Cauchys Theorem

8
Cauchy's Theorem
The Fundamental Theorem of Contour Integration tells us that if / has

an antiderivative in D, then we may evaluate the integral of / along a
path in D from z0 to zx by the formula
In particular, if y is closed, then

1 >
f=F(z1)-F(z0).
I/=o.
r
Cauchy's Theorem puts forward conditions under which Jy / = 0 when

there is no initial reason for / to have an antiderivative. There are many
different versions of Cauchy's Theorem or, to be precise, many different
theorems of this type due to Cauchy, who was first to publish such a
result, announcing it in 1813 and getting it into print in 1825. Gauss was
aware of the basic idea in 1811, but the accolade goes to Cauchy because
he was the first to make it public.
Both Gauss and Cauchy realized the basic fact that if y does not wind
round points outside D, then J y / = 0 . For instance, /(z)=l/z has the
single point 0 outside its domain D, so if the closed contour y does not
wind round the origin, then Sy 1/z dz = 0. (Fig. 8.1)
Our main aim in this chapter is to establish Cauchy's Theorem in the
following form:
If / is differentiable in D and w(y, z) = 0 for all z outside D, then
1/=o.
Jy
We start the theory rolling by proving the special case where the contour
is a triangle. Then we prove a theorem that requires a restriction on the
domain D rather than the contour y. We say that D is a star-domain if it
contains a point z* such that for every other point z eD the line segment
141
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Bristol Library, on 08 Oct 2017 at 06:04:02, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139171632.010
142 8. Cauchy's Theorem
Fig. 8.1
Fig. 8.2
[z*, z] is in D. (Fig. 8.2) We then define F(z) = J[z# z] / and use the triangle
version of the theorem to show that F is an antiderivative of /. This means
that Jy / = 0 for any closed contour in a star-domain. In particular a disc
is a star-domain and this gives a very significant result. For a differentiable
function / in a general domain D, we may not be able to find an anti-
derivative F:D-*C, but if we restrict our attention to any disc A in D,
then there is an antiderivative F:A-*C. Thus an antiderivative may not
exist globally throughout D but it does exist locally in any neighbourhood
Nr(z0) ^D for any z 0 e D.
1. The Cauchy Theorem for a triangle 143
Using the Paving Lemma, any contour y in an arbitrary domain D can

be written as y = 7 i + •*• -hyn where each subcontour yr lies in a disc
Dr^D. In the (star-domain) Dr we can choose a step path or with the
same endpoints as yr and (by the existence of an antiderivative in Dr\
r / y r y
This reduces the investigation of Jy / to the case of an integral along a
step path (j, which may be attacked by geometrically inspired methods.
Fig. 8.3
1. The Cauchy Theorem for a triangle

At the end of the nineteenth century, amongst many different versions of
the Cauchy Theorem, a most ingenious proof for a triangular contour was
conceived by E. H. Moore. Earlier proofs usually insisted that the function
/ had a continuous derivative / ' . By restricting the contour to a triangle,
Moore's proof requires only that / ' exists throughout D. It will thus pro-
vide the basis for the theory for all differentiable functions.
For zu z2, z3e C, let T(zu z2, z3) be the set of points inside and on the
triangle with vertices zl9 z2, z3. (Formally T(zu z2, z3) is the set of points
AiZ!-l-A2z2-l-A3z3 for non-negative real numbers ku A2, A3 satisfying
Ax + A2 + A3 = 1). Let dT(zu z2, z3) be the boundary contour composed of
the three line segments [z l5 z 2 ], [z 2 , z 3 ], [z 3 , z{\. Wherever there is no
cause for confusion we shall denote the triangle by T and its boundary
by dT
THEOREM 8.1 (The Cauchy Theorem for a triangle).

Let / be a differentiable function in a domain D. If the triangle T lies
inD, then SdTf=O. (Fig. 8.4)
Proof. Let \SdTf\
We will show that c = 0 by an indirect argument. First we subdivide T into
144 S. Cauchy's Theorem
Fig. 8.4
Fig. 8.5
four triangles T (1) , T (2) , T (3) , T (4) by joining the midpoints of the sides.
(Fig. 8.5)
c =
and we must be able to choose r such that

LU U
)dT^
f
(If more than one r satisfies this.inequality, choose the least.)
Define 7\ = T(r), then we have
f and
JdTi
(where, as usual, L(y) denotes the length of y).
We repeat the process of subdivision to give a sequence of triangles
1. The Cauchy Theorem for a triangle 145
^Tl^T2^" 2 T n 2 • • • satisfying
11 and L(dTn)=($"L(dT).
Next we get another estimate for |Jarn/|» using the fact that / is dif-
(1)
ferentiable.
The nested sequence T 27^ 3 • • • 2Tn 2 • • contains a point z0. Here
/ is differentiate, so, given £>0, there exists <5>0 such that
0<|z-z o |<<5 implies

f(z)-f(z0)
-f'(z0) <£.
Hence
\z -zo\<S implies | f(z) -/(z 0 ) -f'{zo)(z - zo)\ ^ s\z - zo\.
For some integer JV, every point in Tn is within s of z0 for n^N. Thus
|/(z)-/(z o )-/ r Uo)(z-z o )|^8|z-Zo| for zeT n , n^N.
For z € Tn, we trivially have \z—zo\^L(dTn), so the Estimation Lemma
gives
11, {/(z)-/(z o )-/'(zoXz-Zo)}dz
But —/(z0) —/'(zo)(z — zo) is of the form a + bz where a and b are constants.
(2)
This has an antiderivative az+jbz2, so SeTn(a + bz) dz=0, and (2) reduces
to
/ 11
Comparing this with the earlier estimate in (1), we find
JS
f
and this gives
But e is arbitrary and c2»0, so we must have c = 0, that is

1
J'-
JdT
•
This proof deserves a commentary, because its analytic presentation
obscures the fact that the basic idea is very simple and very geometric.
It uses two facts. One is that the integral of /(z) is additive on contours -
that is, the contributions from the subdivided contours add up to that
for the original one. The other is that a differentiable function is approxi-
mately linear (that is, of the form a + bz) near to any given point.
If it were possible for / to be exactly linear, locally, then we could take a
fine subdivision making it linear on each subcontour; get zero for the
integral on each subcontour by explicit computation using the anti-
derivative az + bz2/2; and add all these zeros to get zero for the original
integral.
Unfortunately this can't happen, and we are faced with adding a larger
and larger number of contributions, each getting closer and closer to zero.
By estimating the rate of growth or shrinkage we show that the errors in
assuming approximate linearity tend to zero fast enough to compensate
for the increasing number of subcontours.
It is an interesting exercise to rewrite the proof in such a way that this
informal description becomes a formal argument which keeps the
geometry to the fore.
2. Existence of an antiderivative in a star-domain

Recall that D is a star-domain if there exists z*eD (called a star-centre)
such that the straight line [z*, z] lies in D for all z e'D. In a star-domain
there is an obvious candidate for the antiderivative of a function /, namely
the integral F(z) = S[z^z]f.
THEOREM 8.2. If / is differentiable in a star-domain D with star-centre

z*, then F(z) = S[z^z] f is an antiderivative for / in D.
Proof. D is open, so for zx eD there exists £!>0 such that N^

For \h\ < £i, the triangle with vertices z0, zuzl+h lies entirely in D. (Fig. 8.6)
Fig. 8.6
2. Antiderivatives in star-domains 147
Theorem 8. 1 gives
f f+\ f+\ /=o.

This can be written as
:,)+ f f-F(Zl+h) = (
J[zuzl->rK\
or
F(z,+A)-F(Zl)
The proof now proceeds in the same manner as Theorem 5.11.

For a constant c e C,
J[z,,z1+/,]C Z
hence
F(Zl+h)-F(Zl)
(Zl)= f dz (3)
A • / v " 1 ' J[«lfz1+*] A
From the continuity of /, given e > 0 there exists S > 0 such that
\Z-Zl\<S implies | / ( z ) - / ( z 1 ) | < £ .
For z on the line segment [z l5 zx +/i],
|A|<5 implies |z—z x |<^ and so |/(z)— /(zx)|<e.
The Estimation Lemma gives
and from (3), if \h\<S, then

LJ £ i
Since £ is arbitrary, we have

v F(Zl+h)-F(Zl)
hm
/
so F' =/, as required.
n
COROLLARY 8.3. If / is differentiable in a star-domain D, then J y / = 0
for all closed contours y in D, and the integral of / between any two points
in D is independent of the choice of contour between the points.
Proof. This is an immediate deduction from Theorems 8.2 and 6.11. •
3. An example - the logarithm

