An Introduction to Analysis/Differential forms

This page is brought to you by Wikimedia Laboratories
Jump to: navigation, search

In particular, the chapter covers subharmonic functions.

Contents

Implicit function theorem

4 Theorem A linear operator T from a finite-diemnsional vector space \mathcal{X} into itself is injective if and only if it is surjective.
Proof: Let e_1, ... e_n be a basis for \mathcal{X}. The following are equivalent: (i) T has zero kernel. (ii) 0 = T(\sum_{j=1}^n a_j e_j) = \sum_{j=1}^n a_j T(e_j) implies that all the a_j are zero. (iii) T(e_1), ... T(e_n) is a basis for \mathcal{X}. Since the range of T is the span of the set \{ T(e_1), ... T(e_n) \}, the theorem now follows. \square

4 Theorem Let \Omega be a neighborhood of a point (a, b) \in \mathbb{R}^n \times \mathbb{R}^m. If f_j(a, b) = 0 and f_j \in \mathcal{C}^1 (\Omega) for j = 1 ... n, and if the matrix

\begin{bmatrix} {\partial f_1 \over \partial x_1} & \cdots & {\partial f_1 \over \partial x_n} \\ \vdots &
\ddots & \vdots \\ {\partial f_n \over \partial x_1} & \cdots & {\partial f_n \over \partial x_n}\end{bmatrix}

is invertible at (a, b), then the equations f_j(x, y) = 0, j = 1 ... n, has a unique solution x such that x(b) = a and x is \mathcal{C}^1 in some neighborhood of b.
Proof (from [1]):

We need

4 Lemma If a linear operator T is injective in \Omega, then T^{-1} is defined and continuously differentiable in T(\Omega).

Let F(x, y) = (f(x, y), y) for (x, y) \in \Omega.

Connected spaces

The space A at top is connected; the shaded space B at bottom is not.

A set E is connected if there exists no open cover of E consisting of two disjoint open sets.

A connected component of a set E in G is the "maximal" connected subsets containing E; that is, the component = \bigcup connected set \subset G containing E. Every topological space, in other words, consists of components, which are necessarily disjoint and closed. That a topological space consists of exactly one component is equivalent to that the space is connected.

To give an example, induce to an arbitrary set G a topology as a collection of any subsets of G (i.e., the finest topology). The topological space G has no closed sets since every open set in G is also closed. The components of G are the same as all the subsets of G since .

4.3 Theorem The following are equivalent. Given a topological space G,

  1. G is connected.
  2. If G = A \cup B, then both \overline{A} \cap B and A \cap \overline{B} are nonempty.
  3. Only \varnothing and G have empty boundary.

Proof: Suppose G = A \cup B for some sets A and B. If \overline{A} and B are disjoint, so are A and B since A \subset \overline{A}. This is to say that (1) is false, which also follows if A and \overline{B} are disjoint for the same reasoning. This shows that (1) implies (2). Now suppose E is nonempty, open, closed subset of G that is not G. Then so is G \backslash E. Thus, G = E \cup (G \backslash E), the disjoint union of an open set and a closed set. This contradicts (2). Hence, (2) implies (3. Finally, suppose (1) is false; that is, there are at least two components of G, either of which has empty boundary but is not G. \square

A path is a continuous function from [0, 1] to some space; e.g., a straight-line represented by f(t) = A path is a loop if f(0) = f(1). e.g., a unit circle represented by f(t) = e^{t 2 \pi i}.

Two points a and b are said to be jointed by a path f if f(0) = a and f(1) = b. We say the space is path-connected, the importance of which notion is the following.

5.1 Theorem A set E is path-connected set if and only if it is connected.

Two paths that are homotopic.

Two paths are said to be homotopic if FIXME.

