Complex Analysis Flashcards

1
Q

Three miracles of holomorphic functions?

A
  1. Contour integration: If f is holomorphic in Omega, then for appropriate closed paths in Omega the integral f(z)dz = 0.
  2. Regularity: If f is holomorphic, then f is indefinitely differentiable
  3. Analytic Continuation: If f and g are holomorphic functions in Omega which are equal in an arbitrarily small disc in Omega, then f = g everywhere in Omega.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Prove: | |z| - |w| | <= |z - w|

A

From triangle inequality. Stein 3

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Define: holomorphic at the point z0, holomorphic on Omega, Entire

Examples?

A

Holomorphic if quotient [ f(z0 +h) - f(z0) ] / h converges to a limit when h –> 0. Here h in C, h != 0. Denote f’(z0) - derivative of f at z0.

  1. Polynomials = entire
  2. 1/z holomorphic on C - {0}
  3. Complex conjugation - not analytic
  4. Power series
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Compare holomorphic functions to differentiable functions of one real variable

A

A holomorphic function satisfies much stronger properties than a differentiable function of one real variable.

  1. Holomorphic implies infinitely differentiable. Not true for real: f(x) = x^1/3 on R.
  2. Holomorphic implies analytic. Not true for real infinitely differentiable: f(x) = e^-1/x
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Compare holomorphic functions to differentiable mappings R^2 –> R^2

A

Recall def of derivative for mapping of R^2 –> R^2.

Complex differentiation - derivative is complex number (rotation + dilation = 2 real degree of freedom)

Real derivatives - derivative is a matrix - Jacobian (4 real degrees of freedom)

Cauchy-Riemann Equations - link real and complex analysis

Complex valued function on open set of C holomorphic <=> Component functions are continuously differentiable and satisfy Cauchy-Riemann Equations

Note: We can weaken this to simply differentiable

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Discuss the differential operators d/dz and d/dz bar

A

Stein 12

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Discuss complex exponential vs complex geometric series

A

Stein 14

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Discuss the radius of convergence of a power series. Prove existence

A

Stein 15. Converges absolutely on disk of convergence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Define trig functions on C. Euler formulas?

A

Power series definitions. e^iz + e^-iz / 2 = cos z etc.

Stein 16

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Are power series holomorphic? Computation of derivative?

A

The power series f(z) = sum_n=0^infty a_n z^n defines a holomorphic function in its disc of convergence. The derivative of f is also a power series obtained by differentiating term by term the series for f, that is f’(z) = sum_n=0^infty n a_n z^n-1. Moreover, f’ has the same radius of convergence as f.

Use Hadamard + lim n^(1/n) = 1 for radius of convergence

Break into 3 pieces S_N, S’_N, and E_N

As a corollary: A power series is infinitely complex differentiable in its disc of convergence, everything obtained by termwise differentiation.

Stein 16

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Define: analytic function

A

Analytic at z0 if exists a power series expansion centered at z0 with positive radius of convergence, if power series expansion at every point in domain, then called analytic

We will show: Holomorphic <=> Analytic

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Define: parameterized curve, smooth, piecewise smooth, equivalent parameterizations, smooth curve, end points, closed, simple

A

A parameterized curve is a function z(t) which maps a closed interval [a,b] of R into the complex plane

Smooth if z’(t) exists and is continuous and z’(t) != 0 - i.e. an immersion

Piecewise smooth if z is continuous and if there exist points a = a0 < a1 < … < an = b where z(t) is smooth in the intervals [ak, ak+1]

Two parameterizations are equivalent if there exists a continuously differentiable bijection s -> t(s) from [c,d] to [a,b] s.t. t’(s) > 0 and z*(s) = z(t(s))

The smooth curve is the image in C. gamma- travels in opposite direction

closed if endpoints are equal z(a) = z(b). Simple if no self intersections

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Standard parameterization of the circle?

A

z(t) = z_0 + re^it centered at z0 of radius r

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Define: the integral of f along a curve gamma, length of gamma

A

Stein 21. Compare to Lee 291

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

How can we bound the size of a line integral

A

integral over gamma f(z) dz | <= sup |f(z)| * length(gamma)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Define: primitive of f

A

A function F that is holomorphic on Omega and st F’(z) = f(z) for all z in Omega

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Prove: The Fundamental Theorem for Line Integrals - Complex setting

Corollary?

A

Lee 291, Stein 22, If f has a primitive F in Omega, and gamma is a curve in Omega that begins at w1 and ends at w2, then integral over gamma f(z) dz = F(w2) - F(w1).

If gamma is a closed curve in an open set omega and f is continuous and has a primitive in Omega, then integral over gamma of f(z) dz = 0.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Prove: f(z) = 1/z does not have a primitive in the open set C - {0}.

A

Stein 23. Just integrate it around a simple closed curve - circle - see that not 0. Can’t have primative.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Prove: If f is holomorphic in a region Omega and f’ = 0, then f is constant.

A

Stein 23 - 24

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

What is Goursat’s theorem? Proof

A

Thm. If Omega is an open set in C, and T < Omega a triangle whose interior is also contained in Omega, then

integral_T f(z) dz = 0

whenever f is holomorphic in Omega.

Proof. Create a nested sequence of triangles…stein 34-36

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Prove: A holomorphic function in an open disk has a primitive in that disc

A

pg 37-39

Compare this to Lee 291-292 Fundamental Thm of Line Integrals - exact, closed, conservative

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Prove: Cauchy’s theorem for a disk

How far can we generalize this approach?

A

If f is holomorphic in a disk, then integral_gamma f(z) dz = 0 for any closed curve gamma in that disk.

Proof. Simple application of existence of primitive pg 39

We can find a primitive in any contour that is simple enough to have a clear interior and simple enough s.t. we can construct polygonal paths in an open neighborhood of the contour and its interior

For the most general case, use Jordan curve theorem to show interior of any simple closed piecewise smooth curve is well-defined and simply connected - thus Cauchy holds

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Show e^-pi x^2 is its own Fourier transform

A

pg 42-43

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Discuss representation formulas

A

In particular integral representation formulas - Allow us to recover a function on a large set from its behavior on a smaller set