The function /(z)= 1/z is differentiable in the domain C\{0}. The latter
is not a star-domain, but if we restrict the function to a star-domain
D cz C \ {0}, then the results of the last section apply in D.
The cut plane Cn = C\N where JV = {x + iy eC|y = 0, x<0} is a star-
domain with 1 as a star-centre. (Fig. 8.7)
Fig. 8.7
Because 1/z is differentiable in C it has an antiderivative, which we

denote by Log, given by
-I 1/zdz (z,e(U
We exploit the fact that the integral is independent of the path and
integrate along a specially chosen contour. Let zl = r£e where r > 0 and
-7i<0<7r, then define y = y1-|-72 where yl is the line segment [1, r] and
y2(t) = relt(O<t<6). (For r < l , then [1, r] is the directed line segment
from 1 back to r, and for 0 < 0, we take y2(i) = re"1' (0 < t < 6).) (Fig. 8.8)
Fig. 8.8
5. Cauchy's Theorem 149
Then
Logrei0= f l/zdz + [ 1/zdz

Jyj Jy2
f i
= A - T7uire 1 'df
Ji J
= logr + i0.
This gives an alternative approach to the complex logarithm if we so
desire. In particular it affords a much more satisfying proof of the con-
tinuity of the argument in the cut plane Cn than the prosaic version given
in §7.2. Because the function Log is differentiable in Cn, hence continuous,
so its imaginary part, the argument of z, is also continuous there.
4. Local existence of an antiderivative

Let / be differentiable in an arbitrary domain D. Then / may not have
an antiderivative which works throughout D. But D is open, so for any
zoeD there is a disc Nr(z0) ^D. A function F:Nr(z0)-+C such that F'(z)=
f(z) for all z e Nr{z0) is called a local antiderivative of /. Because a disc is a
star-domain, Theorem 8.2 tells us that there is a local antiderivative of /
in every disc in D.
This immediately simplifies integration of a differentiable function
along an arbitrary contour because we can integrate along a step path
instead:
LEMMA 8.4. If y is a contour in a domain D from z0 to zu then there exists
a step path G in D from z0 to zx such that Jy f=Sa f for every function /
differentiable in D.
Proof. By the Paving Lemma we have y = 7i + • • • +yn where each yr lies
in a disc Dr ^D. Let ar be a step path in Dr from the initial point of yr to
its final point, then in the star-domain Dri Syrf=Sarf (Corollary 8.3).
If G = GX + • • • +am then G is a step path from z0 to zx in D as in Figure 8.3
and
«/y r = l «/yr i* = 1 */<rr «/CT
5. Cauchy's Theorem
We build up to Cauchy's Theorem in stages. First we consider a rectangle
R = {x + iy e
with boundary contour

dR = [zu z2] + [z2, z3] + [z3, z 4 ] + [z4, z t ]
where zx = a + ic, z2 = b 4- ic, z3 = b + id, z4 = a + id. (Fig. 8.9)
dR
Fig. 8.9
LEMMA 8.6. If R c £ and / is differentiable in D, then $dR / = 0 .
Proo/. Insert the opposite contours [zl5 z 3 ], [z3, zx] and use the Cauchy
Theorem for a Triangle twice. (Fig. 8. 10) •
Fig. 8.10
Now we take an arbitrary closed step path a and insert extra line
segments to make up a collection of rectangles. To do this we extend all
the horizontal and vertical line segments of o ad infinitum, breaking the
plane up into a finite number of rectangles: some finite, Rl9...,Rk and
some infinite, Rk+ u ...,Rm- (An example is drawn in Figure 8.11, where
5. Cauchy's Theorem 151
Rn Rn R,
R, *,. R3 R>,
Fig. 8.11
R* RA R, «.*
*23 R9 *,7
R22 Rn R>, R»
In the interior of each Rn, we choose a point zn and define
(This is independent of the particular choice of zn inside Rn.)

