Topics in Complex Analysis Mats Andersson PDF

TOPICS IN
COMPLEX
ANALYSIS
Universitext: Tracts in Mathematics
Editorial Board
(North America):
S. Axler
F.W. Gehring
P.R. Halmos
Springer
New York
Berlin
Heidelberg
Barcelona
Budapest
Hong Kong
London
Milan
Paris
Santa Clara
Singapore
Tokyo
Universitext
Editors (North America): S. Axler, F.W. Gehring, and P.R. Halmos
Aksoy/Khamsi: Nonstandard Methods in Fixed Point Theory

Andersson: Topics in Complex Analysis
Aupetit: A Primer on Spectral Theory
BoossBleecker: Topology and Analysis
Borkar: Probability Theory: An Advanced Course
Carleson/Gamelin: Complex Dynamics
Cecil: Lie Sphere Geometry: With Applications to Submanifolds
Chae: Lebesgue Integration (2nd ed.)
Charlap: Bieberbach Groups and Flat Manifolds
Chern: Complex Manifolds Without Potential Theory
Cohn: A Classical Invitation to Algebraic Numbers and Class Fields
Curtis: Abstract Linear Algebra
Curtis: Matrix Groups
DiBenedetto: Degenerate Parabolic Equations
Dimes: Singularities and Topology of Hypersurfaces
Edwards: A Formal Background to Mathematics I alb
Edwards- A Formal Background to Mathematics II alb
Foulds: Graph Theory Applications
Fuhrmann: A Polynomial Approach to Linear Algebra
Gardiner: A First Course in Group Theory
G3rdinglrambour: Algebra for Computer Science
Goldblatt: Orthogonality and Spacetime Geometry
Gustafson/Rao: Numerical Range: The Field of Values of Linear Operators and
Matrices
Hahn: Quadratic Algebras, Clifford Algebras. and Arithmetic Witt Groups
Holmgren: A First Course in Discrete Dynamical Systems
Howe/ran: Non-Abelian Harmonic Analysis: Applications of .5L(2, R)
Howes: Modern Analysis and Topology
Humi/Miller: Second Course in Ordinary Differential Equations
Hurwltz/Kritikos: Lectures on Number Theory
Jennings: Modem Geometry with Applications
Jones/Morris/Pearson: Abstract Algebra and Famous Impossibilities
Kannan/Krueger: Advanced Analysis
Kelly/Matthews: The Non-Euclidean Hyperbolic Plane
Kostrikin: Introduction to Algebra
Luecking/Rubel: Complex Analysis: A Functional Analysis Approach
MacLane/Moerdijk: Sheaves in Geometry and Logic
Marcus: Number Fields
McCarthy: Introduction to Arithmetical Functions
Meyer: Essential Mathematics for Applied Fields
Mines/Richman/Ruitenburg: A Course in Constructive Algebra
Molse: Introductory Problems Course in Analysis and Topology
Morris: Introduction to Game Theory
Porter/Woods. Extensions and Absolutes of Hausdorff Spaces
Ramsay/Richtmyer: Introduction to Hyperbolic Geometry
Reisel: Elementary Theory of Metric Spaces
Rickart: Natural Function Algebras
(continued after index)

Mats Andersson
Topics in
Complex Analysis
Springer
Mats Andersson
Department of Mathematics
Chalmers University of Technology
Goteborg University
S-412 96 Goteborg
Sweden
Editorial Board (North America):

S. Axler F.W. Gehring P.R. Halmos
Department of Department of Department of
Mathematics Mathematics Mathematics
Michigan State University of Michigan Santa Clara University
University Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Santa Clara, CA 95053
East Lansing, MI 48824 USA USA
USA
Mathematics Subject Classification (1991): 30-01, 30C20, 30C15, 32A35
With 4 figures.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Andersson, Mats.
Topics in complex analysis/Mats Andersson.
p. cm. - (Universitext)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-387-94754-X (soft: alk. paper)
1. Functions of complex variables. 2. Mathematical analysis.
1. Title.
QA331.7.A52 1996
515'.9-dc20 96-11793
Printed on acid-free paper.
1997 Springer-Verlag New York, Inc.

All rights reserved. This work may not be translated or copied in whole or in part
without the written permission of the publisher (Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., 175
Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10010, USA), except for brief excerpts in connection with
reviews or scholarly analysis. Use in connection with any form of information storage
and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar meth-
odology now known or hereafter developed is forbidden.
The use of general descriptive names, trade names, trademarks, etc., in this publication,
even if the former are not especially identified, is not to be taken as a sign that such
names, as understood by the Trade Marks and Merchandise Marks Act, may accord-
ingly be used freely by anyone.
Production managed by Francine McNeill; manufacturing supervised by Jeffrey Taub.
Photocomposed copy prepared from the authors AMS-TeX files.
Printed and bound by Braun-Brumfield, Inc., Ann Arbor, MI.
Printed in the United States of America.
987654321
ISBN 0-387.94754-X Springer-Verlag New York Berlin Heidelberg SPIN 10524446
Preface
This book is an outgrowth of lectures given on several occasions at Chalmers

University of Technology and Goteborg University during the last ten years.
As opposed to most introductory books on complex analysis, this one as-
sumes that the reader has previous knowledge of basic real analysis. This
makes it possible to follow a rather quick route through the most fundamen-
tal material on the subject in order to move ahead to reach some classical
highlights (such as Fatou theorems and some Nevanlinna theory), as well
as some more recent topics (for example, the corona theorem and the Hi-
BMO duality) within the time frame of a one-semester course. Sections 3
and 4 in Chapter 2, Sections 5 and 6 in Chapter 3, Section 3 in Chapter 5,
and Section 4 in Chapter 7 were not contained in my original lecture notes
and therefore might be considered special topics. In addition, they are
completely independent and can be omitted with no loss of continuity.
The order of the topics in the exposition coincides to a large degree
with historical developments. The first five chapters essentially deal with
theory developed in the nineteenth century, whereas the remaining chapters
contain material from the early twentieth century up to the 1980s.
Choosing methods of presentation and proofs is a delicate task. My aim
has been to point out connections with real analysis and harmonic anal-
ysis, while at the same time treating classical complex function theory. I
also have tried to present some general tools that can be of use in other
areas of analysis. Whereas these various aims sometimes can be incom-
patible, at times the scope of the book imposes some natural restrictions.
For example, Runge's theorem is proved by the "Hahn-Banach method,"
partly because it is probably the simplest way to do so, but also because it
is a technique that every student in analysis should become familiar with.
However, a constructive proof is outlined as an exercise. Complex anal-
ysis is one of the origins of harmonic analysis, and several results in the
latter subject have forerunners in complex analysis. Fatou's theorem in
Chapter 6 is proved using standard harmonic analysis, in particular using
the weak-type estimate for the Hardy-Littlewood maximal function. How-
vi Preface
ever, most standard tools from harmonic analysis are beyond the scope of
this book, and therefore, the LP-boundedness of the Hilbert transform and
the Hr-space theory, for instance, are treated with complex analytic meth-
ods. Carleson's inequality is proved by an elementary argument due to B.
Berndtsson, rather than using the LP-estimate for the maximal function,
and Carleson's interpolation theorem is proved using the beautiful and ex-
plicit construction of the interpolating function due to P. Jones from the
1980s. However, a proof based on the 86-equation is indicated in an exer-
cise.
Necessary prerequisites for the reader are basic courses in integration
theory and functional analysis. In the text, I sometimes refer to distribution
theory, but this is merely for illustration and can be skipped over with no
serious loss of understanding. The reader whose memory of an elementary
(undergraduate) course in complex analysis is not so strong is advised to
consult an appropriate text for supplementary reading.
As usual, the exercises can be divided into two categories: those that
merely test the reader's understanding of or shed light on definitions and
theorems (these are sometimes interposed in the text) and those that ask
the reader to apply the theory or to develop it further. I think that for
optimal results a good deal of the time reserved for the study of this subject
should be devoted to grappling with the exercises. The exercises follow the
approximate order of topics in the corresponding chapters, and thus, the
degree of difficulty can vary greatly. For some of the exercises, I have
supplied hints and answers.
At the end of each chapter, I have included references to the main results,
usually to some more encyclopedic treatment of the subject in question, but
sometimes to original papers. If references do not always appear, this is
solely for the sake of expediency and does not imply any claim of origi-
nality on my part. My contribution consists mainly in the disposition and
adaptation of some material and proofs, previously found only in papers
or encyclopedic texts addressed to experts, into a form that hopefully will
be accessible to students.
Finally, I would like to take this opportunity to express my apprecia-
tion to all of the students and colleagues who have pointed out errors and
obscurities in various earlier versions of the manuscript and made valu-
able suggestions for improvements. For their help with the final version,
I would like to thank in particular Lars Alexandersson, Bo Berndtsson,
Hasse Carlsson, Niklas Lindholm, and Jeffrey Steif.
Goteborg, Sweden Mats Andersson

Contents
Preface v
Preliminaries 1
1. Notation ......................................................................... 1
2. Some Facts .................................................................... 2
1. Some Basic Properties of Analytic Functions 5

1. Definition and Integral Representation ....................... 5
2. Power Series Expansions and Residues ....................... 12
3. Global Cauchy Theorems .............................................. 18
2. Properties of Analytic Mappings 28

1. Conformal Mappings ..................................................... 28
2. The Riemann Sphere and Projective Space .................. 33
3. Univalent Functions ...................................................... 35
4. Picard's Theorems .......................................................... 38
3. Analytic Approximation and Continuation 46

1. Approximation with Rationals ..................................... 46
2. Mittag-Leffler's Theorem and the Inhomogeneous
Cauchy-Riemann Equation .......................................... 48
3. Analytic Continuation ................................................... 51
4. Simply Connected Domains .......................................... 53
5. Analytic Functionals and the Fourier-Laplace
Transform ...................................................................... 55
6. Mergelyan's Theorem .................................................... 58
4. Harmonic and Subharmonic Functions 67

1. Harmonic Functions ...................................................... 67
2. Subharmonic Functions ................................................ 71
viii Contents
5. Zeros, Growth, and Value Distribution 82

1. Weierstrass' Theorem .................................................... 82
2. Zeros and Growth .......................................................... 85
3. Value Distribution of Entire Functions ....................... 88
6. Harmonic Functions and Fourier Series 97

1. Boundary Values of Harmonic Functions .................... 97
2. Fourier Series ................................................................. 104
7. HP Spaces 112
1. Factorization in IF Spaces ............................................ 112
2. Invariant Subspaces of H2 ............................................ 116
3. Interpolation of H ....................................................... 118
4. Carleson Measures ......................................................... 121
8. Ideals and the Corona Theorem 130

1. Ideals in A(12) .................................................................. 130
2. The Corona Theorem ..................................................... 131
9. H' and BMO 141

1. Bounded Mean Oscillation ............................................ 141
2. The Duality of H' and BMO ......................................... 146
Bibliography 151
List of Symbols 153

Index 155
Preliminaries
1. Notation
Throughout this book the letters 12 and K always will denote open and
compact sets, respectively, in 1R2, and w will denote a bounded open set
with (when necessary) piecewise C' boundary 8w, which is always supposed
to be positively oriented; i.e., one has w on the left-hand side when passing
along Ow. The notation w CC St means that the closure of w is a compact
subset of St, and d(K, E) denotes the distance between the sets K and
E. Moreover, D(a, r) is the open disk with center at a and radius r,
and U denotes the unit disk, i.e., U = D(0, 1), and T is its boundary
aU = {z; Izj = 1}. The closure of a set E E 1R2 is denoted by E and its
interior is denoted by int E.
The space of k times (real) differentiable (complex valued) functions in
St is denoted by Ck(Sl) (however, we write C(1) rather than CO(Q)) and
C(S2) = nCk(Sl). Moreover, &(D) is the subspace of functions in Ck(S2)
whose derivatives up to the kth order have continuous extensions to St, and
Co (St) is the subspace of functions in Ck(c) that have compact support
in Q. Lebesgue measure in 1R2 is denoted by dA, whereas do, denotes arc
length along curves. We use the standard abbreviation a.e. for "almost
every(where)." We also use u.c. for "uniformly on compact sets." If f, q5
are functions, then "f = O(0) when x -+ a" means that f/0 is bounded
in a neighborhood of a and "f = o(O) when x -p a" means that f /0 0
when x a. Sometimes we also use the notation f N g, which means that
f is less than or equal to some constant times g. Moreover, f - g stands
for f N g and f ? g.
We will use standard facts from basic courses in integration theory and
functional analysis. Sometimes we also refer to distribution theory (mainly
in remarks), but these comments are meant merely for illustration and
always can be passed over with no loss of continuity. In the next section
we have assembled some facts that will be used frequently in the text. In the
first chapters we refer to them explicitly but later on often only implicitly.
2 Preliminaries
Almost all necessary background material can be found in [F] or [Rul],

combined with a basic calculus book. For the facts in item B below see,
e.g., [Ho], which also serves as a general reference on distribution theory.
2. Some Facts
A. Some facts from calculus. If f is a map from S2 into R2 that is C1
in a neighborhood of a, then
f(a+x)= f(a)+Dfjax+o(IxI) x-40, when
for some linear map x t-- D f J x, i.e., f is differentiable at a. If f is
considered as a complex valued function, then
of
DfIax = xl 8x1 a +x2 8x2 a
of
Let 7(t) = (-y1(t),72(t)), a < t < b be a piecewise C' parametrization of
the curve r. If P, Q are continuous functions on r, then
l Pdx + Qdy = f (P('71(t),'Y2(t))'Yi(t)+Q('Yi(t),`Y2(t))7i(t))dt,
b
a
and this expression is independent of the choice of parametrization. Note
that
jfdg = ff
if f, g E C1(1) and r c S2. In particular, for an exact form we have
f dg = g('Y(b)) - g(7(a))
The arc length of the curve r is
Ir1 = f =f l7'(t)12dt = fb + ((t))2dt

r a
and
If Pdx +Qdyl
< f IPI2 + IQI2da < Irl sup IPI2 + IQ12.
Green's formula (Stokes' theorem) states that if P, Q E C' (e)), then
f Pdx + Qdy = j(Qz -
d
(uLv - vAu)dA = faW (u 8v - v M da,

L 8i1
where 8/871 is the outward normal derivative, i.e., 8u/877 = 77j (8u/8xj )
if 77 = (771i rh) is the outward normal to Ow.
2. Some Facts 3
On some occasions we also refer to the inverse function theorem, see, e.g.,
[Ho]: If f: S2 -+ R2 is C1 and its derivauive Df 1a at a E f2 is nonsingular,
then locally f has a C' inverse g.
B. Existence of test functions. There are "plenty" of functions in
Co (0), namely,
(i) for any K C 1 there is a 0 E Co (SZ) such that = 1 in a neighborhood
of Kand 0<0<1.
(ii) if f E L' (0) and fn OfdA = 0 for all cb E Co (S2), then f = 0 a.e.
(iii) if f is continuous on K C 1 and e > 0, there is a 0 E Co (52) such that
SUPK 10 - f J < e.
(iv) if USIa = 0, then there is a smooth partition of unity subordinate to the
open cover IL, i.e., there are 0k E Co (SL k) such that 0 < k <_ 1,
locally only a finite number of Ok are nonvanishing and >k Ok =_ 1 in R.
C. Integration theory. From integration theory we use the standard

convergence theorems, such as Fatou's lemma, Lebesgue's theorem on dom-
inated convergence, and the monotone convergence theorem. Moreover, we
frequently use Jensen's and Holder's inequalities and Fubini's theorem, the
duality of LP and LQ for p < oo, and the one-to-one correspondence be-
tween the continuous linear functionals on C(K) and the space of finite
complex Borel measures on K (usually just referred to as measures on
K). Furthermore, we need the Jordan decomposition of a real measure,
the Lebesgue-Radon-Nikodym decomposition of a complex measure with
respect to a positive measure (the Lebesgue measure in our case) and the
weak type 1-1 estimate for the Hardy-Littlewood maximal function.
In particular, we frequently will make use of "differentiation under the
integral sign": Suppose that X, ,u is a measure space and f (x, t) is a mea-
surable function on X x I, where I is an interval in R, which is continuously
differentiable in t. Suppose further that f (x, t) and f'(x, t) are in L1()
for each fixed t so that
g(t) = and h(t) ff'(x,t)d/2(x)
are well-defined. One may ask whether g'(t) = h(t). Suppose that there is
a 0 e L1() such that
If'(x,t)1 <_''(x)
Then h(t) is continuous by the dominated convergence theorem. Moreover,
ffxt If'(x, t) ldp(x)dt < oo,

so we can use Fubini'ss theorem:
fb
6 h(t)dt = f f'(x, t)dp(x)) dt = f (f b f'(x, t)dt)
J \I / a
4 Preliminaries
and hence
b
h(t)dt = J (f (x, b) - f (x, a)) dp(x) = g(b) - g(a)
1n
for all a, b E I. Since h is continuous, g' = h.

D. Functional analysis. We will use basic results such as orthogonal
decomposition and Parseval's equality in Hilbert spaces, the Hahn-Banach
theorem, the Banach-Steinhaus theorem, and the open mapping theorem
in Banach spaces. Moreover, on some occasions we require Arzela--Ascoli's
theorem on locally equicontinuous subsets of C(1l) and Tietze's extension
theorem.
We also refer to the Fourier transform, Plancherel's formula, and the

inversion formula; see, e.g., Ch. 9 in [Rull.
1
Some Basic Properties of

Analytic Functions
1. Definition and Integral Representation

We identify C with R2 by identifying the complex number z = x + iy with
the point (x, y) E 1R2. Observe that a (complex-valued) differential form
Pdx+Qdy always can be written in the form f dz+gdz, where dz = dx+idy
and d2 = dx-idy (take f = (P-iQ)/2 and g = (P+iQ)/2). This motivates
us to introduce the differential operators
a 1 a a
az-2(ax-iay) and
a =2 ax + i ay
so that
df = Lx dx + y dy Lz dz + aj dz. (1.1)
Note that A = a2/ax2 + a2/ay2 = 4a2/8zaz.
1.1 Proposition. If f is differentiable at the point a, then the limit

f(a + z) - f(a)
1i
o (1.2)
exists if and only if (af/az)Ia = 0; and in that case, the limit equals
(af/az)Ia.
The limit (if it exists) is denoted by [(a).
Proof. The differentiability off is equivalent to
f(a+z)-f(a)=zaf 1a+za-Ia+o(IzI)
6 1. Some Basic Properties of Analytic Functions
Thus, (1.2) exists if and only if

z of
lira -
Z- .O z az a
exists, and this holds if and only if (of/az)Ia = 0. The last statement
follows immediately. 0
Notice that if f = u + iv, where u and v are real, then the Cauchy-
Riemann equation of/az = 0 is equivalent to
{:: -vx (1.3)
(identify the real and imaginary parts in the equation (a/ax + i&/(9y)(u +
iv) = 0).
Definition. A function f E C'(SZ) is analytic (or holomorphic) in S2 if

of /a2 = 0 in I. The set of analytic functions is denoted by A(Q).
In view of Proposition 1.1, f E C'(1) is analytic in S if and only if (1.2)
exists for all a E Il, but we even have
1.2 Goursat's Theorem. If f is any (complex valued) function in 11 such
that (1.2) exists for all a E S2, then f is C1 and hence analytic.
The proof appears later on! In most cases, it is advantageous to write the
Cauchy-Riemann equation in the complex form (9f /c)2 = 0, rather than as
(1.3). For instance, clearly the product rules
a a _ of ag
az(f9) az9+fa9
and
az (f 9) az 9 + f az
hold; thus, if f,g E A(S2), one immediately finds that fg c A(S2) and
(f g)' = f'g + f g'. Suppose that h(t) is C' on an interval I C R and that
f is C1 in a neighborhood of the image of h in C. Then by (1.1),
d(f o h) dt = d(f o h) = Of dh +
8f dh = off dh
dt + Of dh dt,
dt az 8z az dt az Wt
and therefore we have the chain rule
dfoh_Ofdh afdh
dt ozdt+azdt
In the same way, if h(C) is C' in some domain in C, then
ofoh afdh ofah and afoh_afah Ofah
Or oz Or + aZ or aT -Oz aT + 54 aT
Thus, if f, g are analytic, then f o g is analytic and (f o g)' = f'(g)g'.
1. Definition and Integral Representation 7
1.3 Example. If f E A(Q) and f'(z) = 0 for all z E 1, then df = 0 and

hence f is locally constant. Suppose now that f E A({p < IzI < R}) and
that f (z) = f (reie) only depends on 0. Then by the chain rule
of
__ of 19Z of '92 iB of _ so f
0
ar azar+azar - e-5-z - f,
and therefore f is constant. The same conclusion holds if f is independent
of 0.
Here are some other simple consequences of the product rule and the
chain rule (and the definition).
(a) If f, g E A(1l) and a, /3 E C, then f g E A(Sl) and a f +,3g E A(Sl).
(b) z -4 z'^, m being a natural number, is analytic in C.
(c) If f E A(1), then 1/ f E A(Sl \ f f = 0}). (First show that 1/z E
A(C \ {0}) !)
(d) z e' =def e' (cosy + i sin y) is analytic in C.
(e) ((9/az)zm = mz'-', (a/az)e= = ez, (a/az)(1/f) = -f'/f2.
Exercise 1. Show that
(a) of/az = of/49z.
(b) if f E A(Sl), then z ,--+ f (z) is analytic in {z; z E 1}.
(c) if f E A(1) and f is real, then f is (locally) constant.
(d) if f E A(Sl) and If I is constant, then f is (locally) constant.
If the curve I is given by r(t) = rl (t) + ir2(t), a < t < b, then, see A in
the preliminaries,
fdz + gdz = f (f (r(t))r'(t) + g(r(t))r'(t))dt,

b
J
where of course r'(t) = ri(t) +ir2(t). Moreover,
ffdz
=jb
V.
f' If(r(t))IIr'(t)Idt= f rIfIdo
so that (Idzl = do)
<- f IfIIdzI <- Irlsrplf1. (1.4)

f
1.4 Proposition. If F E A(S2) and f = F', then
ffdz = F(r(b)) - F(r(a)).
In particular, fr, f dz = 0 if I' is closed.
Proof. fdz = (aF/az)dz = (aF/az)dz + (aF/(9z)dz = dF; therefore,

f dz is an exact form and thus the proposition follows, cf. item A in the
preliminaries.
In complex notation Green's formula` becomes (check!)
w
2iJ (dA(z),
/
f,g E Cw). (1.5)
From th is we immediately get

1.5 Cauchy's Integral Theorem. If f E A(w) fl C' (o), then
fdz = 0.
w
The next theorem in particular tells us that the values of an analytic

function in the interior of a domain are determined by its values on the
boundary.
1.6 Cauchy's Formula. If f E C' (w`) and z E w, then

1 f(C)dC 1 8f dA(()
f(z)=2-7riJsw ( - z 7r ,l
In particular, if f E A(w) fl C' (i3), then
1
f(z) = 2ir: r8w
f(()d(
,
(-z
Proof. Take z c w. For a so small that {C; K - z( < E} C w, (1.5) (with
f replaced by f(()/(( - z)) gives that
2i
Of da(() = _ ( fdI fd( (1.6)
w\{IC-z1} a(( - z w (- z IC-zl=f C- z
since ( - 1/(( - z) is analytic in w \ {1( - zl < ell. By (1.5) again, we get
fdC 1
_zl=f ( - C-zl=c
lic IZ E
f (f() + (- fda(()
2i
WE2
27ri
j
IC-zI<E
-zl<c
(f (z) + O(j( - zj)) dA(() = 21rif (z) + O(e).
Since z)-' is locally integrable, the theorem follows from (1.6)

when a tends to zero. O
1.7 Some Simple but Important Consequences.

(a) By Proposition 1.4 and Cauchy's formula (with f - 1), we get
(27ri if n = 1
41=,e 00 if n#1.
(b) If the curve r starts at a and ends up at b, then, by Proposition 1.4,

fd__I(]=b-a.
(c) If 0 E CG(C), then (by Cauchy's formula)
OW _ - f (80/,%) ((dA(() = aza m(()d z(())

(1.7)
where the second equality is obtained by making the linear change of
variables C F-+ C+z in the last integral and differentiating under the inte-
gral sign. Hence (a/OC)1/7r( = bo (the Dirac measure) in the distribution
sense; this is equivalent to A log 47rbo since (a/aC) log I(I2 = 1/C
(even in the distribution sense).
(d) From Cauchy's formula it follows that analytic functions have the mean
value property:
f (z) = 2a f
0
2ir
f (z + re't)dt.
To see this, one simply makes the substitution ( = z + re", 0 < t < 21r
(so that d( = ire`tdt = i(C - z)dt) in the formula
f (z) = 1
27ri
J 1(-zlsrf C(C)d(
-z
(e) If f is analytic and we differentate under the integral sign in Cauchy's
formula, we find that f is C, f (m) is analytic, and
f(m)(z) = mt j f(C)d(
27x2 ((- z)m+1 m = 0,1,2,.... (1.8)
Thus in particular we have that A(Q) C C(1l) for any Q.

1.8 Proposition. If K C w CC S2, then there are constants Cm = Cm,,,,,K
such that for all f E A(1l),
sup If(m)I <_ CmIIf II LI(w)
K
Proof. Take 0 E C, (w), 0 < 0 _< 1, such that 0 = 1 in a neighborhood of

K. Let b = d(K, {z E w; O(z) 34 1}). Since f4' E Co (C), we get by (1.7)
1 00 f(()dA(() z E K. (1.9)
f (z) =
a f e( (- z
Notice that the integration in this integral is performed only over the strip
{C; 0 < 0 < 1} cc w \ K. Hence for z in a neighborhood of K we can
differentiate the integral and obtain
f(-)(Z)
-TILE
7r f 04' f(()d)(()
a( ((- z)m+1'
z E K.
In this integral, IC - zj > 6, and therefore we get the estimate
sup lf(m)t < ,rb-+i Sup I a f If(()IdA(().

0
The formula (1.9) is a variant of Cauchy's formula where the curve is
replaced by a strip. The usual Cauchy formula cannot be used in the
preceding proof (since we want L1-estimates), nor in the next one (since
it deals with functions only defined a.e.). However, even in some other
situations it is more convenient to use (1.9) rather than the usual Cauchy
formula, as will be apparent in what follows.
1.9 Proposition (Weyl's Lemma). Suppose that f E L 10l c(Q) and
of /oz = 0 weakly, i.e.,
f faqS/az = 0, E Co (S2). (1.10)
Then there is a g E A(n) such that f = g a.e.

Thus, in particular, if f E C(S2) and (1.10) holds, then f is analytic. An
analogous result is also true (with essentially the same proof) for f E D'(S2)
(the space of distributions on 11). Clearly, any f E A(S1) satisfies (1.10).
Proof. Take w cc 1 and 0 E CO '(Q) such that 1 in a neighborhood
of w, and let
g(z) 1 f (aolaCf (S) dA((), z E w.
If f is analytic, then (1.9) says that g = f in w; we are going .to show

that (1.10) actually implies that f = g a.e. in w. Since g(z) is analytic in
w and w cc SZ is arbitrary, our proof is then complete. To do this, take
.b tE CO '(w). By Fubini's theorem
f 9(z)V5(z) 7 f z"(Z) f
i f z (z))) f (o + JS 4
aS
_- (_.:'
f (z)) f (C)
z
The first of these integrals vanishes by the assumption on f, since
l - 1 fZ (z)
z-
+
is in Co (St) (why?). According to (1.7), the second integral is
= f o(C)+G(C)f(C) = f(c)f()
since supp i1' C (0 = 11, and thus we have showed that f gp = f f V) for
all z/) E Co(w). This implies that f = g a.e. in w.
We say that fj - f u.c. (uniformly on compact sets) if for each K C S2,

fj -+ f uniformly on K.
1.10 Proposition. Suppose that fj E A(c).

a) If fj -+ f u.c., then f E A(c) and f("`) - f('") u.c. for each in.
b) If fj f in L1 r.(c), then there is a g E A(Q) such that f = g a.e. and
f"` -+ g("') U. C. for each m.
Proof. The hypothesis in (a) implies the one in (b). To prove (b), observe
that f satisfies (1.10) and therefore f = g a.e. for some g c A(S2). Then
apply Proposition 1.8 to fj - g.
One also can easily verify Proposition 1.10 directly from Proposition 1.8
by locally representing fk by formula (1.9) and taking limits.
1.11 Morera's Theorem. If f E C(ft) and fao fdz = 0 for all triangles
A C S2, then f E A(SZ).
Proof. Since analyticity is a local property, we may assume that S2 is

convex. Fix a point a E 11 and let F(z) = fia z) f where [a, z] is the
straight line from a to z. By assumption, fia z) + fix z+w] = .f)a,z+wj, giving
F(z + w) - F(z) = wf (z) + J (f (() - f (z)) d( = wf (z) + o(IwI)

[z,z+w)
by 1.7 (b) and (1.4). Thus, F is differentiable in z, 8F/8z = f (z), and
8F/82 = 0; therefore, F is in C1(Q) and hence analytic. Therefore, cf.
1.7 (e), f = F' is analytic.
Proof of Goursat's Theorem. Assume that 0 is convex, take an arbi-

trary closed triangle Ao in S2, and let I = feoo fdz. Divide the triangle
into four new triangles Aj by inscribing a trianile in Ao with corners at
the midpoints of the edges of A0. Then I = F_1 feo; fdz, which implies
that I feo; f dz > 1I for some Aj. Denote it by A. By repeating this
procedure we get a sequence Ak such that Ak D Ak+l and
fdz > 4-kI. (1.11)
Choose a point a E nAk. Given e > 0 there is a 6 > 0 such that

If(z) - f(a) - (z - a)f'(a)I < elz - al
<6. Taken so large that On C {Iz - al < b}. Then

if Iz-allfaa
fdzI (f(z) - f(a) - (z - a)f'(a)) dz1
110A,
-n IaAoI2
E L8O Iz - alldzI < E iaAnI2 = E4 ,
which together with (1.11) implies that I < ElaooI2. Thus, I = 0 and the
desired conclusion follows from Morera's theorem.
1.12 The Maximum (Modulus) Principle. If Il is connected, f E
A(Il), and If (a) I = supra If I for some a E II, then f is constant.
Proof. From the mean value property, cf. 1.7 (d), we get
f2r
If (a) l 5? f (a + re't) l dt < M= sup I f 1,
2,r I
n
with equality in the last inequality if and only if if I = M on the circle
IC - aI = r. Hence, if I f (a) I = M, then I f I = M in a neighborhood of a.
Therefore, the set A = {z e 11; If (z)l = M} is open and closed in 0. Since
A # 0, A = S2 and therefore If I, and hence f, is constant.
One can replace this closed-open argument, and others in what follows,
by a more conceptual "chain of circles" argument.
By the uniqueness theorem (Theorem 2.6 below) it follows that f is
constant as long as If I has a local maximum.
1.13 Corollary. If f E C(i) n A(1l) and S2 is compact, then supra IfI =
supan If I.
Proof. Take a point a E Sl such that (f (a) I = supra If I. If a E 1911, the

conclusion is obvious. Otherwise, by the maximum principle, f must be
constant in the component of Ii that contains a, but then the supremum
also is attained on the boundary.
Thus, If I always attains its supremum on the boundary if Sl is bounded.
For unbounded domains this is not true in general. Consider, e.g., f (z) =
exp(-iz) in the upper half-plane. The reader might hope for a bounded
counterexample, but that is not possible, cf. Exercise 41.
2. Power Series Expansions and Residues

For the local study of analytic functions, power series expansions are an
important tool, which we are now going to exploit. Suppose that cn E C
2. Power Series Expansions and Residues 13
and 1/R, where 0 < R < oo. Then the power series
00
f(z) = : Cnzn (2.1)
n=0
converges uniformly in each domain D(0, r) (the disk with center 0 and
radius r), r < R, and diverges if IzI > R (exercise!).
2.1 Proposition. Suppose that f is given by (2.1). Then f is analytic in
D(0, R), f'(z) = EO 1 in D(0, R), and
ncnzn-1
n! f(C)d( r < R.
n!cn = f (") (0) = (2.2)
2ni J ICI=* ( n+1 ,
Conversely, if f E A(D(0, R)) and cn are given by (2.2), then 0 cnzn

converges to f u.c. in D(0, R).
Proof. Let FN(z) = > cnxn. Then FN is analytic in D(0, R), and,
.
since FN converges u.c., lim FN = f is analytic in D(0, R). From Propo-
sition 1.10 we get that Fir -- f' u.c. and hence f'(z) = O 1 ncnzn-1 in
D(0, R). By induction it follows that f (n)(0) = n!cn. The second equality
in (2.2) is just (1.8).
For the converse, suppose that IzI < r < R. Then
1 zn
x ('n+1
0
converges uniformly for ICI = r and hence
z
n=0 - 1C1=r
Sn+1 z
n=0
z .
Since
f(C)d( < r-n sup If(C)I

(n+1
1C1=r ltl=r
for each r < R, we get
2.2 Cauchy's Estimate. If f E A(D(0, R)) and If I < M, then
m!MR-m_
If (-1(0)1 = m!ICrnI 5
2.3 Liouville's Theorem. If f is an entire function (i.e., analytic in the

entire plane) and
I f(x)I 5 C (1 + IzIN) ,
then f is a polynomial of degree at most N. In particular, if f is bounded,

then it is constant.
Proof. Suppose that f (z) = Fo czn. By Cauchy's estimate,
1c,j < C(1 + RN)R_ r
for all R > 0, and consequently c,,, = 0 if m > N. 0
2.4 The Fundamental Theorem of Algebra. If the polynomial p(z) =
CNZN + CN_1ZN-1 + + co has no zeros in C, then it is constant, i.e.,
cj=0forj>0.
Proof. If p is nonvanishing in C, then 1/p is an entire function. Moreover,
1/p(z) = O(IzI-N) when z --+ no, and hence is constant by Liouville's
theorem.
2.5 Proposition. If f E A(D(a, r)) and f is not identically zero, then for
some integer m, f (z) = (z - a)mh(z), where h # 0 in a neighborhood of a.
One then says that f (z) has a zero of order or multiplicity m at a.
Proof. Since f can be expanded in a power series,

00 00
f(z) = cj(z - a)j = (z - a)m E cj+m(z - a)3 = (z - a)mh(z),
j=m j=0
where cm # 0. Then h(a) # 0 and hence h # 0 in a neighborhood of a by
continuity.
2.6 The Uniqueness Theorem. If Sl is connected, f E A(1l), and the

set Z(f) = {z E S2; f (z) = 0} has a limit point in S2, then f - 0 in Q.
Proof. Let A be the set of limit points of Z(f). Then A is closed in 0
(why?). If a E A, then a is an interior point of A according to Propo-
sition 2.5. Hence A is open. Since 0 is connected and A -76 0, A = 0.
0
2.7 Remarks. The assumption about connectedness is necessary. If ) =
{z; Izl < 1 or Jzj > 2}, then the function f that is 0 for IzJ < 1 and 1
for Jzj > 2 is in A(D) and its zero set has limit points in S1 even though f is
not identically zero itself. Observe that if f1 is connected, f, g E A(1), and
f = g on a set with a limit point in 1, then f =- g in Q. For instance, if
the usual trigonometric functions are extended to complex z in the obvious
way, sinz = (expiz - exp(-iz))/2i and so on, then the usual identities,
such as sin 2z = 2 sin z cos z, hold since they hold for real z.
If a E 0 and f is analytic in S2\a, we say that f has an isolated singularity

at a. We now shall determine the possible nature of an isolated singularity.
Without loss of generality we may assume of course that a = 0.
2.8 Proposition. If f has an isolated singularity at 0 and is bounded in

a punctured neighborhood, then the singularity is removable, i.e., f can be
defined at 0 so that it is analytic in a neighborhood.
Proof. Define h(z) as z f (z) for z # 0 and h(0) = 0. Then h is continuous
and by Morera's theorem (how?) it is indeed analytic in Q. Hence, near
0, h(z) = ciz + c2z2 + ... , and therefore f (z) = cl + c2z + .... Thus, f
becomes analytic if we let f (0) = cl.
Notice that the corresponding statement for smooth functions is false;

consider, e.g., z i-- sin(1/Izt).
2.9 Proposition. If f is analytic in S2 = {O < Izi < R}, then f has a

Laurent series expansion
f(z) _ 00 Cn z"
_,
that converges u.c. in Q. The coefficients cn are given by
1 f(()d(
, n E Z, 0 < r < R. (2.3)
cn = 21ri fCI =*
I
C+i
Sketch of Proof. If 0 < e < jzj < R - e, then

f(z) = 1 fICI=R-ef(C)d( _ 1 [ f(C)d(
27ri C-z 21ri ICI=E C - z
One then proceeds as in the proof of Proposition 2.1 (exercise!). 0
More generally: if f E A({0 < r < Izj < R}), then it can be represen-
tated by a Laurent series f (z) = c z' that converges u.c., and the
representation is unique since the coefficients must satisfy (2.3).
Definition. Assume that f (z) has an isolated singularity at 0 and Lau-

rent series expansion ., c = 0 for n < 0, the singularity is
removable (cf. Proposition 2.8). If c = 0 for n < -N and c_N 0, then
f has a pole of order or multiplicity N. Otherwise, f is said to have an
essential singularity at the origin.
If f (z) has a pole at 0 of order N, then f (z) - EN ckzk has a removable

singularity at 0. The sum is called the principal part of f (z) at 0. Moreover,
Z' f (z) has a removable singularity at 0, so f (z) = z-"'h(z), where h(z)

is analytic and nonvanishing near 0. Hence if (z) J coo when z --. 0, e.g.,
the image of 0 < JzJ < r is contained in the complement of any given disk
D(0, R) if r is sufficiently small. However, if f has an essential singularity,
then it can omit at most one single value in each punctured neighborhood
of 0. This is the so-called big Picard theorem, which is proved in Ch. 2.
Right now we restrict ourselves to the following much weaker and simpler
result.
2.10 Proposition. Suppose that f is analytic in Il = {0 < IzJ < r} and
has an essential singularity at 0. Then its image is dense in C.
Proof. If the image is not dense, then there is a w E C and a neighborhood
W of w such that f({0 < JzJ < r})f1W = 0. Then 1/(f(z)-w) is bounded,
and hence it has a removable singularity. Therefore, 1/(f (z) -w) = zl"h(z),
where h(0) # 0, and thus f (z) = w + 1/zNh(z), i.e., f has a pole of order
N at the origin.
2.11 Examples.
(a) exp(1/z) = Eo z-1/n!, and therefore exp(l/z) has an essential singu-
larity at the origin and omits the value zero. By Picard's theorem it
therefore attains all other values in each domain {0 < JzJ < e}. This also
can be verified easily by a direct computation (exercise!).
(b) Suppose that f (z) has an isolated singularity at 0 and that f (z) _
O(lzIm) for some integer m. By Propositions 2.5 and 2.8 there is an
integer N > m such that f (z) = zNh(z) and h(z) is analytic and non-
vanishing near 0. If N > 0, then f has a zero of order N; and if N < 0,
it has a pole of order -N.
Exercise 2. Show that the big Picard theorem implies the little Picard
theorem: Each entire nonconstant function attains all values with one pos-
sible exception.
Definition. Suppose that f has an isolated singularity at the point a. For

small enough r > 0, the number
Res(f, a) 27rz
=1f f (a + ()d( (2.4)
C I=r
is independent of r and is called the residue of f at a; actually, it is just
the coefficient c_1 in the Laurent expansion of f at a.
If f has a pole of order m at a, then the residue can be computed by the
formula (check!)
Res(f, a) = 1
1)! d
11 a(z - a)'f(z);
(m
but in concrete situations it is often simpler (and, in case of an essential

singularity, necessary) to derive c-1 in some more direct way.
2.12 Examples. The residue of cot z = cos z/ sin z at z = mir is 1 since
mir) cot z = 1; cf. Remark 2.7.
The function f(z) = z2/sin(1/z) is analytic in {0 < Izi < 1/ir}, has an
essential singularity at 0, and the residue is 7/360 since
1 1 1 7
sinw = 3
and hence
2 2 11 7 1 3 1 7 1
sin Z 6z 360 z3 6 360 z

Make this calculation rigorous!
If f EC1(l \jai, ...,a,,,})nA(ii\{a1,...,am}), where a,,..., a, are
m points in w, then
m
fd( = 2iriERes(f,aj).
Jaw j=1
In fact, if ej is chosen such that D(aj, ej) is contained in 1 and does not
contain any other ak, then by Cauchy's theorem (how?)
J f d - j-1 f ail-E
f d(.
Definition. A function f is meromorphic in S2 if there is a sequence of

points ak E Sl that has no limit point in 0, and if f is analytic in SZ \ {ak}
and has a pole at each ak.
Thus, f is meromorphic in Sl if and only if locally either f or 1/f is
analytic. Also note that if f is meromorphic in a connected set Sl and its
zero set has a limit point in Sl, then f - 0.
2.13 Proposition. Suppose that f is meromorphic in 0, w C Sl and f
has no poles or zeros on 8w. Let Nf and Pf be the numbers of zeros and
poles, respectively (counted with multiplicities). Then
1
2Tri
I , f (() Nf - Pf.
Observe that f has only a finite number of zeros and poles in w.