Examples from complex analysis? Harmonic functions?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Prove: Cauchy's Integral Formula
Thm. Suppose f is holomorphic in an open set that contains the closure of a disk D. If C denotes the boundary circle of this disc with the positive orientation, then f(z) = 1/2pi*i integral_C f(zeta)/(zeta - z) d zeta for any point z in D Pf. 45-47
26
Prove: If f is holomorphic in an open set Omega, then f has infinitely many complex derivatives in Omega. Give representation formula for these derivatives
pg 47 -48
27
What are the Cauchy inequalities? Proof
If f is holomorphic in an open set that contains the closure of a disc D centered at z0 and of radius R, then | f^(n) (z_0) | <= n! ||f||_C / R^n where ||f||_C denotes the supremum of | f | on the boundary circle C. pg 48-49
28
When does a holomorphic function have a power series expansion at z0? Proof? What does this imply about entire functions?
Suppose f is holomorphic in Omega. If D is a disc centered at z0 and whose closure is contained in Omega, then f has a power series expansion at z0 for all z in D... pg 49-50 Proof. Use Cauchy integral formula If f is entire, f has a power series expansion around 0 that converges in all of C
29
Prove: Liouville's Thm
Thm. If f is entire and bounded, then f is constant Proof. Suffices to prove f' = 0. Cauchy Inequalities give | f'(z) < = B/R for all z in C. Take r --> inf pg 50
30
Discuss analytic continuation. Proof?
Says the genetic code of a holomorphic function is determined if we know its values on an appropriate arbitrarily small subset Thm. Suppose f is a holomorphic function in a region Omega that vanishes on a sequence of distinct points with a limit point in Omega. Then f is identically zero. pg 52 Corollary. Suppose f, g holomorphic in Omega and f(z) = g(z) for all z in some nonempty open subset of Omega. Then f(z) = g(z) throughout Omega. In general, this shows the rigidity of holomorphic/analytic functions - giving value on any convergent sequence fully determines f - very different than smooth case
31
Converse to Cauchy's thm?
Morera's thm. Suppose f is a cts function in the open disc D s.t. for any triangle T contained in D, integral_T f(z) dz = 0. Then f is holomorphic. Proof. Clearly has primitive
32
What can we say about sequences of holomorphic functions? Proof?
If we have a sequence of holomorphic functions which converges uniformly to a function f in every compact subset of Omega, then f is holomorphic in Omega. This is significantly stronger than the situation in real variables, were Weierstrass's theorem says every continuous function can be approximated uniformly by polynomials but clearly not every continuous function is differentiable pg 53-54
33
What can we say about holomorphic functions defined in terms of integrals?
Thm 5.4. Essentially: Let f_s(z) be a homotopy of holomorphic functions defined on Omega. Then the function f(z) = integral_0^1 f_s(z) ds is holomorphic Easy proof using Morera and exchanging order of integration - Fubini pg 56
34
What is the Schwarz reflection principle? Proof?
Let Omega be an open subset of C that is symmetric w.r.t. the real line: z in Omega <=> z bar in Omega. Let Omega+ be the part in upper half plane, Omega- in lower half plane, and I = U intersect R. Draw a picture. Symmetry Principle: If f+ and f- are holomorphic functions defined on Omega+ and Omega- that extend continuously to I and agree on I, then the continuous function given by pasting lemma is actually holomorphic. Proof? Morera Notice: That by uniqueness of analytic continuation - this extension is unique. Schwarz reflection principle: Suppose that f is holomorphic in Omega+ and extends continuously to I and is real valued on I> Then there exists a function F holomorphic on all of Omega such that F = f on Omega+.
35
What is Runge's approximation theorem?
Any function holomorphic in a neighborhood of a compact set K can be approximated uniformly on K by rational functions whose singularities are in K^c. If K^c is connected, any function holomorphic in a neighborhood of K can be approximated uniformly on K by polynomials.
36
In general, what determines analytic functions? Meromorphic functions?
Analytic functions = zeros | Meromorphic functions = zeros and poles
37
Define: point singularity
A point singularity of a function f is a complex number z s.t. f is defined in a neighborhood of z but not at the point z itself - aka isolated singularities
38
Why must the zeros of a non-trivial analytic function be isolated?
By analytic continuation, if they were not isolated the function would be zero So if f(z) = 0 we can find a ball around z s.t. f is non zero on the punctured ball B - {z}
39
What does a holomorphic function look like around a zero? proof order, multiplicity? simple?
pg 73 If f is holomorphic with zero at z0 and does not vanish identically on Omega, then f(z) = (z-z0)^n g(z) in an open neighborhood U of z0, where g is non-vanishing holomorphic on U n is the multiplicity or order of the zero. Called simple if order 1 - describes the rate at which the function vanishes
40
Define: pole
A function has a pole at z0 if the function 1/f defined to be zero at z0 us holomorphic in a full neighborhood of z0
41
What does a holomorphic function look like around a pole? Proof? order, multiplicity, simple, principal part, residue
If f has a pole at z0, then in a neighborhood of that point there exists a non-vanishing holomorphic function h and a unique positive integer n s.t. f(z) = (z - z0)^-n h(z) pg 74-75
