Question about uniform convergence in a proof

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on Proposition 14.5 from David C. Ullrich's "Complex Made Simple," which addresses uniform convergence in the context of conformal mappings. It establishes that for a bounded simply connected open set ##D## and a conformal equivalence ##\phi: D \rightarrow \mathbb{D}##, if ##\zeta## is a simple boundary point, then ##\phi(z_n)## converges to a point ##L## on the boundary of the unit disk ##\partial \mathbb{D}## as ##z_n## approaches ##\zeta##. The proof involves demonstrating that if two subsequences converge to different limits, it leads to a contradiction, thereby confirming uniform convergence. The discussion also highlights the importance of selecting appropriate sequences to ensure convergence properties are maintained.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of conformal mappings and their properties.
  • Familiarity with complex analysis, particularly the concept of simple boundary points.
  • Knowledge of uniform convergence and its implications in analysis.
  • Experience with sequences and subsequences in mathematical proofs.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of conformal mappings in complex analysis.
  • Learn about uniform convergence and its applications in function analysis.
  • Explore the concept of simple boundary points in the context of complex domains.
  • Investigate the implications of the Arzelà-Ascoli theorem on uniform convergence.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, particularly those specializing in complex analysis, graduate students studying advanced calculus, and researchers focusing on the properties of conformal mappings and uniform convergence.

MathLearner123
Messages
25
Reaction score
4
TL;DR
Question about uniform convergence in a proof
The below proposition is from David C. Ullrich's "Complex Made Simple" (pages 264-265)

Proposition 14.5. Suppose ##D## is a bounded simply connected open set in the plane, and let ##\phi: D \rightarrow \mathbb{D}## be a conformal equivalence.

(i) If ##\zeta## is a simple boundary point of ##D## then there exists ##L \in \partial \mathbb{D}## such that ##\phi\left(z_n\right) \rightarrow L## whenever ##\left(z_n\right)## is a sequence in ##D## tending to ##\zeta##. (In other words, ##\phi## can be extended continuously to the set ##D \cup\{\zeta\}##, and the extended function satisfies ##\sigma(\zeta) \in \partial \mathbb{D}##.)

(ii) Suppose that ##\zeta_1## and ##\zeta_2## are two simple boundary points; choose corresponding complex numbers ##L_1## and ##L_2## as in (i). If ##\zeta_1 \neq \zeta_2## then ##L_1 \neq L_2##.

Proof. First we note that if ##\left(z_n\right)## is any sequence in ##D## tending to a point of the boundary then ##\left|\phi\left(z_n\right)\right| \rightarrow 1## : If ##r<1## then ##K=\phi^{-1}(\bar{D}(0, r))## is a compact subset of ##D## and hence there exists ##N## such that ##z_n \notin K## for all ##n>N##; thus ##\left|\phi\left(z_n\right)\right|>r## for every ##n>N##.

Now we prove (i). Suppose that ##\zeta## is a simple boundary point of ##D## and that ##\left(z_n\right)## is a sequence of points of ##D## such that ##z_n \rightarrow \zeta##. Now the compactness of the closed disk shows that there exists ##L \in \overline{\mathbb{D}}## and a subsequence ##\left(z_{n_j}\right)## such that ##\phi\left(z_{n_j}\right) \rightarrow L## (hence ##|L|=1## by the comments in the previous paragraph). To show that ##\phi\left(z_n\right) \rightarrow L## we need only show that every other convergent subsequence of ##\left(\phi\left(z_n\right)\right)## also tends to ##L##.

Suppose not: ##\left(\phi\left(z_n\right)\right)## has two subsequences tending to different limits. Adjusting the notation a bit we may assume that ##\phi\left(z_{2 n}\right) \rightarrow L_1## and ##\phi\left(z_{2 n+1}\right) \rightarrow L_2##, where ##L_j \in \partial \mathbb{D}## and ##L_1 \neq L_2##. Now, since ##\zeta## is a simple boundary point, there exists a continuous curve ##\gamma:[0,1) \rightarrow D## and a sequence ##\left(t_n\right)## in ##[0,1)## such that ##t_n \leq t_{n+1}, t_n \rightarrow 1, \gamma\left(t_n\right)=z_n##, and ##\lim _{t \rightarrow 1} \gamma(t)=\zeta##.

Now let ##\Gamma=\phi \circ \gamma##. Then ##\Gamma:[0,1) \rightarrow \mathbb{D}##, and an argument as above shows that ##|\Gamma(t)| \rightarrow 1## as ##t \rightarrow 1##. But the curve ##\Gamma## does not actually tend to a. single point of ##\partial \mathbb{D}##, since ##\Gamma\left(t_{2 n}\right) \rightarrow L_1## while ##\Gamma\left(t_{2 n+1}\right) \rightarrow L_2##. Thus ##\Gamma## nust actually "cross" some sector ##S## infinitely many times as it tends to ##\partial \mathbb{D}##. So, at least for large ##n##, there exist nunbers ##a_n## and ##b_n## such that ##t_{2 n}<a_n<b_n<t_{2 n+1}, \gamma\left(a_n\right)## lies on one edge of ##S##, ##\gamma\left(b_n\right)## lies on the other edge of ##S##, and ##\gamma\left(\left(a_n, b_n\right)\right)## lies in the interior of ##S##. Let ##\gamma_n=\left.\gamma\right|_{\left[a_n, b_n\right]}##.

Let ##f=\phi^{-1}##. Then ##f \in H(\mathbb{D})## and ##f## is bounded. We have ##f(\Gamma(t)) \rightarrow \zeta## as ##t \rightarrow 1##, since ##f(\Gamma(t))=\gamma(t)##; thus ##f \circ \gamma_n \rightarrow \zeta## uniformly.

I don't understand the last part. How I can prove that uniform convergence? (I think that the author is wrong and it is ##\Gamma_n = \Gamma_{|[a_n, b_n]}## instead of ##\gamma_n## everywhere).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Since the ##\gamma_n## all lie on the curve in ##\mathbb{D}##, the ##f(\gamma_n)## all lie on the curve in ##D##.

I think a slightly missed step here is that you can pick the ##\gamma_n## such that ##|\gamma_n|\to 1##, since the magnitude of the curve in ##\mathbb{D}## approaches 1.

This means that ##f(\gamma_n)## have to lie entirely on the section of the curve in ##D## for which the original ##t## value is very close to 1.

So you have a sequence of functions ##g_n=f(\gamma_n)## for which for every ##\epsilon>0##, there exists ##M## such that ##\forall t, |g_n(t)-\zeta| \leq \sup_{t>1-\epsilon} |f(\gamma(t))-\zeta|## as long as ##n>M##. And the thing on the right goes to zero as epsilon goes to zero
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K