I am learning about gamma function and just got a doubt that how can I prove that gamma function gives out a complex number when taken complex numbers as inputs and that no real number would be obtained when complex numbers are taken as inputs. I am trying to prove this,but I don't think so that I have enough information of gamma function to prove that. Thanks in advance
- 26,355
-
The Gamma function can be expressed in various ways. Which one is your working model? – Christian Blatter Aug 14 '20 at 14:11
-
This may help:https://math.stackexchange.com/q/620064/792125 – Mike Aug 14 '20 at 14:11
-
2It's not true. (Note that $\Gamma$ isn't entire, but $1/\Gamma$ is.) – Daniel Fischer Aug 14 '20 at 14:19
1 Answers
It's not true.
For the sake of contradiction, suppose $\operatorname{Im}(\Gamma(z))$ were positive on the entire upper half plane. Because of the simple poles of $\Gamma$, there exist negative real numbers $x$ with $\Gamma(x) < 0$, and by continuity there exist $z$ in the upper half plane with $\operatorname{Re}(z) < 0$ and $\operatorname{Re}(\Gamma(z)) < 0$. Using $\Gamma(z+1) = z \Gamma(z)$, we find that $$\operatorname{Im}(\Gamma(z+1)) = \operatorname{Re}(z) \operatorname{Im}(\Gamma(z)) + \operatorname{Im}(z) \operatorname{Re}(\Gamma(z)) \,.$$ By assumption, the LHS is $> 0$, and by the choice of $z$, the LHS is $ < 0$. This is a contradiction.
When $\operatorname{Im}(\Gamma(z))$ is negative on the entire upper half plane, the argument is similar: choose $z$ in the upper half plane with $\operatorname{Re}(z) < 0$ and $\operatorname{Re}(\Gamma(z)) > 0$. Then the LHS above is negative, and the RHS is positive.
- 26,355
-
I thank Bart Michels a lot for responding to my question. But I want a counter example if my statement that gamma function is complex for complex inputs is false. I liked your proof a lot but I am still unable to convince myself. So can you please provide a counter example – bora ramireddy Aug 14 '20 at 14:40
-
See e.g. the plot of $\Im\Gamma(x+i)$: you can notice that there are roots $x\approx-1.7738957686109185727712943025$, $x\approx-0.5639201269680536363061172$, $x\approx1.3127722981031503113028536$. Expand the range of plotting and you'll notice others. Similarly with other imaginary parts of the argument. – Ruslan Aug 14 '20 at 14:49
-