42
Why is residue important?
All the other terms in principal part have primatives in a deleted neighborhood of z0. So integration of the principal part in any circle centered at z0 yields 2 pi i a_-1 pg 75
43
How can you calculate residues?
In the case when f has a simple pole at z0, just take lim as z ---> z0 of (z-z0)f(z) for higher order pole, involves multiplication by (z-z0)^n and differentiation pg 75-76
44
Discuss the residue formula. Prove
Integrating a holomorphic function around a simple closed curve just yields 2pi*i sum residues pg 76 -77
45
Prove integral over R of 1/1+x^2 = pi
pg 78 - 79
46
Compute the integral of 1/(1+x^4) over R
Kevin
47
Define: removable singularity
Let f be a function holomorphic is an open set Omega except possibly at one point z0 in Omega. If we can define f at z0 in such a way that f becomes holomorphic in all of Omega, we say that z0 is a removable singularity for f.
48
What is Riemann's theorem on removable singularities? Proof?
Suppose that f is holomorphic in an open set Omega except possibly at a point z0 in Omega. If f is bounded on Omega - {z0}, then z0 is a removable singularity. Proof. Choose as small disc D in Omegas centered at z0 and show f(z) = cauchy integral formula on this disc. pg 84 -85
49
Prove: If z0 is an isolated singularity of f, then z0 is a pole <=> | f(z) | --> inf as z --> z0.
From Riemann's theorem on removable singularities pg 85
50
What are the three categories of isolated singularities? Properties?
1. Removable singularities (f bounded near z0) z 2. Pole singularities ( |f(z)| --> inf as z --> z0) 1/z 3. Essential singularities (anything else) e^1/z
51
What is Casorati-Weierstrass? Proof?
Thm. Suppose f is holomorphic in the punctured disc D_r(z0) - {z0} and has an essential singularity at z0. Then the image of D_r(z0) - {z0} under f is dense in the complex plane. Pf. By contradiction. pg 86 Picard proved a much stronger fact
52
Define: meromorphic function, singularities at infinity, meromorphic in the extended complex plane
A function f on an open set Omega is meromorphic if there exists a sequence of points {z0, z1, z2, ... } that has no limit points in Omega and such that 1. the function f is holomorphic on Omega - {z0, z1, z2,. ...} 2. f has poles at the points {z0, z1, z2, ... } Consider F(z) = f(1/z) no holomorphic in a deleted neighborhood of origin. f has pole at infinity if F has pole at origin, similarly for essential and removable singularities. A meromorphic function that is either holomorphic at infinity or has a pole at infinity is s.t.b. meromorphic in the extended complex plane. Think about 1/z as defining chart on Riemann sphere…
53
What are the meromorphic functions in the extended complex plane? Proof?
These are just the rational functions. By compactness, only finitely many poles in extended complex plane. The idea is to subtract from f its principal parts at all its poles, including the one at infinity. Then show that the resulting function is entire and bounded - hence constant by Liouville. Follows that a rational function is determined up to a multiplicative constant by prescribing locations and multiplicities of zeros and poles pg 87
54
What is the argument principle? Proof?
Thm. Suppose f is meromorphic in an open set containing a circle C and its interior. If f has no poles and never vanishes on C, then 1/2pi i integral_C f'(z)/f(z) dz = (number of zeros of f inside C) minus (number of poles of f inside C), where the zeros and poles are counted with their multiplicities. This thm holds for toy contours. pg 90
55
What are three results that follow from argument principle? proofs?
1. Rouche's theorem: Suppose that f and g are holomorphic in an open set containing a circle C and its interior. If | f(z) | > | g(z) |for all z in C, then f and f+g have the same number of zeros inside the circle C. i.e. we can perturb f by g without changing number of zeros. Pf. Consider the homotopy f_t(z) = f(z) + tg(z) from f to f+g. The condition | f(z) | > |g(z)| implies f_t has no zeros on the circle and the argument principle implies n_t = 1/2pi i int_C f'_t(z)/f_t(z) dz is an integer. But n_t is cts so n_t must be constant (otherwise intermediate value thm gives non integer n_t) 2. Open mapping theorem: If f is holomorphic and non-constant in a region Omega, then f is open (maps open sets to open sets). Pf. 3. Maximum modulus principle: If f is a non-constant holomorphic function in a region Omega, then f cannot attain a maximum in Omega. Pf. Suppose that f did attain a maximum at z0. Since f is holomorphic it is an open mapping, and therefore, if D < Omega is a small disc centered at z0, its image f(D) is open and contains f(z0). This proves that there are points z in D s.t. | f(z) | > | f(z0) |, a contradicition. As a corollary, we see that |f(z)| attains its maximum on Omega closure (provided Omega closure compact). pgs 91 -92
56
Discuss homotopies and simply connected domains w.r.t. complex analysis
Thm. If f is holomorphic in Omega, then int_gamma0 f(z) dz = int_gamma_1 f(z) dz whenever the two curves gamma0 and gamma1 are homotopic in Omega. A region is simply connected if pi_1 = 0, iff any two pairs of curves in gamma with the same endpoints are homotopic. Thm. Any holomorphic function in a simply connected domain has a primitive. Pf. Simply connected insures that any definition of a primitive by integrating a path from a basepoint is independent of choice of path Cor. If f is holomorphic in the simply connected region Omega, then integral_gamma f(z) dz = 0 for any closed curve gamma in Omega.
57
What is the natural approach to defining complex logarithm? Problems?
Want log to be inverse of exp. Natural to set log z = log r + i*theta if z = re^i*theta. The problem here is that theta is only uniquely determined up to integer multiples of 2 pi. "Locally" we can give an unambiguous definition of log by fixing some choice of theta and only allowing theta to vary a little bit - will no work globally. Start at 1 and wrap around the origin, we'll get an integer multiple of 2pi*i Not single valued. Must restrict the set on which it is defined - branch/sheet of logarithm
58
When is there a branch of the logarithm?
Thm. Suppose that Omega is simply connected with 1 in Omega and 0 not in Omega. Then in Omega there is a branch of the logarithm F(z) so that 1. F is holomorphic in Omega (ANALYTIC) 2. e^F(z) = z for all z in Omega (INVERSE to EXP) 3. F(r) = log r whenever r is a real number near 1. (EXTENDS REAL LOG) Pf. We just construct F as a primitive of the function f(z) = 1/z which is holomorphic in Omega by choice of Omega. F(z) = integral_gamma f(w) dw where gamma is any curve connecting 1 to z in Omega. Since Omega simply connected, this is well-defined. pg 98
59
What is the principal branch of the logarithm?
Let Omega = C - {(-inf, 0] } be the slit plane. The principal branch of log is defined on Omega by log z = log r + i*theta where z = re^i*theta and |theta| < pi
60
Define: conformal map/biholomorphism
For Stein, these are used interchangeably to mean a bijective holomorphic function f: U --> V. Say U, V are conformally equivalent or biholomorphic pg 206
61
Prove: If f: U --> V is holomorphic and injective, then f'(z) != 0 for all z in U. In particular, the inverse of defined on its range is holomorphic, and thus the inverse of a conformal map is also holomorphic
By contradiction assume f'(z0) = 0 for some z0 in U. pg 206-207
62
Prove: The unit disc is conformally equivalent to the upper half-plane
Let F(z) = (i -z) / (i + z) and G(w) = i (1 - w) / (1 + w). Thm. The map F: H --> D is a conformal map with inverse G : D --> H. Pf. Show F maps into D by observing |F(z)| < 1 and G maps into H by observing Im G(w) > 0. Finally, compute G(F(z)) = z and F(G(w)) = w. Maps like F, G are called fractional linear transformations pg 208-209
63
Examples of conformal mappings?
Recall: conformal really is about the fact that mappings preserve angles. Rotations, translations, dilations etc. The key examples to extract from the list below are: fractional linear transformations, powers, logs, exps, trig 1. Translation z --> z + h 2. Dilations z --> cz where c in R>0 3. Rotations z --> cz where |c| = 1 4. Powers z--> z^n. Define using branch of logarithm. For example, let 0 < alpha < 2, then f(z) = z^alpha takes the upper half plane to the sector S = { w in C : 0 < arg(w) < a*pi}. f(re^i*theta) = r^alpha e^i*alpha*theta 5. f(z) = (1 + z) / (1 - z) takes upper half disc conformally to the first quadrant 6. f(z) = log z defined as the branch of the logarithm obtained by deleting the negative imaginary axis takes the upper half-plane to the strip {w = u + iv | u in R, 0 < v < pi} 7. f(z) = log z also defines a conformal map from the half-disc {z = x + iy : |z| < 1, y > 0} to the half strip {w = u + iv : u < 0, 0 < v < pi} 8. f(z) = e^iz takes the half strip conformally to the half disc
64
What is Schwarz lemma? Proof?
Lemma. Let f : D --> D be holomorphic with f(0) = 0. Then 1. | f(z) | <= | z | for all z in D 2. If for some z0 != 0 we have | f(z0) | = |z0|, then f is a rotation 3. |f'(0)| <= 1, and if equality holds, then f is a rotation Proof. Expand f in power series at 0. Notice f(0) = 0, so a0 = 0 so f(z) / z is holomorphic in D. Everything comes from this... pg 218 - 219
65
Discuss automorphisms of the disc
Every automorphism of the disc (conformal map D --> D) is a rotation after a Blaschke Factor - recall the Blaschke Factor is an involution exchanging 0 and alpha in D. Taking boundary to boundary. Proof. Since f is automorphism, there exists a unique alpha s.t. f(alpha) = 0. Now comes down to a few applications of Schwarz lemma. Corollary. The only automorphisms of the unit disc that fix the origin are the rotations. pgs 219 - 221
66
Discuss automorphisms of the upper half-plane
Use our classification of automorphisms of the disc together with the conformal map F: H --> D, then Gamma(phi) = F^-1 phi F is an isomorphism of automorphism groups Aut(D) to Aut(H). Aut(D) is isomorphic to PSU(1,1) and Aut(H) is isomorphic to PSL(2, R). Try to do all of this by looking at subsets of sphere? pgs 221 - 223
67
Why can there be no conformal map from F: C --> D?
Such a map would be bounded and entire so constant by Liouville's Thm
68
What is the Riemann mapping theorem? Proof?
The basic problem is to determine conditions on an open set Omega that guarantee the existence of a conformal map F : Omega --> D. All we need require is a simple topological property possessed by D: namely Omega must be simply connected. Thm. Suppose Omega is proper (not all of C) and simply connected. If z0 in Omega, then there exists a unique conformal map F: Omega --> D such that F(z0) = 0 and F'(z0) > 0. It follows that any two proper simply connected open subsets in C are conformally equivalent. pgs 224 - 231