Grothendieck decompostion simple example

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Jim Kata
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Example
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the Grothendieck decomposition of the function exp{(ω)}, where ω has a simple pole. It establishes that exp{(ω)} can be expressed as exp{(F+)}z^{-1}exp{(F-)}, with F+ being holomorphic and F- antiholomorphic. The participants analyze the implications of ω being represented by a Laurent series on the punctured disk and address the essential singularity of exp(w) at z=0. The conclusion emphasizes the bounded nature of the expression |exp(F+)*exp(F-)/z| near z=0.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of complex analysis, specifically poles and Laurent series.
  • Familiarity with holomorphic and antiholomorphic functions.
  • Knowledge of the properties of exponential functions in complex analysis.
  • Basic concepts of singularities in complex functions.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of Laurent series in complex analysis.
  • Learn about the behavior of holomorphic and antiholomorphic functions.
  • Explore the implications of essential singularities in complex functions.
  • Investigate the applications of Grothendieck decomposition in mathematical analysis.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, particularly those specializing in complex analysis, as well as students seeking to deepen their understanding of function decomposition and singularity behavior in complex functions.

Jim Kata
Messages
198
Reaction score
10
Say you have [tex]exp{(\omega)}[/tex] and [tex]\omega[/tex] has a simple pole show that
[tex]exp{(\omega)}=exp{(F+)}z^{-1}exp{(F-)}[/tex] where F+ is holomorphic and F- is antiholomorphic. My basic thought is if [tex]\omega[/tex] has a simple pole then [tex]\omega z[/tex] is holomorphic and on the punctured disk it can be represented by a Laurant series. The problem is that I'm missing a factor of log on z.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That can't be right - consider w=1/z, so exp(w) has an essential singularity at z=0 and thus hits almost every value in a neighbourhood of 0. But if F+ and F- are holomorphic and antiholomorphic then exp(F+) and exp(F-) would be close to 1 near z=0, which means that |exp(F+)*exp(F-)/z| is bounded from below near z=0.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 104 ·
4
Replies
104
Views
18K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K