We say a space is simply connected if every path in the space is homotopic to a point. For example, in the plane \mathbb{R}^2, every circle centered at the origin is homotopic to the origin. But in \mathbb{R}^2 / {0} the circle fails to be homotopic to the origin. Hence, the former is simply connected while the latter is not. We also see, in light of theorem 3.1, that every simply-connected space is connected.

5.1 Theorem Let E be a set. The following are equivalent.

  • (i) df = 0 implies that f is constant for any f \in \mathcal{C}^1(E)
  • (ii) E is connected.

Partition of unities

4 Lemma (Urysohn) A topological space X is normal if and only if for any disjoint closed sets A and B there exists a continuous function f such that 0 \le f \ge 1, f = 0 on A and f = 1 on B. Proof (from Urysohn's lemma):

4 Corollary A topological space X is completely regular if and only if there exists a continuous injection from X to a compact Hausdorff space with continuous inverse.

4 Theorem A Hausdorff space is paracompact if and only if it admits a partition of unity.

Sheaf theory

We say \mathcal{F} is a pre-sheaf on a topological space M if for any open subsets U \subset V \subset W of M

  • \mathcal{F}(U) is an abelian group, ring, module, etc.
  • If \rho_{U, V}: U \to V is a set-inclusion (i.e., \rho(x)=x), then:
\mathcal{F}(\rho_{U,V}): \mathcal{F}(V) \to \mathcal{F}(U) is a group (resp. ring, module, etc.) homomorphism such that \mathcal{F}(\rho_{U,U}) = \operatorname{id}_{\mathcal{F}(U)} and \mathcal{F}(\rho_{U,W}) = \mathcal{F}(\rho_{U,V}) \circ \mathcal{F}(\rho_{V,W})

If in addition the following holds a pre-sheaf is called a sheaf: for open sets U_j \subset M and their union U

  • (a) If f, g \in \mathcal{F}(U) and f|_{U_j} = g|_{U_j} for all j, then f|_U =  g|_U
  • (b) If f \in \mathcal{F}(U_j) and f_j|_{U_j \cap U_k} = f_k|_{U_j \cap U_k} for all j, k, then there exists a f \in \mathcal{F}(U) such that f|_{U_j} = f_j for all j.

Here, we used (and will use) the notation g|_B = \mathcal{F}(\rho_{B,A})(g) for g \in \mathcal{F}(A) and B \subset A. We shall also denote \mathcal{F}(\rho_{U,V}) simply by \rho_{U,V} when no confusion is possible. \square

Given sheaves \mathcal{F}, \mathcal{G} a sheaf (resp. pre-sheaf) homomorphism \phi: \mathcal{F} \to \mathcal{G} is given by a group (or ring, module, etc) homomorphism \phi_U: \mathcal{F}(U) \to \mathcal{G}(U) such that \phi_U \circ \mathcal{F}(\rho_{U, V}) = \mathcal{G}(\rho_{U, V}) \circ \phi_V for any U \subset V.

A sheaf homomorphism \phi: \mathcal{F} \to \mathcal{G} is called an isomorphism if there is another sheaf homomorphism \psi: \mathcal{G} \to \mathcal{F} such that \phi \circ \psi = identity = \psi \circ \phi. A word of caution: it is not necessary that if \phi is surjective, then \phi_U is surjective for every open subset U, though the converse holds.

4 Corollary If \phi is a sheaf homomorphism, then its kernel \operatorname{ker}(\phi) is a sheaf when it is defined by

\operatorname{ker}(\phi)(U) = \operatorname{ker}(\phi_U) for each U.

Proof: Everything is clear except that f \in \operatorname{ker}(\phi)(U=\cup U_j) (while we know f \in \mathcal{F}(U)) in (b) of the definition. But since (\phi_U f)|_{U_j} = \phi_U (f|_{U_j}) = \phi_U f_j = 0 for all j and \mathcal{G} is a sheaf, we have \phi_U f = 0. \square

Though \operatorname{im}(\phi) can be defined similarly, in general it need not be a sheaf. Thus, we shall use the following formal procedure.

4 Lemma (sheafification) Every pre-sheaf \mathcal{F} on M gives rise to a sheaf \mathcal{G} on M defined for each open subset U \subset M by \mathcal{G}(U) = all the maps f:U \to \cup_{z \in U} \mathcal{F}_z satisfying the following:

  • U is the union of open sets V_j \subset U, and
  • For every j there is some g_j \in \mathcal{F}(V_j) such that f_z = (g_j)_z for all z \in V_j (where f_z =f(z) and (g_j)_z = (V_j, g_j)).

If \psi_U(g) = g for every g \in \mathcal{F}(U), \psi_U is an injection from \mathcal{F}(U) to \mathcal{G}(U), and it is an isomorphism if \mathcal{F} is actually a sheaf.
Proof: It is clear that \mathcal{G} is a sheaf and that \phi_U is injective since we can just take V_j = U. Next, suppose \mathcal{F} is a sheaf, let f \in \mathcal{G}(U) be given, and let V_j and g_j correspond to f as in the definition. For every j,k we have

(g_j|_{V_j \cap V_k})_z = f_z = (g_k|_{V_j \cap V_k})_z for all z \in V_j \cap V_k,

which implies g_j|_{V_j \cap V_k} = g_k|_{V_j \cap V_k}. Since \mathcal{F} is a sheaf, we can thus find g \in \mathcal{F}(U) with g|_{V_j} = g_j for every j. This is to say, we may have supposed that V_j = U in the first place. Hence, \psi_U is surjective. \square

Let \phi be a sheaf homomorphism. By the application of the lemma to the pre-sheaf given by \mathcal{F}(U) = \operatorname{im}(\phi_U) we define the image sheaf \operatorname{im}(\phi).

Corollary For any U, \{ x; x \in U, f(x) = g(x) \} is open for any f, g \in \mathcal{F}(U)</mah>.''<br />

A sheaf <math>\mathcal{F} on M is said to be flasque if \rho_{U,M}:\mathcal{F}(M) \to \mathcal{F}(U) is surjective.

4 Lemma Every short exact sequence of sheaves:

0 \longrightarrow \mathcal{F}^0 \longrightarrow \mathcal{F}^1 \longrightarrow \mathcal{F}^2 \longrightarrow 0

induces for every U an exact sequence

0 \longrightarrow \mathcal{F}^0(U) \longrightarrow \mathcal{F}^1(U) \longrightarrow \mathcal{F}^2 (U)

where the map \mathcal{F}^1(U) \to \mathcal{F}^2(U) is surjective if \mathcal{F}^0 is flasque.
Proof: By \delta^j we denote the map \mathcal{F}^j \to \mathcal{F}^{j+1}. It is clear that \ker(\delta^0(U)) = 0 if \ker(\delta^0) = 0. Let f \in \ker({\delta^1}_U) = \ker(\delta^1)(U) = \operatorname{im}(\delta^0)(U) be given. Since \operatorname{im}(\delta^0)(U) is a sheafification, we can write U as the union of open subsets V_j \subset U so that: for each j there is a g_j \in \operatorname{im}({\delta^0}_U) such that f_z = (g_j)_z for all z \in V_j. That is, there are u_j with {\delta^0}_U(u_j) = g_j and we have:

{\delta^0}_{V_j \cap V_k} (u_j|_{V_j \cap V_k}) = f|_{V_j \cap V_k} = {\delta^0}_{V_j \cap V_k} (u_k|_{V_j \cap V_k}),

and u_j|_{V_j \cap V_k} = u_k|_{V_j \cap V_k} since {\delta^0}_U is injective. Hence, there exists u \in \mathcal{F^0}(U) with u|_{V_j} = u_j. It follows: ({\delta^0}_U u)|_{V_j} = {\delta^0}_{V_j} u_j = f|_{V_j} and so {\delta^0}_U u = f. It remains to show that {\delta^1}_U is surjective when F^0 is flasque. To this end, let f \in \operatorname{im}(\delta^1)(U) be given, and as before let V_j, u_j so that we have:

{\delta^1}_{V_j \cap V_k} ((u_j - u_k)|_{V_j \cap V_k}) = 0.

