Proving Analyticity of Product of Analytic Functions

  • Thread starter Thread starter MathematicalPhysicist
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Functions Proofs
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the analyticity of the product of two analytic functions, f and g, within a specified interval. The original poster seeks to establish the radius of convergence for the product function fg using Cauchy-Hadamard theorem and related inequalities.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to find the radius of convergence for the product of two analytic functions and discusses the coefficients involved. They also explore inequalities related to the coefficients and question how to establish a lower bound. Some participants question the validity of the original poster's approach and clarify the distinction between product and composition of functions.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different interpretations of the problem. Some guidance has been offered regarding the use of Cauchy's product for absolute convergence, and there is recognition of potential errors in earlier reasoning. Multiple perspectives are being considered without a clear consensus yet.

Contextual Notes

There is an assumption that both functions f and g converge absolutely within a certain radius, and the implications of this assumption are being examined. The original poster expresses uncertainty about their initial approach and seeks clarification on the correct method to prove the statement.

MathematicalPhysicist
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
4,662
Reaction score
372
i need to prove that if f and and g are analytic functions in (-a,a) then so is fg.

well basically i need to find the radius of convergence of fg, which its coefficient is: [tex]c_n=\sum_{i=0}^{n} b_i*a_{n-i}[/tex], by using cauchy hadamard theorom for finding the radius of convergence, and to show that it's not greater than a.
well limsup |c_n|^1/n, then [tex]c_n=a_0b_n+...+a_nb_0[/tex]
now i think that [tex](c_n)^{\frac{1}{n}}<= ((n+1)(\max_{n \in N}(|a_n|,||b_n|))^2)^{1/n}[/tex]
i think this inequality also applies to alternating sequences.
anyway i don't know how bound it below.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
wait a minute i think that's enough iv'e shown that the radius cannot be greater than a.
stupid me. (-;
 
But this isn't true. If f is analytic in some region, then gf is analytic in that region if f maps into some region in which g is analytic. And the converse is certainly false.
 
He's talking about the product of f and g, not the composition.
 
Ah! Now why didn't I think of that? (Suggestions not necessary.)
 
yes I am talking of the prodcut.
anyway, i think this appraoch of mine isn't correct.
i think that bassically in order to prove it you need to use here cauchy's product.
i.e if two partial sums f_n and g_n converges absolutely then also their cauchy's product converges absolutely.
bassically here we assume that both g and f converges in 0<r<a, in [-r,r] they converge absolutely so also their cauchy product converges absolutely at [-r,r].
is this better than my other obvoiusly faulty answer?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K