Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

*****Loop integral 2009*****?

Evaluate loop integral L ∫dz/(2009 + z^2009) , when

1) L: |z| = 1;

2) L: | 2z - √7| + | 2z + √7| = 8.

Update:

*********************

Well, the exponent is so large on purpose - that you wouln't try to find the roots :)

Rozeta, your solution is correct though ellipse is much smaller.

And there exist other - short and elegant - solution. Try to egzamine z=infinity.

Update 2:

************

There is a remarkable theorem which states that sum of all residus at all singular points of the function including infinity is equal to 0.

So to say

∑[i=1 to 2009] Res(f,Zi) = - Res(f,∞).

Then the integral can be evaluated this way

http://i633.photobucket.com/albums/uu51/labasrasa/...

Update 3:

*************

By the way about the equation of ellipse.

The equation describes the ellipse by definition - as locus of points such that the sum of the distances from the moving point to two fixed points (foci) remains constant = 2a.

So eq. | z - √7/2| + | z + √7/2| = 4

gives c = √7/2 and 2a=4, a=2.

Then b ² = a ² - c ² = 4 - 7/4 = 9/4.

The equation of the ellipse:

x ²/2 ² + y ²/1.5 ²=1

2 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    1) J=∫[L] dz/(2009 + z^2009) =

    2πi∑[i=1 to 2009] Res(Zi), where Zi are the roots of

    2009+z^2009=0 ==> Zi^2009=-2009,

    (all Zi are inside the unit circle |z| = 1)

    and

    Res(Zi)=

    lim[z->Zi] (z-Zi)/(2009 + z^2009)=[Lopital's rule]=

    lim[z->Zi] 1/(2009*z^2008)=1/(2009*Zi^2008)=

    Zi/(2009*Zi^2009)=-Zi/2009² ==>

    ∑[i=1 to 2009] Res(Zi) =

    (-1/2009²)∑[i=1 to 2009] Zi =

    (-1/2009²)*0 = 0 ==> J=0

    Edit:

    Mistake due to hurrying.

    2009^(1/2009)>1

    |Zi|=2009^(1/2009)=1.00379...

    1) L: |z| = 1 ==> All poles Zi are OUT of the unit circle |z|=1 (but very close to it) ==> J=0

    2) L: | 2z - √7| + | 2z + √7| = 8

    | z - √7/2| + | z + √7/2| = 4

    √[(x-√7/2)²+y²]+√[(x+√7/2)²+y²]=4

    √[(x+√7/2)²+y²]=4-√[(x-√7/2)²+y²]

    (x+√7/2)²=

    16-8√[(x-√7/2)²+y²]+(x-√7/2)²

    2√7x=16-8√[(x-√7/2)²+y²]

    √7x=8-4√[(x-√7/2)²+y²]

    4√[(x-√7/2)²+y²]=8-√7x

    16(x²-x√7+7/4+y²)=64-16x√7+7x²

    9x²+16y²=36

    L: x²/2²+y²/1.5²=1 ==> All Zi are inside the ellipse ==> J=0.

    I think the ellipse is correct now.

    Edit2:

    At the beginning of solving (2), I was thinking to use the inequality

    |a|+|b|≥|a+b|, which, used for L2: |2z - √7|+|2z + √7|=8 would lead to

    L3: |z|≤2, but this can't be used, since L2 is inside L3,

    as the equation of the ellipse showed later.

    Very nice question!

  • DavidG
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    Tabula,

    first off great question, did the exponent have to be so large!!

    I will following the same train of thought as Roveta, however for convenience, I solve

    int ( dz/ ( n + z^n) dz ) ; n being a natural number

    for both (1), (2)

    we have,

    L = int ( ( 1/ (n + z^n ) dz)

    L = sum ( Res(z = zi) i = 1 to n )

    Where zi are the solutions to

    n + z^n = 0 --> z^n = -n (*)

    that for (1) lie within |z| = 1

    to solve (*) I will employ De Moivre's formula,

    i.e,

    if z^n = w ; w being another complex number

    then the solution z are,

    z = r^(1/n) * ( exp( ( (t + 2*k*pi)/n )*i) k = 0 to n - 1

    which clearly are all distinct

    r = magnitude of w

    t = principle of w

    here r = n , t = (3/2)pi ( as n is a natural number)

    Hence the solutions z are

    z = n^(1/n) * exp( ( ( (3/2)pi + 2*k*pi )/n )* i)

    z = n^(1/n) * exp( ( ( (3/2) + 2*k )pi/n )* i) k = 0 to n - 1

    we observe for all residues to lie within |z| = 1 we have the condition

    |n^(1/n)| <= 1 --> n <= 1

    and as such no solutions exist as n is a natural number

    Hence for (1)

    (1) = 0

    For (2).... this obviously requires a bit more work, I will keep you posted (pardon the pun)

    David

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.