Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Consider the integral


where $a$ is a complex number and $0<r<|a|$. We have


Let $\gamma=\partial D(0,r)$. Then

$$\begin{align}\int_\gamma\frac{\log(z-a)}{iz}\,dz&=\int_0^{2\pi}\frac{\log\left(re^{it}-a\right)} {ire^{it}}rie^{it}\,dt\\ &=\int_0^{2\pi}\log\left(re^{it}-a\right)\,dt\end{align}$$



Now my problem is that $\log(z-a)$ is not holomorphic in $D(0,r)$, so i can't use Cauchy's integral formula to compute $I$. How can I solve this?

share|cite|improve this question
If $z$ is in the disk of radius $r$ around $0$, then $z-a$ is in the disk of radius $r$ around $a$. Since $r\lt|a|$, this disk does not enclose $0$. So are you sure $\log(z-a)$ is not holomorphic? – Gerry Myerson Nov 15 '12 at 22:35
yes, $0$ is not in $D(a,r)$, but this, i think, ensures only that $log(z-a)$ is well defined. But for the holomorphicity, shouldn'i i require some more? For example, if $log(z-a)=Log(z-a)$ is the principal branch of logarithm, i think i should exclude a line from the complex plane, say the negative real numbers. But if i take $z$ and $a$ with the same imaginary part, then $z-a$ lies on that line, where Log is not holomorphic. – Federica Maggioni Nov 16 '12 at 8:40
Just choose a branch of the logarithm that is holomorphic on your disc (not necessarily the principal branch), which is possible since $a \notin D(0,r)$. – mrf Nov 16 '12 at 9:27
up vote 0 down vote accepted

Because $0<r<|a|,$ $$\ln(a-z)=\ln{a\left(1-\dfrac{z}{a}\right)}=\ln{a}+\ln{\left(1-\dfrac{z}{a}\right)}=\ln{a}+\sum\limits_{k=1}^{\infty}{\frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}\cdot\left(\frac{z}{a} \right)^k }.$$ Therefore, Laurent expansion for $\frac{\ln(a-z)}{iz}=-i\frac{\ln(a-z)}{z}$ is $$-i\frac{\ln{a}}{z}-i\sum\limits_{k=1}^{\infty}{\frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}\cdot\frac{z^{k-1}}{a^k } }.$$ Using the residue theorem for integral $\int\limits_{\gamma}\frac{\log(z-a)}{iz}\,dz$ gives $$\int\limits_{\gamma}\frac{\log(z-a)}{iz}\,dz=2\pi{i}\cdot(-i\ln{a})=2\pi\ln{a}.$$ Taking the real part, $$\operatorname{Re}\left(\int_{\gamma}\frac{\log(z-a)}{iz}\,dz\right)=\operatorname{Re}(2\pi\ln{a})=2\pi\ln{|a|}.$$

share|cite|improve this answer
Note that this is homework and the OP had an almost complete solution by themselves. Also, how do you justify the logarithmic identities on line 1? (In general, it is not true that $\log(zw) = \log w + \log w$ for complex numbers, if you have fixed a branch of $\log$.) – mrf Nov 16 '12 at 9:44
ok, i thank you all for your help. I think there exists a definition of log such that log is holomorphic in every simply connected open set not containing the origin. But i really can't understand this fact in practice. What branch of log i take in order to be sure that it is holomorphic in the disc $D(0,r)$. I'm quite confused about this. Is it sufficient to say: ok, $z-a\neq 0$ hence log is holomorphic? – Federica Maggioni Nov 16 '12 at 12:03

$\newcommand{\+}{^{\dagger}} \newcommand{\angles}[1]{\left\langle\, #1 \,\right\rangle} \newcommand{\braces}[1]{\left\lbrace\, #1 \,\right\rbrace} \newcommand{\bracks}[1]{\left\lbrack\, #1 \,\right\rbrack} \newcommand{\ceil}[1]{\,\left\lceil\, #1 \,\right\rceil\,} \newcommand{\dd}{{\rm d}} \newcommand{\down}{\downarrow} \newcommand{\ds}[1]{\displaystyle{#1}} \newcommand{\expo}[1]{\,{\rm e}^{#1}\,} \newcommand{\fermi}{\,{\rm f}} \newcommand{\floor}[1]{\,\left\lfloor #1 \right\rfloor\,} \newcommand{\half}{{1 \over 2}} \newcommand{\ic}{{\rm i}} \newcommand{\iff}{\Longleftrightarrow} \newcommand{\imp}{\Longrightarrow} \newcommand{\isdiv}{\,\left.\right\vert\,} \newcommand{\ket}[1]{\left\vert #1\right\rangle} \newcommand{\ol}[1]{\overline{#1}} \newcommand{\pars}[1]{\left(\, #1 \,\right)} \newcommand{\partiald}[3][]{\frac{\partial^{#1} #2}{\partial #3^{#1}}} \newcommand{\pp}{{\cal P}} \newcommand{\root}[2][]{\,\sqrt[#1]{\vphantom{\large A}\,#2\,}\,} \newcommand{\sech}{\,{\rm sech}} \newcommand{\sgn}{\,{\rm sgn}} \newcommand{\totald}[3][]{\frac{{\rm d}^{#1} #2}{{\rm d} #3^{#1}}} \newcommand{\ul}[1]{\underline{#1}} \newcommand{\verts}[1]{\left\vert\, #1 \,\right\vert} \newcommand{\wt}[1]{\widetilde{#1}}$ $\ds{a \in {\mathbb C}}$.

Lets $\ds{z \equiv r\expo{\ic t}\ \imp\ \dd z = r\expo{\ic t}\ic\,\dd t\ \imp\dd t = {\dd z \over \ic z}}$:

\begin{align} I&=\left.\color{#66f}{\large\int_{0}^{2\pi}\ln\pars{\verts{re^{\ic t} - a}}\,\dd t} \,\right\vert_{\,0\ <\ r\ <\ \verts{a}} =\Re\int_{0}^{2\pi}\ln\pars{re^{\ic t} - a}\,\dd t \\[3mm]&=\Re\oint_{0\ <\ \verts{z}\ =\ r\ <\ \verts{a}} \ln\pars{z - a}\,{\dd z \over \ic z} =\Re\pars{2\pi\ic\lim_{z\ \to\ 0}\bracks{z\,{\ln\pars{z - a} \over \ic z}}} =2\pi\,\Re\pars{\ln\pars{-a}} \\[3mm]&=\color{#66f}{\Large 2\pi\ln\pars{\verts{a}}} \end{align}

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.