3
$\begingroup$

Hey my first question here, so I got an exercise but need some help. The questions is:

I have a domain $U\subset\mathbb{C}$, and curves $\gamma_j : [0, 1] \to U$, $j \in \{0, 1\}$ which are continuously differentiable.

They have the same start and end point, so $\gamma_0(0) = \gamma_1(0) = z_0$ and $\gamma_0(1) = \gamma_1(1) = z_1$. There is also a Homotopy between these points, $H : [0, 1] \times [0, 1] \to U$ with $H(0, \cdot) = \gamma_0$, $H(1, \cdot) = \gamma_1$, $H(\cdot, 0) = z_0$ and $H(\cdot, 1) = z_1$.

Show $\Gamma = \gamma_0 - \gamma_1$ is homologous to zero.

Here is the definition of homologous to zero:

If $\Gamma$ is in $U$ and if $Int(\Gamma) \subset U$, then $\Gamma$ is called homologous to zero. With $Int(\Gamma) = \{z\in\mathbb{C}\setminus[\Gamma]\mid ind_\Gamma(z) \neq 0\}$. $Int(\Gamma)$ is called Interior and $ind_\Gamma(z)$ is called winding number.

I probably have to show that $ind_{\gamma_0}(z) = ind_{\gamma_1}(z) \ \forall z \notin U$. Which probably implies $Int(\gamma_0 - \gamma_1) = Int(\Gamma) \subset U$ and therefore $\Gamma$ is homologous to zero.

Any ideas how to do this? Thanks in advance!

EDIT:

I think I got something but maybe there are some arguments missing:

Proof:

Let $z\in\mathbb{C} \setminus U$. Since $H$ is continuously differentiable, the mapping $$j \mapsto ind_{\gamma_j}(z) = \frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_{\gamma_j} \frac{1}{\xi - z}d\xi = \frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_0^1 \frac{1}{H(j, t) - z}\frac{\partial^2 H(j,t)}{\partial j \partial t} dt$$ is continuously from $[0, 1]$ to $\mathbb{R}$. Also, the values from this map are in $\mathbb{Z}$. Therefore, the mapping is constant.

This implies $ind_{\gamma_0}(z) = ind_{\gamma_1}(z) \ \forall z \notin U$.

Which implies $Int(\gamma_0 - \gamma_1) = Int(\Gamma) \subset U$ and therefore $\Gamma$ is homologous to zero. $\Box$

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I think the phrase you're looking for is "homologous to zero." $\endgroup$ – D. Brogan Jun 22 at 12:20
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Your question does not make much sense. How is the subtraction $\gamma_0 - \gamma_1$ defined? How is $Int(\Gamma)$ defined? And "Is $\Gamma$ in $U$ and is $Int(\Gamma) \subset U$, so $\Gamma$ is called null-homolog" is not even a grammatical sentence, let alone a reasonable definition of what is called "homologous to zero" in English. $\endgroup$ – Lee Mosher Jun 22 at 12:48
  • $\begingroup$ @D.Brogan thank! I'll have a look maybe I'll find something regarding this :) $\endgroup$ – Xvid Jun 22 at 12:56
  • $\begingroup$ @LeeMosher sorry, english isn't my first language so I'm sorry for grammatical errors. Regarding your questions, we never explicitly defined $\gamma_0 - \gamma_1$. $Int(\Gamma)$ is an open subset, I have defined it in my post. Well, besides the grammatical error this is unfortunately the defintion my professor gave us. *I edited the post now, hopefully it's grammatically now a bit more correct :) $\endgroup$ – Xvid Jun 22 at 12:56
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Xvid Your proof doesn't work. See my above comment. I recommend to have a look at math.stackexchange.com/q/112679. $\endgroup$ – Paul Frost Jun 23 at 12:28
2
$\begingroup$

The discussion in the comments shows that some concepts need to be clarified. Here is a pragmatic approach.

You start with curves $\gamma_j : [0, 1] \to U$, $j \in \{0, 1\}$, which are continuously differentiable. Let us assume that the homotopy $H : I \times I \to U$ from $\gamma_0$ to $ \gamma_1$ is a continuous map which is partially differentiable with respect to the second coordinate (i.e. $\dfrac{\partial H}{\partial s}(t,s)$ exists for all $(t,s) \in I \times I$) and such that $\dfrac{\partial H}{\partial s} : I \times I \to \mathbb C$ is continuous. This implies that all intermediate curves $H_t = H(t,-)$, $t \in I$, are continuously differentiable. This requirement is a little bit weaker than assuming that $H$ is continuously differentiable (this concept would need further clarification).

Let us moreover agree that the winding number $ind_\gamma(z)$ is defined for closed piecewise continuously differentiable curves $\gamma$ and all $z \notin \gamma(I)$. The winding number is always an integer given by $$ind_\gamma(z) = \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_\gamma \frac{1}{\zeta-z}d\zeta = \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_0^1 \frac{\gamma'(s)}{\gamma(s)-z}ds .$$

Finally we regard $\Gamma = \gamma_0 - \gamma_1$ as a closed curve based at $z_0$. It is composed by $\gamma_0$ (path from $z_0$ to $z_1$) followed by the inverse of $\gamma_1$ (path from $z_1$ to $z_0$). Explicitly, $\Gamma(s) = \begin{cases} \gamma_0(2s) & s \le 1/2 \\ \gamma_1(2-2s) & s \ge 1/2 \end{cases} \quad$ .

Let us define a homotopy $G : I \times I \to U, G(t,s) = \begin{cases} H(t,s) & s \le 1/2 \\ \gamma_1(2-2s) & s \ge 1/2 \end{cases} \quad$ . This is a homotopy from $G_0 = \Gamma$ to $G_1 = \gamma_1 - \gamma_1$ such that all $G_t$ are piecewise continuously differentiable curves.

By definition $G(I\times I) \subset U$. It therefore suffices to show that for all $z \in \mathbb C \setminus G(I\times I)$ we have $ind_\Gamma(z) = 0$ because this implies that $Int(\Gamma) \subset G(I\times I) \subset U$.

For $z \in \mathbb C \setminus G(I\times I)$ we obviously have $ind_{G_1}(z) = \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{\gamma_1} \frac{1}{\zeta-z}d\zeta - \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{\gamma_1} \frac{1}{\zeta-z}d\zeta = 0$. We want to prove that $ind_\Gamma(z) = ind_{G_0}(z) = 0$. To do this, it has to be shown that the function $$\phi : I \to \mathbb Z, \phi(t) = \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_0^1 \frac{G_t'(s)}{G_t(s)-z}ds$$ is continuous and therefore constant. I shall not give a proof but leave it as an excercise to you.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

Thanks to everyone, I'll provide the solution from my teacher which seems, at least for me, a bit more easier to understand.

We have to show that $Int(\Gamma) = Int(\gamma_0 - \gamma_1) \subset U$, or in other words $ind_{\Gamma}(z) = ind_{\gamma_0 - \gamma_1}(z) = 0 \ \forall z \notin U$.

Let us define the mapping

$$\eta_s(z) : [0, 1] \to \mathbb{R}, s \mapsto ind_{\gamma_0 - \gamma_s}(z) \ \forall z \notin U$$

$$\rightarrow ind_{\gamma_0 - \gamma_s}(z) = \frac{1}{2 \pi i} \int_{\gamma_0 - \gamma_s} \frac{d\zeta}{\zeta - z}= \frac{1}{2 \pi i} \int_{\gamma_0} \frac{d\zeta}{\zeta - z} - \frac{1}{2 \pi i} \int_{\gamma_s} \frac{d\zeta}{\zeta - z}$$

The first term is obviously constant, as he doesn't vary. The second term can we rewrite as:

$$- \frac{1}{2 \pi i} \int_{\gamma_s} \frac{d\zeta}{\zeta - z} = - \frac{1}{2 \pi i} \int_0^1 \frac{\gamma_s^\prime(t)}{\gamma_s(t) - z} dt.$$

We know, from some previous Proposition from our lecture, that this is continuous and $\in \mathbb{Z}$, therefore this one is constant too.

$\Rightarrow \eta_s(z) = const.$

We only have to calculate now what the value of $\eta_s(z)$ for every $s\in [0,1]$ is (as it's constant).

Let $s = 0 \rightarrow \eta_0(z) = ind_{\gamma_0 - \gamma_0}(z) = 0$.

Therefore, $\eta_1(z) = ind_{\gamma_0 - \gamma_1}(z) = ind_{\Gamma}(z) = 0 \ \forall z \notin U$. $\Rightarrow Int(\Gamma) \subset U$ and therefore $\Gamma$ is homologous to zero.

With this, one can also easily come to the homotpy version of Cauchy's integral theorem.

It's probably not a perfect proof but this kinda works out for me, sorry for grammar errors

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The proof is not correct. You consider the function $I(s) = -\frac{1}{2 \pi i} \int_{\gamma_s} \frac{d\zeta}{\zeta - z} = - \frac{1}{2 \pi i} \int_0^1 \frac{\gamma_s^\prime(t)}{\gamma_s(t) - z} dt$ and claim that it is continuous (which is certainly true) and an integer which is not true. An integral of the form $\frac{1}{2 \pi i} \int_{\gamma} \frac{d\zeta}{\zeta - z}$ only takes integer values for closed curves. $\endgroup$ – Paul Frost Jun 24 at 16:54
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ However, you can easily repair it. Although $I(s) = -\frac{1}{2 \pi i} \int_{\gamma_s} \frac{d\zeta}{\zeta - z}$ doesn't take integer values, it is continuous and therefore also $\eta_s$ is continuous. But $\eta_s$ takes integer values and thus is constant. $\endgroup$ – Paul Frost Jun 24 at 17:14
  • $\begingroup$ @PaulFrost thanks! Maybe I missed this argument but yeah make sense. $\endgroup$ – Xvid Jun 25 at 9:06

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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