Can I think of a toy contour as any closed piecewise-smooth curve which is simple?
$begingroup$
I feel Stein doesn't give the specific definition of toy contour, can I think of a toy contour as any closed piecewise-smooth curve which is simple?
complex-analysis analysis contour-integration
asked Jan 14 at 9:07
Born to be proudBorn to be proud
856510
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I feel Stein doesn't give the specific definition of toy contour, can I think of a toy contour as any closed piecewise-smooth curve which is simple?
complex-analysis analysis contour-integration
asked Jan 14 at 9:07
Born to be proudBorn to be proud
856510
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I feel Stein doesn't give the specific definition of toy contour, can I think of a toy contour as any closed piecewise-smooth curve which is simple?
complex-analysis analysis contour-integration
asked Jan 14 at 9:07
Born to be proudBorn to be proud
856510
$endgroup$
I feel Stein doesn't give the specific definition of toy contour, can I think of a toy contour as any closed piecewise-smooth curve which is simple?
complex-analysis analysis contour-integration
complex-analysis analysis contour-integration
asked Jan 14 at 9:07
Born to be proudBorn to be proud
856510
asked Jan 14 at 9:07
Born to be proudBorn to be proud
856510
edited Jan 14 at 13:09
Born to be proud
asked Jan 14 at 9:07
Born to be proudBorn to be proud
856510
asked Jan 14 at 9:07
Born to be proudBorn to be proud
856510
asked Jan 14 at 9:07
Born to be proudBorn to be proud
856510
856510
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Yes, that's a valid way to think about it.
What's going on here is a theorem of topology:
The Jordan Curve Theorem. If $C$ is any continuous simple closed curve then $mathbb R^2 - C$ has two connected components, one of which (called the "interior") is bounded and the other (called the "exterior") is unbounded.
It's pretty clear from what the author is saying (in the first paragraph of the passages you have shown us) that he/she does not want to spend the time to either state or prove the Jordan Curve Theorem. This is certainly a reasonable decision for a textbook author, because it is a very hard theorem to prove.
Instead, the words "toy contour" are used to mean any continuous simple closed curve for which the conclusion of the Jordan Curve Theorem is obvious. Examples of this would include any convex simple closed curve (an exercise). But he also wants some nonconvex examples such as the "keyhole" example, and the exercise is still pretty easy for those.
And, by the way, there is another theorem with the same hypotheses but still stronger conclusions than the Jordan Curve Theorem, it is known as the Schönflies Theorem. The author's comments in that first paragraph lead me to think that the concept of "toy contour" might also be referring to those stronger conclusions in some form or another.
answered Jan 14 at 15:09
Lee MosherLee Mosher
51k33889
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3073009%2fcan-i-think-of-a-toy-contour-as-any-closed-piecewise-smooth-curve-which-is-simpl%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Yes, that's a valid way to think about it.
What's going on here is a theorem of topology:
The Jordan Curve Theorem. If $C$ is any continuous simple closed curve then $mathbb R^2 - C$ has two connected components, one of which (called the "interior") is bounded and the other (called the "exterior") is unbounded.
It's pretty clear from what the author is saying (in the first paragraph of the passages you have shown us) that he/she does not want to spend the time to either state or prove the Jordan Curve Theorem. This is certainly a reasonable decision for a textbook author, because it is a very hard theorem to prove.
Instead, the words "toy contour" are used to mean any continuous simple closed curve for which the conclusion of the Jordan Curve Theorem is obvious. Examples of this would include any convex simple closed curve (an exercise). But he also wants some nonconvex examples such as the "keyhole" example, and the exercise is still pretty easy for those.
And, by the way, there is another theorem with the same hypotheses but still stronger conclusions than the Jordan Curve Theorem, it is known as the Schönflies Theorem. The author's comments in that first paragraph lead me to think that the concept of "toy contour" might also be referring to those stronger conclusions in some form or another.
answered Jan 14 at 15:09
Lee MosherLee Mosher
51k33889
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Yes, that's a valid way to think about it.
