31.6 Entire Functions

Definition 31.6.1 (Entire Function).label Let $E$ be a complete separated locally convex space over $\complex$, then an entire $E$-valued function is an $E$-valued holomorphic function on $\complex$.

Proposition 31.6.2.label Let $E$ be a complete separated locally convex space over $\complex$, and $f \in H(\complex; E)$, then for any $z_{0} \in \complex$ and $z \in \complex$,

\[f(z) = \sum_{k = 0}^{\infty} \frac{1}{k!}D^{k}f(z_{0})(z - z_{0})^{k}\]

where the radius of convergence of the series is infinite.

Proof. See (4) of Definition 31.1.6.$\square$

Theorem 31.6.3 (Liouville).label Let $E$ be a complete separated locally convex space over $\complex$ and $f \in H(\complex; E)$. If $f$ is bounded, then $f$ is constant.

Proof. Let $x_{0} \in \complex$ and $[\cdot]_{E}: [E, \infty)$ be a continuous seminorm on $E$, then by Cauchy’s Estimate,

\[[Df(z_{0})]_{E} \le \frac{1}{r}\sup_{z \in \ol{B(z_0, r)}}[f(z)]_{E}\]

for all $r > 0$. Therefore $Df = 0$, and $f$ is constant.$\square$

Theorem 31.6.4 (Fundamental Theorem of Algebra).label Let $p \in \complex[z]$ be a non-constant polynomial, then there exists $z \in \complex$ such that $f(z) = 0$.

Proof. Let $p \in \complex[z]$ such that $p(z) \ne 0$ for all $z \in \complex$. Let $f = 1/p$, then $f \in H(\complex; \complex) \cap C_{0}(\complex; \complex)$, so $f$ is bounded. By Liouville’s Theorem, $f$ and thus $p$ is constant.$\square$

Proposition 31.6.5.label Let $f \in H(\complex; \complex)$, then the following are equivalent:

  1. (1)

    $f(z) \ne 0$ for all $z \in \complex$.

  2. (2)

    There exists $\ell \in H(\complex; \complex)$ such that $f = e^{\ell}$.

Proof. (1) $\Rightarrow$ (2): For each $z \in \complex$, let

\[g(z) = \int_{0}^{w} \frac{f'(w)}{f(w)}dw\]

then $g \in H(\complex; \complex)$ with $g' = f/f'$, and

\begin{align*}\frac{d}{dz}\braks{f(z)e^{-g(z)}}&= f'(z)e^{-g(z)}- f(z)g'(z)e^{-g(z)}\\&= f'(z)e^{-g(z)}- f'(z)e^{-g(z)}= 0\end{align*}

Therefore $fe^{-g}$ is a non-zero constant. For any $\lambda \in \complex$ with $e^{\lambda} = fe^{-g}$, let $h = g + \lambda$, then $f = e^{h}$.$\square$

Proposition 31.6.6.label Let $f \in H(\complex; \complex)$ such that:

  1. (a)

    $f(0) = 1$.

  2. (b)

    $f'(0) = 0$.

  3. (c)

    $0 < |f| < |\exp|$.

then $f = 1$.

Proof, [Lemma 4.4, Zhu93]. By (c) and Proposition 31.6.5, there exists $g \in H(\complex; \complex)$ such that $f = e^{g}$. Since $f(0) = 1$, $g(0) = 0$. As $f'(0) = g'(0)f(0) = 0$, $g'(0) = 0$ as well.

From (c), $|g(z)| \le e^{|z|}$ for each $z \in \complex$. Thus for every $r > 0$ and $z \in B_{\complex}(0, r)$, $|g(z)| \le |g(z) - 2r|$, and

\[g_{r}: \ol{B_\complex(0, r)}\setminus \bracs{0}\to \complex \quad z \mapsto \frac{r^{2}}{z^{2}}\frac{g(z)}{2r - g(z)}\]

extends to a holomorphic function on $B_{\complex}(0, r)$ by Proposition 31.2.3. Since $|g_{r}(z)| \le 1$ for all $z \in \partial B_{\complex}(0, r)$, $g_{r}(z) \le 1$ for all $z \in B_{\complex}(0, r)$ by the Maximum Modulus Theorem.

Finally, since $|g_{r}(z)| \le 1$ for all $z \in \complex$ and $r > |z|$, $g = 0$ and $f = 1$.$\square$

Post a Comment

Name:Email:
Please enter the tag of the current page (TT) to post the comment.
Tag: