Set $f(x)=sum a_n x^n$ , $f$ is well defined on a nonempty set $A$ . If $f(x) = 0$ for all $x in A$ , can we...
$begingroup$
Set $f(x)=sum a_n x^n$ ,$x in C$ . $A$ is a subset of $C$ , $f$ is well defined on $A$ and only on $A$ ,$A-0$ is nonempty. If $f(x) = 0$ for all $x in A$ , can we prove that $a_n=0$ for all $n$ ?
My attempt:
If $B$ is an open set in $A$ , then $f$ has derivatives of all orders in $B$ . Since $f=0$ in $B$ , $f^{(n)}(x)=0$ in $B$ , this implies that $a_n = 0$ .
I'm not sure whether this proof is right , and I think there might have some other direct and rigorous proof .
complex-analysis
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Set $f(x)=sum a_n x^n$ ,$x in C$ . $A$ is a subset of $C$ , $f$ is well defined on $A$ and only on $A$ ,$A-0$ is nonempty. If $f(x) = 0$ for all $x in A$ , can we prove that $a_n=0$ for all $n$ ?
My attempt:
If $B$ is an open set in $A$ , then $f$ has derivatives of all orders in $B$ . Since $f=0$ in $B$ , $f^{(n)}(x)=0$ in $B$ , this implies that $a_n = 0$ .
I'm not sure whether this proof is right , and I think there might have some other direct and rigorous proof .
complex-analysis
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I expect you are talking about $f$ being an infinite sum and $f$ is well-defined as in the series converges?
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 17:27
$begingroup$
Yes , I am learning holomorphic function and power series right now .
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:32
$begingroup$
If all you know is that $A$ is nonempty, this is very false. Consider the fact that $sin(z)=0$ for $zin {kpi: kinBbb Z}$.
$endgroup$
– Ted Shifrin
Dec 19 '18 at 18:30
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Set $f(x)=sum a_n x^n$ ,$x in C$ . $A$ is a subset of $C$ , $f$ is well defined on $A$ and only on $A$ ,$A-0$ is nonempty. If $f(x) = 0$ for all $x in A$ , can we prove that $a_n=0$ for all $n$ ?
My attempt:
If $B$ is an open set in $A$ , then $f$ has derivatives of all orders in $B$ . Since $f=0$ in $B$ , $f^{(n)}(x)=0$ in $B$ , this implies that $a_n = 0$ .
I'm not sure whether this proof is right , and I think there might have some other direct and rigorous proof .
complex-analysis
$endgroup$
Set $f(x)=sum a_n x^n$ ,$x in C$ . $A$ is a subset of $C$ , $f$ is well defined on $A$ and only on $A$ ,$A-0$ is nonempty. If $f(x) = 0$ for all $x in A$ , can we prove that $a_n=0$ for all $n$ ?
My attempt:
If $B$ is an open set in $A$ , then $f$ has derivatives of all orders in $B$ . Since $f=0$ in $B$ , $f^{(n)}(x)=0$ in $B$ , this implies that $a_n = 0$ .
I'm not sure whether this proof is right , and I think there might have some other direct and rigorous proof .
complex-analysis
complex-analysis
edited Dec 19 '18 at 17:35
J.Guo
asked Dec 19 '18 at 17:16
J.GuoJ.Guo
3159
3159
$begingroup$
I expect you are talking about $f$ being an infinite sum and $f$ is well-defined as in the series converges?
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 17:27
$begingroup$
Yes , I am learning holomorphic function and power series right now .
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:32
$begingroup$
If all you know is that $A$ is nonempty, this is very false. Consider the fact that $sin(z)=0$ for $zin {kpi: kinBbb Z}$.
$endgroup$
– Ted Shifrin
Dec 19 '18 at 18:30
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I expect you are talking about $f$ being an infinite sum and $f$ is well-defined as in the series converges?
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 17:27
$begingroup$
Yes , I am learning holomorphic function and power series right now .
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:32
$begingroup$
If all you know is that $A$ is nonempty, this is very false. Consider the fact that $sin(z)=0$ for $zin {kpi: kinBbb Z}$.
$endgroup$
– Ted Shifrin
Dec 19 '18 at 18:30
$begingroup$
I expect you are talking about $f$ being an infinite sum and $f$ is well-defined as in the series converges?
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 17:27
$begingroup$
I expect you are talking about $f$ being an infinite sum and $f$ is well-defined as in the series converges?
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 17:27
$begingroup$
Yes , I am learning holomorphic function and power series right now .
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:32
$begingroup$
Yes , I am learning holomorphic function and power series right now .
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:32
$begingroup$
If all you know is that $A$ is nonempty, this is very false. Consider the fact that $sin(z)=0$ for $zin {kpi: kinBbb Z}$.
$endgroup$
– Ted Shifrin
Dec 19 '18 at 18:30
$begingroup$
If all you know is that $A$ is nonempty, this is very false. Consider the fact that $sin(z)=0$ for $zin {kpi: kinBbb Z}$.
$endgroup$
– Ted Shifrin
Dec 19 '18 at 18:30
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Assume $f(x)=sum a_nx^n$ converges exactly on $Asubsetmathbb{R}$ with $Asetminus{0}neqemptyset$. Let $rin Asetminus{0}$. Because every infinite series has a radius of convergence, such that everything strictly within that radius makes the series converge, while everything strictly outside the radius makes the series diverge, we find that ${xinmathbb{R}:|x|<|r|}subset A$. Because $|r|>0$ we find an interval where the series of $f$ converges.
For the final step, use the fact that an analytic function is entirely defined by its local behaviour. If an analytic function is identically $0$ on some non-discrete set (for example an interval) then all power series coefficients are $0$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I have learned that a holomorphic function is determined by its restriction to any open subset of its domain of definition , but this question seems so obvious , is there an primary proof of this ?
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:40
$begingroup$
I remember being assigned to prove that an analytic function that vanishes on a non-discrete set must have all its power series coefficients $0$. This was pretty tedious. The proof is by induction. If the first $n$ terms are $0$, you can write $f(x)=a_nx^n+x^{n+1}g(x)$ for some analytic $g$. Then use some estimate to show that $g$ is negligable close to $x=0$.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 18:20
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I don't think the set necessarily has to have any topology on it, so we can create counterexamples where the idea of an "open" set doesn't make any sense. For example, if $A=mathbb{F}_2$, we can choose $a_0=0,a_1=a_2=1$ to get
$$x+x^2,$$
a polynomial which is identically $0$ on $mathbb{F}_2$ but still has nonzero coefficients.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I believe the OP means that $f$ is well-defined on $A$ and only on $A$, so if $f(x)=x^2+x$ then $A=mathbb{R}$.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 17:22
$begingroup$
@SmileyCraft The (implied) coefficient of $1$ here on each of $x$ and $x^2$ is the multiplicative identify in $mathbb{F}_2$, not in $mathbb{R}$. This polynomial is thus not defined anywhere outside of $mathbb{F}_2$.
$endgroup$
– Carl Schildkraut
Dec 19 '18 at 17:25
$begingroup$
@ SmileyCraft Yes , I will edit my question.
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:26
$begingroup$
@CarlSchildkraut I believe the OP also was talking about real-valued functions.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 17:26
$begingroup$
I want to talk about the real-valued function or the complexed function , but I'm not sure how to edit to show this .
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:30
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
For simplicity, I will assume $A$ is connected otherwise repeat the proof to each component. Observe first that if $f(z)$ is analytic on $A$, then it has an open neighborhood where it's analytic on so $A$ has infinitely many elements. I will even weaken the assumptions given and only use that we need a limit point inside $A$ (this is known as the identity theorem).
So by Heine-Borel, we know there exists a limit point $z^*$ inside $A$ such that $f(z_k) = 0$ for all $z_k rightarrow z^{*}$. Then by analyticity begin{equation} f(z) = a_k(z-z^*)^k + sum_{n=0}^{infty} a_{k+1+n}(z-z^*)^{k+1+n} end{equation} where $k$ is chosen as the minimal integer such that $a_k neq 0$ (otherwise we'll be done). Then begin{equation} frac{f(z)}{(z-z^*)^k} = a_k + sum_{n=0}^{infty} a_{n+1+k}(z-z^*)^{n+1} end{equation} But observe as for all $z_j$ the left hand side is 0, we see by continuity at $z=z^*$, the left hand side is 0. But at $z^*$ the sum is 0, so it implies $a_k$ must be zero; therefore, we have a contradiction. In particular, this shows that every point where the power series of $z^*$ converges is identically 0.
In particular we have shown that $U = {z: f(z) = 0}$ is open. But also since $f$ is continuous, so the pre-image of a singleton must be closed, which means $U$ is closed, open and non-empty. Then as $A$ is connected (or repeat the proof to each connected component), we see $U = A$. So $f$ is identically $0$ over A.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
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%2f3046628%2fset-fx-sum-a-n-xn-f-is-well-defined-on-a-nonempty-set-a-if-fx%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Assume $f(x)=sum a_nx^n$ converges exactly on $Asubsetmathbb{R}$ with $Asetminus{0}neqemptyset$. Let $rin Asetminus{0}$. Because every infinite series has a radius of convergence, such that everything strictly within that radius makes the series converge, while everything strictly outside the radius makes the series diverge, we find that ${xinmathbb{R}:|x|<|r|}subset A$. Because $|r|>0$ we find an interval where the series of $f$ converges.
For the final step, use the fact that an analytic function is entirely defined by its local behaviour. If an analytic function is identically $0$ on some non-discrete set (for example an interval) then all power series coefficients are $0$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I have learned that a holomorphic function is determined by its restriction to any open subset of its domain of definition , but this question seems so obvious , is there an primary proof of this ?
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:40
$begingroup$
I remember being assigned to prove that an analytic function that vanishes on a non-discrete set must have all its power series coefficients $0$. This was pretty tedious. The proof is by induction. If the first $n$ terms are $0$, you can write $f(x)=a_nx^n+x^{n+1}g(x)$ for some analytic $g$. Then use some estimate to show that $g$ is negligable close to $x=0$.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 18:20
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Assume $f(x)=sum a_nx^n$ converges exactly on $Asubsetmathbb{R}$ with $Asetminus{0}neqemptyset$. Let $rin Asetminus{0}$. Because every infinite series has a radius of convergence, such that everything strictly within that radius makes the series converge, while everything strictly outside the radius makes the series diverge, we find that ${xinmathbb{R}:|x|<|r|}subset A$. Because $|r|>0$ we find an interval where the series of $f$ converges.
For the final step, use the fact that an analytic function is entirely defined by its local behaviour. If an analytic function is identically $0$ on some non-discrete set (for example an interval) then all power series coefficients are $0$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I have learned that a holomorphic function is determined by its restriction to any open subset of its domain of definition , but this question seems so obvious , is there an primary proof of this ?
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:40
$begingroup$
I remember being assigned to prove that an analytic function that vanishes on a non-discrete set must have all its power series coefficients $0$. This was pretty tedious. The proof is by induction. If the first $n$ terms are $0$, you can write $f(x)=a_nx^n+x^{n+1}g(x)$ for some analytic $g$. Then use some estimate to show that $g$ is negligable close to $x=0$.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 18:20
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Assume $f(x)=sum a_nx^n$ converges exactly on $Asubsetmathbb{R}$ with $Asetminus{0}neqemptyset$. Let $rin Asetminus{0}$. Because every infinite series has a radius of convergence, such that everything strictly within that radius makes the series converge, while everything strictly outside the radius makes the series diverge, we find that ${xinmathbb{R}:|x|<|r|}subset A$. Because $|r|>0$ we find an interval where the series of $f$ converges.
For the final step, use the fact that an analytic function is entirely defined by its local behaviour. If an analytic function is identically $0$ on some non-discrete set (for example an interval) then all power series coefficients are $0$.
$endgroup$
Assume $f(x)=sum a_nx^n$ converges exactly on $Asubsetmathbb{R}$ with $Asetminus{0}neqemptyset$. Let $rin Asetminus{0}$. Because every infinite series has a radius of convergence, such that everything strictly within that radius makes the series converge, while everything strictly outside the radius makes the series diverge, we find that ${xinmathbb{R}:|x|<|r|}subset A$. Because $|r|>0$ we find an interval where the series of $f$ converges.
For the final step, use the fact that an analytic function is entirely defined by its local behaviour. If an analytic function is identically $0$ on some non-discrete set (for example an interval) then all power series coefficients are $0$.
answered Dec 19 '18 at 17:35
SmileyCraftSmileyCraft
3,531517
3,531517
$begingroup$
I have learned that a holomorphic function is determined by its restriction to any open subset of its domain of definition , but this question seems so obvious , is there an primary proof of this ?
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:40
$begingroup$
I remember being assigned to prove that an analytic function that vanishes on a non-discrete set must have all its power series coefficients $0$. This was pretty tedious. The proof is by induction. If the first $n$ terms are $0$, you can write $f(x)=a_nx^n+x^{n+1}g(x)$ for some analytic $g$. Then use some estimate to show that $g$ is negligable close to $x=0$.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 18:20
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I have learned that a holomorphic function is determined by its restriction to any open subset of its domain of definition , but this question seems so obvious , is there an primary proof of this ?
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:40
$begingroup$
I remember being assigned to prove that an analytic function that vanishes on a non-discrete set must have all its power series coefficients $0$. This was pretty tedious. The proof is by induction. If the first $n$ terms are $0$, you can write $f(x)=a_nx^n+x^{n+1}g(x)$ for some analytic $g$. Then use some estimate to show that $g$ is negligable close to $x=0$.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 18:20
$begingroup$
I have learned that a holomorphic function is determined by its restriction to any open subset of its domain of definition , but this question seems so obvious , is there an primary proof of this ?
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:40
$begingroup$
I have learned that a holomorphic function is determined by its restriction to any open subset of its domain of definition , but this question seems so obvious , is there an primary proof of this ?
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:40
$begingroup$
I remember being assigned to prove that an analytic function that vanishes on a non-discrete set must have all its power series coefficients $0$. This was pretty tedious. The proof is by induction. If the first $n$ terms are $0$, you can write $f(x)=a_nx^n+x^{n+1}g(x)$ for some analytic $g$. Then use some estimate to show that $g$ is negligable close to $x=0$.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 18:20
$begingroup$
I remember being assigned to prove that an analytic function that vanishes on a non-discrete set must have all its power series coefficients $0$. This was pretty tedious. The proof is by induction. If the first $n$ terms are $0$, you can write $f(x)=a_nx^n+x^{n+1}g(x)$ for some analytic $g$. Then use some estimate to show that $g$ is negligable close to $x=0$.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 18:20
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I don't think the set necessarily has to have any topology on it, so we can create counterexamples where the idea of an "open" set doesn't make any sense. For example, if $A=mathbb{F}_2$, we can choose $a_0=0,a_1=a_2=1$ to get
$$x+x^2,$$
a polynomial which is identically $0$ on $mathbb{F}_2$ but still has nonzero coefficients.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I believe the OP means that $f$ is well-defined on $A$ and only on $A$, so if $f(x)=x^2+x$ then $A=mathbb{R}$.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 17:22
$begingroup$
@SmileyCraft The (implied) coefficient of $1$ here on each of $x$ and $x^2$ is the multiplicative identify in $mathbb{F}_2$, not in $mathbb{R}$. This polynomial is thus not defined anywhere outside of $mathbb{F}_2$.
$endgroup$
– Carl Schildkraut
Dec 19 '18 at 17:25
$begingroup$
@ SmileyCraft Yes , I will edit my question.
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:26
$begingroup$
@CarlSchildkraut I believe the OP also was talking about real-valued functions.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 17:26
$begingroup$
I want to talk about the real-valued function or the complexed function , but I'm not sure how to edit to show this .
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:30
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
I don't think the set necessarily has to have any topology on it, so we can create counterexamples where the idea of an "open" set doesn't make any sense. For example, if $A=mathbb{F}_2$, we can choose $a_0=0,a_1=a_2=1$ to get
$$x+x^2,$$
a polynomial which is identically $0$ on $mathbb{F}_2$ but still has nonzero coefficients.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I believe the OP means that $f$ is well-defined on $A$ and only on $A$, so if $f(x)=x^2+x$ then $A=mathbb{R}$.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 17:22
$begingroup$
@SmileyCraft The (implied) coefficient of $1$ here on each of $x$ and $x^2$ is the multiplicative identify in $mathbb{F}_2$, not in $mathbb{R}$. This polynomial is thus not defined anywhere outside of $mathbb{F}_2$.
$endgroup$
– Carl Schildkraut
Dec 19 '18 at 17:25
$begingroup$
@ SmileyCraft Yes , I will edit my question.
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:26
$begingroup$
@CarlSchildkraut I believe the OP also was talking about real-valued functions.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 17:26
$begingroup$
I want to talk about the real-valued function or the complexed function , but I'm not sure how to edit to show this .
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:30
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
I don't think the set necessarily has to have any topology on it, so we can create counterexamples where the idea of an "open" set doesn't make any sense. For example, if $A=mathbb{F}_2$, we can choose $a_0=0,a_1=a_2=1$ to get
$$x+x^2,$$
a polynomial which is identically $0$ on $mathbb{F}_2$ but still has nonzero coefficients.
$endgroup$
I don't think the set necessarily has to have any topology on it, so we can create counterexamples where the idea of an "open" set doesn't make any sense. For example, if $A=mathbb{F}_2$, we can choose $a_0=0,a_1=a_2=1$ to get
$$x+x^2,$$
a polynomial which is identically $0$ on $mathbb{F}_2$ but still has nonzero coefficients.
answered Dec 19 '18 at 17:21
Carl SchildkrautCarl Schildkraut
11.3k11441
11.3k11441
$begingroup$
I believe the OP means that $f$ is well-defined on $A$ and only on $A$, so if $f(x)=x^2+x$ then $A=mathbb{R}$.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 17:22
$begingroup$
@SmileyCraft The (implied) coefficient of $1$ here on each of $x$ and $x^2$ is the multiplicative identify in $mathbb{F}_2$, not in $mathbb{R}$. This polynomial is thus not defined anywhere outside of $mathbb{F}_2$.
$endgroup$
– Carl Schildkraut
Dec 19 '18 at 17:25
$begingroup$
@ SmileyCraft Yes , I will edit my question.
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:26
$begingroup$
@CarlSchildkraut I believe the OP also was talking about real-valued functions.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 17:26
$begingroup$
I want to talk about the real-valued function or the complexed function , but I'm not sure how to edit to show this .
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:30
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
I believe the OP means that $f$ is well-defined on $A$ and only on $A$, so if $f(x)=x^2+x$ then $A=mathbb{R}$.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 17:22
$begingroup$
@SmileyCraft The (implied) coefficient of $1$ here on each of $x$ and $x^2$ is the multiplicative identify in $mathbb{F}_2$, not in $mathbb{R}$. This polynomial is thus not defined anywhere outside of $mathbb{F}_2$.
$endgroup$
– Carl Schildkraut
Dec 19 '18 at 17:25
$begingroup$
@ SmileyCraft Yes , I will edit my question.
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:26
$begingroup$
@CarlSchildkraut I believe the OP also was talking about real-valued functions.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 17:26
$begingroup$
I want to talk about the real-valued function or the complexed function , but I'm not sure how to edit to show this .
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:30
$begingroup$
I believe the OP means that $f$ is well-defined on $A$ and only on $A$, so if $f(x)=x^2+x$ then $A=mathbb{R}$.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 17:22
$begingroup$
I believe the OP means that $f$ is well-defined on $A$ and only on $A$, so if $f(x)=x^2+x$ then $A=mathbb{R}$.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 17:22
$begingroup$
@SmileyCraft The (implied) coefficient of $1$ here on each of $x$ and $x^2$ is the multiplicative identify in $mathbb{F}_2$, not in $mathbb{R}$. This polynomial is thus not defined anywhere outside of $mathbb{F}_2$.
$endgroup$
– Carl Schildkraut
Dec 19 '18 at 17:25
$begingroup$
@SmileyCraft The (implied) coefficient of $1$ here on each of $x$ and $x^2$ is the multiplicative identify in $mathbb{F}_2$, not in $mathbb{R}$. This polynomial is thus not defined anywhere outside of $mathbb{F}_2$.
$endgroup$
– Carl Schildkraut
Dec 19 '18 at 17:25
$begingroup$
@ SmileyCraft Yes , I will edit my question.
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:26
$begingroup$
@ SmileyCraft Yes , I will edit my question.
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:26
$begingroup$
@CarlSchildkraut I believe the OP also was talking about real-valued functions.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 17:26
$begingroup$
@CarlSchildkraut I believe the OP also was talking about real-valued functions.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 17:26
$begingroup$
I want to talk about the real-valued function or the complexed function , but I'm not sure how to edit to show this .
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:30
$begingroup$
I want to talk about the real-valued function or the complexed function , but I'm not sure how to edit to show this .
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:30
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
For simplicity, I will assume $A$ is connected otherwise repeat the proof to each component. Observe first that if $f(z)$ is analytic on $A$, then it has an open neighborhood where it's analytic on so $A$ has infinitely many elements. I will even weaken the assumptions given and only use that we need a limit point inside $A$ (this is known as the identity theorem).
So by Heine-Borel, we know there exists a limit point $z^*$ inside $A$ such that $f(z_k) = 0$ for all $z_k rightarrow z^{*}$. Then by analyticity begin{equation} f(z) = a_k(z-z^*)^k + sum_{n=0}^{infty} a_{k+1+n}(z-z^*)^{k+1+n} end{equation} where $k$ is chosen as the minimal integer such that $a_k neq 0$ (otherwise we'll be done). Then begin{equation} frac{f(z)}{(z-z^*)^k} = a_k + sum_{n=0}^{infty} a_{n+1+k}(z-z^*)^{n+1} end{equation} But observe as for all $z_j$ the left hand side is 0, we see by continuity at $z=z^*$, the left hand side is 0. But at $z^*$ the sum is 0, so it implies $a_k$ must be zero; therefore, we have a contradiction. In particular, this shows that every point where the power series of $z^*$ converges is identically 0.
In particular we have shown that $U = {z: f(z) = 0}$ is open. But also since $f$ is continuous, so the pre-image of a singleton must be closed, which means $U$ is closed, open and non-empty. Then as $A$ is connected (or repeat the proof to each connected component), we see $U = A$. So $f$ is identically $0$ over A.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For simplicity, I will assume $A$ is connected otherwise repeat the proof to each component. Observe first that if $f(z)$ is analytic on $A$, then it has an open neighborhood where it's analytic on so $A$ has infinitely many elements. I will even weaken the assumptions given and only use that we need a limit point inside $A$ (this is known as the identity theorem).
So by Heine-Borel, we know there exists a limit point $z^*$ inside $A$ such that $f(z_k) = 0$ for all $z_k rightarrow z^{*}$. Then by analyticity begin{equation} f(z) = a_k(z-z^*)^k + sum_{n=0}^{infty} a_{k+1+n}(z-z^*)^{k+1+n} end{equation} where $k$ is chosen as the minimal integer such that $a_k neq 0$ (otherwise we'll be done). Then begin{equation} frac{f(z)}{(z-z^*)^k} = a_k + sum_{n=0}^{infty} a_{n+1+k}(z-z^*)^{n+1} end{equation} But observe as for all $z_j$ the left hand side is 0, we see by continuity at $z=z^*$, the left hand side is 0. But at $z^*$ the sum is 0, so it implies $a_k$ must be zero; therefore, we have a contradiction. In particular, this shows that every point where the power series of $z^*$ converges is identically 0.
In particular we have shown that $U = {z: f(z) = 0}$ is open. But also since $f$ is continuous, so the pre-image of a singleton must be closed, which means $U$ is closed, open and non-empty. Then as $A$ is connected (or repeat the proof to each connected component), we see $U = A$. So $f$ is identically $0$ over A.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For simplicity, I will assume $A$ is connected otherwise repeat the proof to each component. Observe first that if $f(z)$ is analytic on $A$, then it has an open neighborhood where it's analytic on so $A$ has infinitely many elements. I will even weaken the assumptions given and only use that we need a limit point inside $A$ (this is known as the identity theorem).
So by Heine-Borel, we know there exists a limit point $z^*$ inside $A$ such that $f(z_k) = 0$ for all $z_k rightarrow z^{*}$. Then by analyticity begin{equation} f(z) = a_k(z-z^*)^k + sum_{n=0}^{infty} a_{k+1+n}(z-z^*)^{k+1+n} end{equation} where $k$ is chosen as the minimal integer such that $a_k neq 0$ (otherwise we'll be done). Then begin{equation} frac{f(z)}{(z-z^*)^k} = a_k + sum_{n=0}^{infty} a_{n+1+k}(z-z^*)^{n+1} end{equation} But observe as for all $z_j$ the left hand side is 0, we see by continuity at $z=z^*$, the left hand side is 0. But at $z^*$ the sum is 0, so it implies $a_k$ must be zero; therefore, we have a contradiction. In particular, this shows that every point where the power series of $z^*$ converges is identically 0.
In particular we have shown that $U = {z: f(z) = 0}$ is open. But also since $f$ is continuous, so the pre-image of a singleton must be closed, which means $U$ is closed, open and non-empty. Then as $A$ is connected (or repeat the proof to each connected component), we see $U = A$. So $f$ is identically $0$ over A.
$endgroup$
For simplicity, I will assume $A$ is connected otherwise repeat the proof to each component. Observe first that if $f(z)$ is analytic on $A$, then it has an open neighborhood where it's analytic on so $A$ has infinitely many elements. I will even weaken the assumptions given and only use that we need a limit point inside $A$ (this is known as the identity theorem).
So by Heine-Borel, we know there exists a limit point $z^*$ inside $A$ such that $f(z_k) = 0$ for all $z_k rightarrow z^{*}$. Then by analyticity begin{equation} f(z) = a_k(z-z^*)^k + sum_{n=0}^{infty} a_{k+1+n}(z-z^*)^{k+1+n} end{equation} where $k$ is chosen as the minimal integer such that $a_k neq 0$ (otherwise we'll be done). Then begin{equation} frac{f(z)}{(z-z^*)^k} = a_k + sum_{n=0}^{infty} a_{n+1+k}(z-z^*)^{n+1} end{equation} But observe as for all $z_j$ the left hand side is 0, we see by continuity at $z=z^*$, the left hand side is 0. But at $z^*$ the sum is 0, so it implies $a_k$ must be zero; therefore, we have a contradiction. In particular, this shows that every point where the power series of $z^*$ converges is identically 0.
In particular we have shown that $U = {z: f(z) = 0}$ is open. But also since $f$ is continuous, so the pre-image of a singleton must be closed, which means $U$ is closed, open and non-empty. Then as $A$ is connected (or repeat the proof to each connected component), we see $U = A$. So $f$ is identically $0$ over A.
answered Dec 19 '18 at 18:27
Story123Story123
22017
22017
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
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%2f3046628%2fset-fx-sum-a-n-xn-f-is-well-defined-on-a-nonempty-set-a-if-fx%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
$begingroup$
I expect you are talking about $f$ being an infinite sum and $f$ is well-defined as in the series converges?
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 19 '18 at 17:27
$begingroup$
Yes , I am learning holomorphic function and power series right now .
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Dec 19 '18 at 17:32
$begingroup$
If all you know is that $A$ is nonempty, this is very false. Consider the fact that $sin(z)=0$ for $zin {kpi: kinBbb Z}$.
$endgroup$
– Ted Shifrin
Dec 19 '18 at 18:30