Without using Reimann Mapping theorem , How to argue conformal maps does not exist?
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Without using Reimann Mapping theorem , How to argue conformal maps does not exist ?
1) For $mathbb C/${0}$to mathbb D$
I know first set is not simply connected .But need to argue without using RMT.
I tried to Liovellies theorem but as function is not entire, I could not applied.
I also tried reverse direction I know that any non vanishing function is of form $e^{f(z)}$ for some holomorphic function f(z).
Please suggest some natural strategy to tackle such problem?
Any Help will be appreciated
complex-analysis
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Without using Reimann Mapping theorem , How to argue conformal maps does not exist ?
1) For $mathbb C/${0}$to mathbb D$
I know first set is not simply connected .But need to argue without using RMT.
I tried to Liovellies theorem but as function is not entire, I could not applied.
I also tried reverse direction I know that any non vanishing function is of form $e^{f(z)}$ for some holomorphic function f(z).
Please suggest some natural strategy to tackle such problem?
Any Help will be appreciated
complex-analysis
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Without using Reimann Mapping theorem , How to argue conformal maps does not exist ?
1) For $mathbb C/${0}$to mathbb D$
I know first set is not simply connected .But need to argue without using RMT.
I tried to Liovellies theorem but as function is not entire, I could not applied.
I also tried reverse direction I know that any non vanishing function is of form $e^{f(z)}$ for some holomorphic function f(z).
Please suggest some natural strategy to tackle such problem?
Any Help will be appreciated
complex-analysis
Without using Reimann Mapping theorem , How to argue conformal maps does not exist ?
1) For $mathbb C/${0}$to mathbb D$
I know first set is not simply connected .But need to argue without using RMT.
I tried to Liovellies theorem but as function is not entire, I could not applied.
I also tried reverse direction I know that any non vanishing function is of form $e^{f(z)}$ for some holomorphic function f(z).
Please suggest some natural strategy to tackle such problem?
Any Help will be appreciated
complex-analysis
complex-analysis
edited Nov 19 at 11:43
asked Nov 19 at 11:38
Shubham
1,4641519
1,4641519
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Let $f : mathbb C setminus {0} to mathbb D$ holomorphic. Then $0$ is an isolated singularity of $f$ and $f$ is bounded. Hence, $0$ is a removable singularity of $f$. Therefore there is a entire function $g$ such that $f(z)=g(z)$ for all $z ne 0$. Then $g$ is bounded and by Liouville $g$ is constant. Thus $f$ is constant.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
You can extend such a map to the whole $mathbb{C}$ by the classification of singularities. So you get a contradiction from Louville's Theorem.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
If a conformal map existed then it would be invertible, under which function the image of $mathbb D$ would have to be simply connected.
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Let $f : mathbb C setminus {0} to mathbb D$ holomorphic. Then $0$ is an isolated singularity of $f$ and $f$ is bounded. Hence, $0$ is a removable singularity of $f$. Therefore there is a entire function $g$ such that $f(z)=g(z)$ for all $z ne 0$. Then $g$ is bounded and by Liouville $g$ is constant. Thus $f$ is constant.
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Let $f : mathbb C setminus {0} to mathbb D$ holomorphic. Then $0$ is an isolated singularity of $f$ and $f$ is bounded. Hence, $0$ is a removable singularity of $f$. Therefore there is a entire function $g$ such that $f(z)=g(z)$ for all $z ne 0$. Then $g$ is bounded and by Liouville $g$ is constant. Thus $f$ is constant.
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Let $f : mathbb C setminus {0} to mathbb D$ holomorphic. Then $0$ is an isolated singularity of $f$ and $f$ is bounded. Hence, $0$ is a removable singularity of $f$. Therefore there is a entire function $g$ such that $f(z)=g(z)$ for all $z ne 0$. Then $g$ is bounded and by Liouville $g$ is constant. Thus $f$ is constant.
Let $f : mathbb C setminus {0} to mathbb D$ holomorphic. Then $0$ is an isolated singularity of $f$ and $f$ is bounded. Hence, $0$ is a removable singularity of $f$. Therefore there is a entire function $g$ such that $f(z)=g(z)$ for all $z ne 0$. Then $g$ is bounded and by Liouville $g$ is constant. Thus $f$ is constant.
answered Nov 19 at 11:49
Fred
42.6k1642
42.6k1642
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
You can extend such a map to the whole $mathbb{C}$ by the classification of singularities. So you get a contradiction from Louville's Theorem.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
You can extend such a map to the whole $mathbb{C}$ by the classification of singularities. So you get a contradiction from Louville's Theorem.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
You can extend such a map to the whole $mathbb{C}$ by the classification of singularities. So you get a contradiction from Louville's Theorem.
You can extend such a map to the whole $mathbb{C}$ by the classification of singularities. So you get a contradiction from Louville's Theorem.
answered Nov 19 at 11:46
Dante Grevino
5017
5017
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
If a conformal map existed then it would be invertible, under which function the image of $mathbb D$ would have to be simply connected.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
If a conformal map existed then it would be invertible, under which function the image of $mathbb D$ would have to be simply connected.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
If a conformal map existed then it would be invertible, under which function the image of $mathbb D$ would have to be simply connected.
If a conformal map existed then it would be invertible, under which function the image of $mathbb D$ would have to be simply connected.
answered Nov 19 at 11:45
Richard Martin
1,5868
1,5868
add a comment |
add a comment |
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3004818%2fwithout-using-reimann-mapping-theorem-how-to-argue-conformal-maps-does-not-exi%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown