Show that the partial sums of a power series have no roots in a disk as n->infty

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the polynomial sequence defined by f_n(z) = ∑(k=0 to n)(1/k!)z^n, demonstrating that for sufficiently large n, f_n(z) has no roots within the disk D_0(100). The analytic convergence of f_n to e^z on the complex plane is established, utilizing a corollary of Rouche's theorem. The argument confirms that the number of roots of f_n in the interior of D_0(100) matches that of e^z, which is zero, thus concluding that f_n(z) has no roots in this region.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of power series and their convergence properties.
  • Familiarity with analytic functions and their behavior in complex analysis.
  • Knowledge of Rouche's theorem and its applications in root counting.
  • Basic concepts of uniform convergence in the context of complex functions.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of Rouche's theorem in more complex scenarios.
  • Explore uniform convergence of sequences of analytic functions in detail.
  • Investigate the properties of compact sets in complex analysis.
  • Learn about bounding techniques for exponential functions on closed disks.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, particularly those specializing in complex analysis, students tackling advanced calculus problems, and anyone interested in the properties of power series and their roots.

michael.wes
Gold Member
Messages
35
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Let f_n(z)=\sum_{k=0}^n\frac{1}{k!}z^n. Show that for sufficiently large n the polynomial f_n(z) has no roots in D_0(100), i.e. the disk of radius 100 centered at 0.


Homework Equations



This is a sequence of analytic functions which converges uniformly to e^z on C.

The Attempt at a Solution



I want to apply the analytic convergence property, and a corollary to Rouche's theorem, which says that if I have two analytic functions on a region, a closed path gamma with interior, homologous to 0 in the region, and |g(z)-f(z)|<|f(z)| for all z in the image of gamma, then the number of roots of g in the interior of gamma is the same as the number of roots of f in the interior of gamma, counting multiplicities.

That looks like a handful, but I think I've basically got it..

Let epsilon = 1. We know that for sufficiently large n,

|f_n(z)-e^z|_im(gamma) <= ||f_n(z)-e^z||_(whole disk) < 1 (arbitrary constant).

But 1 is certainly less that ||e^z||_im(gamma), since ||e^z||_im(gamma) >= |e^100| >> 1.

So f_n and e^z have the same number of roots on the interior, that is, none.

I would appreciate it if someone could check my work, and let me know if there are any holes in the argument. Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
z=(-100) is on the boundary of D_0(100). e^(-100) certainly isn't greater than e^(100)!
 
I can't seem to come up with much after you pointed out the flaw in this argument. Could you give me a hint on how to proceed? The assignment itself says: 'hint: circles are compact sets'. The only use I can think of for this is that f_n converges on closed disks to e^z, and hence uniformly and absolutely to e^z on C, but other than that I'm stuck.

Thanks!
 
michael.wes said:
I can't seem to come up with much after you pointed out the flaw in this argument. Could you give me a hint on how to proceed? The assignment itself says: 'hint: circles are compact sets'. The only use I can think of for this is that f_n converges on closed disks to e^z, and hence uniformly and absolutely to e^z on C, but other than that I'm stuck.

Thanks!

Try to find a much better bound for e^z on the circle of radius 100. You've got the right idea, it's just that your bounds are way off.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
3K