We say that Rn is relevant if vn^0. Thus Rn is only relevant if a winds
round it. In particular the infinite rectangles Rk+19... Rm are all irrelevant
because they lie outside a. (In Figure 8.11, the only relevant rectangles
are R 3 , ,R5, R-j, Rs.)
We now demonstrate that we may express o in terms of the boundaries
of relevant rectangles by taking vn copies of each boundary dRn. (If vn is
negative, we take — vn copies of the opposite contour — dRn.)
For instance, in Figure 8.11, we take —R3, R5, R7, R$; cancelling the
opposite segments common to K5, R8 and to R-j, R8, we finish up with the
step contour a.
To show that this works for an arbitrary closed step contour a, it is
convenient to use the notation ny to represent n copies of y for n^O and
— n copies of —7 for n<0. The most straightforward process is then to
start with the set of contours
2dR2 -a}
and show that the cancelling of opposite line segments L, — L, wherever
they occur, removes them all.
Suppose that at the end there are q copies of some line segment L.
Then L is a side of at least one finite rectangle Rs and, by allowing q to be
negative if necessary, we may suppose that L is traced in the same direction
as dRs. Let Rr be the rectangle on the other side of L (where Rr may be

finite or infinite). (Fig. 8.12)
z
• r
Fig. 8.12 L
Rr
The set of closed contours
then simplifies to have no copies of L. If we compute the winding numbers

of the contours in B round zs (inside Rs) and zr (inside Rr\ then the absence
of L from the simplified set of contours tells us that the two winding
numbers are the same. But the winding number around zs is
vMSRu zs)+"m +vkw(dRk, zs)-w((T, zs)-qw(dRs, zs) = -q
and around zr it is
vxw(dRu zr)+-- +vkw(dRk, zr)-w((7, zr)-qw(dRs, zs) = 0.
Hence q = 0, as required. This confirms that a may be obtained by taking
vn copies of each relevant rectangular contour dRn and deleting opposite
line segments wherever they occur. •
LEMMA 8.7. Let a be a closed step path in a domain D such that w(<x, z) = 0
for all z $D. Then, for any function / differentiable in D, J f f /=0.
Proof. We express o in terms of relevant rectangles and show that every

relevant rectangle Rn must lie entirely in D. Certainly, for z in the interior
of Rm w(<7, z) = v n ^0 and so z must be in D. On the other hand, a point z
on the boundary dRn either lies on a (and hence in D) or it is in the same
component of the complement of a as points in the interior of Rn, whence
w((j, z) = v n ^0 and, again, z e D.
By cancelling contributions along opposite contours,
n=\ dRn
6. Applications ofCauchy's Theorem 153
Integrals on the right need only be considered when vn^=0; the relevant
rectangle Rn then lies completely in D and (by Lemma 7.6),
J
/=o.
SRn
Hence Sa f= 0, as required. •
We now reach the focal point of the chapter:
CAUCHY'S THEOREM (Theorem 8.8).

Let / be differentiable in a domain D and y a closed contour in D which
does not wind round any points outside D (meaning w(y, z) = 0 for z £ D).
ThenJy/=0.
Proof There exists a step path G in D such that Sa(t)=5y<j) for any function
(j) differentiable in D (using Lemma 8.4). In particular $a f=Sy f
For z 0 £ D, the function </>(z)= l/(z — z0) is also differentiable in D, so
1
w(cr, z0) = —
f 0, = —1 If ,(p = w(y,
, z ,) = 0.
0
2ni Ja 2ni Jy
From Lemma 8.7 we have J^ / = 0 . Hence
jf-h-o. a
6. Applications of Cauchy's Theorem

The Cauchy Theorem we have just given has far wider applications than
simply showing that the integral round certain closed contours is zero. It
enables us to calculate non-zero integrals too. For example, suppose that
7i and y2 have the same winding number round all points outside D, (that
is w(yu z) = w{y2, z) for all z $ D). Let zx be the point where yx begins and
ends and z2 the point where y2 begins and ends. Take any contour G from
Z! to z2. (Fig. 8.13)
Then y = yl+a— y2— G (round yu along <r, round — y2 and back along
— G) is a closed contour in D and w(y, z) = 0 for z$D. Using Cauchy's
Theorem, J / = 0, hence
\ f+jf-j /-J/=°
and
\J-\J
yi 72
Fig. 8.13
If we desire to compute J /, then we may be able to find another contour

y2, as above, where the integral $yi f is easier to calculate. We shall exploit
this fact with telling effect later in the text.
The technique of introducing opposite contours a, — a whose con-
tributions eventually cancel is also a useful one. It enables us to prove a
much more powerful theorem.
THEOREM 8.9 (The generalized version of Cauchy's Theorem).