Then since \operatorname{ker}({\delta^1}_{V_j \cap V_k}) = \operatorname{im}({\delta^0}_{V_j \cap V_k}) there are s_{jk} such that:

(u_j - u_k)|_{V_j \cap V_k} = {\delta^0}_{V_j \cap V_k} s_{jk}.

We shall construct v_j with

(v_k - v_j)|_{V_j \cap V_k} = {\delta^0}_{V_j \cap V_k} s_{jk}

\square

to be merged

In this chapter, we shall prove (after some works are done) Cauchy's integral formula, first by the Stoke's theorem then again by the notion of the winding number.

6.1 Theorem There exists a partition of unity \phi_i subordinate to the cover \{G_j\}; that is:

  • (a) \phi_i is infinitely differentiable in every G_j.
  • (b) \mbox{supp }\phi_j is in G_j.
  • (c) If x is in G_j, then \sum_1^N \phi_j = 1 for some N. (locally finite)

Proof: Let G = the union of all G_j. Choose g_j in C^{\infty}(G) so that {all \mbox{supp }g_j} covers G and  0 \le g_j \ge 1. (See the lemma for why this is possible.)
Let \phi_1 = g_1, \phi_2 = (1 - g_1)g_2, \phi_3 = (1 - g_1)(1 - g_2)g_3 and so forth. If \sum_1^m \phi_j = 1 - \prod_1^m g_j for some m, then the computation gives: \sum_1^{m + 1} \phi_j = 1 - \prod_1^{m + 1} g_j. Since \phi_1 = 1 - (1 - g_1), by induction,

\sum_1^{\infty} \phi_j = 1 - \prod_1^{\infty} g_j, which is locally finite.

For x in G_j, some g_j(x) = 1. Thus, (c) holds and the others (a) and (b) are also true by construction. \square

We define the integral of a form \theta over E by for a partition of unity \phi_j subordinate to the locally finite cover \{E_j\} of E,

\int_E \theta = \sum \int_{E_j} \phi_j \theta.

6.1 Theorem If u is analytic in \Omega, then:

 f(z) = \frac{1}{2 \pi i} \int_{\partial \Omega} \frac{f(\zeta) d\zeta}{\zeta-z} \ \ \  \forall z \in \Omega .

(See also: Calculus:Complex_analysis)

We say a function f satisfies the mean value property when:

f(z) = {1 \over 2 \pi} \int (z + \epsilon e^{i \theta}) d\theta.

An analytic function is an archetypical example, for the property is the immediate consequence of Caucy's integral formula. If f has the mean value property, then, for one, f is harmonic, and for another, the maximal principle become applicable to it.

6.1 Theorem
If u is analytic in \Omega, then the following are equivalent:

  • (a) u^{(k)} (z) = 0 for all k.
  • (b) u \mid_\omega = 0 for some \omega \subset \Omega open.
  • (c) u has a non-isolated zero.

and if any of the above is true, then

  • (d) u \mid_\Omega = 0.

Proof: Let E = \{ f : f \mid_\omega \}. If u is in E, then its derivative:

\dot u = \lim_{h \rightarrow 0} h^{-1} (f(x + h) - f(x))

is 0 in \Omega since \omega consists of interior points, and so we may suppose x + h is \omega. Thus, from (b), (a) follows. That (b) implies (c) is obvious since an interior point is non-isolated. To show (d), let Z be \{ z \subset \Omega : f(z) = 0 \}. Then Z is closed since the inverse of f, which is continuous by the inverse theorem, maps a closed set {0} back to Z in \Omega. Z is also open, which we can know by considering a power series expansion. Since Z is nonempty by assumption, (d) follows after (a). \square (FIXME: this is still a partial proof)

6 Theorem (Runge) Let K \subset \mathbb{C} be compact, and \omega be an arbitrary open subset of \mathbb{C} containing K. Then the following are equivalent:

(a) For any f \in \mathcal{A}(K) and an integer j, we can find a u \in \mathcal{A}(\omega) so that:
\sup_K | f - u | < 2^{-j}
(b) K is holomorphically convex.

