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

  • Thread starter Thread starter sbashrawi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bounded Function
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves proving that for an analytic function \( f \) defined on the punctured disk \( 0 < |z| < 1 \) with the condition \( |f(z)| \leq 4|z|^{1.1} \), it holds that \( |f(1/2)| \leq 1 \).

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss using the Cauchy integral formula and the implications of the maximum modulus theorem. There are attempts to analyze the function \( f(z)/z \) and its behavior near the boundary of the domain.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered hints regarding the analytic nature of the function and its behavior at the boundary. There is an ongoing exploration of the implications of excluding the point \( z = 0 \) and how it affects the proof. Multiple interpretations of the maximum modulus principle are being considered.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the challenge posed by the exclusion of \( z = 0 \) from the domain and the need to adjust approaches accordingly. The discussion reflects uncertainty about the application of the maximum modulus principle in this context.

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)| [tex]\leq[/tex] 4 at z = 1.

then I don't know how to fugure that | f(1/2)|[tex]\leq[/tex]1
 
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.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K