Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. It's 100% free.

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

I used to have a vague feeling that the residue theorem is a close analogy to 2D electrostatics in which the residues themselves play a role of point charges. However, the equations don't seem to add up. If we start from 2D electrostatics given by $$\frac{\partial E_x}{\partial x} + \frac{\partial E_y}{\partial y} = \frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0},$$ where the charge density $\rho = \sum_i q_i \delta(\vec{r}-\vec{r}_i)$ consists of point charges $q_i$ located at positions $\vec{r}_i$, and integrate over the area bounded by some curve $\mathcal{C}$, we find (using Green's theorem) $$\int_\mathcal{C} (E_x\, dy - E_y\, dx) = \frac{1}{\epsilon_0} \sum_i q_i.$$ Now, I would like to interpret the RHS as a sum of residua $2\pi i\sum_i \text{Res}\, f(z_i)$ of some analytic function $f(z_i)$ so that I would have the correspondence $$q_i = 2\pi i\epsilon_0 \text{Res}\, f(z_i).$$ For this to hold, the LHS would have to satisfy $$\int_\mathcal{C} (E_x\, dy - E_y\, dx) = \int_\mathcal{C} f(z)\, dz,$$ however, it is painfully obvious that the differential form $$E_x\, dy - E_y\, dx = -\frac{1}{2}(E_y+iE_x)dz + \frac{1}{2}(-E_y + iE_x)dz^*$$ can never be brought to the form $f(z)dz$ for an analytic $f(z)$.

So, it would appear that there really isn't any direct analogy between 2D Gauss law and the residue theorem? Or am I missing something?

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 3 down vote accepted

The analogy follows with the right definitions. The "flux" of the "vector" $E(z)$ through a contour $\Gamma$ is $\mathrm{Re}\left(\int_\Gamma E(z)^*\,\mathrm{d} z\right)$.

I think you may have forgotten the conjugate in the relationship between the "Electric field" and the complex potential $\Omega$: $E(z) = -(\mathrm{d}_z \Omega(z))^*$.

So it is the conjugate of $E(z)$, not $E(z)$ itself, that is holomorphic, being given by $E(z)^* = -\mathrm{d}_z\Omega(z)$. Work out the direction of the vectors from the Cauchy-Riemann relations and you'll see that you need a conjugate to make $-\nabla \phi$ equal to the real part of the derivative $-(\mathrm{d}_z\Omega(z))^*$.

Hence $\mathrm{Re}\left(\int_\Gamma E(z)^*\,\mathrm{d} z\right)$ is the real part of an everyday contour integral and the flux is thus the real part of $2\,\pi\,i$ times the sum of residues at the poles of $E(z)^*$, whence the 2D Gauss law follows.

share|cite|improve this answer

There is indeed a connection. The holomorphy is easily seen in the electrostatic potential.

In a charge free (two-dimensional) region, the electrostatic potential solves Laplace's equation and hence is a harmonic function. The real and imaginary parts of a holomorphic function are harmonic functions and thus the electrostatic potential can be identified with, say, the real part of a holomorphic function. In more detail, let us write (with $z=x+iy$) $$ f(z) = \phi(x,y) + i\ \psi(x,y)\ , $$ where we choose to identify the real part with the electrostatic potential. You can check that Cauchy-Riemann conditions imply that $\mathbf{E}\cdot \nabla \psi=0$. This implies that the $\psi=$ constant lines are the electrostatic field lines.

Adding a point charge, implies that it is harmonic everywhere except at the location of the charge. The relevant function is $f(z) = \lambda \log (z-z_0)$, where $z_0$ is the location of the charge and $\lambda$ is proportional to the charge. The connection with the residue theorem follows since $f'(z)$ has a simple pole at $z_0$ with residue $\lambda$.

share|cite|improve this answer
Not a point charge but a homogeneous linear distribution, which is perpendicular to the complex plane. – auxsvr Apr 22 '14 at 11:20
The question is on 2D electrostatics. Yes, one can view a two-dimensional point charge as a line charge distribution in three dimensions (or a planar charge distribution in four dimensions and so on) – suresh Apr 22 '14 at 12:07
How do you find the Coulomb potential in dimension 2? – auxsvr Apr 22 '14 at 12:57
@auxsvr Good point. It is taken to be the solution to Laplace's equation. For "point" charges in 2d, it is $\log(x)$ and $d>2$, it is $1/r^{d-2}$. – suresh Apr 22 '14 at 13:50

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.