Increment of $arg(f(z))$ after one rotation
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I'm reading a paper and the author defines $Delta=arg(f(z))$ to be the increment of $arg(f(z))$ when $arg(z)$ for $z=e^iphi$ changes from $0$ to $2pi$. I understand that we're looking to find the difference of the arguments of $f(z)$ after $z$ makes one full rotation around the unit circle, but I'm also confused: $e^i0=e^i2pi$ so $f(e^i0)=f(e^i2pi)$, so would $Delta$ be anything besides 0?!
Thanks for the help, I'm new to complex analysis.
complex-analysis
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I'm reading a paper and the author defines $Delta=arg(f(z))$ to be the increment of $arg(f(z))$ when $arg(z)$ for $z=e^iphi$ changes from $0$ to $2pi$. I understand that we're looking to find the difference of the arguments of $f(z)$ after $z$ makes one full rotation around the unit circle, but I'm also confused: $e^i0=e^i2pi$ so $f(e^i0)=f(e^i2pi)$, so would $Delta$ be anything besides 0?!
Thanks for the help, I'm new to complex analysis.
complex-analysis
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I'm reading a paper and the author defines $Delta=arg(f(z))$ to be the increment of $arg(f(z))$ when $arg(z)$ for $z=e^iphi$ changes from $0$ to $2pi$. I understand that we're looking to find the difference of the arguments of $f(z)$ after $z$ makes one full rotation around the unit circle, but I'm also confused: $e^i0=e^i2pi$ so $f(e^i0)=f(e^i2pi)$, so would $Delta$ be anything besides 0?!
Thanks for the help, I'm new to complex analysis.
complex-analysis
I'm reading a paper and the author defines $Delta=arg(f(z))$ to be the increment of $arg(f(z))$ when $arg(z)$ for $z=e^iphi$ changes from $0$ to $2pi$. I understand that we're looking to find the difference of the arguments of $f(z)$ after $z$ makes one full rotation around the unit circle, but I'm also confused: $e^i0=e^i2pi$ so $f(e^i0)=f(e^i2pi)$, so would $Delta$ be anything besides 0?!
Thanks for the help, I'm new to complex analysis.
complex-analysis
asked Aug 9 at 16:24
ToniAz
987
987
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Yes, but the increment is the difference between the arguments of $f(z)$, not between the values of $f$. You have a function $f:G to mathbbC$ when $G subset mathbbC$ an open domain which contains the unit circle. Now let's define a curve $gamma:[0,2pi] to mathbbC$ by the rule $gamma(t)=f(e^it)$. Then by your definition the increment is $arg(gamma(2pi))-arg(gamma(0))$. Yes, the values of $gamma(2pi)$ and $gamma(0)$ are the same, but their arguments can still be different. For example, if $f$ is the identity function ($f(z)=z$) then you will get $gamma(0)=e^i0$ but $gamma(2pi)=e^2ipi$. The location of these points on the complex plane is the same but their arguments are different-$0$ and $2pi$ respectively. So the increment here will be $2pi$. Intuitively the increment is $2pi$ multiplied by the number of rotations that the curve $gamma$ does around the origin. A rotation counterclockwise counts as 1 rotation, a rotation clockwise counts as -1 rotation.
"The location of these points on the complex plane is the same but their arguments are different." The location of a point determines exactly its modulus and argument, right? for instance, the point $z=3$ has a modulus of $3$ and an argument of $0$.
â ToniAz
Aug 9 at 17:14
Not really. Imagine you make a counterclockwise rotation around the origin and return to the same point. You added $2pi$ to the argument, right? So $2pi$ is also an argument of $z=3$. Same thing about $4pi,-2pi,100pi$ and so on. Every complex number has infinitely many arguments, and the difference between each two is $2pi$ times an integer. So the modulus of a number is a function, but the argument is not, because it is multi-valued.
â Mark
Aug 9 at 17:30
Aha, I guess this is some sort of convention. I'll take that.
