Intereting Posts

The difference between $\Delta x$, $\delta x$ and $dx$
Techniques for showing an ideal in $k$ is prime
Base conversion: How to convert between Decimal and a Complex base?
How to solve the matrix equation $ABA^{-1}=C$ with $\operatorname{Tr}(A)=a$
Axiomatization of $\mathbb{Z}$
How to prove that a bounded linear operator is compact?
Properties of absolutely continuous functions
How to find the value of $\int_0^1 \frac{x-1}{\log x}\,dx$?
Prove the limit exists
$I:=\{f(x)\in R\mid f(1)=0\}$ is a maximal ideal?
Does a non-trivial solution exist for $f'(x)=f(f(x))$?
about limit of a sequence
Another integral for $\pi$
Why is $\frac{\operatorname dy'}{\operatorname dy}$ zero, since $y'$ depends on $y$?
Every ${K}_{1, 3}$-free connected graph of even order has a perfect matching.

I’m trying to understand the derivation of Wiener deconvolution given on its Wikipedia page. In the last couple steps under the derivation section, they take the derivative with respect to $G(f)$ of an equation that has both $G(f)$ and $G^\ast(f)$ in it. They simply state that $G^\ast (f)$ acts as a constant in the differentiation. However, it seems to me that if you don’t treat $G(f)$ as a constant, then you shouldn’t be able to treat $G^\ast (f)$ as a constant because they are directly related.

I searched around some looking for an explanation. I found this page, which seems to agree that the complex conjugate can be treated as a constant. I also found some stuff about the Cauchy-Riemann equations, which seem to be related. However, I haven’t had any classes on complex analysis and don’t understand the intuition behind why this can be done.

Why can the complex conjugate of a variable be treated as a constant when differentiating with respect to that variable?

- Proof of convergence of Dirichlet's Eta Function
- Analytic continuation of Dirichlet function
- About the limit of the coefficient ratio for a power series over complex numbers
- Are there any simple ways to see that $e^z-z=0$ has infinitely many solutions?
- Locally bounded Family
- A question regarding Frobenius method in ODE

- Prove the following equation of complex power series.
- Schwarz-Christoffel mapping onto infinite L-shaped region
- Principal value of the singular integral $\int_0^\pi \frac{\cos nt}{\cos t - \cos A} dt$
- Interesting results easily achieved using complex numbers
- $\int_{|z|=2}^{}\frac{1}{z^2+1}dz$
- Showing Entire Function is Bounded
- Why does a meromorphic function in the (extended) complex plane have finitely many poles?
- How to find $\sum_{k \in \mathbb{Z}}\frac1{(k+a)(k+b)}$
- Images of lines $y = k = \mbox{constant}$ under the mapping $w = \cos (z)$
- Writing Complex Numbers as a Vector in $\mathbb{R^2}$

The nomenclature of $\dfrac{\partial}{\partial z}$ and $\dfrac{\partial}{\partial\bar{z}}$ is confusing because it gives the impression that these are really partial derivatives with respect to two independent variables, $z$ and $\bar{z}$. However, it is clear that $z$ and $\bar{z}$ are not independent.

**Differentiable Functions and Conformal Maps**

A differentiable function on $\mathbb{R}$ locally looks like a linear function, that is, there is a real constant, called $f'(x)$, so that for small $h$,

$$

f(x+h)=f(x)+f'(x)h+o(h)\tag{1}

$$

Analogously, a differentiable function on $\mathbb{C}$ satisfies $(1)$ for some complex number $f'(x)$.

Multiplication on $\mathbb{C}$ acts as a rotation and radial scale when viewed as an action on $\mathbb{R}^2$. Thus, if $f$ is differentiable on $\mathbb{C}$,

$$

f(z+h)-f(z)=f'(z)h+o(h)\tag{2}

$$

That is, when $h$ is small, $h\mapsto f(z+h)-f(z)$ looks like a scaled rotation. For this reason, a differentiable function on $\mathbb{C}$ is called conformal: small features are replicated (scaled and rotated) and angles are preserved.

**Complex Conjugation and Orientation Reversal**

Complex conjugation, $z\mapsto\bar{z}$, is an orientation reversing isometry. Thus, when composed with a conformal map, either before or after, the composition is an orientation-reversing conformal map. Furthermore, double composition yields an orientation-preserving conformal map; for example, if $f(z)$ is conformal, then so is $\overline{f(\bar{z})}$.

As a function on $\mathbb{R}^2$, complex conjugation can be represented by the matrix $\begin{bmatrix}1&0\\0&-1\end{bmatrix}$.

