Question on holomorphic functions

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter disregardthat
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Functions
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
4 replies · 3K views
Messages
1,864
Reaction score
34
I'm reading through a book on Riemann surfaces, and I tend to get stuck on some of the proofs (maybe because of my lacking background in complex analysis). Anyway, here it goes:

It's a rather lengthy proof, and I'd prefer not to give it in full detail. The question itself is pretty self-contained.

Let h(z) be a holomorphic function from some open subset of [itex]\mathbb{C}[/itex], with h(0) non-zero.

Then why can one find an open disc around 0 such that is [itex]z \mapsto zh(z)[/itex] is biholomorphic onto its image? I.e., why does it have an inverse near 0?

The theorem is about the local behavour of holomorphic functions, basically that one can biholomorphically transform any non-constant holomorphic function to [itex]z \mapsto z^k[/itex] for some integer k > 0 locally around a point.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
this is a corollary of the inverse function theorem. the function g(z) = z.h(z). has derivative at z=0 equal to h(0) ≠ 0, hence looks locally near zero like z-->z.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
I have Raghavan Narasimhan & Yves Nievergelt Complex analysis in one variable, what do you think of it? Considering getting a different book, maybe Cartans.