Suppose that yu . . . , yn are closed contours in a domain D such that
w(yl9 z) + • • • +w(ym z) = 0 for all z$D.
Then, for / differentiable in D,
Proof. Suppose that yr begins and ends at zr (l^r^n). Choose any zoeD
and contours Gu...,<rn in D which join z0 to zu..., zn respectively.
(Fig. 8.14) Then
Fig. 8.14
6. Applications of Cauchy's Theorem 155
is a closed contour beginning and ending at z0 and

w(y, z) = 0 for all z £ 7).
By Cauchy's Theorem, Sy / = 0 , so
iff/
that is
I f /=0-
I- = 1 V V ..
•
Given two closed contours yu y2 in D and a contour c in D from a point on
7x to a point on y2 (Fig. 8.13), then the pair of contours <r, — a is called a
cwt from 7x to y2- There is a historical reason for this. Earlier versions of
Cauchy's Theorem were invariably proved for Jordan contours. A closed
Jordan contour is a closed contour y: [a, 6]->C which does not cross
itself, that is,
a<tl<t2^b implies y(ti)^y(f2).
It is intuitively obvious, but analytically difficult to prove, that every
closed Jordan contour separates the plane into two components, the
points O(y) outside 7 and the points 7(7) inside 7, and that O(y) and 7(7)
are both connected sets. (Fig. 8.15)
Earlier versions of Cauchy's Theorem stated that if 7 and 7(7) were in
D, then Jy / = 0 . In applications it was then necessary to introduce 'cuts'
to manufacture Jordan contours. For instance, suppose that / is differenti-
able everywhere except at z0 and two Jordan contours yu y2 both wind
once round z0, as in Figure 8.16a. Two cuts are made in the picture to give
Fig. 8.15
Fig. 8.16
two Jordan contours so that / is differentiable inside each of them (Fig.

8.16b). The integral round each Jordan contour is then known to be zero
and on cancelling the contributions due to the cuts, the result J / = $yi f
is obtained. Such methods usually relied on geometrical intuition, some-
times unsupported by analytic proof. By introducing the winding number
to link analysis and geometric intuition such pitfalls may be avoided,
and with them the necessity to restrict the theory to Jordan contours.
Instead we can define the inside of any closed contour y to be
and the outside to be

= {zeC\ w(y,z) = 0}.
In general I(y) and O(y) need not be connected. (In Figure 8.17, O(y) has
two components Ox and O2, whilst I(y) has three, Iu I2, 13)
Fig. 8.17
Exercises 8 157
The Jordan Contour Theorem (which we do not prove), then says that
the outside and inside of a closed Jordan contour are both connected.
For an arbitrary closed contour y we can rephrase Cauchy's Theorem
as given in Theorem 8.8 to get
THEOREM 8.10. Let / be differentiable in a domain D. If a closed contour

y and its inside I(y) lie in D then J / = 0 . •
7. Simply connected domains

We have known for some time (Theorem 6.11) that Jy / = 0 for all closed
contours in a domain D precisely when / has an antiderivative. We can
now state the precise conditions under which this happens for all functions
differentiable in a given domain D. We say that a domain D is simply
connected if w(y, z) = 0 for every closed contour y in D and z $ D. Equiv-
alently, if y is a closed contour in D, then the inside I(y) lies in D. We then
have
THEOREM 8.11. For a given domain D, Jy / = 0 for all closed contours y

in D and all functions / differentiable in D if and only if D is simply con-
nected.
Proof. If D is simply connected, then Cauchy's Theorem implies Jy / = 0
for all y in D and / differentiable in D. Conversely, if D is not simply
connected, then there exists a closed contour y0 in D and zo$D such that
Let 0(z)= i/2ni(z — z0), then 0 is differentiable in D and
•
Exercises 8
1. State which of the following are star-domains, specifying a star-centre for those
which are and justifying your response for those which are not:
(i) { z e C |
(iii) {z 6 C j z^e i f
(iv) {z e C | \z\> 1 and either im z > 0 o r r e z > 0 } .
2. Let D = C \ {0}. For z0 e D, specify a local antiderivative in some neighbourhood
of z 0 for each of the following functions:
(i) 1/z (ii) 1/z2 (iii) (z + l)/z 2 (iv) (cos z)/z (v) (sin z)/z,
158 8. Cauchfs Theorem
3. Let
If f(z)= l/(z2 -1), use Theorem 8.9 to deduce
Interpret this statement in terms of winding numbers of y, yu y2 around 1, — 1.