**Conformal and Conjugate Conformal**

The partial derivatives of a general differentiable function on $\mathbb{R}^2$ given by $x+iy\mapsto u+iv$ are usually given in a $2\times2$ Jacobian matrix:

$$

\frac{\partial(u,v)}{\partial(x,y)}=\begin{bmatrix}\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}&\frac{\partial v}{\partial x}\\\frac{\partial u}{\partial y}&\frac{\partial v}{\partial y}\end{bmatrix}\tag{3}

$$

The Cauchy-Riemann equations specify that $\dfrac{\partial u}{\partial x}=\dfrac{\partial v}{\partial y}$ and $\dfrac{\partial u}{\partial y}=-\dfrac{\partial v}{\partial x}$, which agrees with the following basis for the orientation-preserving conformal Jacobians on $\mathbb{R}^2$:

$$

\left\{\begin{bmatrix}1&0\\0&1\end{bmatrix},\begin{bmatrix}0&1\\-1&0\end{bmatrix}\right\}\tag{4}

$$

Note that the determinant of any linear combination of these matrices has positive determinant (thus orientation is preserved).

The following basis for the orientation-reversing conformal Jacobians on $\mathbb{R}^2$ follows by composing conjugation with $(4)$:

$$

\left\{\begin{bmatrix}1&0\\0&-1\end{bmatrix},\begin{bmatrix}0&1\\1&0\end{bmatrix}\right\}\tag{5}

$$

Note that the determinant of any linear combination of these matrices has negative determinant (thus orientation is reversed).

Using $(4)$ and $(5)$, we can break any Jacobian into conformal and conjugate conformal parts. Using the component-wise orthogonality that exists among the bases, we can write the conformal part as

$$

\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}+\frac{\partial v}{\partial y}\right)\begin{bmatrix}1&0\\0&1\end{bmatrix}+\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\partial v}{\partial x}-\frac{\partial u}{\partial y}\right)\begin{bmatrix}0&1\\-1&0\end{bmatrix}\tag{6}

$$

and the conjugate conformal part as

$$

\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}-\frac{\partial v}{\partial y}\right)\begin{bmatrix}1&0\\0&-1\end{bmatrix}+\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\partial v}{\partial x}+\frac{\partial u}{\partial y}\right)\begin{bmatrix}0&1\\1&0\end{bmatrix}\tag{7}

$$

**$\dfrac{\partial}{\partial z}$, $\dfrac{\partial}{\partial\bar{z}}$, and Quaternions**

The definitions of $\dfrac{\partial}{\partial z}$ and $\dfrac{\partial}{\partial\bar{z}}$ say

$$

\begin{align}

\frac{\partial}{\partial z}(u+iv)

&=\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial x}-i\frac{\partial}{\partial y}\right)(u+iv)\\

&=\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}+\frac{\partial v}{\partial y}\right)+\frac{i}{2}\left(\frac{\partial v}{\partial x}-\frac{\partial u}{\partial y}\right)\tag{8}

\end{align}

$$

and

$$

\begin{align}

\frac{\partial}{\partial\bar{z}}(u+iv)

&=\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial x}+i\frac{\partial}{\partial y}\right)(u+iv)\\

&=\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}-\frac{\partial v}{\partial y}\right)+\frac{i}{2}\left(\frac{\partial v}{\partial x}+\frac{\partial u}{\partial y}\right)\tag{9}

\end{align}

$$

The space of $2\times2$ Jacobians has $4$ dimensions, so trying to represent these $4$ dimensions with the $2$ dimensions of $\mathbb{C}$, using $\dfrac{\partial}{\partial z}$ and $\dfrac{\partial}{\partial\bar{z}}$, obscures something.

There is a common matrix representation of the complex numbers as $2\times2$ real matrices where

$$

\begin{align}

\mathbf{1}&\leftrightarrow\begin{bmatrix}1&0\\0&1\end{bmatrix}\tag{10}\\

\mathbf{i}&\leftrightarrow\begin{bmatrix}0&1\\-1&0\end{bmatrix}\tag{11}

\end{align}

$$

However, there is also a matrix representation of the quaternions as $2\times2$ complex matrices where, in addition to $(10)$ and $(11)$,

$$

\begin{align}

\mathbf{j}&\leftrightarrow\begin{bmatrix}i&0\\0&-i\end{bmatrix}\tag{12}\\

\mathbf{k}&\leftrightarrow\begin{bmatrix}0&-i\\-i&0\end{bmatrix}\tag{13}

\end{align}

$$

Embed $(8)$ and $(9)$ in the quaternions to get

$$

\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial z}(u+iv)\right)\mathbf{1}