Proof. Since f'(()/ f (() is analytic outside the poles and zeros of f, the
integral is unchanged if 8w is replaced by a union of circles, one around
each pole or zero a of f. Suppose that f (z) = (z - a)mh(z), where h is

analytic and nonvanishing in D(a, 2e). Then
f'(z) _ h'(z) 1
f(z) h(z) +rnz - a'

and hence
f f,(() d< = m2,ri.

JIB-61=f f(()
From the above one gets the desired conclusion. O
2.14 R.ouche's Theorem. Assume that ft(z): [0, 1] x S2 , C is continu-

ous, ft E A(ul) for each fixed t E [0, 1), and also that fe(z): [0, 11 x St --i C
is continuous. If, moreover, ft is nonvanishing on 8w (w CC 11), then fo
and fl have the same number of zeros in w.
Thus, if we change fo continuously, the number of zeros in w cannot
change unless some zero arrives or disappears over the boundary 8w. If,
for instance, f, g E A(Q) and [gI < If I on 8w, then f and f - g have the
same number of zeros in w; we then simply apply the theorem to ft = f - tg.
Proof. In view of Proposition 2.13,
1 f fi(()dC
27ri Ja. ft(()
is integer valued for each t, but since it depends continuously on t, it then
must be constant.
3. Global Cauchy Theorems

We already have seen that if r = 8w, then
1 f d( = r1 if z Ew (by Cauchy's formula)
27ri f r (-- z t0 if z Vi (by Cauchy's theorem).
If I 1 i ... , I N are (piecewise Cl) closed curves with given orientations, we
can define the formal sum r = N F. Such a sum is called a cycle. If 0
is a differential form (1-form), then we let Jr. 0 = EN fry 0. Note that taw
can be interpreted as a sum of curves with given orientations, i.e., a cycle,
but the notion of "cycle" also includes other cases, e.g., passing through a
given curve more than one lap.
Now consider a cycle r and a point z v r. The index of r with respect
to z, Indr(z), is defined by
I /' dC
Ind r( z) =
2rri r
- z.
3. Global Cauchy Theorems 19
For all "reasonable" F it is clear from above that Indr(z) is always an

integer. This also follows from the next argument, which reveals the ge-
ometrical interpretation of Indr(z) as the winding number. However, we
first need a simple lemma.
3.1 Lemma (Local Existence of Logarithm). If V is a convex domain,
f E A(V) and f # 0 in V, then there is a (not unique) h E A(V) such that
exp h = f and h' = f'/f.
It is natural to set h = log f .
Proof. As in the proof of Morera's theorem, we can find a g E A(V) such
that g' = f'/f. Thus, (f exp(-g))' = 0 and hence f exp(-g) = C. Take
h = g + a, where the number a is chosen such that exp a = C. 0
If m is an integer, there is a g E A(V) such that gm = f . To see this,
simply let g = exp(h/m).
Exercise 3. Show that log z = log Iz) + i arg z, where the second log
denotes the usual real-valued natural logarithm, and arg stands for some
branch of the argument function.
Suppose that F is a closed curve (the case when r is a cycle then follows)
with a parametrization t - F(t), 0 < t < 1. If 0 # r, there is (exercise!) a
sequence of disks D0, Dl,. . . , D,,, not containing 0 and such that the curve
segment rk = tk+,j is contained in Dk, where 0 = to < tj < - - < -
t,,, = 1. We can successively choose branches logk z of the logarithm on Dk

so that logk z = 1ogk+1 z on Dk fl Dk+l. Then
f a _ 1: fm-1 m-1
ds
r k-0 rk
= E
k=O
(1ogk+1 I (tk+1) - logk F(tk))
=i(arg,,,, r(o) - arg0 r(0)),

if logk z = log I z I + i argk z, and therefore Indr(0) is the number of laps
that IF runs around the origin. The same holds for Indr(z).
3.2 Example. The intuitive meaning of index is illustrated by Figure 1.
Exercise 4. Show that Indr is constant on each component of C \ F and

vanishes on the unbounded one. Hint: Notice that it is continuous in C \ I'
and O(1/lzl) when jzj --+ oo.
Suppose that f is meromorphic and has no poles or zeros on the closed
curve 7(t). Then 1:'(t) = f o -y(t) is a closed curve and
1 .f'(()dS
Indr(0) =
j A0
Indr (a) = -2
Indr (b) = 1
Indr (c) = 0
FIGURE 1
Hence, Proposition 2.13 implies that the number of zeros minus the number
of poles equals the number of times that f o -y(t) turns around the origin,
if y(t) is a parametrization of 8w. This sometimes is called the principle
of argument. We leave it as an exercise to supply a similar geometrical
interpretation of Rouche's theorem.
Definition. We say that a cycle r in fl is null-homologous with respect
to SZ if Indr(a) = 0 for all a 0 H. Two cycles r'1 and r2 are homologous if
r1 - r2 is null-homologous.
Notice that if w cc f?, then 8w is null-homologous in Cl.
3.3 Cauchy's (Homology) Theorem and Formula. Suppose that f E
A(C) and r is a null-homologous cycle in Cl. Then
f(C)d( = 0 (a)
Jr
and
z
f(z) Indr(z) Z E fl\ r. (b)
r '
It follows that Jr.' f (C)d( = frz f (C)d( if r1 and r2 are homologous.

Note that (b) follows from (a), since C -+ (f (C) - f (z))/(( - z) is analytic
in 12:
Proof of (a). Let H be the union of r and the support of Indr. As Indr
is locally constant in C \ r (cf. Exercise 4 above) it must vanish on each
component that intersects C\Sl. However, Indr vanishes on the unbounded
3. Global Cauchy Theorems 21
component, and hence H must be a compact set in Q. Now take 0 E CO '(P)

such that 0 = I in a neighborhood of H. Then
a0 f(C)da(() z E H,
z
and by Fubini's theorem (check!)
27ri
f (z)dz = 7r
f aT'f (T) Indr(()dA(() = 0
since Indr is supported on H and 80/8c = 0 there.
3.4 Remark. The preceding proof can be interpreted in the sense of dis-
tributions in the following way. Let the distribution (measure) u be defined
by u(q) _ (i/2) fl, q5dS' for 0 E CO. Then u has compact support in Sl and
(8/8() Indr = u, cf. 1.7 (c). The assumption on r implies as before that
Indr is compactly supported in Q. Thus,
Jr fdC = u(f) = as r
(f) = - Indr
) = 0-
3.5 Remark. Note that f (z)dz is a closed 1-form, i.e., d(fdz) = 0 in Q.

By Stokes' theorem (about homology) Jr. f dz = 0 if I' is null-homologous in
Q. However, to obtain Theorem 3.3 one then has to verify the equivalence of
the usual (topological) notion of "null-homologous" and the definition used
above, which is natural in this context. In one direction this immediately
follows from Stokes' theorem. Conversely, if r is null-homologous (in our
sense), then the union of components Vk of C\F where Indr is nonvanishing
is contained in S2, and r is the boundary of the 2-chain F-k akVk where ak
is the value of Indr on Vk; cf. Example 3.2.
Suppose that yo and yi are two continuous closed curves in S2, i.e., con-
tinuous mappings [0, 11 IZ such that y;(0) = yj (1). They are homo-
topic if there is a continuous mapping H: [0, 1] x [0, 1) - 0 such that
H(s, 0) = yo(s), H(s, 1) = yi (s), and H(0, t) = H(1, t) for t E [0,1]. In-
tuitively this means that the curve yo can be continuously deformed to y,
within Sl, and vice versa.
Definition. If 0 is connected and any closed curve -y in 0 is homotopic to

a point (i.e., to a constant mapping 10, 1] St), then S2 is said to be simply
connected.
For instance, any convex domain is simply connected; take H(s, t) _

(1 - t)-y(s) + ta, where a is any point in Cl.
3.6 Cauchy's (Homotopy) Theorem. If -to and yl are homotopic closed

(piecewise C1-) curves in l and f E A(12), then f70 fdz = f. fdz. In
particular, f7 fdz = 0 if y is null-homotopic (homotopic to a point).
This immediately follows from Cauchy's homology theorem and
3.7 Proposition. If yo and -yl are homotopic closed curves, then they are
homologous.
However, it is just as easy to prove the homotopy theorem directly. Also

note that it immediately implies Proposition 3.6.
Sketch of Proof of Cauchy's Homotopy Theorem. Since H: [0, 112 -+

Sl is continuous, there is a positive distance 2e from 52` to the image of H.
One problem is that s '- yt(s) = H(s,t) is not necessarily piecewise C1.
However, for some large integer n, JH(s, t) -H(s', t')J < e if Is-s'J+Jt-t'J <
1/n. Then the rectangle with corners at H ( n n ) H ( n nk) H ( n ' n
and H(n , kn ) is contained in Q. Hence the integral of f over its boundary
vanishes. When k = 0, instead of the straight line between H(n , 0) and
H( , 0), one takes the curves -' H(s, 0), n < $ < '- , and analogously
when k = n - 1. Let ryk be the polygon with corners H(n , ), 0 < i < n.
Then we have that f7k fdz = ffk+, fdz (why?). Since we also
ri have that
f70y. = f and f7ifdz = fin --i fdz, it follows that70f fdz = '7tf fdz.
Yi
3.8 Remark. If a closed curve -y is null-homotopic in 52, then it is null-

homologous by Proposition 3.7. However, the converse is not true in gen-
eral. Let 1 = C \ {a, b} and choose a point 0 E Q. Let a be a closed
curve in H that starts and ends at 0 and surrounds a so that Ind, (a) = 1
and Ind,(b) = 0, and let /3 be a corresponding curve for the point b. Let
y = a/3-1a-1/3 denote the closed curve obtained by first running through /3,
then through a backwards, then through /3 backwards, and finally through
a. Clearly Ind7(a) = Ind7(b) = 0, and therefore -y is null-homologous by
definition. However, at least intuitively, it is perhaps clear that it is not
null-homotopic in St (a rigorous proof is harder). This reflects the topolog-
ical fact that the first fundamental group is not commutative. In Figure 2
a curve is drawn that is homotopic to y.
Supplementary Exercises 23
FIGURE 2
Supplementary Exercises
Exercise 5. Suppose that f is C' in a neighborhood of the origin. Show
that
f(z)=f(0)+
k=1
kIr
j=0 j
k-72j_a
aZjlO+
Exercise 6. Show that an open set S2 in C is connected if and only if
it is pathwise connected (i.e., each pair of points can be connected by a
(piecewise C') curve in SZ).
Exercise 7. Try to show a variant of Morera's theorem where the triangles
are replaced by circles. (Hint: First assume that f is C1.)
Exercise 8. Assume that f and g are entire functions and that If (z)I <
jg(z)I for all z. What can be said about f and g?
Exercise 9. Find all of the zeros of sin z and cos z.
Exercise 10. Assume that f is analytic in the annulus 52 = {r < Izi <
R}. Show that f has a Laurent series expansion f (z) _ E 00 c,iz" that
converges u.c. in 11.
Exercise 11. Assume that f has an isolated singularity at 0. Show that
(a) if f(z) = o(1/IzI), then the singularity is removable.
(b) if f = o(1/IzI-0+')), then f has a pole of order at most N.
(c) if f(z) = o(IzIN), N _> 0, then the singularity is removable and f has a
zero of order at least N + 1.
Exercise 12. Compute f .(1 +x2)`1 exp(ixt)dx for t E R.
Exercise 13. Compute f o (1 + x")dx, n = 2, 3, .... Integrate over an

appropriate "piece of cake"!
Exercise 14. Compute f
Exercise 15. Compute f
. zexp(-ixt) exp(-x2/2)dx.
sinx eiztdx for t E R.
Note that t2 -
2ixt - x2 = -(x + it)2.
Exercise 16. Compute
h(z) = - 1
it f CI<1
(( - z)-ld)(C)
for various z E C,
(a) using polar coordinates and solving the "B-integral" by the calculus of
residues.
(b) by first computing (8/8z)h(z) outside the unit circle and noting that at
least h(z) is continuous over the circle.
(c) by expanding the integrand in approriate power series.
Exercise 17. Compute F_'(1 + k2)-1 by integrating g(z) = n(1 +
z2)-1 cot 7rz over the curves r, which are the rectangles with corners at
(n + 1/2)(1, i). Also compute Ei k-2.
Exercise 18. Suppose that f E A(il), I f (z) = lim fn(z)
exists for all z E Q. Show that f - f u.c.
Exercise 19. Suppose that f,, E A(Q) and that f -+ f in LP r(Q) for
some p > 1. Show that there is a g E A(il) such that f = g a.e. and f -+ g
U.C.
Exercise 20. Suppose that D(a, r) C 0 and that , f E A(il). Suppose

that f does not vanish on the circle Iz - al = r. Determine
(27ri)-1
f (z) 0(z)dz.
Iz-ai=r A-)
Exercise 21. Let f E A(i2), and let yo and yl be two simply closed (piece-
wise C1-) curves in ft Suppose that there is a homotopy H(s, t): [0, 112 --. Q
from yo and y1 such that f has no zero on its image. Show that f has the
same number of zeros inside yo and yj .
Exercise 22. Give a geometrical interpretation of Rouchr 's theorem. Also
formulate and prove a variant where the functions ft are allowed to be
meromorphic.
Exercise 23. Suppose that f E A(S2), f (0) = 0 but f # 0.
(a) Show that f (U) contains a neighborhood of 0. Hint: For some e > 0,
f 34 0 on the circle jzj = e. Consider then
2iri
1 f f'(()d(
C=F f (S) - w
for w near 0.
(b) Suppose in addition that f'(0) # 0. Show that f has a local inverse g(w)
near 0.
(c) Show that g(w) is in fact analytic. Hint: For w near 0,
g(w) = 1j
27ri
f'(()cd(
<1= PO - w
Exercise 24. Suppose that f and g are nonvanishing analytic functions
in U such that (f'/ f)(1/n) = (g'/g)(1/n), n = 1,2,3,.... What is the
relation between f and g?
Exercise 25. Suppose that 1 is connected, f E A(SZ) are nonvanishing
in Sl, and that f,, -+ f u.c. Show that if f is not identically zero, then f is
also nonvanishing in 0.
Exercise 26. Suppose that ) is connected, f,, E A(SZ), and fn(Q) c SZ'
for some open n'. Show that if f -+ f u.c., then either f is constant or
f(S1) c S2'.
Exercise 27. Suppose that f E A(U) nC(U) and I f (z) I < 1 when Izi = 1.
How many solutions does the equation f (z) = z have in U?
Exercise 28. Suppose that f E A(U) fl C(U), If (z) I > 1 when IzI = 1 and
f (0) = 1. Must f have a zero in U?
Exercise 29. How many zeros does f (z) = z5 + 4z2 + 2z + 1 have in the
unit disk?
Exercise 30. Suppose that f is analytic and f (z) _ >o akzk + o(I zI -)
Determine ak.
Exercise 31. Suppose that f E A(l) and a0,.. , a,n E w CC I. Show
.
that
f
1
)dC
p(z) = f (z) - (fl:) C-z zE ,
is the unique polynomial of degree at most m that interpolates f at the

points aj, i.e., such that f (a3) = p(aj), j = 0, ... , M.
Exercise 32. Suppose that f c C' (w) fl L' (w). Show that
u(z) __ 1 r f (C)dA(C) , zEw
Tr w C-z
is a solution to the equation 8u/8z = f in w.
Exercise 33. Supply the details in the following proof that Ind7(0) is an
integer: If -y: [0, 11 -- C is C' and closed, 0 $ 'y, and h(t) = fa y'(t)/y(t)dt,
then h'(t) = -y'(t)/-y(t). Hence, y(t) exp(-h(t)) is constant. Therefore,
exph(t) = y(t)/y(0), and hence exph(1) = 1.
Exercise 34. Suppose that f E A(I) and w CC 11. Show that if log If I <
Re g on Ow for some g c A(1), then log if I < Re g in w. Hint: Consider
f exp(-g).
Exercise 35. Let ft = {x + iy; IxI < it/2}. Show that f (z) = exp(expiz)
is unbounded in ft but supan If I = 1.
Exercises 36-38 exemplify the Phragmen-Lindelof method, which per-
mits certain extensions of the maximum principle to unbounded domains.
As an application, examples of complex interpolation then are given in
Exercises 39 and 40.
Exercise 36. Suppose that S2 = {x + iy; Ixi < n/2}, f E A(ft) n C(O),
If (z)I < exp(A exp alyl) for some a < 1, A < oo, and that if I < 1 on aft.
Show that If I < 1 in Q. Hint:
(a) Let h, (z) = exp(-2e cos,i3z), where a < ,3 < 1. Show that Ih, I < 1 on S2.
(b) Show that
if (z)h, (z)I < exp (AeIvl - e6(e'311 + e3))
on n for b = cos 87r/2.
(c) Show by the maximum principle that If hE I < 1 on some large rectangle
with corners at :En/2 t iyo.
(d) Conclude that If I < 1 in ft.
Exercise 37. Let ft = {z; I arg zI < a}, f E A(ft) n C(St). Find a
boundedness assumption on f which implies that If I < 1 in l if supon If I <
1.
Exercise 38. Suppose that ft = {x + iy; a < x < b}, f E A(ft) n C(O),
and that if I < C in 1. Let M(x) = supYER if (x + iy)I. Show that
Mb-a(x) < M(a)b-xM(b)2-2, a < x < b.
Hint:
(a) First suppose that M(a) = M(b) = 1 and verify the statement in this
case.
(b) Let g(z) = M(a) z M(b) s - and apply (a) to f (z)/g(z).
Exercise 39. Suppose that p and A are (reasonable) positive measures on
two measurable spaces, and suppose that T is a linear operator L1(p)
L(A),andL2() L2(A) such that llTfIL <- MIIfII1andIITfII2 S IIfII2
Then T: LP(p) -+ L'(A) for 1 < p < 2 and IIT f IIq < Mp If Ilp (if q is the
dual index). Hint:
(a) It is enough to show:
I f(Tf)gdAl < MP V simple f,g with IIfII, = IIgIIp = 1. (*)
(A function is simple if it is a finite sum F_cajXE;, where Ej are mea-
surable and have finite measures.)
Notes 27
(b) To show (*), let (f, g simple)

fgzP1gT(lfIzP1f)dA.
O(z) =
Show that O(z) is an entire function, apply Exercise 38 with a = 1/2 and
b = 1, and draw the conclusion that (*) holds.
Exercise 40. Let f (n) _ (1/2ir) J ' f (t)e-'"`dt for f E L'(T). Show the
Hausdorff--Young inequality
_ 1/9 1/p
EIf(n)IQ(2 fjf(t)jPdt I1
1 <p<2.
Exercise 41. Show: If 52 co C is arbitrary, f E A(11) fl C(fi), If I < 1 on

852, and if I < M in 52 for some M, then If I < 1 in H. Hint:
a) Show that one may assume that U fl 52 = 0.
b) Take a E 52 and apply the maximum principle on f"(z)/z.
Notes
Most of the material in this chapter is classical. For historical remarks
about the notion of analytic function, see [Hi].
Notice that the homology variant of Cauchy's theorem (Theorem 3.3)
follows from Cauchy's formula and hence in turn from Green's formula in
a trivial case.
Exercises 12-17 exemplify the calculus of residues. For hints and further
examples, see an elementary book on complex analysis.
The formula in Exercise 31 is called Hermite's formula, and it is funda-
mental in complex approximation theory.
The technique used in Exercise 39 is called complex interpolation. More
about this can be found in [S-W].
2
Properties of Analytic Mappings
1. Conformal Mappings
We now will concentrate on the aspect of analytic functions as mappings
from domains in 1R2 into 1R2. For an arbitrary C1 mapping the relation
f(a + z) - f(a) = 8z Iaz + 821az + o(IzI)

means that the derivative D f (a of f at a is the real linear mapping
z (1.1)
`-' az IaZ + az Ia2.
In particular, if (Of /e2) (a = 0, then D f (n is just multiplication by the
complex number f'(a) = (8 f /8z) (Q and hence nonsingular if (and only if)
f'(a) 54 0. The determinant of z H f'(a)z is equal to If'(a)l2 (exercise!).
1.1 Proposition. Suppose that f E A(f2) and f'(a) # 0. Then there are
neighborhoods V and W of a and f (a), respectively, such that f maps V
bijectively onto W. Moreover, the inverse g is in A(W) and g'(f(z)) _
1/ f'(z).
Proof. By the inverse function theorem there are open sets V and W
such that f maps V bijectively onto W and the inverse g E C1(W). Thus,
g(f (z)) = z in V, and differentiation of this equality with respect to 8/8z
and 8/82 yields the remaining statements.
A proof without any reference to the inverse function theorem is outlined
in Exercise 23 in Ch. 1.
Now we are going to show that f (1l) is open if f c A(Sl) and f is
nonconstant (on each component of 52). We first consider the function
7rm(z) = z"`, m > 0. If 0 E ir,,,(cI), then 0 is an interior point in 7r,,,(I )
since D(0,rm) = 7r,,,(D(0,r)) C 7r,,,(SZ) for some r > 0, and any other
w E 7r1(P) is an interior point by Proposition 1.1. A general analytic f
can be represented as a composition, as the following result illustrates.
1. Conformal Mappings 29
1.2 Theorem. Suppose that St is connected and f E A(i) is nonconstant.

Let m be the order of the zero off - f (a) at z = a E 1z. Then there is a
neighborhood V of a, 45 E A(V) and r > 0 such that
(a) f(z) = f(a) + (4(z))' in V.
(b) 0' # 0 in V and q5: V D(0, r) is a bijection.
Thus, f - f (a) = T,,, o 0 in V, and hence f is an m-to-one mapping from
V \ {a} to {0 < Iw - f (a) I < rm}. In particular, f (a) is an interior point
in f (1l).
Proof of Theorem 1.2. We may assume that 1z is convex and that f (z)
f (a) in c \ {a}. Then f (z) - f (a) = (z - a)mg(z) in 1z where g 0.
According to Lemma 3.1 in Ch. 1, there is a function h such that h"` = g.
If we take 0 = (z - a)h(z), then (a) holds. Since q5(a) = 0 and 0'(a) 0,
Proposition 1.1 provides a neighborhood V of a such that (b) also holds.
0
Suppose that f is a mapping from an open set c in the plane. If there
is an e'O E T such that
reie) - f (a) = eiee'm = ei(e+m)
lim f (a --
r\,o If (a + rese) - f (a) I
for all 0, we say that f preserves angles at a. This means that two half-lines
from a meeting at an angle 0 are mapped onto two curves meeting at the
same angle at f (a), and that the orientation is preserved.
Definition. If f preserves angles at each point, it is called a conformal
mapping.
If f is differentiable at a and df la # 0 (i.e. Df 1a # 0), then f preserves
angles at a if and only if the mapping (1.1) does, and this in turn happens
if and only if (8f/82)Ia = 0 (exercise!). Notice, however, that for example
z zIzI preserves angles at 0 even though the derivative vanishes. Hence
any f E A(1l) with a nonvanishing derivative is a conformal mapping.
Conversely, if f is a conformal C1 mapping, it follows that 8f/82 = 0,
where Df 54 0, and therefore 8f/82 - 0 in 0, i.e., f is analytic. However,
if f is analytic and has a zero of order m > 1 at a, then it follows from
Theorem 1.2 that f blows up angles rn times since z - z' does. Thus we
have proved the following proposition.
1.3 Proposition. If f E A(11) and f' 0, then f is a conformal mapping.
Conversely, if f is a conformal C1 mapping in c, then f is analytic and
f'#0.
Two domains 0 and 0' in C are conformally equivalent if there is a E
A(c) that maps Sl bijectively onto 1z'. We then find that 0-1 E A(c') and
30 2. Properties of Analytic Mappings
both 0 and 45-1 are conformal mappings. If 11 is conformally equivalent to

U, then S2 is homeomorphic to U and hence simply connected. Conversely,
we have
1.4 The Riemann Mapping Theorem. If 12 C C is simply connected

and C \ Il is nonempty, then c2 is con formally equivalent to U.
It follows from Liouville's theorem that C is not conformally equivalent
to U. The Riemann mapping theorem makes it possible to reduce cer-
tain problems in simply connected domains into corresponding problems
in U. We postpone the proof for a while and begin by studying conformal
mappings of U onto itself. To this end we need
1.5 Schwarz' Lemma. Suppose that f E A(U), If (z)1 < 1, and f (0) = 0.
Then
If (z)1 < 1z1, z E U (1.2)
and
If'(0)1 s 1. (1.3)
If equality holds in (1.3) or for some z in (1.2), then f (z) _ Az for some
A E T.
Proof. Set fr(z) = f (rz) for r < 1. Then fr(z)/z is in A(U) fl C(U), and
by the maximum principle
1fr(z)/z1 < sup Ifr(()/(I <t 1, z E U,
ICI=1
i.e., 1f,_(z)1 < 1z1. Letting r tend to 1 we get (1.2) and thereby (1.3).
Observe that g(z) = f(z)/z (g(0) = f'(0)) is in A(U) and that 1s(z)1 < 1.
If 1g(z)1 = 1 for some z E U, then g(z) = A for some A E T, again according
to the maximum principle.
Exercise 1. Suppose that f E A(U), If (z) I < 1, and that f (z) has a
zero of order m at 0. Show that 1 f (z)1 < 1zIm. What happens if there is
equality?
A bijective conformal mapping of 1 onto itself is called an automorphism.
The set of automorphisms of ft is a group under composition.
1.6 Automorphisms of U. For a E U we let

z-a
(z) = 1-az
Then 0 is analytic in the entire plane except for a pole at. 1/6, which
is outside U. For 1z1 = 1 we have 1z - a1 = 1z - a11z1 = 11 - az1, and
1. Conformal Mappings 31
therefore T is mapped into itself, and hence by the maximum modulus

principle U is mapped into itself (this also follows from the elementary
inequality Iz - aI _< 11 - azI for z c U). However, since &,, o 0_a(z) = z
(check!), 45a actually maps T onto itself and U onto itself bijectively. For
any A E T and a E U we have that ?P(z) = A&a(z) is an automorphism of
U. We claim that every automorphism is of this form. In fact, if f (z) is an
automorphism, then f (a) = 0 for some a E U, and thus g = f o O_, is an
automorphism such that g(0) = 0. Hence, by Schwarz' lemma, jg(z)I < IzI.
However, g-' is also an automorphism, and therefore IzI < Ig(z)I. Hence,
I9(z)I = Izj and thus g(z) = Az for some A E T, i.e., f = A.
Exercise 2. Suppose that 0: 0 -* U is a bijective analytic mapping. Show

that any automorphism of Sl has the form z/i-1(AOa o 0). Also show that
if a, b E Sl, then there is an automorphism such that g(a) = b, i.e., the
automorphism group is transitive.
Let us now consider the class E of analytic functions that map U into
U. For a given a E U, we want to optimize Ig'(a)I. If g E E, then Schwarz'
lemma applies to f = 4g(a) o g o 0_a, giving I f'(0) I < 1, and equality holds
if and only if f(w) = Aw, i.e., g(z) = (.\O,, (z)). However,
f'(0) = 0'9(a)(9(a))9 (a)*' a(0) _ (1- I9(a)I2)-'9(a)(1- IaI2),
giving
1-Wa)I2
I9'(0)1 <_
1 - Ia12
Summing up, we get: If g E E, then
-1IaI2
I9 (a)I < 1
and the maximum is attained if and only if g(z) = Aoa(z). In particular,

any optimizing g is automatically bijective and g(a) = 0.
Exercise 3. Suppose that Sl is conformally equivalent to the unit disk.
Let E be the set of all f E A(n) with If (z) I < 1 and fix a E 0. Show that
there is an f E E such that If'(a)l = supgEE Ig'(a)I, and that this f is a
bijective mapping of Cl onto U with f (a) = 0.
Hence, if there is any analytic bijective mapping of Cl onto U, one can
find such a mapping by optimizing If'(a)I. This is the idea behind the
proof of the Riemann mapping theorem. However, to carry out the proof
we need some further preparations.
Definition. A set 4' C A(Sl) is called a normal family if any sequence f

from 1 has a subsequence that converges u.c. in Cl (the limit function is not
necessarily in '1). Sometimes it is convenient to make the definition less
restrictive and accept subsequences that tend to oc u.c. For our purposes
one can adopt either definition.
1.7 Proposition. If 4) C A(Q) and 4) is uniformly bounded on compacts,
then it is a normal family.
Proof. It follows from Proposition 1.8 of Ch. 1 that the gradients of the
functions in 4) are uniformly bounded on compacts and hence 4) is equicon-
tinuous on compacts. The conclusion then follows from the Arzela-Ascoli
theorem.
1.8 Lemma. If S2 is connected, f,, E A(S2), f , f u.c., all f" are injec-
tive, and f is not constant, then f is also injective.
Proof. Take a E S2 and observe that are nonvan-
ishing in S2 \ {a} and that g --i f - f (a) - g u.c. Since g is nonconstant
and S2 \ {a} is connected, g is also nonvanishing in 11 \ {a} (this follows for
instance from the maximum theorem or Rouche's theorem; cf. Exercise 25
of Ch. 1) and hence g(z) # g(a) if z 54 a.
1.9 Proposition. If 0 is simply connected, then each f E A(Q) has a
primitive, and hence each non vanishing f E A(12) has a logarithm.
Proof. Take a E fl and define

F(z) = f j fd(,
r
where I'Z is a curve from a to z; since 0 is simply connected, F(z) is inde-
pendent of the choice of r (why?). As in the proof of Morera's theorem,
it follows that F'= f. The last claim then follows; cf. Lemma 3.1 in Ch. 1.
Proof of the Riemann Mapping Theorem. Let E be the set of all f E

A(f2) that are injective (or univalent) and map S2 into U. By assumption
there is some w E C \ S2, and since S2 is simply connected, there is, by
Proposition 1.9, a 0 E A(Q) such that 02(z) = z -- w. If Oz1) = O(Z2),
then zl = z2, and therefore 0 is injective and O(z1) A -O(z2). Since 0(h) is
open, it contains a disk D(a, r) with 0 < r < jai. Thus D(-a,r)flO(h) = 0
and therefore 0 = r/( + a) E E; hence E is nonempty.
Choose a E Q. The next step consists in proving that if i E E and O(S2)
is not the entire U, then there is a E E such that
IL.'(a)l. (1.4)
To this end take 3 E U \ 7/,(c). Then Op o 'O E E is nonvanishing in S2,
and therefore there is a g E A(Q) such that g2 = 0,3 o 0 E E. However,
2. The Riemann Sphere and Projective Space 33
g is injective (why?) and therefore r = 09(a) o g E E. If ir(z) = z2, then

0 = _A 07r o 4_v(a) obi and therefore *'(a) = (0_0 o 7r o
but since 0_0 o ,r o U U is not injective, the modulus of its
derivative at 0 is less than one, and hence (1.4) follows.
Now only the "soft" part remains. Let rJ = sup r/)'(a)J. It follows
from the above that 0 E E is onto U if 1'/"(a)l = n (note that 77 > 0 since
E is nonempty and that i < oo since E is uniformly bounded). Choose
a sequence x(i from E such that 7. By Proposition 1.7, E is
a normal family, and hence we can extract a subsequence (which we also
denote -0n) that converges u.c. to some i . Since lip'(a)J = 77 > 0, 0 is non-
constant and hence injective by Lemma 1.8. Since O,,(11) C U, zrb(SI) C U,
but Vi(Q) is open and therefore t/i( 1) C U. Thus, we have found a i/i E E
with optimal derivative, and by the preceding step it must be surjective;
hence, the theorem is proved.
2. The Riemann Sphere and Projective Space

We compactify the plane C by adjoining a point oo so that the disks
D(oo, r) = {IzI > r} U {oo} constitute a basis of neighborhoods at oo
and denote it P, the one-dimensional (complex) projective space. By the
mapping
1(re'B) = (1 +r2)-'(2rcosO,2rsinO,r2 - 1), b(00)=(0,0,1),
we can identify P with the sphere S2 in R3. We leave it as an exercise to
verify that 4) is indeed a homeomorphism and to find out its geometrical
meaning.
In D(oo, 0), w = 1/z is continuous. By taking w as a complex coordinate
we can define such concepts as analyticity, zero, removable singularity, pole,
and essential singularity in this set. This is consistent since in the set
0 < JzJ < oo, the function f(z) is analytic if and only if z --+ f(1/z) is,
and so on. Thus, from the point of view of the z coordinate, a function f
defined in D(oo, r) is analytic if z h-- f (1/z) is analytic in D(0, 1/r), and it
has a zero at oc if and only if w -- f (1/w) has a zero at w = 0 and so on.
Since f is meromorphic in SI C P if and only if locally either f or 11f is
analytic, a meromorphic function in SI is just an analytic mapping from SI
to P.
2.1 Remark. Topologically, P is just S2 via the homeomorphism (D. Any-

way, we prefer the notion P since it emphazises the complex structure, even
though it is often practical to keep in mind the geometrical picture of the
sphere, which in this context is referred to as the Riemann sphere. More-
over, even though P is invariant in a certain sense (see Exercise 32), we
mostly think of it as an extension of the usual complex plane, so that for
instance the points 0, 1, and oo have a specified meaning.
2.2 Remark. If w = O(z) is a bijective analytic function in S2, then con-

cepts like analyticity, pole of order m, essential singularity as well as others
can be defined just as well with respect to the coordinate w. This imme-
diately follows from the chain rule. However, the value of the residue at a
point depends on the particular choice of coordinate.
To clarify at this point, recall that any 1-form can be written uniquely
as f dz + gdt. This decomposition is invariant under any analytic change of
coordinate. The first term is a (1,0) -form and the other one a (0, 1)-form,.
Since integration along a curve is intrinsically defined for 1-forms, it
follows from the definition (cf. formula (2.4) of Ch. 1) that the value of the
residue at some point a is invariantly defined for the meromorphic (1, 0)-
form f (z)dz. (In the same way, the value of the derivative of an analytic
f at a certain point depends on the choice of coordinate, whereas the form
of = f'(z)dz is invariantly defined.) For instance, dz is a meromorphic
form with residue 0 at infinity, whereas the form dz/z has residue 1 at the
origin and -1 at oo. It is easily verified (exercise!) that if f is a global
meromorphic form on IF, then the sum of all of its residues is 0.
Since P is compact, any global analytic function on P must attain its

maximum at some interior point and hence by the maximum principle f is
constant, since P is connected. However, there are nontrivial meromorphic
functions on P. By the compactness of P a meromorphic function f has
just a finite number of poles. Let 1(z) be the sum of the principal parts
at these points. Recall that the principal part at a point a E C is the
"negative part" of the Laurent expansion with respect to z at this point.
If oo is a pole, we take instead the principal part with respect to w = 1/z.
Then f - I is analytic on P and hence constant. Therefore, f = I + c is
rational, and we obtain the partial fraction decomposition
+n n(k)
f(z) = p(z) + F
k=1 j=1 `
(z ak)j
C,k ,
where n(k) is the order of the pole in ak and p is a polynomial (p - p(O) is

the principal part at oo).
2.3 Example. We now can give a new approach to Louiville's theorem. If
f(z) is an entire function that is O(Izl-) when JzJ -- oo, then it has a pole
of order at most m at oo. Therefore, there is a polynomial p(z) of degree
at most m (the principal part at oo with respect to w = 11x) such that
f (z) - p(z) is analytic at oo and hence constant by the maximum principle,
so f(z) = c + p(z).
2.4 Example. Let us determine all automorphisms of the entire plane.
Certainly any affine mapping z '- az + b is an automorphism of C, and in
fact all automorphisms are of this kind. In fact, if f is an automorphism,
3. Univalent Functions 35
then it has an isolated singularity at oc; but since f is injective and open,
it follows that there is some punctured neighborhood of oo where f avoids
the open set f (U). Thus, it follows from Proposition 2.10 in Ch. 1 that
the singularity is a pole (or removable). By Louiville's theorem then f is a
polynomial and hence linear because of its injectivity.
Let M be the set of all linear fractions,

az + b
O(z)
cz + d'
where ad 0 bc. Each 0 E M is an analytic bijective mapping from P to P,
and one easily checks that M is closed under composition and that each
95 E M has an inverse in M, i.e., M is a group.
Exercise 4. Show that if a, ,13,'y are three different points on IP, there is a
unique 0 E M such that 0(a) = 0, 0(,3) = 1, and 0(-y) = oo.
Exercise 5. Show that 0 E M maps "circles" onto "circles," if "circle"
means circle or line in C.
2.5 Automorphisms of P. We claim that M is precisely the automor-

phism group of P. To begin with, assume that g: P P is an automorphism
such that g(0) = 0, g(1) = 1 and g(oo) = oo. We already know that g must
be rational, and since it has no pole in C, it is a polynomial. Since it is
injective, it then must be a linear polynomial, and thus g(z) = z since
g(0) = 0 and g(1) = 1. Now if f: P -+ P is any automorphism, we can com-
pose it with a linear fraction 0 such that g = 0 of has 0, 1, and oo as fixed
points. However, then 0 o f is the identity and therefore f = 0-1 E M.
A further discussion about IP and its automorphism group M is outlined

in the exercises.
3. Univalent Functions
Suppose that f is analytic in U, f (0) = 0, and f'(0) = 1. Then we
know from Proposition 1.1 that f (U) contains a neighborhood of the ori-
gin. Is there a constant r such that rU C f (U) for all such f? With-
out further restrictions on f the answer is no. For instance, the function
ff(z) = e(exp(z/e) - 1) satisfies these requirements, but the point -e is not
contained in f f (U). However, if we impose the extra condition that f be
injective, or univalent, then the situation is different. The principal result
is Koebe's theorem.
Definition. Let S be the class of injective analytic functions in U with

f (0) = 0 and f'(0) = 1.
Notice that each f E S is a conformal equivalence from U to its image

f(U)
3.1 Theorem (Koebe's Theorem). If f E S, then
f (U) D D(0,1/4).
The main tool in the proof of Koebe's theorem is a result referred to as

the area theorem. In the proof we use the following simple observation.
Exercise 6. If w is a bounded domain with C1 boundary, then
/
I zdz = 2i ! da(z).
aW W
3.2 Theorem (The Area Theorem). Suppose that

1
h(z) = 1 +c0+c1z+c2z2+c3z3+
is analytic and injective for 0 < IzI < 1. Then
00
Notice that if h is as in the theorem and avoids the value a, then 1/(h(z)-
a) E S. Conversely, if f E S, then h = 1/f satisfies the hypothesis of the
theorem.
Proof. Take r < 1. Since h is injective and analytic, it is actually an

orientation preserving diffeomorphism from U to a certain subset of IP con-
taining oo; hence V,. = IP\ h(D(0, r)) is a an open subset of the plane whose
boundary is parametrized by ry: 0 F-+ h(reie) and 0 runs from 2a to 0 (sic!).
In virtue of the preceding exercise, the area of V, is
r f a"
A,. = 2i wdw = -2z h(re'B)h'(reie)ire'dG. (3.1)
Jry
A simple calculation gives that

h(reie)h'(re:e)re:e 2 + (Icl I2 + 2Ic2I2 + 31C3 12 + ... )r2 + ... ,
r
where the dots at the end denote terms with nonzero integer powers of e'B
Since L " ei,RedO = 0 for m 54 0, (3.1) implies that
0 < A,. = . 2
1
T
- O
nIcni2r2
The desired result is obtained by letting r tend to 1. 0

3. Univalent Functions 37
Notice that equality in the area theorem means that the intersection of
the sets V, is a zero set, i.e., h attains almost all values. The theorem
implies in particular that 1c1 J < 1. If we have Icl J = 1, then ck = 0 for
k > 1 and hence
h(z) = 1 + co + e0z.
z
This function is actually injective (verify!) and maps {0 < JzJ < 1} onto
the complement of the line segment between the points -2eie/2 + co and
2ei812 + cp. (Since h is continuous on U and h(U) is open, it is enough to
verify that h maps T onto this segment.) In particular, if we choose cl = 1
and co = 2, then h(z) avoids the interval [0, 4] and hence f = 1/h E S
avoids the set [1/4, oo), which shows that the constant 1/4 in Koebe's
theorem is the best possible.
3.3 Proposition. Suppose that f = z + a2z2 + ... E S.

(a) There is a function g c S such that g2(z) = f (z2).
(b) Ja2J < 2.
Proof. Since f (z) is injective, f (z)/z is nonvanishing and therefore equal

to 02 for a 0 with 0(0) = 1. Thus f (z2) (g(z))2, where
g(z) = zq(z2) = z + 2a2zs + ... ,
so to prove (a) we just have to verify that g(z) is injective. However, if

g(z) = g(w), then f(z2) = f(w2) so that z = w; but g(-z) = -g(z) and
so z = -w implies that z = w = 0. Hence, in any case z = w.
For the second statement, letting g(z) be as above we have that
1 1 1 \= 1z
1 - 2 a2z2 + ... /J
1
2 a2z + ...
g(z) Z
and therefore by the area theorem, 1(-1/2)a2J 1.
3.4 Remark. If we have equality in (b), then as noted above 1/g(z) _

1/z + co + eiez. The relation f(z2) = g2(z) then implies that co = 0 and
thus f (z) = z/(1+eiez)2. We leave it as an exercise to determine the range
of this function. Note that
00
f(z) = e-9 E(-1)n+1nein9Zn i
n=1
and hence Ia,, I = n. In fact, for any f = z + a2z2 + E S it is true that
JanJ < n. For a long time this was known as Bieberbach's conjecture, and
it was proved by de Branges in 1984.
We have seen an example of an injective h(z) = 1/z+co+clz+... in U

that avoided an interval of length 4. Actually this is optimal, as we have
3.5 Proposition. If h(z) = 1/z+co+clz+... is injective in U and avoids

the values w1 and w2i then 1w1 - w21 < 4.
Proof. By assumption, 1/(h(z) - wj) = z + (wj - co)z2 + E S, so

1w.i - col < 2 by Proposition 3.3 (b). This implies that Iwl - W21:5 4.
It is now easy to prove Koebe's theorem.
Proof of Theorem 3.1. If f E S and avoids w, then h = 11f avoids 1/w

and 0, and therefore 11/w1 < 4. Thus, w E f (U) if Iw1 < 1/4.
4 Picard's Theorems
Picard's theorem states that if an entire function omits two distinct val-
ues, then it is constant; and, more generally, that if an analytic function
omits two distinct values in some punctured neighborhood of an isolated
singularity, then the singularity is either a pole or removable. The latter
statement is usually called the big Picard theorem. The proof presented
here proceeds via a classical result called Schottky's theorem. The main
tool is Bloch's theorem, which states that there is an absolute constant
f such that if f E A(U) and f'(0) = 1, then f (U) contains a disk with
radius e. It should be pointed out that in general this disk will not be cen-
tered at f (0); cf. the example at the beginning of the preceding paragraph.
However, if one also imposes a boundedness condition, then in fact f (U)
contains D(f (0), r) for some fixed r.
4.1 Proposition. Suppose that f E A(U) satisfies that f (O) = 0 and

f'(0) = 1. If furthermore If 1 < M, then
f (U) j D(0, 1/4M).
Notice that if M = 1, then f(U) = U by Schwarz' lemma. The proposi-

tion implies that
f(D(0, R)) D D(0,1f'(0)12R2/4M)
if f is analytic in D(0, R), f (0) = 0, and If I < M.
Proof. If w f (U), there is a h E A(U) with h(O) = 1 such that
h(z) = (I -f(z)/w)112 = 1 - 2wz+...
4 Picard's Theorems 39
and Ih(z)12 < 1 + M/Iwl. For any h(z) = ao + a1 z +. - - E A(U) we have

00
lh(reà)12d0 = E r2ttlan12, r < 1,
0 0
and therefore 1 + r2/41w12 < 1 + M/IwI, i.e., Iwl > r2/4M. Letting r -+ 1,
we get the desired result.
4.2 Theorem (Bloch's Theorem). If f E A(U) and f'(0) = 1, then

f (U) contains some disk with radius e, where a is an absolute constant.
If f is analytic in D(a, R), it follows that the image of f contains a disk

with radius If'(a)IRe.
For an even stronger statement also due to Bloch, see Exercise 31.
Proof. We may assume that f is analytic in some neighborhood of the

closure of U since otherwise we can consider f(rz)/r for r near 1. Let
w(t) = t sup I f'(z)I
Then w(t) is continuous for 0 < t < 1, w(0) = 0, and w(1) = 1, and
therefore there is a least to > 0 such that w(to) = 1. Choose a such that
Ial < 1 - to and I f'(a)I = 1/to. In D(a, to/2), I f'I < 2/to since D(a, t0/2) C
D(0, 1 - to/2) and in the latter domain sup l f'I < 1/(to/2) = 2/to. Now
g(z) = f(z) - f(a) = 1 f'(T)dr

a
is analytic in z E D(a, to/2), Ig'(a)I = 11t0, and Ig(z)I < t0/2.2/to = 1, and
therefore g(D(a, t0/2)) contains the disk D(0, 1/16), i.e., f(U) contains the
disk D(f (a), 1/16).
We now can conclude the little Picard theorem. With no loss of generality
we may assume that f is an entire function that omits the values 0 and
1. Since C is simply connected, there is some function log f in U and
furthermore some function
log f log f
g(x) =log
2iri 27ri
We claim that this g omits the set

n-1)+m27ri, n>1, m=0,f1,f2,...}.
In fact,
f =exp (2i rexp9 + 2exp(-9)121

` /1 (4.1)
(let a = log f /27ri; then exp g = f - a --I and exp(-g) = /a + a - 1,

and thus expg+exp(-g) = 2f). Certainly there is a positive number d
such that each disk with radius d intersects E, and hence it follows from
Bloch's theorem that g(a) = 0 for any a. Therefore, g is constant and
hence so is f.
To obtain the big Picard theorem, we need Schottky's inequality, the
proof of which requires a somewhat refined version of the previous argu-
ment.
4.3 Proposition (Schottky's Inequality). There are positive functions
m(a, )3, r) and M(a, (3, r) such that if f E A(U) avoids 0 and 1 and a <
If (0) 1 < 0, then
m(a,/3,r) If(z)I < M(a,0,r), IzI < r < 1.
Proof. Assume that f E A(U) and avoids the values 0 and 1. Since U
is simply connected, there is a function g E A(U) such that (4.1) holds.
Moreover, we can choose g by first determining the value g(0) so that
Ig(0) I <- C'(a, Q) if 0 < a < If (0) I < Q. (4.2)
If IzI = r < 1, then the function
g(z + (1 - r)()
(S) =
(1 - r)g'(z)
is analytic in the unit disk and 0'(0) = 1. By Bloch's theorem, therefore, its
image contains a disk with radius e, i.e., some disk with radius (1-r)Ig'(z)It
is contained in g(U). However, since g avoids the set E, we must have that
Ig (z)I < f(,d r)"

Since
g(z) = g(0) + fI g'(r)dr,
we thus obtain the estimate

Ig(z)I < Ig(0)I + e(1dlzlzl) C(a,13) e(1dlzlxl). (4.3)
< +
From (4.3) and (4.2) we now get that I f (z) I < M(a, /3, r) if IzI < r < 1.
Applying it to 1/f we get the lower estimate. 0
Notice that one needs both the upper and the lower bound on If (0)I even
to get the estimate If(z)I < M.
4.4 The Big Picard Theorem. If f is analytic near a point a and omits
two distinct values in some punctured neighborhood of a, then a is a pole
or a removable singularity.
Proof. We have to prove that if f is analytic for (z( > 1/2 and avoids
0 and 1, then either f is bounded or has a pole at infinity. If not, the
image of f on each set IzI > R is dense according to Proposition 2.10 in
Ch. 1, and therefore there are An oo such that 1/2 < If (A,,) 1 :5 1. Set
fn(z) = f(Anz). Then fn is analytic in Iz( > 1/2 and 1/2 < lfn(1)I < 1,
and therefore Schottky's inequality yields that
c < I fn(z)I < C, z E D(1, 1/4).
For a E TnD(1, 1/4) we can repeat the argument and hence get constants
c' and C' such that
c' < If-WI < C', z E D(a, 1/4).
After a finite number of steps we have covered the entire unit circle, and
hence there are constants k and K such that
k<Ifn(z)(<K, zET,
i.e., (f(< K on Iz( = A, . By the maximum principle
(f max (K, sup Ill

\ T
for 1 < IzI < (Anl. Hence, f is bounded for 1 < Iz( < oo, which is a
contradiction. 0
Exercise 7. Show that the maximum modulus principle follows from the
open mapping theorem.
Exercise 8. Show that the determinant of the linear mapping z az is
(a(2.
Exercise 9. Complete the proof of Proposition 1.3, i.e., show that if
df(a # 0 and f preserves angles at a, then (8f/8z)1n = 0.
Exercise 10. Given S2 C C, find an exhausting sequence of compacts
... K C Kn+i .... i.e., such that any compact K C 92 is contained in
some Kn. Find an increasing sequence of compacts Kn such that UKn = S2
which is not exhausting.
Exercise 11. Let 4iP = If E A(U); f t,,, If (dA < exp(1 - Is D a
normal family?
Exercise 12. Show that the function t from P (the extended plane) to
S2 is indeed a homeomorphism. Include a drawing.
Exercise 13. Suppose that f : U - U is analytic and f (a) = r3. Show

that
f(z) - Q z-a
1-Of (Z) 1 -&z
Exercise 14. Find all automorphisms of the upper half-plane II+.
Exercise 15. Suppose that f E A(II+) and If I < 1. How large can I f'(i)
be? Which f are optimal?
Exercise 16. Suppose that f E A(U) fl C(U) and If I = 1 on T. Show
that f has at least one zero in U unless f is constant.
Exercise 17. Find all f E A(U) fl C(U) such that If I = 1 on T. Hint:
Note that each finite product of functions a is of this kind.
Exercise 18. Suppose that f, g E A(U), f (0) = g(0), g(U) C f (U), and
that f is injective. Show that g(D(0, r)) C f (D(0, r)), 0 < r < 1.
Exercise 19. Let (D = If E A(U); Ref > 0 and f (0) = 1}. Show
that ' is a normal family. What happens if one removes the assumption
f(0) = 1?
Exercise 20. Find a homeomorphism from U to U that has no continuous
extension to U.
Exercise 21. Suppose that Il is connected and symmetric with respect to
the real axis, f E A(5l), and f is real on ) fl R. Show that f (z) = f (z).
Exercise 22. Suppose that f is analytic in a connected neighborhood of
T and that If I = 1 on T. Show that f (z) = 11f (1/z).
Exercise 23. Find all meromorphic functions f in C such that If I = 1 on
T.
Exercise 24. Let A(1, R) = {z; I < IzI < R}. Show that if A(1, R) is
conformally equivalent to A(1, R'), then R = R' by filling out the details
in the following arguments. Let f: A(1, R) -+ A(1, R') be analytic and
bijective. First show that I f (z,) I 1 when Izj 1 and I f (zj) I --* R'
when Izj I R, or vice versa. In that case, replace f by R'/f. Then show
that
R'
logIf(z)1 =log logIzI
log R
and conclude that R = R'. Hint:
u(z) = log if (z)I - (log R'/ log R) log IzI
is harmonic in A(1, R) and vanishes on the boundary, and hence it vanishes
identically; see Ch. 4.
Exercise 25. Find all automorphisms of A(1, R).
Exercise 26. Show that if f (z)dz is a meromorphic form on P, then the

sum of all of its residues is 0.
Exercise 27. Show that if f E S, then there is a g E S such that gm(z) _
f (z')-
Exercise 28. Suppose that f (z) is an injective meromorphic function in
U such that f (0) = 0 and f'(0) = 1, and suppose that f avoids w1 and W2.
Show that Iw1 - w2I/Iw11Iw21 < 4.
Exercise 29. Determine the image of the function f (z) in Remark 3.4.
Exercise 30. Here is a sketch of an alternative proof of Proposition 4.1.
If f (z) = z + a2z2 + a3z3 + ... , then lakl < M by Cauchy's estimate. For
Izl=r<1,
If(z)I > r - Mr2 - Mr3 - ... = r(1 + M) - 1 M = ON,
and 0(r) attains its maximum at p = 1 - M/(1 + M). However, since
(we may assume that) M > 1,
0(P)=( 1+M-vM) 2 =( 1+M+VM) -2 > 1
(1 + / )2M > 6M
1
Thus, if IzI = r < p, then

r0PP)
If(z)1 ? 0(r) >_
as r 0(r)/r is decreasing. Hence, f (z) has just one zero in D(0, p).
However, if (zl = p and IwI < 0(p), then If(z)I > 0(p) > Iwl and thus by
Rouchr 's theorem, z - f (z) - w has exactly one zero in D(0, p). Thus,
f (D(O, P)) D D(0, 0(P))
Exercise 31. Show the following stronger version of Theorem 4.2: There
exists an absolute constant b > 0 such that if f E A(S2) and f'(0) = 1,
then some open subset of U is mapped bijectively by f onto some disk with
radius b.
The following exercises contain a further discussion about the one-
dimensional complex projective space P and the Riemann sphere.
Exercise 32. Here is the usual formal definition of P: On C2 \ {(0,0)} the
points Z = (zo, z1) and W = (wo, wl) are equivalent if and only if w = az
for some a E C \ {0}. The set of equivalence classes is denoted by IP and
is made into a topological space by requiring that the natural projection
7r: C2 \ (0, 0) -+ P be continuous and open. Since 7rI {Iz1=1 } is surjective,
P is compact. In 7r({zo # 0}), one can take z = zl/zo as a local complex
coordinate. A nonsingular linear transformation on C2 with matrix
G=
gives rise to an automorphism O(z) on P given by the formula

az + b (*)
O(z) =
cz+d
in the coordinate z. It follows that the set M of all automorhisms of P of
the type (*) is a group.
Exercise 33. From this point of view a natural distance or metric on P is
Iwozi - wizil
X(Z,W) -+1 Z iI2 -+I WO I2 W 1I2,
IzoI2
which in the coordinate z = z1/zo is
X(z, w) = VI'l- , X(z, 00) =

+ IzI2 1I + Iw12 1 -+1 Z I2
Actually, X(z, w) _> 0 and X(z, w) = 0 if and only if z = w and the triangle
inequality holds, i.e., X(z, w) < X(z, u) + X(u, w). Moreover, X(z, w) < 1
with equality if and only if w = -1/z. The metric X is invariant under the
subgroup U of M, that arises from the group of unitary matrices G, i.e.,
such that G*G = I. The subgroup U is (also) transitive, i.e., for any pair
of points z, w E P there is some ?k E U mapping z on w.
Exercise 34. Each "circle" on IP is of the form {z; X(z, w) = r}.
Exercise 35. There is a unique normalized measure dp on IP that is
invariant under U, i.e., such that p(E) = p( rl,(E)) for all (measurable) E
and 0 E U. Since
X(z + h, z) _ 1
lim
IhI 1 + Iz12'
it follows that
dp(z) _ dA(z)
(1 + IzI2)2
7r
Exercise 36. Show that if P is identified with the sphere S2 via the
mapping 4), then X corresponds to half the cordial distance between points
on S2. Moreover, show that the measure du corresponds to the normalized
surface measure on S2. Also show that a "circle" on P corresponds to a
circle on S2.
Notes
The first complete proof of the Riemann mapping theorem is from the
end of the nineteenth century. The proof presented here depends heavily
on normal families. A more constructive proof was obtained by Koebe.
Notes 45
For the history of the R.iemann mapping theorem and its connection to
Dirichlet's problem, see [Hi].
Any doubly connected domain (such that the complement has two com-
ponents) with reasonable boundary is conformally equivalent to an annulus
A(1, R) (for a unique R in view of Exercise 24). See [Al] and [A2] for fur-
ther results about multiply connected domains.
Koebe proved in 1907 that there exists some constant k such that f (U) D
D(0, k) for each f E S. The optimal value k = 1/4 was determined by
Bieberbach in 1916. Bieberbach also made the conjecture that n
for all n. de Brange's proof of the conjecture is published in Acta Math.,
vol. 154 (1985).
Picard proved the theorem bearing his name in 1879. The proof pre-
sented here is due to Bloch (1924). The result in Exercise 31, as well as
Theorem 4.2, is due to Bloch. The best constant in Theorem 4.2 is called
Landau's constant L, whereas the best constant in Exercise 31 is called
Bloch's constant B. Their exact values still are not determined, but it is
known that 0.4330... < B < 1/2 < L < 0.5433... ; see Liu and Minda,
Tans. Amer. Math. Soc., vol. 333 (1992), 325-338.
3
Analytic Approximation
and Continuation
1. Approximation with Rationals

In this section we study the possibility of approximating analytic functions
with polynomials and, more generally, by rational functions. The main
result is Runge's theorem.
1.1 Runge's Theorem. Suppose that K is compact in 1P and that the
set {a? } contains one point from each component of 1P \ K. If f is analytic
in a neighborhood of K, then, for given e > 0, there is a rational function
r having poles only in the set {aj } such that if - rl < e on K.
Of course, one of the points may be oo. Note that 1P \ K has at most
countably many components.
1.2 Corollary. If K C C and C \ K is connected, i.e., K has no "holes,"

then any f that is analytic in a neighborhood of K can be uniformly ap-
proximated by polynomials on K.
Notice that there is no requirement that K be connected.
1.3 Example. There is a sequence of polynomials pn such that pn(z) -+ 1
for all zEUand pn(z)-+0 forallzVU. In order to see this, let K,, =
U U {z; 1+1/n < jzj < n,0 < argz < 27r- 1/n}. Since the complement
of each K is connected, Runge's theorem applies to the function f that
is I in a neighborhood of U and 0 in a neighborhood of Kn \ U; therefore,
there are polynomials pn(z) such that 1pn - 11 < 1/n on U and 1pnI < 1/n
on Kn \ U. The sequence pn then has the stated properties.
The requirement of (at least) one point from each component of P \ K
is necessary. In fact, if a is a point in the component V of P \ K, then
1. Approximation with Rationals 47
f (z) = (z - a) - l is analytic in a neighborhood of K (take f (z) = z if

oo e V). If f (z) could be approximated arbitrarily well on K by a rational
function r(z) with no poles in V, then (z - a)r(z) - 1 would be near 0
on 8V C K and hence in V by the maximum principle. This leads to a
contradiction when z = a.
Proof of Runge's Theorem. We may assume that K C C. The dual

space of C(K) is precisely the space of (complex) measures on K. If f IK is
not in the closure of the space (of restrictions to K) of rational functions
having poles in {aj }, there is (according to the Hahn-Banach theorem) a
measure p on K that vanishes on these rational functions but such that
p(f) 0.
Thus, if At is a measure on K that vanishes on rational functions with
poles in each {aj }, we have to prove that (f) = 0. To this end, let
Kz-(
h(C) = f dp(z) CEP \ K.
Let V be a component of P \ K and ak a point in v fl jai I. If ak 0 00,

then
1 - (C - ak)"
z - (z - ak)"+l
o
uniformly for z E K if C E D(ak, r) CC V. Hence, h = 0 in D(ak, r) by the

assumption on p, and since h is analytic in V, it must vanish identically
there; analogously if ak = oo. Hence, h = 0 in P\ K. Now take 0 E Co (C)
such that = 1 in a neighborhod of K. Then for z E K,
f(z) = f(z)O(z) _ -! f f(S)a'zaSda(s)

and, by Fubini's theorem,
(f) = fK fdu = ,-I f f(C) a"h(C)da(() = 0,

since 84,/85 = 0 on K and h = 0 outside K. 0
We leave it to the reader to give an interpretation of this proof in the sense
of distributions; cf. Remark 3.4 in Ch. 1 and Exercise 18. A constructive
proof of Runge's theorem is outlined in Exercise 6.
By means of the following simple lemma we obtain some important corol-
laries of Runge's theorem.
1.4 Lemma. If Sl C C, then there are compact sets ... K. C int(Kn+1) C

Kn+1 C C Si such that each component of P \ K" intersects P \ Si and
any K C Si is contained in some K.
48 3. Analytic Approximation and Continuation
The first condition on Kn means that it has no "unnecessary holes."
Sketch of Proof. Take a sequence... Hn c int(Hn+l) C H.+1 C . C St

such that UHn = Q. Let Kn be the union of Hn and all components of
P \ Hn that do not intersect P \ Q. 0
One also can define Kn directly by P \ Kn = D(oo, n) U U.VoD(a, l/n).
By the lemma we get the following corollaries:
1.5 Corollary. If 0 C P and f E A(c), there are rational functions rn

with poles outside Il such that rn f u.c. in 0.
1.6 Corollary. If St C C, 1P\ 1l is connected and f e A(c), then there are
polynomials pn such that pn --+ f u.c. in Q.
2. Mittag-Leffler's Theorem and the Inhomogenous

Cauchy-Riemann Equation
Recall that a principal part at a E C is a rational function
n
p(z) _ ci
i-1 (z-a)j
2.1 Mittag-Leffler's Theorem. Let aJ be a sequence with no limit point
in St C C, and let p,(z) be principal parts at a,. Then there is a mero-
morphic f in 11 that has principal part pj at aj for each aj and no other
poles.
Proof. Take Kn as in Lemma 1.4 and let

qn(z) pi (z)
ajEK
There is only a finite number of a3 in K,,; therefore, each qn is a rational
function and qn+l - qn is analytic in a neighborhood of Kn. Hence by
Runge's theorem there are rational rn with poles in IP\S2 such that
qn - rnI < 2-n on Kn. Define
00
f = ql + E(qn+l - qn - r'n)
1
For fixed N,
N-1 00
f = qN - rn + E(qn+l - qn - rn),
1 N
2. Mittag-Leffer's Theorem and the Inhomogenous Cauchy-Riemann ... 49
and the last sum converges uniformly on KN and hence is analytic in

int(KN). Since the rn have their poles outside S2, f is meromorphic in
int(KN) and has the prescribed principal parts there (and no others). Since
N is arbitrary, the proof is complete.
2.2 Remark. The notion of principal part p of f at the point a depends

on the coordinate z. However, in any case, f - p is analytic near a, and
therefore the principal parts with respect to any two different coordinates
differ by an analytic function. Mittag-Lefer's theorem can be stated in
the following invariant way: Suppose that we have an open cover S2j of
0 C IF and meromorphic fj in 12j such that f, - fk is analytic in S2j fl f2k.
Then there is a global meromorphic function f in S2 such that f = fj in
S2j. It is readily verified that Theorem 2.1 follows from this statement, a
proof of which is outlined in Exercise 7.
Recall (cf. (1.7) in Ch. 1) that if 0 E Co , then

0(()d z(()
is a C'
u(z)
f 1
solution to 8u/8z = . By a proof analogous to the preceding

(2.1)
proof of Mittag-Leffler's theorem we get an existence theorem for solutions

to the inhomogenous Cauchy-Riemann equation.
2.3 Theorem. If 52 C C and f E C1 (Q), there is a u E Coo (Q) such that

4=
0 'LL
f (2.2)
8z
in Q.
Proof. Take K. as before and choose 0n E Co (int(K,,+1)) such that

0n = 1 in a neighborhood of K. Now there are un E C(S2) such that
Bun/8z = inf. Observe that (8/(9z)(u,+i - un) = 0 in a neighborhood
of K. Thus there are rational rn, having their poles outside Sl, such that
Iun+1 - un - r,ll < 2-" on K. Then
u = u1 + F_(un+1 - un - rn)
1
is a C-function, since on each fixed compact there is only a finite number

of terms that are not analytic and the "tail" converges uniformly. There-
fore, we may differentiate termwise, and hence
00
8u / l F
1
2.4 Remark. For a function u let eu = (8u/az)d2. Then 8u is the

(0, 1)-part of the form df and hence invariant under analytic changes of
coordinate; cf. Remark 2.2 in Ch. 2. If F is a smooth (0, 1) form, then the
equation 8u = F has an invariant meaning, even at infinity. We then can
formulate the preceding theorem as: If St C IP and f is a smooth (0, 1)-
form in 1, then there is a smooth function u such that 0% = f in 0. This
follows immediately from Theorem 2.3 except in the case 0 = P. However,
if F is a global (0, 1)-form on IF, we can solve 8uj = F in Sto = D(0, 2R)
and Sl1 = D(oo, R), respectively. Then ul - uo is analytic in the annulus
{R < IzI < 2R}, and therefore (using, e.g., the Laurent series expansion)
the function can be written hl - ho, where hj are analytic in Ci. Thus
uo - ho = ul - hl in the annulus and, since Co U Stl = IF, we get a global
solution.
Theorem 2.3 is a pure existence theorem. It is clear that if uo is a

particular solution to (2.2), then any other solution has the form u =
uo + h where h E A(D). Often it is important to single out a solution with
certain properties. This can be done by L2 methods (see Ch. 8, where some
examples of this technique are exploited in the text and in the exercises).
Another way to get further information about a solution is to use some
explicit formula. If f E L' (C), then
u(z) = _ 1 f (S)dA(()
IT r S-z
provides a solution to (2.2). [To see this, let X be a cut-off function in Cl that
is identically 1 in some neighborhood of K C Cl and write f = X f +(I - X) f .
This gives rise to two terms: the first one solves (2.2) on K (cf. (2.1)), and
the second one is analytic near K.) It is also possible to construct such
formulas that will work for a larger class of f:
2.5 Example. It follows that
Kf(z) -ICz21 f(e)d z(()

-7r lU \1 C
solves (2.2) if f(1 - I S I2) I f I < oo _ In fact, one can just apply the arguments
above to the function
S_ (1_cl2)
-(f(S)
and let z = w. In this formula, f is thus allowed to grow somewhat at the
boundary. However, this solution also has a certain minimality property.
Let B(U) be the subset of analytic functions in U that belong to L2(U).
From Proposition 1.10 of Ch. 1 it follows that B(U) is a closed subspace
3. Analytic Continuation 51
of L2(U). Let
Pu(z) = 1 u(()d\(2)
lr U (1 - Cz)
One can verify (see Exercise 9) that P is a bounded operator from L2(U)
to B(U). Furthermore, one can check that
K(Ou/8z) = u - Pu (2.3)
for u E C'(U). Since, for instance, the analytic polynomials are dense
in B(U) (Exercise.9), (2.3) shows that Pu = u if u E B(U) is analytic,
i.e., P is a projection. Moreover, it is indeed the orthogonal projection
P: L2(U) B(U) since its kernel (1 - (z)-2/7r is hermitian (which in
turn implies that P is self-adjoint). The operator P is called the Bergman
projection in U and B(U) the Bergman space. Now, if (2.2) has a solution
u in for example L2(U) n C1(U), it follows from (2.3) that Kf is the one
with minimal norm in L2(U) since it is orthogonal to B(U).
Further examples of integral representation of solutions will be given in
the exercises.
3. Analytic Continuation
In Ch. 1 we found that the logarithm function could be defined along any
curve in the plane that avoids the origin. This is an instance of analytic
continuation, a notion that we now shall make precise. A function element
is an ordered pair (f, D), where D is an open disk and f E A(D). Suppose
that y: [0, 1) - fZ is a curve and we are given fo E A(D(y(0), ro)). We say
that fo (or more precisely (fo, D(y(0), ro))) can be continued along y if there
are numbers 0 = so < s1 < . . < s = 1 and function elements (fj, Dj)
.
such that -y(O) is the center of Do, y(1) is the center of Dn, y([sj,sj+lj) C
Dj, and fj = fj+i in Dj n Djt1 (which by the assumption is nonempty).
Note that if g is a continuation of f along y, then f is a continuation of g
along -y.
3.1 Proposition. Any two continuations of fo along -y coincide, i.e., if we
have 0 = so < sl < < sn = 1, 0 = ao < a1 < . < a,, = 1, and
corresponding function elements (f j, Dj) and (9k, Dk), then fn = g n in
DnnDm.
Hence, we can talk about the continuation of fo along -y.
Proof. Assume the contrary. Then there are i and j such that [si, si+1) n
[aj, aj+1) 0, fi gj on DinDJ, and i+j is minimal. We also may assume
that si > aj. Then i > 1 and s, E [aj, aj+1). Thus, 'y(si) E D;_1 n Di n D1.
Since i + j is minimal and [st_1i si] n [off, o j+11 34 0, necessarily fi- I= gi

on D;_1 nD3. Hence, gj = fi_1 = ft on Di_1 nDinD;, but since DjnD;
is connected, we must have gj = fi on the whole Dj n Di, which is a
contradiction.
Notice that an analytic function has a continuation from the center of a

disk to the entire disk if and only if its power series at the center converges in
the whole disk. Hence, the definition of analytic continuation along a curve
also provides, at least in principle, a method to perform the continuation
if it exists at all; cf. Exercise 19. In practice, however, one often can use
some other representation of the continuation.
3.2 Example (The Gamma Function). The formula

F(z) = tz-Ie-tdt
J0
defines an analytic function for Re z > 0 that is called the Gamma function.
An integration by parts reveals that zF(z) = r(z + 1). Since r(1) = 1, it
follows that r(n) = (n - 1)! for positive integers n and that r(z) has
a meromorphic continuation to the entire plane with poles at the points
0,-1,-2,....
3.3 Example. Consider the function f (z) defined in the unit disk by
f (z) _ z".
1
We claim that (f, U) can be continued along any curve from U that avoids
the points 1 and 0 sic!. To begin with, as fo exp(-nt2)dt = 7r/n/2, one
finds that f (z) coincides with
2 00 z
F(z) =
7r o e, -z dt (3.1)
in the unit disk, and therefore the formula (3.1) provides a continuation of
f along any curve that does not intersect the half-axis (I, oe). Let F_ (z)
denote F(z) below [1, oo) and F+(z) above. We claim that F_ (z) can be
continued across any point in (1, oo). To see this, use Cauchy's theorem and
move the path of integration in (3.1) from, say, 1/R to R a little bit into the
upper half-plane. If the modified path is sufficiently near the positive real
axis, then its image under rr --4 exp(-r2) will run in the upper half-plane,
and hence the resulting integral will provide a continuation of F_ across
the real axis between exp(1/R2) and exp(R2). In the same way, F+ can he
continued a little bit below (1,oo). By Exercise 23
1
-.o
F(x + ie) - F(x - ie) = (3.2)
og
C
4. Simply Connected Domains 53
and hence, by uniqueness,

1
F_(z) = F+(z) -
v1
in a neighborhood of (1, oo), where og z is the branch that is positive on
(1,oo). If it is continued from a point in (1,oo) along a closed curve that
surrounds 1 but not 0, then one ends up with its negative. We leave it to
the reader to determine the continuation of f (z) along an arbitrary curve
avoiding 0 and 1.
Analytic continuation plays an important role in Section 5 below,
3.4 The Monodromy Theorem. Suppose that SZ C P is simply con-

nected and (f, D) is a function element that can be continued along any
curve in c that starts at the center of D. Then there is a g E A(i) such
that f =gin D.
Proof. It is enough to show the following: If r and ro are curves that begin
at the center of D and terminate at /3, and g and go are the continuations
of f along r and ro, respectively, then g = go. Assume the contrary.
Since continuation along a curve is reversible, we thus have a closed curve
'7o = -I' + r'o such that go # g is the continuation of g along Yo. Since
SZ is simply connected, there is a homotopy ryt, ryt(0) = .yt(1) = /3 (why?)
between -yo and -yl: [0, 1] --+ /3. Let gt be the continuation of g along ryt. It is
clear that gl = g. Now fix a t. Then there are 0 = so < sl < <s=1
and (f),Dj) such that ryt([sj,sj+l]) C D3, fo = g, and f = gt. Let e
be the least distance between ryt([sj, s,+1]) and 52 \ Dj, j = 0, ... , n. By
compactness there is a 6 > 0 such that c yt(s) -'yu(s)I < E if Iu-t] < 6. Take
such a u. Then (fj, Dj) is also a continuation along 7'u and hence gu = gt.
Thus It E [0, 1]; gt = g} is open and (trivially) closed and therefore equal to
the whole interval [0, 11. Hence go = g, which contradicts our assumption.
3.5 Remark. What we in fact proved was: If (f, D) can be continued along
any curve in 9 that starts at the center of D, then the continuation along a
closed null-homotopic curve must be f itself. Incidentally, by considering,
e.g., og z in 0 = C \ {0, 1}, this proves that the curve in Example 3.8 in
Ch. 1 is not null-homotopic.
4. Simply Connected Domains

We now will sum up the various conditions on an open set that we have
met thus far, which are equivalent to simple connectedness.
4.1 Theorem. Suppose that 11 Ck C is connected. Then the following

statements are equivalent:
(a) l is homeomorphic to the unit disk.
(b) f is simply connected.
(c) Any closed curve in Sl is null-homologous.
(d) P \ fl is connected.
(e) Sl is conformally equivalent to the unit disk.
(f) The monodromy theorem holds.
(g) Any f E A(Sl) can be approximated u.c. in Sl by polynomials.
(h) f fdz = 0 for any closed -y and f E A(Sl).
(i) Any f E A(Sl) has a primitive function in 0.
(j) Any nonvanishing f E A(Q) has a logarithm in Q.
In Ch. 4 we will add an additional equivalent condition, namely,
(k) Each real harmonic function u in 12 is the real part of some f E A(Sl).
4.2 Remark. Notice that (a) to (d) are purely topological properties of
an open set in 1R2, and they are still equivalent even if we remove the
assumption that C \ 1 # 0. It is clear that (a)-+ (b)-* (c); cf. Proposi-
tion 3.7 in Ch. 1. However, it is not at all obvious that (c) implies (a).
The corresponding statement for domains in higher dimensional R1 is not
true. More precisely, there are connected domains with vanishing homol-
ogy groups that are not contractible, as well as contractible domains that
are not homeomorphic to the ball in R^'.
Proof. Clearly, (a) (b) (c). From Cauchy's homology theorem it
follows that (c) implies (h), and in Ch. 2 we saw that (h) -+ (i) -+ (j)
-+ (e) --b (a); therefore all of them are equivalent. Thus (d), (f), and (g)
remain.
The Monodromy theorem states that (f) follows from (b). Conversely,
suppose that (f) holds and take w E C \ Q. Any function element (f, D)
in S1, where f (z) is some branch of log(z - w) in D, can be continued
analytically along any curve in Q. Thus if the monodromy theorem holds,
there is a global function g(z) that coincides with f (z) on D. Hence, by
uniqueness, expg(z) = z - w in Sl so that g'(z) = (z - w)-1; and hence
1
Indr(w) = 2 r i
/ dz = 1 / g , (z)dz = 0
,z-w 21ri r
for all closed curves r. Thus all closed curves are null-homologous in SZ,
and hence (f) is equivalent to the first group of conditions.
By Runge's theorem (more precisely, Corollary 1.6), (d) implies (g),
which in turn implies (h). Hence, it just remains to see that (d) follows
from the others. If (d) is false, then P \ SZ consists of two disjoint compacts
H and K, where K is compact in C and H contains oo. Let W = Sl U K.
Since W = P \ H, it is open and K is compact in W. Take 0 E Co (W)
5. Analytic Functionals and the Fourier-Laplace Transform 55
with 0 = 1 in a neighborhood of K, and choose a E K. Then

1 f 80 d)(() (4.1)
1 OC( - a
in
Note that a '/e( has its support in Q. (Intuitively, one should think of
8.o/8C as a curve in S2 with index 1 at o. Then (4.1) immediately contra-
dicts (h).) If (i) holds, there is an analytic f in 0 such that f' (z - a)-i,
and hence
f a"f'(()dA(C)
I.
2" f(()da(C) = f 8 8f-d)(C) = 0,
-49
which is a contradiction.
4.3 Remark. In the proof we used the fact that a compact set K in
the plane is connected if and only if it has no nontrivial clopen (relatively
closed and open) subset. It is not true that each component of K is clopen;
for example, a Cantor set is totally disconnected, i.e., each component
consists of just one single point. However, for each a E K the component
of K containing a is the intersection of all clopen subsets of K that contain
a.
5. Analytic Functionals and the Fourier-Laplace Transform

A continuous linear functional p on the space of entire functions A(C),
p E A'(C), is called an analytic functional. It is carried by the compact set
K if for each open w ID K there is a constant C, such that
Ip(f)I IS CwsupIf1, f E A(C),
and any p E A'(C) is carried by some compact set K. In fact, since the
family of sets
VK,,={fEA(C); suplfI<e},
K
e>0, KCC
is a basis for the topology on A(C), p-1(U) must contain some VK,,, and
hence p is carried by K. By the maximum principle it follows that if P \ K
and P \ K' have the same unbounded component (the one containing oo),
then p is carried by K if and only if it is carried by K'. Hence, it is
natural to restrict to carriers with connected complements. Such compacts
are called polynomially convex in C (cf. Exercise 5). For example, the
functional
p(f) = f0 f(z)dz
is carried by any reasonable curve joining 0 and 1. For another example,
let e be analytic in P\ K. Take a cut-off function X that is identically 1 in a
neigborhood of K, or take a set w i K with reasonably smooth boundary,

and let
rf0azd)(z) ffct.dz. (5.1)
J ,
Since this expression is independent of the particular choice of x or w (why),
p so defined is an analytic functional that is carried by K. Actually, any
functional carried by K is of this kind. To see this, first notice that by
the Hahn-Banach theorem p can be extended to a functional on C(w) and
hence is represented by a measure on 0. Thus we can define
q5(z) = lL (z 1 =
) f
dp(()
,
and by varying w this defines a \' that is analytic in P \ K and 0 at oo. It

is easily verified that 0 represents p in the sense (5.1).
For p E A'(C) we define the Fourier-Laplace transform
Fe(z) (ez) .
This is an entire function and p = 0 if a = 0. In fact, after differentiating
and evaluating at 0 (keeping in mind that p can be represented by some
measure) it follows that p vanishes on all polynomials, and the polynomials
are dense in A(C). If p is carried by K, then
J,4(z)l S C.eH,(z) W D K, (5.2)
where H,,,(z) is the 1 homogeous function
H. (z) = sup(Rez().
l,EW
Recall that a compact set K C C is convex if its intersection with each line
is connected. If K is convex, then
K = {z; RezS < HK((), (E C). (5.3)
This follows from the Hahn-Banach theorem since any real linear functional
on 1R2 has the form z '--f Re (z; see also Exercise 36.
An entire function h(z) that satisfies jh(z) 1 < Cexp(CIzl) is said to be of
exponential type. Hence, the Fourier-Laplace transform of each p E A'(C)
is of exponential type. However, the converse is also true. More precisely,
we have
5.1 Theorem (Polya). If K C C is compact and convex and h(z) is an

entire function satisfying (5.2), then h(z) is the Fourier-Laplace transform
of a unique p E A'(C) that is carried by K.
Proof. The proof consists in constructing the desired analytic functional
by means of the so-called Borel transform. Given an entire function f
5. Analytic Functionals and the Fourier-Laplace Transform 57
of exponential type, the Borel transform is defined near oo (for z with

HK(11Z) < 1) by
Bf(z) =z
1
If (A/z)e-ada.
This clearly defines an analytic function in a neighborhood of - that van-

ishes at oo. We claim that if p.t is defined via (5.1) (0 = B f ), then 2 = f.
To this end first notice that B f - 0 implies that f - 0 (differentiate
w Bf (1/w)/w and evaluate at w = 0). Hence it is enough to show that
if 0 is analytic near oo, say for IzI > R/2, and vanishes at oo and p is the
corresponding functional, then B = 46. However, since
2m(() =
JIwI=R q(w)etwdw,
we have for IzI > R that
27riB(z) = z f W (J 0(w)ea",/zdw e--`dA.

0 \ IwI=R /
By the change of variables w/z F-+ w and Fubini's theorem the expression
on the right-hand side equals
O(zw)dw =
f IwI=R/IzI
O(zw) (fe)(w_1)dA) dw = f
w I=R/Izl 1 - w )
where the last equality holds because 0 is analytic in IzI > R and vanishes
at oo.
To see that p is carried by K if K is convex, we have to verify that B f
has an analytic continuation to the set P \ K. For any real 0 let Fe be the
half-line 0 < t -- eiet and let
f(etet)e tzetedt.
Bef(z) = f f(t)e-azdA = f
Since Re(etez) > HK(eie) if and only if the same equality holds for some
w D K instead of K, the condition (5.2) implies that Be f is analytic in
the half-plane H9 = {Ree'Bz > HK(e'B)}. For all large z with e'Bz real
and positive, a simple change of variable reveals that Be f (z) = B f (z).
Hence they coincide on their common set of definition, and hence B f (z)
has.a continuation to the union of all the sets H9 which, in view of (5.3),
is precisely P \ K. p
We conclude with a related result.
5.2 Theorem (Paley-Wiener). Suppose that f (z) is an entire function

such that
If W1 < CeAI=I
and
10000 I f(x)I2dx < co. (5.4)
Then there is a g(t) E L2(--A, A) such that

(5.5)
f(z) = f A
A
Note that the converse is immediate in view of Plancherel's theorem since

f (-x) is the Fourier transform of g.
Proof. As in the preceding proof, we find that the Borel transform B f (z)
is analytic in {IzI > A}. However, in view of the assumption (5.4), it
follows that in fact Bo f (z) is defined for Re z > 0 and B, f for Re z < 0,
and therefore B f (z) is analytic in the complement of the interval [-iA, iA].
Now let fi (x) = f (x)e-Ì xl. Then
f ( ) = foo
00 ff (t)e-'`fdt = Bof (e + it) - B,.f (-e + i.),
which tends to 0 when a -, 0 if ICI > A. On the other hand, since fE -+ f

in L2, Plancherel's theorem implies that fE -+ f in L2, and hence f 0
for ICI > A. If g = j, then (5.5) holds for real z by the inversion formula,
and as both sides are entire functions, it holds for all z.
6. Mergelyan's Theorem
Let K be a compact set in the plane and suppose that f is a complex
function on K that can be uniformly approximated by analytic polynomials
on K. It then follows that f is continuous on K and analytic in the
interior. If any such f can be approximated uniformly by polynomials,
then the complement of K must be connected; cf. the discussion after
Runge's theorem.
6.1 Mergelyan's Theorem. Let K be a compact-set in the plane such

that the complement is connected, and suppose that f is continuous on K
and analytic in the interior of K. To each e > 0 there is a polynomial such
that If - pI<e on K.
Notice that Runge's theorem applies only if f is analytic in a neighbor-
hood of K, and therefore Mergelyan's theorem is considerably stronger. In
particular, if the interior of K is empty, any continuous function can be
approximated uniformly by analytic polynomials. If K is an interval, this
6. Mergelyan's Theorem 59
is the classical Weierstrass' theorem. This section is devoted to the proof

of Mergelyan's theorem.
Proof. To begin with, we can extend f to a continuous function with

compact support in C, which we also denote f. This is an application of
Tietze's extension theorem. Let w(6) be the modulus of continuity of f,
w(6) = sup{ I f (z) - f Wk ; Iz - wI < 6}.
Since f is uniformly continuous, w(6) -' 0 when 6 --+ 0. Hence, it is enough
to find, for each 6, a polynomial p such that
I f(z) - p(z) I < Cw(6), z E K, (6.1)
where C is independent of 6. In what follows, C denotes such a constant,
but it can be different in different places.
Let be a smooth positive function with support in D(0, 1/2) such that
f OdA = 1, and let 46(z) = 6-24(z/6). The function
4)(z) = f * 06(z) = f 06(z - w)f(w)dA(w) = f5s(w)f(z - w)dA(w)

is then smooth, and since
f(z) - 4)(z) = f(f(z) - f(z w))Ob(w)dA('w),
it follows that
If (z) - DI < w(6). (6.2)
Moreover,
8 = f (w)f (z - w)dA(w) = f a 66 (w) (f (z - w) - f (z))dA(w)

(since f (8O6/8zv)(w)d)(w) = 0), and hence we get the estimate
84)l < C,(6)
(6.3)
8z 6
since f IaO6/ewIdA(w) _< C/6. Thus, we have approximated f so far by

the function 4, which at least is analytic at points in K that have distance
more than 6 to OK. Let H denote the support of A)/8w. The crucial part
of the proof is contained in the following proposition.
6.2 Proposition. There is an open neighborhood f2 of K and a continuous

function r((, z) defined for ( E H and z E SZ such that r((, z) is holomorphic
for z e fl,
C,52
r((, z) ,5 IS C,5
- Z13'
(1 z
and
jr((, z) I <-
where the constant C is independent of 6.

Taking this proposition for granted, it is now easy to conclude the proof
of the theorem. By formula (1.7) in Ch. 1 we have that
IH (a aC)da(C)
(D (z)
Now the function

F(z) r((, z)
_- Ix aS
is analytic in Il D K, and by (6.3)
IF(z) - -,P(z)I <
Cw(6)
b f u
r(( , z) - 1
In this integral we estimate the integrand by C/6+I(-z1-1 when 1(-zl _< 6

z
dA(()
and by C6z/I( - z13 when I( - zI > 6. In any case, we get the estimate
Cw(b) where C is independent of 6. In combination with (6.2) we get that
If (z) - F(z)I < Cw(b) on K, and since F is analytic in a neighborhood
of K, we can apply Runge's theorem and obtain a polynomial p such that
(6.1) holds.
It remains to prove Proposition 6.2, and to this end we need yet another
result.
6.3 Proposition. Let D be a disk with radius 6 and E a connected com-

pact subset with diameter at least 6 such that P\ E is also connected. Then
there is a smooth function r((, z) defined for z c P \ E and ( E D that is
analytic in z and satisfies
C62
r((, z) - (1 (6.4)
z 1(G6z13
and
Ir((, z)I < b , (6.5)
where the constant C is independent of 6.

Proof. By a change of scale and a translation we may assume that 6 = 1
and that D is the unit disk U. Note that in particular it is necessary to
find an analytic function g(z) in P \ E that is bounded, and such that
zg(z) 1 when z -' oo. (6.6)
6. Mergelyan's Theorem 61
The latter condition means that g(oo) = 0 and that its derivative at oo is
I with respect to the coordinate w = 1/z. It follows from the Riemann
mapping theorem and its proof that such functions exist, and that if g(z)
is such a function with minimal sup norm, then g(z) is in fact a bijection
onto some disk D(0, t). Now Proposition 3.5 in Ch. 2 applies to the inverse
of the function z '--b g(z/t)/t, and hence the diameter of the set tE is less
than 4; so t < 4 and thus lg(z)l < 4.
For fixed ( E U and 1z -- (I > 2 we have
Q2(()
9(z) x+(z-()2+C 1z(13
If we define
r((,z) = g(z) - a2(()g2(z), (6.7)
then
r((,z) - 1 = C
z- (1z 1Ci3)
when z -+ oo. Now
a2(0 = 1 JzJ=R
27ri
(z - ()g(z)dz = b - (,
where b = (1/27ri) f :-R zg(z)dz. We can change the path of integration

to the unit circle, and since IgI < 4, we then get that IbI < 4 and hence also
the estimate (6.5). Finally, the function
Z- (Z-O' (r((, z) - z 1 (
is analytic in P \ E (it is bounded when z - oo and hence it has removable
singularity at oo), and it is bounded by some constant C in U \ E that is
independent of ( E U; therefore, by the maximum principle it is bounded
by the same constant in P \ E. Thus (6.4) holds. O
Proof of Proposition 6.2. We can cover H by a finite number of disks

D; with radii 26 and centers outside K. Moreover, since the complement
of K is connected, in each Dj we can find a set Ej of diameter at least
26 that does not intersect K (there must be a curve from the center to
the boundary that does not intersect K). For each Dj let rj ((, z) be the
functions given by Proposition 6.3, and let R = f11P \ Ej. Then clearly
Il D K, and if 03 is a partition of unity subordinate to the open cover Dj
of the compact set H, then
r((,z) _ .0i(()ri((,z)
has the required properties. 0

6.4 Remark. Essentially the same proof also gives the following more
general result: Suppose that K C P is compact and P \ K has a finite
number of components. Choose one point aj from each component. Then
any f E C(K)flA(int(K)) can be uniformly approximated by rationals with
poles only at the points aj.
Exercise 1. Show that if S2 C C is bounded, then P \ Il is connected if
and only if C \ S2 is. Give a counterexample when S2 is unbounded.
Exercise 2. Let S1 = {z; IzI < 1, 12z - lI > 1} and f E A(S2). Show that
there are polynomials p,n such that p - f u.c. in P. What can be said
about f if p - f uniformly in S2?
Exercise 3. Show that there are polynomials p,, such that limp, = 0 in
C\{0}
Exercise 4. Do polynomials p exist such that is equal to 1
when Imz > 0, 0 when Imz = 0, and -1 when Imz < 0?
Exercise 5. For a compact K C C, define the polynomially convex hull
K = {z E C; Ip(z)I < SUPK IPI for all polynomials p}. Note that K D K.
A compact set K is said to be polynomially convex if k = K. Show that
K is polynomially convex if and only if C \ K is connected.
Exercise 6. Supply the details in the following constructive proof of
Runge's theorem. First consider the set A = {a E C \ K; the functions
z '-- (z - a)-k, k = 1, 2 .... can be uniformly approximated on K by
rationals with poles in {aj} }. A is trivially relatively closed in C \ K. Take
aEA. For /3near a
z-b O (z-a)k+l
with uniform convergence on K. Hence (z - 0) -1 can be approximated on
K by our rationals and hence also (z for k > 1. Thus A is open.
Since A intersects each component of C \ K, it follows that A = C \ K. If f
is analytic in a neighborhood of K, as usual one can express f as a Cauchy
integral where the integration is performed outside K, and this integral
then can be approximated uniformly on K by a finite Riemann sum in
which the terms are functions of the type z - (z - a)-1 for a E C \ K.
Exercise 7. Use Theorem 2.3 to prove the statement in Remark 2.2. Hint:
Let Oj be a locally finite partition of unity subordinate to the open cover nk
(i.e., locally all but a finite number of the qj vanish, E Oj = 1, and to each
j there is an nj such that O j E Co (c,,, )). Let gk = >(fk - )j. Then
gk is smooth in fk and 9k-91 = fk-ft in S2kf1S2t. Now 0 = 9gk/8z defines

a global smooth function in ft and if 8u/02 = ?i in St, then f = fk - gk + u
is a global meromorphic function with the required properties.
Exercise 8. Show that for each b > 0 and -y > 0 there is a positive
constant C7,6 such that
f (1 - I(I)-1+6 1
-C.y,6(1-IZI)Y ( )
U I1-(zl1+6+7
Exercise 9. Here is an outline of a proof of the statements in Example 2.5.
(i) Prove that P is bounded on L2(U). By Schwarz' inequality,
IPu(z)I2 < CJ (1 - I(12)-1/2 r (1 - ICI2)1/2Iu(()I2

I1-(ZI2
U I1-(@I2 u
Then apply (*) to the first integral on the right-hand side and use Fubini's
theorem.
(ii) Show that the space of analytic polynomials is dense in B(U). Show first
that if f E B(U) is orthogonal to all polynomials, then f = 0.
(iii) Verify (2.3).
Exercise 10. Are the polynomials dense in Bp = A(U) fl LP(U)?
Exercise 11. Suppose that St is bounded, /. ((, z) E C' (f) x 52), z '-- Vi((, z)
is analytic for each fixed ( E 0, and El)((, () = 1. Show that
u(z) _ - in '1((, z) f z(() (**)
is a solution to 3u/82 = f if f E C1 (S2) and for each K C Si there is a

constant CK such that
sup f IV,((, z)f (()I dA(() < CK.
zEK 2
Exercise 12. Also show the converse: If 0 E C'(S2 x 0) and (**) is a

solution for all f in, for example, CO '(Q), then z z) is analytic and
IL((, () = 1.
Kf(z) _ -1 fICI<1(1-\ 1I(I2)"

- (z
f(()dA(()
z
solves au/02 = f in the unit disk if I f (()I < C(1 - I(I2)--+E-1
Exercise 14. Use the operators K,,, to show that there is a solution to
(2.2) in U with Iu(z)I < C(1 - IzI)-r if I f(()I < (1 - I(I)-r-1, r > 0.
Exercise 15. For a > 0, let L' be L2 in U with respect to the weight
(1 - I(I2)a-1dA((). Let B,, = A(U) r1 LQ and
u (1 -x(12) (zu(()dA(()
P,u(z) _ 7r
Try to generalize Example 2.5.

Exercise 16. Let Q = C and take '0 in Exercise 11 as an integer power
of (1 + (z)/(1 + 1(12). Are the occurring solutions minimal in some sense?
What are the corresponding projection operators? Consider the same ques-
tions for Vi = exp((z).
Exercise 17. One can obtain Mittag-Leflier's theorem directly from The-
orem 2.3: First construct a 0 E C(S2\ {aj}) such that Eli -- p3 is analytic in
a neighborhood of ai for each j. Show that g = (8/82)( - pj) is a global
C function in Q. Take u E C(1) such that 8u/8z = g and consider
f =1-u.
Exercise 18. Let f c Co (C) have support K (or, more generally, take a
measure on K). Let aj be a set of points, one from each component of
IP \ K. Show that 8u/82 = f has a solution with support in K if and only
if fK r(z) f (z)dA(z) = 0 for all rationals with poles in the set {a3 }. Give an
interpretation of the proof of Runge's theorem in the sense of distributions.
Exercise 19. Suppose that a _> 0 and limsup(a,)1/" = 1. Show that
1 is a singular point for f (z) = > a"z", i.e., show that f (z) cannot be
continued along the positive real axis to the point 1. Hint: Consider the
power series expansion of f around the point 1/2.
Exercise 20. Assume that (f, b) is the analytic continuation of (f, D)
along some curve -y. Let g be an entire function, and suppose that go f = 0
in D. Show that g o f = 0 in D.
Exercise 21. Compute F(m/2) for integers m. What are the residues at
the points 0, -1, - 2.... ?
Exercise 22. Let E C(U), and define
a
f(a) =
a ft l<1 (1 - Kl2Y
Show that f (a) is analytic for Re a > 0 and show that f can be continued
to a meromorphic function in the whole plane with (possible) poles only
at a = -1, -2, .... In particular, it has a removable singularity at a = 0.
Show that if 0 is holomorphic, then f (a) is constantly equal to 0(0).
Exercise 23. Verify the limit (3.2). Hint: Let f (t) be a locally integrable
function on R such that f. I f(t)Idt/(l + t2) < oc and define the Poisson
integral
yf (t)dt y>0
P f (y, x) = 1
7f J y2 + (x - t)2
Then P f (y, x) --* f (x) when y 0 if f (t) is continuous at t = x.
Exercise 24. Let K be a connected compact set in C. Show that C \

K is connected if and only if K has a neighborhood basis consisting of
simply connected (open) sets. A family of open neighborhoods of K is a
neighborhood basis if any neighborhood of K contains some set from the
family.
Exercise 25. Let D be a connected domain in C. Show that the equation
p(a)u = f has an analytic solution in D for each f E A(D) and each
constant coefficient linear differential operator
ak
p(a) _ ak ,
k=1 aCk
if and only if D is simply connected.

Exercise 26. Suppose that f E A(12), 0 is connected, f 0 0, and that for
each positive integer n there is a g E A(Sl) such that g' = f. Show that f
has a logarithm in Q. Hint: log f exists if and only if f,, f'dz/ f = 0 for all
closed curves -y in Q.
Exercise 27. Find all jc E A'(C) that are carried by the set {0}.
Exercise 28. Show that if P \ K is connected, then there is a 1-1 cor-
respondence between the space of functionals carried by K and the set of
analytic functions in P \ K that vanish at oo.
Exercise 29. Suppose that n 3 K and that 0 E A(ft \ K). Let {aj }
contain one point from each component of P \ K, and let K c w cc f
such that w is disjoint from {aj}. Show that 0 is the restriction of a
function 1 E A(1) if and only if fd. rq5dz = 0 for all rationals r with poles
in {a3}. Hint: Take a function F E C(1l) that coincides with 0 in the
complement of a neighborhood of K. Modify F to an analytic function by
solving 49u./8z = 8F/02 in an appropriate way.
Exercise 30. Let f (z) = Io anzn be of exponential type. Show that the
Borel transform is given by
00
Bf(z) _ ann!z-(n+1)
for large Izi. Use this to prove directly that E;e = f if (P = Bf and (5.1)
holds.
Exercise 31. Suppose that E A'(C) is carried by K. Show that in each
open w 3 K there is a sequence of points aj E w and numbers cj such that
/L = ECjAQ,.
Exercise 32. It is clear tnat {z; HK(1/z) < 1} C P\K. For which convex
K is the inclusion strict?
Exercise 33. Use Cauchy's theorem to show that all of the BB(z) in
Section 5 coincide on their overlaps.
Exercise 34. Verify the statement in Remark 6.4.
Exercise 35. Give an elementary proof of Mergelyan's theorem when K
is the closed unit disk (one cannot use the Taylor polynomials directly).
Exercise 36. Assume that K C C is convex. Show that through each
point p c C \ K there is some line that does not intersect K. Use this
result to conclude (5.3). Hint: Assume that 0 V- K and that each line
through 0 intersects K. For each real 0, the line t '-+ eiet intersects K
either for some positive or some negative t but not both. Show that the
set of 0 for which the intersection occurs for positive t is both open and
closed. Deduce a contradiction.
Notes
Runge's theorem was published in 1885. The Poisson integral in Exer-
cise 23 solves Dirichlet's problem in the upper half-plane; in Ch. 4, the
corresponding integral in the unit disk is studied.
Polya's theorem (Theorem 5.1) is from 1929; see [B] for references and
further results about functions of exponential type.
Mergelyan's theorem is from 1952; see AMS Translations 101 (1954). For
a different proof see Carleson, Math. Scand., vol. 15 (1964).
4
Harmonic and Subharmonic
Functions
1. Harmonic Functions
A function u E CZ(SZ) is harmonic in Sl if Du = 0. If u, v are harmonic
and a, /3 E C, then au + /3v is harmonic. If f E A(SZ), then f, f, Ref , and
Im f are harmonic in Q. If, in addition, f is nonvanishing, then log If is
harmonic. If Il = C \ {0}, then log IzI is harmonic in 11, but there is no
f E A(Sl) such that log I z I = Ref. However, we have
1.1 Proposition. If u is real and harmonic in a simply connected domain

Sl, then u = Ref for some f E A(SI).
Proof. Since 28u/8z E A(fl) and Sl is simply connected, there is a g E
A(Q) such that g' = 8g/8z = 28u/8z. Thus 8(g + g)/8z = 28u/8z,
and since u is real, 2u = g + + 2c for some real constant c; therefore,
u=Re(g+c). 0
In particular, we find that harmonic functions are C. Moreover, we
have the following uniqueness property: If u is harmonic in a connected
set Sl and vanishes in an open subset, then u vanishes identically in Q. In
fact, one may assume that u is real. Then the statement follows from the
identity theorem for analytic functions applied to 8u/8z. If u is harmonic
in a neighborhood of D(z, r), then
2n
u(z) = 2- j u(z + reè)dO, (1.1)
0
i.e., u has the mean value property. Again we may assume that u is real,
and then (1.1) follows from Proposition 1.1 and the mean value property for
analytic functions. From (1.1) and the uniqueness property it follows that a
real harmonic u has no local maxima or minima unless it is locally constant.
Analogously to Corollary 1.13 in Ch. 1, we also have the following.
68 4. Harmonic and Subharmonic Functions
1.2 The Maximum Principle. If 52 is bounded and u E C(f) is real

and harmonic in 52, then u attains its maximum and minimum on 852. In
particular, u = 0 if u = 0 on Oh.
We now shall derive a generalization of (1.1) that represents the value at

an arbitrary interior point in terms of the boundary values on the disk. If
u is real and harmonic in a neighborhood of U, then, by Proposition 1.1,
u(z) = 2 E anzn + 1: dn.Zn i Anr1n1eine (1.2)

0 0 = -M
(where z = re") with absolute convergence on U. Hence,
u(eie)
u(reie) = 1 00 rInIe.n(e-t)dt' r < 1
o 00
(replace reie with e't in (1.2), plug it into the integral above, and use the
fact that f e'mtdt = 0 for nonzero integers m), so that
u(re'B) = 2n f z, u(e:c)p, (B - t)dt =

0 27r
fz u(et(e-t))P,(t)dt, 0 < r < 1,
0
where Pr(t) _ E 00 rInle`nt. If z = re"' and = eat, then the Poisson

kernel is
Pr(B - t) =>rknlein(O-t) = Re
(eu +z\
(\ eat - z/}
1 - r2 1 - 1z12 1 - +z12
1 -2rcos(B-t)+r2 11-Cz12 1C-z12
Verify the equalities! The second one reveals that the Poisson kernel is a
harmonic function of z = re'0 for fixed eat.
Exercise 1. Show that Pr(t) = Pr(-t), t ti Pr(t) is strictly decreasing on

(0,7r), Pr(6) --. 0 when r Z 1 for fixed 6 > 0, and that (1/27r) f Pr(t) = 1
for all r < 1; cf. Figure 1 in Section 1 of Ch. 6.
1.3 Remark. Since harmonicity is preserved under translation and dila-

tion, we get that
1
f2w R2 - r2
u(a + react) =
27r R2 - 2Rr cos(O - t) + r2 u(a + Re't)dt r < R
if u is harmonic in a neighborhood of D(a, R).
1. Harmonic Functions 69
For f E C(T), one defines the Poisson integral Pf of f as

P f(reie) r2w
f (e't)P,(0 - t)dt
= J0
12,
f (e`(0-t))Pr(t)dt, r < 1,
27r
which is a harmonic function in U since the Poisson kernel is harmonic.
1.4 Proposition. If f E C(T), then Pf is harmonic in U; and if Pf is

defined as f on T, then Pf E C(U).
Dirichlet's problem is the following: Given a function on Oil, find a
harmonic function F in 11 such that F = f on Oil. To discuss its solvability,
one of course must specify which class of domains and functions f one
allows, and the exact meaning of f = F. For bounded domains i2 with
reasonable boundary (e.g., piecewise C'), any continuous f on Bit has a
continuous harmonic extension F to Il, which in view of the maximum
principle is necessarily unique. In this book we essentially will restrict
our attention to the unit disk. Proposition 1.4 says that the solution to
Dirichlet's problem in U for continuous f is given by the Poisson integral
Pf.
Proof of Proposition 1.4. We shall prove that P f (re") - f (eie) uni-
formly in 0 when r / 1. Given e > 0, take b > 0 such that If (e'(e-t)) -
f(eie)I < E if Iti < 6. Now
fw2Pf(Te'e)
- f(e'e) = 27r
(f (e'(e-t)) - f(eie))Pr(t)dt.
In the set b _< ItI < -7r, Pr(t) < Pr(b) (cf. Exercise 1), whereas in the set
0 < ItI < 6, I f (e'(o_t)) - f (e'B)I < E. Since Pr(t)/27r is positive and has
integral 1, we get the estimate
IPf(reie) - f(eie)I 5 2IIfjI.Pr(b) +E,
which is less than 2e if r is sufficiently close to 1. 0
We now consider a converse of the mean value property.
1.5 Theorem. Suppose that u E C(i2) and that, for each z E 0, (1.1)
holds for small r > 0. Then u is harmonic in Q.
Proof. We may assume that u is real. Moreover, it is enough to prove

that u is harmonic in each disk D CC D. Given such a D, take the
harmonic function h such that h = u on 8D. Then v = u - h also satisfies
the hypothesis in D. If v had a positive supremum in D, then it would
be attained on a nonempty compact set K C D, and this in turn would

violate (1.1) for Z E K with minimal distance to 8D_ Thus, v < 0 in D.
For the same reason, v > 0, and therefore u = h in D.
The proof above shows that it is enough to assume that for each z E Il
there is a sequence rn \ 0 for which (1.1) holds. From Theorem 1.5 it
follows that u is harmonic if u -. u u.c. and each un is harmonic.
1.6 Weyl's Lemma. If U E L o_(cl) (or u E D'(0)) and f uE4 = 0 for all
q5 E Co , then u is harmonic; more precisely, there is a harmonic function
v in fI such that u = v a.e. (or as distributions).
We will not rely on this result and leave the proof as an exercise; it is in
fact a consequence of Theorem 2.12 below.
1.7 Harnack's Theorem. If u are harmonic in a connected domain 0

and ul < u2 < u3 ... , then either u,, / oo for all z E S2 or u. / u < 00
U.C. in 0.
Proof. Take D(a, R) C ft. We may assume that ul > 0. Since