Proof: The theorem is a consequence of the Hahn-Banach theorem.

A compact subset K of a complex plane is said to have the Runge property if K satisfies any of the statements in the theorem.

6.2 Theorem (Weierstrass) Let \Omega \subset \mathbb{C} be open. Let the sequence z_j \subset \Omega be discrete, and n_j be a sequence of arbitrary integers. Then there exists a nonzero f \in \mathcal{A}(\Omega \backslash \{ z_1, z_2, ... \}) such that for each j (z - z_j)^(-n_j) f is nonzero and analytic in some open set containing z_j.
Proof: Let K_j be an exhaustion by compact sets of \Omega with the Runge property. By the Runge property, for each j, we find a u_j \in \mathcal{A}(\Omega) so that:

\sup_{K_j} | (z - z_j)^{n_j} + u_j | < 2^{-j}

where since the sequence z_j is discrete, we may suppose z_k \not \in K_j for any k \le j. Let

g = \sum_1^\infty (z - z_j)^{n_j} + u_j, and f(z) = e^{\int_0^z g(s)ds}.

Then f is analytic in \Omega except for all z_j. Also, let j be fixed and \omega be an open set containing z_j and no other terms in the sequence. Then {\dot f \over f} = g in \omega. Thus, by Cauchy's integral formula,

2 \pi i n_j = \int_{\omega} g(s)ds = \int_{\omega} { \dot f(s) \over f (s) }ds

It now follows that the argument principle says f has a zero of order n_j (if the order is negative, then it is actually a pole). \square

This formulation is probably more illustrative, if it states more weakly.

6.2 Corollary Every discrete subset of \Omega \subset \mathbb{C} is the zero and pole set of some analytic function.
Proof: Every discrete set is countable.

6 Theorem Let \Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^n be open and connected and \eta be one-form. Then the following are equivalent:

(1) \eta is exact on \Omega.
(2) \int_{\gamma} = 0 if \gamma is a closed path.
(3) \int_a^b \eta is independent of path.

Proof: On \Omega, if \eta is exact, then \eta = df for some zero-form f. It thus follow:

\int_a^b \eta = \int_{\gamma} df = f(\gamma(1)) - f(\gamma(0)).

If \gamma is a closed path, then \gamma(1) = \gamma(0) by definition, and hence, (2) is true. Let \gamma_1 and \gamma_2 be arbitrary paths from a to b. Then

\int_{\gamma_1 - \gamma_2} \eta = 0 if (2) is true.

Thus, (2) implies (3). Finally, show (3) implies (1). Let f(x) = \int_0^x \eta. Then df = \sum_1^n {\partial f \over \partial x_i} dx_i. For each i, if \int_x^{x + h_i} \eta = g(x + h_i) - g(x), then since <math>\int_0^{x + h_i} - \int_0^x = ,

{\partial f \over \partial x_i} (x) = lim_{h_i \to \infty} {1 \over h_i} (\int_x^{x + h_i}\eta
= lim_{h_i \to \infty} {1 \over h_i} (g(x + h_i) - g(x)) = {\partial g \over \partial x_i}(x)

Here the derivative of f does exist since the integral is independent of path. We conclude that  df = \sum_1^n {\partial f \over \partial x_i} dx_i = \eta.

Unitary operators

A continuous linear operator U: \mathcal{X} \to \mathcal{Y} is said to be unitary if U is surjective and preserves norms; i.e., \|x\|_\mathcal{X} = \|Ux\|_\mathcal{Y} for all x.

4 Theorem Suppose \mathcal{X} and \mathcal{Y} are Hilbert spaces. A continuous linear operator U is unitary if and only if U^*U and UU^* are identity on \mathcal{X} and \mathcal{Y}, respectively.
Proof: The direct part follows from the identity

\|U^*U x - x\|_\mathcal{X}^2 \le \|U^*\| \|Ux\|^2_\mathcal{X} - 2\|Ux\|^2_\mathcal{Y} + \|x\|^2_\mathcal{X}

and the converse from the identity

\|Ux\|^2_\mathcal{Y} = \langle U^*Ux, x \rangle_\mathcal{X} = \|x\|^2_\mathcal{X}. \square

Stokes formula

4 Theorem (Stokes) If \omega \subset \mathbb{C} has boundary which consists of finitely many Jordan curves, then:

\int_{\partial \omega} \eta = \int_\omega d\eta

Proof: (FIXME: To be written)

4 Corollary (Green) If \omega \subset \mathbb{C} has boundary which consists of finitely many Jordan curves, then we have:

\int_\omega (f\Delta g - g\Delta f) dx \wedge dy = \int_{\partial \omega} \left( f{\partial \over \partial x} g - g{\partial \over \partial x} f \right)dy - \left(f{\partial \over \partial y} g - g{\partial \over \partial y} f \right)dx.

Proof: d \left( f{\partial \over \partial x} g - {g \over \partial x} f \right) \wedge dy = \left( f {\partial^2 \over \partial x^2}g - g {\partial^2 \over \partial x^2}f \right) dx \wedge dy. \square

Harmonicity

Let \Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^n. A function u \in \mathcal{C}^2(\Omega) is said to be harmonic if

\sum_1^n {\partial^2 u \over \partial x_j^2} = 0 (the Laplace equation)

We also define the poisson kernel

P(x / R, y) = {C_n}^{-1} (1 - | x / R |^2) | y - x / R |^{-n}

where C_n is the volume of a unit ball in \mathbb{R}^n.

4. Theorem Let \Omega = \mbox{Ball}_R. Then u is harmonic on and continuous on \overline{\Omega} if and only if

u(x) = \int P(x / R, y) u(Ry) d\omega(y).

Proof: Suppose u is harmonic on \Omega. Then using the Green's function

u(x) = \int P(x / r, y) u(ry) d\omega(y) for |x| < r < R.

Letting r \to R gives the direct part. Conversely, if x \in \Omega, then the second derivative of u = 0 since P is harmonic on \Omega. \square

4. Corollary (mean value property) Let \Omega = \mbox{Ball}_R and u be harmonic on and continuous on \overline{\Omega}. Then

u(0) = \int u(Ry) {d\omega(y) \over C_n}.

Proof: Let x = 0 in the theorem. Then P(0, y) = {C_n}^{-1}.

4. Corollary (maximum principle) If \Omega \subset \mathbb{R} and u:\Omega \to \mathbb{R} is harmonic on \Omega and continuous on \overline{\Omega}, then for x \in \Omega,

\min_{\mbox{b}\Omega}u \le u(x) \le \max_{\mbox{b}\Omega}u

where if the equality holds at some x \in \Omega, then f is constant in the component of x.
Proof: (i) Suppose \Omega = \mbox{Ball}_R. Then for x \in \Omega

u(x) = \int_{|y| = 1} P(x / R, y) u(Ry) d \omega(y)
\le \sup_{\mbox{b}\Omega} u \int_{|y| = 1} P(x / R, y) d\omega(y)
= \sup_{\mbox{b}\Omega} u

since

\int_{|y| = 1} P(x / R) d\omega(y) \sup_{\mbox{b}\Omega} = 1 when |x| \le |R|.