=\frac{\mathbf{1}}{2}\left(\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}+\frac{\partial v}{\partial y}\right)+\frac{\mathbf{i}}{2}\left(\frac{\partial v}{\partial x}-\frac{\partial u}{\partial y}\right)\tag{14}

$$

and

$$

\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial\bar{z}}(u+iv)\right)\mathbf{j}

=\frac{\mathbf{j}}{2}\left(\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}-\frac{\partial v}{\partial y}\right)+\frac{\mathbf{k}}{2}\left(\frac{\partial v}{\partial x}+\frac{\partial u}{\partial y}\right)\tag{15}

$$

Finally, substituting $(10)$-$(13)$ into $(14)$ and $(15)$, it becomes apparent, upon comparison with $(6)$ and $(7)$, that $\left(\dfrac{\partial}{\partial z}(u+iv)\right)\mathbf{1}$ represents the conformal part of the Jacobian and $\left(\dfrac{\partial}{\partial\bar{z}}(u+iv)\right)\mathbf{j}$ represents the conjugate conformal part.

**Conclusion**

For a general $f:\mathbb{C}\mapsto\mathbb{C}$, $\dfrac{\partial}{\partial z}f$ can be mapped to the conformal part of the $2\times2$ Jacobian, $\dfrac{\partial f}{\partial z}=\dfrac{\partial(u,v)}{\partial(x,y)}$, and $\dfrac{\partial}{\partial\bar{z}}f$ can be mapped to the conjugate conformal part. It is merely convenience of notation that we write $\dfrac{\partial}{\partial z}$ and $\dfrac{\partial}{\partial\bar{z}}$ because $\dfrac{\partial}{\partial z}f\;\mathrm{d}z+\dfrac{\partial}{\partial\bar{z}}f\;\mathrm{d}\bar{z}=\mathrm{d}f$. However, they are not true partial derivatives, but $2$ pieces of a $2\times2$ Jacobian composed of $4$ partial derivatives.

So, to answer the question asked, $z\mapsto\bar{z}$ is conjugate conformal, so $\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\bar{z}=0$; therefore, $\bar{z}$ acts like a constant under $\frac{\partial}{\partial z}$.

$\displaystyle{\frac{\partial}{\partial z}}$ and $\displaystyle{\frac{\partial}{\partial \overline z}}$ are defined such that $\displaystyle{\frac{\partial}{\partial z} z=1}$, $\displaystyle{\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\overline{z}=0}$, $\displaystyle{\frac{\partial}{\partial \overline z} z=0}$, and $\displaystyle{\frac{\partial}{\partial \overline z}\overline z=1}$. This shows why $\overline{z}$ can be treated as constant when differentiating with respect to $z$, in that differentiating something like $z\overline z + 3\overline{z}^3$ with respect to $z$ is very similar to differentiating $xy+3y^3$ with respect to $x$.

In terms of real coordinates, $z=x+iy$, $\overline z=x-iy$, $\displaystyle{\frac{\partial}{\partial z}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial x}- i\frac{\partial}{\partial y}\right)}$ and $\displaystyle{\frac{\partial}{\partial \overline z}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial x}+ i\frac{\partial}{\partial y}\right)}$.

The Cauchy-Riemann equations are related, because they are equivalent to $\displaystyle{\frac{\partial}{\partial \overline z}f=0}$.

- Extension of vector bundles on $\mathbb{CP}^1$
- Lattice Walk on Diagonally Overlapping Square Lattices
- A generating function for walks on a rooted infinite regular tree
- Pullbacks of categories
- Linear Functional: Continuous?
- Finding out the limit $\lim_{a \to \infty} \frac{f(a)\ln a}{a}$
- Equivalent definitions of Lebesgue Measurability (Rudin and Royden)
- How to prove that if convex $A \subset \mathbb{R}^n$ and $A+A=A$ then $0 \in cl(A)$?
- Check my answer: Prove that every open set in $\Bbb R^n$ is a countable union of open intervals.
- How to prove Gauss's Digamma Theorem?
- What is the codimension of matrices of rank $r$ as a manifold?
- composition of an integer number
- $x^3-9=y^2$ find integral solutions
- Why is Gödel's Second Incompleteness Theorem important?
- Summary: Spectrum vs. Numerical Range