero. This cooresponds with the answer I got, /hurray!
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  11. #11
    Super Member
    Joined
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    903
    Ok good. Here's my work for #1: Call the legs of the contour as we go around them in the first quad, c1, c2, c3.

    On c1 we have R^4-3R^2+3 and for large R, \Delta_{c1}\arg f(z)=0 (cake)

    On c2 we have a similar situation as the example exercise:

    R^4e^{4it}\left(1-\frac{3}{R^2e^{2it}}+\frac{3}{R^4e^{2it}}\right)
    and using the same argument, we get \Delta_{c2}\arg f(z)=2\pi

    However on c3, let z=yi so that f(yi)=y^4+3y^2+3>0 for all y so that \Delta_{c3}\arg f=0

    So that over the entire contour, \Delta_C\arg(f)=2\pi which means there is only a single root in this contour. Hey, I think I'm getting it too!
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. Complex Analysis -analytic function
    Posted in the Differential Geometry Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: November 11th 2011, 03:17 AM
  2. Complex Analysis: Analytic Function
    Posted in the Differential Geometry Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: September 26th 2011, 06:32 PM
  3. Complex Analysis-Analytic Continuation
    Posted in the Advanced Math Topics Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 1st 2010, 02:14 PM
  4. zeros of an analytic function
    Posted in the Advanced Applied Math Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: November 20th 2009, 11:22 AM
  5. The Zeros of an Analytic Function
    Posted in the Calculus Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: November 16th 2008, 10:15 AM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum