How can we prove that |f(1/2)| <= 1?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sbashrawi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bounded Function
sbashrawi
Messages
49
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Let f ba analytic function on 0< |z| < 1 and suppose |f(z)| <= 4|z|^1.1 for all 0<|z|<1.
Prove that |f(1/2)| <= 1

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



I tried to prove it be cauchy integral formula but I got
|f(1/2)|< 8 r ^1.1 r<1
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hint: Clearly f(0) = 0. The consider f(z)/z, Cearly this functon is analytic and is also zero at z = 0, so we can divide yet again by z. We comnclude that

g(z) = f(z)/z^2

is an analytic function.

What does the Maximum Modulus theorem imply for |g(z)| for
|z|<1 given the bounds on |f(z)|?
 
Count Iblis said:
Hint: Clearly f(0) = 0. The consider f(z)/z, Cearly this functon is analytic and is also zero at z = 0, so we can divide yet again by z.


the function [f(z)]/[z] is not defined at z = 0, so how it can be zero.

and if f(0 ) = 0 but 0 is not in the set. it is a boundary point

Max | f(z)| = Max |f(z)| on the boundary and it is clear that

Max | f(z)| \leq 4 at z = 1.

then I don't know how to fugure that | f(1/2)|\leq1
 
Yes, I see now that the point z = 0 is excluded. I would suggest you to first solve the slightly different problem in which z = 0 is in the domain. If you do that, then it is a trivialy matter to modify the proof to take into account that z = 0 is not in the domain.
 
I think this is not related to the maximum modulus principle since it says that f cannot achieve max. on an open set or it is a constant. If it is constant, then what is the value of this constant?
 
Just close the boundaries at first and then assume that f(z)/z^2 assumes a maximum at the boundary. Then prove the result of this modified problem and then fix the proof by taking into account that the boundary is in fact open. E.g. you can think of placing boundaries a distance of epsilon within the region and then the analogues of the above result will hold. Since epsilon is larger than zero but arbitrary, you will recover the result.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top