â ToniAz
Aug 9 at 17:40
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Yes, but the increment is the difference between the arguments of $f(z)$, not between the values of $f$. You have a function $f:G to mathbbC$ when $G subset mathbbC$ an open domain which contains the unit circle. Now let's define a curve $gamma:[0,2pi] to mathbbC$ by the rule $gamma(t)=f(e^it)$. Then by your definition the increment is $arg(gamma(2pi))-arg(gamma(0))$. Yes, the values of $gamma(2pi)$ and $gamma(0)$ are the same, but their arguments can still be different. For example, if $f$ is the identity function ($f(z)=z$) then you will get $gamma(0)=e^i0$ but $gamma(2pi)=e^2ipi$. The location of these points on the complex plane is the same but their arguments are different-$0$ and $2pi$ respectively. So the increment here will be $2pi$. Intuitively the increment is $2pi$ multiplied by the number of rotations that the curve $gamma$ does around the origin. A rotation counterclockwise counts as 1 rotation, a rotation clockwise counts as -1 rotation.
"The location of these points on the complex plane is the same but their arguments are different." The location of a point determines exactly its modulus and argument, right? for instance, the point $z=3$ has a modulus of $3$ and an argument of $0$.
â ToniAz
Aug 9 at 17:14
Not really. Imagine you make a counterclockwise rotation around the origin and return to the same point. You added $2pi$ to the argument, right? So $2pi$ is also an argument of $z=3$. Same thing about $4pi,-2pi,100pi$ and so on. Every complex number has infinitely many arguments, and the difference between each two is $2pi$ times an integer. So the modulus of a number is a function, but the argument is not, because it is multi-valued.
â Mark
Aug 9 at 17:30
Aha, I guess this is some sort of convention. I'll take that.
â ToniAz
Aug 9 at 17:40
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Yes, but the increment is the difference between the arguments of $f(z)$, not between the values of $f$. You have a function $f:G to mathbbC$ when $G subset mathbbC$ an open domain which contains the unit circle. Now let's define a curve $gamma:[0,2pi] to mathbbC$ by the rule $gamma(t)=f(e^it)$. Then by your definition the increment is $arg(gamma(2pi))-arg(gamma(0))$. Yes, the values of $gamma(2pi)$ and $gamma(0)$ are the same, but their arguments can still be different. For example, if $f$ is the identity function ($f(z)=z$) then you will get $gamma(0)=e^i0$ but $gamma(2pi)=e^2ipi$. The location of these points on the complex plane is the same but their arguments are different-$0$ and $2pi$ respectively. So the increment here will be $2pi$. Intuitively the increment is $2pi$ multiplied by the number of rotations that the curve $gamma$ does around the origin. A rotation counterclockwise counts as 1 rotation, a rotation clockwise counts as -1 rotation.
"The location of these points on the complex plane is the same but their arguments are different." The location of a point determines exactly its modulus and argument, right? for instance, the point $z=3$ has a modulus of $3$ and an argument of $0$.
â ToniAz
Aug 9 at 17:14
Not really. Imagine you make a counterclockwise rotation around the origin and return to the same point. You added $2pi$ to the argument, right? So $2pi$ is also an argument of $z=3$. Same thing about $4pi,-2pi,100pi$ and so on. Every complex number has infinitely many arguments, and the difference between each two is $2pi$ times an integer. So the modulus of a number is a function, but the argument is not, because it is multi-valued.
â Mark
Aug 9 at 17:30
Aha, I guess this is some sort of convention. I'll take that.
â ToniAz
Aug 9 at 17:40
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Yes, but the increment is the difference between the arguments of $f(z)$, not between the values of $f$. You have a function $f:G to mathbbC$ when $G subset mathbbC$ an open domain which contains the unit circle. Now let's define a curve $gamma:[0,2pi] to mathbbC$ by the rule $gamma(t)=f(e^it)$. Then by your definition the increment is $arg(gamma(2pi))-arg(gamma(0))$. Yes, the values of $gamma(2pi)$ and $gamma(0)$ are the same, but their arguments can still be different. For example, if $f$ is the identity function ($f(z)=z$) then you will get $gamma(0)=e^i0$ but $gamma(2pi)=e^2ipi$. The location of these points on the complex plane is the same but their arguments are different-$0$ and $2pi$ respectively. So the increment here will be $2pi$. Intuitively the increment is $2pi$ multiplied by the number of rotations that the curve $gamma$ does around the origin. A rotation counterclockwise counts as 1 rotation, a rotation clockwise counts as -1 rotation.
Yes, but the increment is the difference between the arguments of $f(z)$, not between the values of $f$. You have a function $f:G to mathbbC$ when $G subset mathbbC$ an open domain which contains the unit circle. Now let's define a curve $gamma:[0,2pi] to mathbbC$ by the rule $gamma(t)=f(e^it)$. Then by your definition the increment is $arg(gamma(2pi))-arg(gamma(0))$. Yes, the values of $gamma(2pi)$ and $gamma(0)$ are the same, but their arguments can still be different. For example, if $f$ is the identity function ($f(z)=z$) then you will get $gamma(0)=e^i0$ but $gamma(2pi)=e^2ipi$. The location of these points on the complex plane is the same but their arguments are different-$0$ and $2pi$ respectively. So the increment here will be $2pi$. Intuitively the increment is $2pi$ multiplied by the number of rotations that the curve $gamma$ does around the origin. A rotation counterclockwise counts as 1 rotation, a rotation clockwise counts as -1 rotation.
answered Aug 9 at 16:46
Mark
95119
95119
"The location of these points on the complex plane is the same but their arguments are different." The location of a point determines exactly its modulus and argument, right? for instance, the point $z=3$ has a modulus of $3$ and an argument of $0$.
â ToniAz
Aug 9 at 17:14
Not really. Imagine you make a counterclockwise rotation around the origin and return to the same point. You added $2pi$ to the argument, right? So $2pi$ is also an argument of $z=3$. Same thing about $4pi,-2pi,100pi$ and so on. Every complex number has infinitely many arguments, and the difference between each two is $2pi$ times an integer. So the modulus of a number is a function, but the argument is not, because it is multi-valued.
â Mark
Aug 9 at 17:30
Aha, I guess this is some sort of convention. I'll take that.
â ToniAz
Aug 9 at 17:40
add a comment |Â
"The location of these points on the complex plane is the same but their arguments are different." The location of a point determines exactly its modulus and argument, right? for instance, the point $z=3$ has a modulus of $3$ and an argument of $0$.
â ToniAz
Aug 9 at 17:14
Not really. Imagine you make a counterclockwise rotation around the origin and return to the same point. You added $2pi$ to the argument, right? So $2pi$ is also an argument of $z=3$. Same thing about $4pi,-2pi,100pi$ and so on. Every complex number has infinitely many arguments, and the difference between each two is $2pi$ times an integer. So the modulus of a number is a function, but the argument is not, because it is multi-valued.
â Mark
Aug 9 at 17:30
Aha, I guess this is some sort of convention. I'll take that.
â ToniAz
Aug 9 at 17:40
"The location of these points on the complex plane is the same but their arguments are different." The location of a point determines exactly its modulus and argument, right? for instance, the point $z=3$ has a modulus of $3$ and an argument of $0$.
â ToniAz
Aug 9 at 17:14
"The location of these points on the complex plane is the same but their arguments are different." The location of a point determines exactly its modulus and argument, right? for instance, the point $z=3$ has a modulus of $3$ and an argument of $0$.
â ToniAz
Aug 9 at 17:14
Not really. Imagine you make a counterclockwise rotation around the origin and return to the same point. You added $2pi$ to the argument, right? So $2pi$ is also an argument of $z=3$. Same thing about $4pi,-2pi,100pi$ and so on. Every complex number has infinitely many arguments, and the difference between each two is $2pi$ times an integer. So the modulus of a number is a function, but the argument is not, because it is multi-valued.
â Mark
Aug 9 at 17:30
Not really. Imagine you make a counterclockwise rotation around the origin and return to the same point. You added $2pi$ to the argument, right? So $2pi$ is also an argument of $z=3$. Same thing about $4pi,-2pi,100pi$ and so on. Every complex number has infinitely many arguments, and the difference between each two is $2pi$ times an integer. So the modulus of a number is a function, but the argument is not, because it is multi-valued.
â Mark
Aug 9 at 17:30
Aha, I guess this is some sort of convention. I'll take that.
â ToniAz
Aug 9 at 17:40
Aha, I guess this is some sort of convention. I'll take that.
â ToniAz
Aug 9 at 17:40
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2877403%2fincrement-of-argfz-after-one-rotation%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password