Likewise, -u(x) \le \sup_{\mbox{b}\Omega} -u. Thus,

\inf_{\mbox{b}\Omega}u \le u(x) \le \sup_{\mbox{b}\Omega}u

where \inf and \sup are actually \min and \max, respectively since the continuity of u and the compactness of a closed ball. (ii) Suppose \Omega is arbitrary. Let x \in \Omega. From (i) it follows that u is constant on every open ball containing x. Since \Omega is open, every component of \Omega is open. Since an open set is the union of non-disjoint open balls, u is constant on the component of x. \square

4. Theorem Let u be continuous on \Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^n. Then the following are equivalent:

  • (i) u is harmonic.
  • (ii) If \delta \le 0 is given,
    \int u(x + ry) {d\omega(y) \over C_n} \wedge d\mu(r) = u(x) \int d\mu(r)
  • where d(x, \mbox{b}\Omega) \le \delta and \mbox{supp} (d\mu) \subset [0, \delta].
  • (iii) If \delta > 0 is given, then (ii) holds.

Proof: The mean value property says:

u(x) = \int u(x + ry) {d\omega(y) \over C_n}

By integrating both sides we get:

u(x) \int d\mu(r) = \int u(x + ry) {d\omega(y) \over C_n} \wedge d\mu(r)

Hence, (i) implies (ii). Clearly, (ii) implies (iii). Suppose (iii), and let B be an open ball with \overline{B} \subset \omega. Let h be harmonic on B and continuous on \overline{B} such that u = h on \mbox{b}B. If \mbox{Ball}_{\delta, x} \subset \Omega, then using (iii)

\int (h - u)(x + ry) {d\omega(y) \over C_n} \wedge d\mu(r) = (h - u)(x) \int d\mu(r)

where h - u = 0 on the boundary of B. Since d\mu(r) has non-zero measure, u = h on B. Thus, (iii) implies (i). \square

Cauchy's integral formula

4 Thorem Let G be a bounded open subset of \mathbb{C} whose boundary is smooth enough that Stokes' formula is applicable. If u \in \mathcal{C}^1(\overline{G}), we have:

u(w) =  {1 \over 2 \pi i} \int_{\partial G} {u(w) \over z - w} dz - {1 \over \pi} \int_G {\partial u \over \partial \bar z} (z) {1 \over z - w} dx \wedge dy for w \in G

4 Theorem Let \mu be a complex-valued measure with compact support in \mathbb{C} and define

u(w) = \int {1 \over z - w} d\mu

Schwarz lemma

4 Lemma (Schwarz) If f is analytic and |f(z)| \le 1 for all |z| < 1 and f(0) = 0, then we have:

|f(z)| \le |z| for all |z| \le 1

Moreover, if the equality in the above holds at some point w \ne 0, then f is proportional to z
Proof: The hypothesis means that we can write f(z) = zg(z). Furthermore, if 0 < r < 1, the maximum principle says

\sup_{|z| \le r} |g(z)| = \sup_{|z| = r} |g(z)| \le {1 \over r}.

and g is constant if g = 1 at some point on the circle |z|=r. Letting r \to 1 completes the proof. \square

Addendum

A Lie algebra is an algebra whose multiplication, denoted by [,], satisfies

  • (i) [x, x] = 0, and
  • (ii) [[x, y], z] + [[y, z], x] + [[z, x], y] = 0

for all x, y, z. Under the assumption (ii) we see (i) is equivalent to

0 = [x + y, x + y] = [x, y] + [y, x].

When given an algebra is associative; i.e., (xy)z = x(yz) we can turn the algebra into a Lie algebra by defining [x, y] = xy - yx, called a commutator. Indeed, it is clear that [x, y] distributes over scalars and addition and the condition (i) holds. It then follows [[x,y],z] = [x,[y,z]] - [y,[x,z]].


Also,  \int e^x = f(u^n)

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
FlaggedRevs
Print/export
Toolbox