Proving No Simple Pole at 0 for $f'$ on $\mathbb{D} - \{0\}$

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Dustinsfl
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Pole
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving that there is no analytic function \( f \) on the punctured unit disc \( \mathbb{D} - \{0\} \) such that the derivative \( f' \) has a simple pole at 0. It is established that if \( f(z) = \frac{g(z)}{h(z)} \) with \( h(z) \neq 0 \), then \( f' \) can only have poles of order 2, thus ruling out the possibility of a simple pole at 0. The counterexample \( f(z) = \ln z \) is presented, demonstrating that while \( f \) is analytic on \( \mathbb{D} - \{0\} \), its derivative \( f'(z) = \frac{1}{z} \) does indeed have a simple pole at 0, highlighting the importance of branch points in this context.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of complex analysis concepts, specifically analytic functions.
  • Familiarity with the properties of poles and Laurent series.
  • Knowledge of branch points and their implications in complex functions.
  • Proficiency in differentiation of complex functions.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of Laurent series and their convergence in complex analysis.
  • Learn about branch points and their significance in the context of analytic functions.
  • Explore the implications of poles of different orders in complex function theory.
  • Investigate the relationship between analytic functions and their derivatives in punctured domains.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, particularly those specializing in complex analysis, students studying analytic functions, and researchers exploring the properties of singularities in complex domains.

Dustinsfl
Messages
2,217
Reaction score
5
Prove that there is no function $f$ such that $f$ is analytic on the punctured unit disc $\mathbb{D} - \{0\}$, and $f'$ has a simple pole at 0.

Let $f$ be analytic on the punctured disc $\mathbb{D} - \{0\}$.
$$
f(z) = \frac{g(z)}{h(z)}
$$
such that $h(z)\neq 0$.

Then
$$
f'(z) = \frac{g'(z)h(z) - g(z)h'(z)}{(h(z))^2}
$$

So $f'(z)$ has only poles of order 2. Therefore, $f'$ can't have a simple pole at 0.

How is this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Counterexample: $\displaystyle f(z)=\ln z$ is analytic in $\mathbb{D}-\{0\}$ and is $\displaystyle f'(z)=\frac{1}{z}$...

... the exact formulation of the theorem should be: prove that there is no function f(*) so that f(*) in analytic in the punctured disk $\mathbb{D}-\{0\}$, $\{0\}$ is not a brantch point, and f'(*) has a simple pole at $\{0\}$...

Kind regards

$\chi$ $\sigma$
 
chisigma said:
Counterexample: $\displaystyle f(z)=\ln z$ is analytic in $\mathbb{D}-\{0\}$ and is $\displaystyle f'(z)=\frac{1}{z}$...

... the exact formulation of the theorem should be: prove that there is no function f(*) so that f(*) in analytic in the punctured disk $\mathbb{D}-\{0\}$, $\{0\}$ is not a brantch point, and f'(*) has a simple pole at $\{0\}$...

Kind regards

$\chi$ $\sigma$

Giving that caveat. Would I be correct then?
 
chisigma said:
The existence of singularities called brantch points is too often forgotten. For more information see...

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/BranchPoint.html

Kind regards

$\chi$ $\sigma$

Is what I have correct if I add the branch put argument in then?
 
If $\{0\}$ is not a brantch point, then f(*) can be written as Laurent series 'centered' in $z=0$...

$\displaystyle f(z)= \sum_{n=- \infty}^{+ \infty} a_{n}\ z^{n}$ (1)

Now if we derive (1) we obtain in any case a Laurent series in which is $a_{-1}=0$ so that f'(*) has no single pole in $\{0\}$...

Kind regards

$\chi$ $\sigma$
 
chisigma said:
If $\{0\}$ is not a brantch point, then f(*) can be written as Laurent series 'centered' in $z=0$...

$\displaystyle f(z)= \sum_{n=- \infty}^{+ \infty} a_{n}\ z^{n}$ (1)

Now if we derive (1) we obtain in any case a Laurent series in which is $a_{-1}=0$ so that f'(*) has no single pole in $\{0\}$...

Kind regards

$\chi$ $\sigma$

So we can assume the series is uniformly convergent?
 
chisigma said:
Counterexample: $\displaystyle f(z)=\ln z$ is analytic in $\mathbb{D}-\{0\}$ and is $\displaystyle f'(z)=\frac{1}{z}$...

... the exact formulation of the theorem should be: prove that there is no function f(*) so that f(*) in analytic in the punctured disk $\mathbb{D}-\{0\}$, $\{0\}$ is not a brantch point, and f'(*) has a simple pole at $\{0\}$...

Kind regards

$\chi$ $\sigma$

But the theorem says f has to be analytic on the punctured disc isn't ln z not analytic on it. So the branch point part would be irrelevant.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K