What's going on here is a theorem of topology:
The Jordan Curve Theorem. If $C$ is any continuous simple closed curve then $mathbb R^2 - C$ has two connected components, one of which (called the "interior") is bounded and the other (called the "exterior") is unbounded.
It's pretty clear from what the author is saying (in the first paragraph of the passages you have shown us) that he/she does not want to spend the time to either state or prove the Jordan Curve Theorem. This is certainly a reasonable decision for a textbook author, because it is a very hard theorem to prove.
Instead, the words "toy contour" are used to mean any continuous simple closed curve for which the conclusion of the Jordan Curve Theorem is obvious. Examples of this would include any convex simple closed curve (an exercise). But he also wants some nonconvex examples such as the "keyhole" example, and the exercise is still pretty easy for those.
And, by the way, there is another theorem with the same hypotheses but still stronger conclusions than the Jordan Curve Theorem, it is known as the Schönflies Theorem. The author's comments in that first paragraph lead me to think that the concept of "toy contour" might also be referring to those stronger conclusions in some form or another.
answered Jan 14 at 15:09
Lee MosherLee Mosher
51k33889
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Yes, that's a valid way to think about it.
What's going on here is a theorem of topology:
The Jordan Curve Theorem. If $C$ is any continuous simple closed curve then $mathbb R^2 - C$ has two connected components, one of which (called the "interior") is bounded and the other (called the "exterior") is unbounded.
It's pretty clear from what the author is saying (in the first paragraph of the passages you have shown us) that he/she does not want to spend the time to either state or prove the Jordan Curve Theorem. This is certainly a reasonable decision for a textbook author, because it is a very hard theorem to prove.
Instead, the words "toy contour" are used to mean any continuous simple closed curve for which the conclusion of the Jordan Curve Theorem is obvious. Examples of this would include any convex simple closed curve (an exercise). But he also wants some nonconvex examples such as the "keyhole" example, and the exercise is still pretty easy for those.
And, by the way, there is another theorem with the same hypotheses but still stronger conclusions than the Jordan Curve Theorem, it is known as the Schönflies Theorem. The author's comments in that first paragraph lead me to think that the concept of "toy contour" might also be referring to those stronger conclusions in some form or another.
answered Jan 14 at 15:09
Lee MosherLee Mosher
51k33889
$endgroup$
Yes, that's a valid way to think about it.
What's going on here is a theorem of topology:
The Jordan Curve Theorem. If $C$ is any continuous simple closed curve then $mathbb R^2 - C$ has two connected components, one of which (called the "interior") is bounded and the other (called the "exterior") is unbounded.
It's pretty clear from what the author is saying (in the first paragraph of the passages you have shown us) that he/she does not want to spend the time to either state or prove the Jordan Curve Theorem. This is certainly a reasonable decision for a textbook author, because it is a very hard theorem to prove.
Instead, the words "toy contour" are used to mean any continuous simple closed curve for which the conclusion of the Jordan Curve Theorem is obvious. Examples of this would include any convex simple closed curve (an exercise). But he also wants some nonconvex examples such as the "keyhole" example, and the exercise is still pretty easy for those.
And, by the way, there is another theorem with the same hypotheses but still stronger conclusions than the Jordan Curve Theorem, it is known as the Schönflies Theorem. The author's comments in that first paragraph lead me to think that the concept of "toy contour" might also be referring to those stronger conclusions in some form or another.
answered Jan 14 at 15:09
Lee MosherLee Mosher
51k33889
edited Jan 14 at 15:17
answered Jan 14 at 15:09
Lee MosherLee Mosher
51k33889
answered Jan 14 at 15:09
Lee MosherLee Mosher
51k33889
answered Jan 14 at 15:09
Lee MosherLee Mosher
51k33889
51k33889
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3073009%2fcan-i-think-of-a-toy-contour-as-any-closed-piecewise-smooth-curve-which-is-simpl%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