4. Show that D = {z eC\z^= ±1} is not simply connected. Let
D0 = D \ ( L 1 u L 2 ) .
Show that D o is simply connected. Is it a star-domain? Does f(z)= l/(z2 — 1)
have an antiderivative in D or Do? In each case, justify your response.
5. Let D = {z e C | z ^ + i} and let y be a closed contour in D. Find all the possible
values of Jy l/(z2 + 1) dz. If a is a contour from 0 to 1, find all the possible values
ofj a l/(z 2 + l)dz.
6. Let y! = Sx + L - S 2 - L , y2 = Sx + L+ S2 —L where
S2(t)=2Qu {0
L=[l,2].
Describe the inside and outside of yt and y2-
Let /(z)=(cos z)/z. By writing cos z as a power series and considering f(z)=
(l/z) + gf(z), or otherwise, compute JVi /, Sy2 f. Compare these computations with
Theorem 8.10.
7. Let D = {z e C | z =f z1? z ^ z 2 ,..., z ^ zfc} and suppose that / is differentiate in D.
Show that for any closed contour y in D
where Sr is a circle centre zr and nr is an integer.

If lim z ^ z (z-zr)f(z) = ar e C for r= 1,..., /c, show that

Cauchys Theorem

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cauchys Theorem

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

8

The Fundamental Theorem of Contour Integration tells us that if / has

In particular, if y is closed, then

Cauchy's Theorem puts forward conditions under which Jy / = 0 when

Using the Paving Lemma, any contour y in an arbitrary domain D can

1. The Cauchy Theorem for a triangle

THEOREM 8.1 (The Cauchy Theorem for a triangle).

and we must be able to choose r such that

0<|z-z o |<<5 implies

11, {/(z)-/(z o )-/'(zoXz-Zo)}dz

But e is arbitrary and c2»0, so we must have c = 0, that is

2. Existence of an antiderivative in a star-domain

THEOREM 8.2. If / is differentiable in a star-domain D with star-centre

Proof. D is open, so for zx eD there exists £!>0 such that N^

f f+\ f+\ /=o.

The proof now proceeds in the same manner as Theorem 5.11.

and from (3), if \h\<S, then

Since £ is arbitrary, we have

Proof. This is an immediate deduction from Theorems 8.2 and 6.11. •

3. An example - the logarithm

Because 1/z is differentiable in C it has an antiderivative, which we

Logrei0= f l/zdz + [ 1/zdz

4. Local existence of an antiderivative

«/y r = l «/yr i* = 1 */<rr «/CT

with boundary contour

LEMMA 8.6. If R c £ and / is differentiable in D, then $dR / = 0 .

In the interior of each Rn, we choose a point zn and define

(This is independent of the particular choice of zn inside Rn.)

as dRs. Let Rr be the rectangle on the other side of L (where Rr may be

The set of closed contours

then simplifies to have no copies of L. If we compute the winding numbers

Proof. We express o in terms of relevant rectangles and show that every

We now reach the focal point of the chapter:

CAUCHY'S THEOREM (Theorem 8.8).

6. Applications of Cauchy's Theorem

If we desire to compute J /, then we may be able to find another contour

THEOREM 8.9 (The generalized version of Cauchy's Theorem).

is a closed contour beginning and ending at z0 and

two Jordan contours so that / is differentiable inside each of them (Fig.

and the outside to be

THEOREM 8.10. Let / be differentiable in a domain D. If a closed contour

7. Simply connected domains

THEOREM 8.11. For a given domain D, Jy / = 0 for all closed contours y

If f(z)= l/(z2 -1), use Theorem 8.9 to deduce

Interpret this statement in terms of winding numbers of y, yu y2 around 1, — 1.

where Sr is a circle centre zr and nr is an integer.

You might also like