Complex Analysis 07: Contour Integration

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 16 гру 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 31

  • @vanessatram792
    @vanessatram792 9 років тому +33

    u saved a life sir, i've been crying 2 days about this

  • @ninosawbrzostowiecki1892
    @ninosawbrzostowiecki1892 7 років тому +12

    I've watched so many of your videos this quarter I could say you were one of my professors.

  • @taiyyabahmed6206
    @taiyyabahmed6206 7 років тому +1

    I'd rather just watch your videos than go to class, you explain it so much better!
    Thank you

  • @Rinnertt
    @Rinnertt 9 років тому +2

    Great series! Good format, and really clear explanation. Makes it seem quite simple really :). Also love the "thank you" on the end, haha.

  • @Xado147
    @Xado147 8 років тому +6

    10:27 Shouldn't there be *(-1)3ie^(-it) ?

    • @raphael8347924
      @raphael8347924 6 років тому

      I think not, since γ’dt is just (dγ/dt)dt, saving us from t being implicit. Writing it in the form f(γ)dγ, the conjugation only affects f(γ). This means only f(γ) is the integrand, while γ‘ is part of the „integration step“. If it would be complex conjugated, we would step in the wrong direction along the imaginary axis.
      An operation on the integrand shouldn’t affect the way the integration itself works. γ‘ should always behave the same way.
      Definitely no expert here, just sharing my thoughts.

    • @gyaneshjha8870
      @gyaneshjha8870 6 років тому

      No because z is same only you want to integrate the conjugate

  • @mnada72
    @mnada72 3 роки тому

    Thank you so much, your lessons made a difference :)

  • @hs1308
    @hs1308 9 років тому +1

    how to find the gamma function ? Could you elaborate on that part ?

  • @mungo3012
    @mungo3012 8 років тому +10

    When you differentiate 3e^it is that not just i3e^it

    • @clillis8792
      @clillis8792 8 років тому

      +mungo3012
      there is no 3e^it in the expression once it has been expanded

  •  7 років тому

    at 02:30 how can I derive limits of "t". I couldnt understand this

    • @TheMathCoach
      @TheMathCoach 7 років тому +3

      He wants to describe the line that goes from the starting point (5) to the end point (2+3i). He created this line by using the formula: Line(t) = [starting point] + t*([end point] - [starting point]), where t is the variable in this case and can be described as the flowing of time. By creating the line this way we will always get that Line(t=0) = starting point and Line(t=1) = end point.
      He could have created another formula for the line, but by doing it this way the limits will always be 0 and 1. Let me know if you want any more clarification on the subject.

  • @TheAdlcn
    @TheAdlcn 9 років тому +1

    how did you find gama(t)?
    I couldnt understand sir :(

  • @mustaphaharir5121
    @mustaphaharir5121 4 роки тому

    thank u very much sir for these explanations

  • @VenusianJungles
    @VenusianJungles 7 місяців тому

    Why isn't z bar analytic here?

  • @gildinerm
    @gildinerm 8 років тому

    When integrating zbar, are we integrating dz or dzbar

  • @mohamedboushab5547
    @mohamedboushab5547 8 років тому

    if gamma denotes the contour with {Im(z)=4} in the comlex plane what we'll be the gamma of t ?

    • @manhalrahman5785
      @manhalrahman5785 5 років тому

      t +4i
      t€(-1/0, 1/0)
      (Can't get the symbol for infinity :P)

  • @arijitdas2073
    @arijitdas2073 3 роки тому

    Man only if you were my professor! I won't be struggling as much

  • @hassnataha9593
    @hassnataha9593 6 років тому

    i want to know how to get f(gamma(t))?

  • @el-mehdibenchaib9950
    @el-mehdibenchaib9950 7 років тому

    Can somebody explains to me how did Cauchy made this theory? I always wanted to know how did those scientists made theories, I don't need calculation I need to understand the theory and where it exist in nature, I think that we should know where did those theory come from?

    • @stydras3380
      @stydras3380 7 років тому

      el-mehdi Benchaib Oftentimes these theories just drop out of math without a relation to nature... sometimes they do... I think if you want to understand this theory you most probably have to read a proof of some sort.

  • @n0n3st0p
    @n0n3st0p 5 років тому

    great vid:) helped a lot

  • @Grassmpl
    @Grassmpl 7 років тому

    at 6:42, the question is ambiguous. The 1/4 circle curve can be clockwise or
    counterclockwise.

  • @tondekush
    @tondekush 6 років тому

    great video

  • @sunilrathodn714
    @sunilrathodn714 6 років тому

    Is this topic is there for her mains

  • @titaniaxoxo6170
    @titaniaxoxo6170 3 роки тому

    I love you so much lol

  • @jernyx9139
    @jernyx9139 2 роки тому

    stari ti si tak mužicl