Complex Differentiable and Holmorphic Functions (Pt. II)
Point of Post: This is a continuation of this post.
Complex Differentiablility
Let be open (we are obviously endowing with the usual topology). We say that a function is differentiable at if there exists a linear function such that the limit
We call the complex total derivative of at and denote it . Of course, this definition is pure pedantry since any linear function is of the form for some complex number . Thus, we know that , if it exists, is secretly just multiplication by some constant. We denote this constant and call it the derivative of at . We see then that being differentiable at is equivalent to the statement that
exists, and when it does, it is equal to .
If is differentiable at every point of we say it’s differentiable on . Note then that we get a function defined by . We say that is continuously differentiable if is continuous on . We say that is twice differentiable if is differentiable on , and we define times differentiable similarly.
The first key theorem about differentiable functions is the following:
Theorem: Let be open. Then, if is such that is complex differentiable at then it is real differentiable at and (i.e. the complex total derivative is equal to the real total derivative).
Proof: Identifying as vector spaces we see that is naturally an map which evidently satisfies
from where the conclusion follows by the definition of being real differentiable and being a total derivative.
This allows us to conclude about the complex derivative all the things that were true for real differentiable functions . For example:
Corollary(Chain Rule): Let be open and suppose that and are functions such that is differentiable at and is differentiable at . Then, is differentiable at and .
Proof: By the chain rule for total derivatives and the fact that (complex total derivative equals total derivative) we know that , but this is clearly just the linear map from where the conclusion follows.
Using the same idea we also can conclude the following:
Corollary: Let be open and . Suppose that are differentiable at then:
where we must assume that for the last one.
Proof: The first and last one we have proven before (here and here respectively) and the second can be proved thinking of multiplication as a bilinear map and applying this result.
We also know this fact:
Theorem: Let be open and connected. Then, if as functions on then for some constant . In particular, if then is constant.
Proof: Apply the case for real functions.
Since we know that real differentiable functions are continuous we may also conclude this:
Theorem: Let be open. If is differentiable at then it is continuous at .
References:
[1] Greene, Robert Everist, and Steven George Krantz. Function Theory of One Complex Variable. Providence: American Mathematical Society, 2006. Print.
[2] Conway, John B. Functions of One Complex Variable I. New York: SpringerVerlag, 1978. Print.
[3] Rudin, W. Real and Complex Analysis. New York,NY: McGrawHill, 1988. Print.
[4] Ahlfors, Lars V. Complex Analysis; an Introduction to the Theory of Analytic Functions of One Complex Variable. New York: McGrawHill, 1966. Print.
May 1, 2012  Posted by Alex Youcis  Complex Analysis, Uncategorized  Analytic Function, CauchyRiemann Equations, Complex Analysis, Complex Analysis  Analysis, Complex Differentiable Function, d zee, d zee bar, Differentiable Function, dz, dz bar, Holmorphic Function, Intuition, Total Derivative, Wirtinger's Derivatives
2 Comments »
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
About me
My name is Alex Youcis. I am currently a senior a first year graduate student at the University of California, Berkeley.
About Me
Blogroll
 Absolutely Useless
 Abstract Algebra
 Annoying Precision
 Aquazorcarson's Blog
 Bruno's Math Blog
 Chris' Math Blog
 Climbing Mount Bourbaki
 E. Kowalski's Blog
 Geometric Group Theory
 Geometry and the Imagination
 Gower's Weblog
 Hard Arithmetic
 HardyRamanujan Letters
 Ngô Quốc Anh's Blog
 Project Crazy Project
 Rigorous Trivialities
 Secret Blogging Seminar
 SymOmega
 TCS Math
 Unapologetic Mathematician
 What's New
Lecture Notes
Categories
Top Posts
 Munkres Chapter two Section 12 & 13: Topological Spaces and Bases
 Munkres Chapter 2 Section 19 (Part I)
 Munkres Chapter 2 Section 17
 Munkres Chapter 2 Section 1
 Munkres Chapter 1 Section 1
 Relation Between Sylow's Theorems and Direct Product
 Munkres Chapter 2 Section 18
 Halmos Chapter one Section 13 and 14: Linear Functionals and Bracket Notation
 Free Vector Spaces
 Munkres Chapter 1 Section 2

Algebra Algebraic Combinatorics Algebraic Topology Analysis Answers Category Theory Chapter 2 Characters Character Theory Class Functions Compactness Complex Analysis Connectedness Derivative Differential Geometry Differential Topology DIrect Limit Direct Limits Examples Exterior Algebra Field Theory Finite Dimensional Vector Spaces Full Solutions Functor Galois Theory Geometry Group Group Actions Group Algebra Groups Group Theory Halmos Homological Algebra Homomorphism Homotopy Ideals Induced Character Induced Representation Intuition Inverse Limit Irreducible Characters Irreps Isomorphism Linear Algebra Linear Transformations Manifolds Matrices Module Modules Module Theory Motivation Multivariable Analysis Munkres Normal Subgroups Number Theory Permutations PID Polynomials Prime Ideals Products Product Topology Projections Representation Theory Review of Group Theory Riemann Surfaces Ring Rings Ring Theory Rudin Solutions Sylow Theorems Symmetric Group Tensor Product Topology Total Derivative
[…] Complex Differentiable and Holmorphic Functions (Pt. III) Point of Post: This is a continuation of this post. […]
Pingback by Complex Differentiable and Holmorphic Functions (Pt. III) « Abstract Nonsense  May 1, 2012 
[…] we’d have that is entire (note we can divide since is never zero). That said, using the division rule we see […]
Pingback by The Exponential and Trigonometric Functions « Abstract Nonsense  May 5, 2012 