(R - r)2 < R2 - 2rR cos(B - t) + r2 < (R + r)2,
we have, by Remark 1.3,
<un(a+re'B) < r R.
7F-+-r R-r
Thus, if u,(a) J' oo, then u / oo in a neighborhood of a. On the other
hand, if u,, (a) J' u(a) < oo, then u = limun < oo in a neighborhood of a.
Thus, A = {z; u(z) = oo} is open and closed, i.e., ll or 0. If u J' u < oo,
then u satisfies the Poisson formula by monotone convergence, and hence
it is harmonic. However, if continuous functions u tend to a continuous
limit u monotonically, then the convergence must be u.c. (this is sometimes
called Dini's lemma). In the present situation one also can see that the
convergence is u.c. from the representation by the Poisson integral.
1.8 Schwarz' Reflection Principle. Suppose that l is a connected do-

main, symmetric with respect to the real axis, and that L = Il fl R is an
interval. Let S2+ = {z E 11; Im z > 0}. Suppose that f E A(S2+) and that
Im f has a continuous extension to S2+ U L that vanishes on L. Then there
is a F E A(S2) such that F = f in S2+ and F(z) = f (z) in 11 \ 52+.
Proof. If v = Im f is extended to S2 \!n+ by letting v(z) = -v(z), then
v E C(1l) and has the mean value property at each point; therefore, it is
harmonic by Proposition 1.5. In a simply connected symmetric neighbor-
hood w of L in f2 there is a g E A(w) such that v = Im g and f = g in
2. Subharmonic Functions 71
f2+flw (why?). Since g is real on L, its power series at points on L has real
coefficients, and therefore g(i) = g(z). Let F(z) = f (i) in f2 \ (S2+ U L)
and F = f in 52+. Then F is analytic in 1 \ L, but F = g in w \ L, and
hence F extends to an analytic function in f2.
Exercise 2. Let f2 be as above. Suppose that f E A(S2+) and that

Jfj - 1 on L. Formulate the corresponding reflection theorem. Then
assume instead that fl is an appropriate neighborhood of some connected
subset L of T and 0+ = U fl 0. Formulate the reflection theorem in this
case. Hint: Use a conformal mapping from the upper half-plane onto U.
2. Subharmonic Functions
Subharmonicity is a fundamental concept in complex analysis. Many im-
portant properties of analytic functions depend simply on the fact that the
logarithms of their modulii are subharmonic. Subharmonic functions are
related to harmonic functions in much the same way as convex functions
(in one or several real variables) are related to linear functions.
Definition. A function u in fl with values in [-oo, oc) is subharmonic,
u E SH(11), if
(a) u is upper semicontinuous.
(b) for each K C Sl and h E C(K) that is harmonic in int(K) and > u on
OK one has that h > u on K.
Sometimes one excludes u - -oo from the definition. It is clear that real
harmonic functions are subharmonic. Note that if u is upper semicontinu-
ous on a compact set K, then SUPK u is finite and attained at some point
on K. Hence, if u E SH(fl) and K C fl, then supK u is attained on OK
(why?).
2.1 Theorem. Suppose that u is upper semicontinuous in 11 with values

in [-oo, oo). Then the following conditions are equivalent:
(i) u is subharmonic.
(ii) If D = D(z, r) cc 0, h E C(D) is harmonic in D and > u on OD, then
h>uinD.
(iii) If D = D(z, r) cc fl, then
2,r
1
u(z) < r u(z + re'8)dO. (2.1)
0
(iv) For each z E S2, (2.1) holds for small r > 0.

As u is bounded from above on compact sets, the integral in (2.1) makes
sense and takes values in [-oo, oo). From condition (iv) it follows that sub-
harmonicity is a local property. Since a harmonic function u has the mean

value property, it follows that Jul satisfies (iii) and hence that Jul is sub-
harmonic. If f is analytic in ft, then log if I is upper semicontinuous, takes
values in [-oo, co), and satisfies condition (iv) as it is harmonic outside the
zeros of f . We therefore obtain
2.2 Corollary. If f is analytic in fI, then u = log If I is subharmonic in Q.
Proof of Theorem 2.1. Trivially (i) implies (ii). Assume that (ii) holds
and take D(z,r) CC ft. Since u is upper semicontinuous, there are con-
tinuous functions hi such that h; \ u on OD (prove this!). Let Hj be the
harmonic extensions of hj to D. Then
z'.
u(z) < H3(z) = 2 / hj (z + re'o) dO,
0
according to (ii). Now (iii) follows by monotone convergence.

Clearly, (iii) implies (iv). Assume that (iv) holds and let K C 0, h E
C(K), h > u on OK, and h be harmonic in int(K). Then v = u - h < 0
on 8K and satisfies (2.1) at interior points for small r. As v is upper
semicontinuous, the same argument as in the proof of Theorem 1.5 gives
that v<OonK. 0
2.3 Proposition. If is increasing and convex on R and u E SH(SZ),
then 0 0 u E SH(Q) (where (0(-oo): = limx-_. O(x)).
Proof. First notice that ou is upper semicontinuous, since (k is increasing
and continuous (any convex function on R is continuous). Moreover, for
small r,
o u(z) <_ 0 (2 Io
u(z + reie)dO
/ <_ 2x I
o
0 o u(z + rese)d6,
where the first inequality holds because 0 is increasing and the second
one follows from Jensen's inequality. Now the proposition follows from
Theorem 2.1. 0
2.4 Example. If f E A(fl), then not only is log If I subharmonic but, e.g.,
log' If 1: = max(log If 1, 0) and if 4 a > 0 also are. This follows immedi-
ately from Proposition 2.3 by taking O(x) = max(x, 0) and O(x) = exp(ax),
respectively.
2.5 Proposition.
(a) If u E SH(f2), u = sups u0, < oo, and u is upper semicontinuous (e.g.,
if {a} is finite), then u E SH(f2).
(b) If uj E SH(fl), then ul + U2 E SH(Q) and cut c- SH(Q) if c > 0.
(c) If uj \, u and u, E SH(]), then u E SH(fl).
Proof. (a) and (b) immediately follow (e.g., from Theorem 2.1). For (c),
first note that {u <a I = Uj{uj <a I is open and therefore u is upper semi-
continuous. Then (c) follows by monotone convergence (and Theorem 2.1).
2.6 Theorem. If u E SH(S)) and D(z, R) C Q, then
r -+ m(r) = -J r2ir
0
u(z + re'B)d8, 0<r<R
is increasing and m(r) \ u(z) when r \ 0.
In fact, m(r) is continuous for r < R; see Exercise 32.
Proof. Take rl < r2 and continuous h.; \ u on 8D(z, r2), and let H; be
the harmonic extensions. Then u < H1 on D(z,rl) and hence
2i
-
2w
m(rl) < 1
r Hj (z + rleie)dO = Hj(z) = JO hj(z + r2e4a)d9;
but the right-hand side tends to m(r2) by monotone convergence, and thus
r .-+ m(r) is increasing. If u(z) < a, then u(z + reie) < a for small r > 0
because of the semicontinuity, and thus lim sup,,,o m(r) < u(z). Since
u(z) < m(r), the theorem follows.
2.7 Theorem. If Sl is connected, u E SH(1), and u 0- -oo, then u E

Lio0(Sl); in particular, u > -oo a.e.
Proof. From (2.1) we get that

u(z) <
12
err
f !C<,.
u(z + ()dA(()
if D(z,r) CC Q. If u(z) > -oo, it thus follows that u is integrable in D

since u is bounded from above on D. Let
E _ {z E St; u is integrable in a neighborhood of z}.
Then trivially E is open. From the argument above it follows that u - -oo
in a neighborhood of each point in Sl \ E, and thus E is closed.
2.8 Corollary. If 0 is connected and u -oo, then the integrals in (2.I)

are > -oo for all r > 0.
Our next objective is to approximate an arbitrary subharmonic function
with smooth ones. Let u E SH(Sl), u 05 -oo, and choose a positive 0 E
Co (U) such that V)(z) = zP(IzI) and f ipdA = 1. If 7P,(z) = e-2i(i(z/e), then
fOdl=land
u, = u *?P, = J u(z - e()'+l)(()dA(()
is in C(II ), where 1 C = {z E 52; d(z, c9Q) > e}.
2.9 Proposition. uE E SH(l) fl C(12,) and uE \ u when e \ 0.

Proof. Take an arbitrary point in Q. With no loss of generality we may
assume that it is 0. Then by Fubini's theorem and (2.1),
u,(0) = f 5 f 2r f u(reie - c()dO P(()dA(()

1 2ir
1 27r
2J uE(reie)dO,
so (2.1) is satisfied for uf, and hence it is subharmonic. Now

2fr
uE(0) = ZOO f u(-ere'B)dOrz/i(r)dr,
0
which decreases when a decreases and has limit fo 21ru(0)r i(r)dr = u(0)
by monotone convergence and Theorem 2.6, i.e., u, \ u when e \ 0.
In particular, if u, v E SH(fl) and u = v a.e., then u - v.
2.10 Lemma. If U E C2(1l), then u is subharmonic if and only if Du > 0
in Sa.
Proof. Suppose that Du > 0. Take a disk D cc Q, an h harmonic

in a neighborhood of D, and > u on 8D. For simplicity, suppose that
D = D(0, r). If e > 0, then v = u - h + CIz12 - ere is a C2 function such
that Ov = Du + 4c > 0 and v < 0 on 8D. If supD v > 0, then v has a local
maximum at some p E D, and thus the Hessian at p must be negatively
semidefinite, which contradicts the fact that Av= the trace of the Hessian
> 0. Thus, v < 0 in D, i.e., u - h < er2 in D, and since a is arbitrary, then
u < h in D. This proves that u is subharmonic, according to Theorem 2.1.
Conversely, assume that u is subharmonic and take a point, say 0, in 0.
By Taylor's formula,
u(re'B) = u(0) + 2 Re uZ (0)reie + Re uxz (0)r2e2iB + u-,2 (0)r2 + o(r2).
Integrating this equality and using (2.1) we get
0 < u,j(0)r2 + o(r2)
for small r, which implies that iu(0) = 4u-.t(O) > 0.

2.11 Theorem. If u is subharmonic in Il (and 0 -oo on each component),

then
u0OdA > 0, 0 < 0 E Co (p). (2.2)
Thus, 0 -* f u0OdA is a positive linear functional on CO A, and hence

it is represented by a positive measure (see Exercise 28) that we denote by
Du or Dud..
Proof. Take u, \ u, which arer C and subharmonic. Then
fui&cb = lim / U, AO = lim Du, > 0.
f 0
2.12 Theorem. If u E LIc(l1) (or D'(1)) and (2.2) holds, then there is a
unique v E SH(1l) such that u = v a.e. (or in D'(Sl)).
In particular, this implies Weyl's lemma for harmonic functions.
Proof. Let u, = u * 0, as before. Since Du, = u * DOE _> 0 by (2.2), u,

are subharmonic by Lemma 2.10. However, then u * 0E * 06 < u * 0, * 06'
if b < 6', i.e., u * 06 * 0, < u * 06, * (k,. Letting e \ 0, we find that u * O6 is
subharmonic and decreases if 6 decreases. By Proposition 2.5 (c), it follows
that v = lim6,,a u * 06 is subharmonic, and since u * 06 - u in Lioc (see
Exercise 27), we can conclude that u = v a.e.
Thus, roughly speaking, u is subharmonic if and only if Du is a positive

measure.
2.13 Example. Let us compute A log If I if f is analytic. Suppose that f E

A(Q) has zeros at al , a2.... with multiplicities M1, m2, .... As A log Izl =
21rb (see 1.7 (c) in Ch. 1 or the proof of Jensen's formula below), it follows
that
Olog If l = 21r rnjba,,
where b,,; is the point mass at e 9j.
Let us consider the inhomogenous Laplace equation. If f E C(ul), then

there is a solution to
Du = f (2.3)
in C(1E). This follows from Theorem 2.3 in Ch. 3 applied twice. If f
behaves reasonably well near the boundary, then the Newton potential of
f,
u(z) = 27< flog Iz - (If(()dA((), (2.4)
is a solution in Q. In general, one is interested in a solution with prescribed

boundary values. If v is a solution to (2.3) in U, which is continuous up
to the boundary, then certainly u = v - Pv is the unique solution that
vanishes on the boundary.
2.14 The Green Potential. For z EIU let
G((, z) = 27r
log ! 1 - Sz 1
.
For fixed z E U, G((, z) = 0(1 - I(I); thus, if u is a positive measure in U

such that
J(1 - I(I)du(() < oo, (2.5)
we can define the Green potential
gu(z) = f G((, z)du(()

We leave it to the reader to verify that if p is any positive measure that
satisfies (2.5), thenCp(z) is a negative subharmonic function in U that
solves Au = p in the distribution sense and vanishes on the boundary in
the sense that
lim 1
r71 27r
fp
2,r
gp(reè)dO = 0.
If p = f is a bounded function, then g f has a continuous extension to U,

and hence it vanishes on the boundary and is therefore the unique solution
to (2.3) in U that vanishes on the boundary. Consequently, for any v in,
for example, C2(U), we have the Riesz decomposition
v(z) = G(Av)(z) + Pv(z). (2.6)
Later on it will turn out that this decomposition holds for all subharmonic
functions satisfying (2.8).
We conclude this section with Jensen's formula, which expresses the con-
nection between the growth of the mean values m(r) and the size of Du
for a subharmonic function u.
2.15 Jensen's Formula. If it E SH(D(a, R)) and it 0 -oo, then

u(a) 2R u(a
+ re'B)dO
= 1 fo (2.7)
1 r Du(z)dA(z), r < R.
log I I
27r Iz_.J<r z-a
Proof. Let a = 0 and assume first that it is C2. Green's identity applied
to the domain {e < IzI < r} yields
log
r Du(z)dA(z)
c<IzI<r zI
2'
J u(re'B)dO + J u(eeè)dO + O(e loge),
0 0
which gives (2.7) when e \, 0. For a general subharmonic it, let u f = u * 1/i,
as before. Since (2.7) holds for each uE, we just have to ensure that we can
take limits. If g(z) = log(r/lzJ) is defined as zero outside {IzI < r}, then g
is continuous except at the origin. Now observe that
f g(z)ouE(z) = J g(z) E * Du(z) = / g *'pE(z)Au(z).
However, g * ip, --+ g uniformly outside a neighborhood of the origin (see
Exercise 27) and g * i(iE / g in a neighborhood of the origin (since -g is
subharmonic there); therefore, f giu. - f gOu. Since the convergence of
the other terms in (2.7) is obvious, Jensen's formula is proved.
2.18 Corollary. If it E SH(U) and

27r
sup]
r<1
u+(re'o)d8 < oc, (2.8)
0
then y = Du satisfies (2.5).
We leave the verification of this as an exercise. Conversely, if p satisfies

(2.5), then GA is a solution to (2.3) such that (2.8) holds; cf. 2.14.
Exercise 3. Suppose that it E C2(Sl). Show directly that Du = 0 if (1.1)
holds for small r > 0.
Exercise 4. Suppose that Sl is connected. Show that if each real harmonic
u is the real part of some analytic function in Il, then 0 must be simply
connected. (Together with Proposition 1.1, this establishes the equivalence

of condition (k) to the other conditions in Theorem 4.1 in Ch. 3.)
Exercise 5. Assume that f and f2 are harmonic (and SZ is connected).
Show that f or f is analytic.
Exercise 6. Suppose that u and v are real and harmonic. If uv is also
harmonic, what is the relation between u and v?
Exercise 7. What can be said about {Vu = 0} if u is harmonic?
Exercise S. Show that u o f is harmonic if u is harmonic and f is analytic.
Exercise 9. Suppose that u E LIoc(SZ) and
1 u = u(a)
IDI fD
for all D = D(a, r) cc Q. Show that u is harmonic.
Exercise 10. Suppose that fj E A(ul), Il is connected, f, (a) converges for
some a E St, and Re fj converges u.c. Show that fj converges u.c.
Exercise 11. Suppose that uj u in L10. (c) and uj are harmonic. Show
that uj u U.C.
Exercise 12. Prove the maximum principle for harmonic functions by
using only the fact that they satisfy Du = 0.
Exercise 13. Show that if u is real, harmonic in C, and bounded from
above, then it is constant.
Exercise 14. Suppose that u is real and harmonic in {0 < IzI < 2}, and
u(z) = o(log(1/jzj) when z -+ 0. Show that it has a removable singularity
at 0. Hint: Let v be the harmonic function in U that equals u on the unit
circle. Note that for any e > 0, u - v - e log IzI < 0 on a{6 < IzI < 1} if 6
is small enough.
Exercise 15. Show that it is enough to verify (ii) in Theorem 2.1 for all
h that are harmonic in some neighborhood of D.
Exercise 16. Suppose that f is analytic and nonconstant. Use the pre-
ceding exercise to show that log Ill is subharmonic. Hint: Suppose that
g is analytic in a neighborhood of D cc S2 and that log Ifl < Re g on
8D. Then the maximum principle applied to f exp(-g) implies that the
inequality holds in D as well.
Exercise 17. A function u E C2(1l), Sl C R" is harmonic if !1u =
82u/8x = 0. Prove the mean value property and the maximum princi-
ple for such functions.
Exercise 18. A continuous real function u in SZ C R is convex if t F-*
u(x + ty) is convex for all x E S2, y E R", and small real t. Show that a
u E C2(1l) is convex if and only if the Hessian (32u/aX,8xk)jk is positively

semidefinite for each x E H.
Exercise 19. Show that u is subharmonic if it is convex. Give a coun-
terexample for the converse.
Exercise 20. Show that if u, v > 0 and log u and log v are subharmonic,
then log(u + v) is subharmonic.
Exercise 21. Supply proofs for the statements about the Green function
in 2.14.
(a) Suppose that f E C o (C). Show that 0 f log 1 - zj f (()da(() = 27r f .
(b) Show that Cz(z) < 0 and is locally integrable in U.
(c) Show that Gu(z) is subharmonic.
(d) Show that Lg/2 = Fc.
(e) Show that (1/27r) f f' Ggp(re`0)dO / 0 when r
(f) Show that 9f (z) is continuous up to the boundary if f is bounded.
Hints: For (c), one can consider 9Rp(z) obtained from the kernel GR((, z) _
max(G((, z), -R). For (f), one can observe that 9f has bounded deriva-
tives in the interior.
Exercise 22. Suppose that u E SH(U) is nott identically -oo. Show that
sup J u+(re'B)d9 < oo if sup < oo.
r<1 1/2<r<1
Exercise 23. Prove Corollary 2.16!

Exercise 24. Formulate Jensen's formula when u = log If I, where f is
analytic.
Exercise 25. Suppose that u E SH(U) and that limsupu(z..) < 0 for any
sequence zn that converges to a boundary point. Show that u < 0 in U.
Exercise 26. Suppose that u is upper semicontinuous on T. Show that
there are continuous un such that u \ u.
Exercise 27. Take 0 E COI(U) such that f ,bdA = 1. Let Vi, (z) _
f 29)(z/e). Show that x(,E * f -. f in Lio, if f E Ll . and that V), * f - f
u.c. if f is continuous.
Exercise 28. Show that if A is a positive linear functional on Q02(0), then
there is a positive measure in 1 such that AO = f d for all 0 E C02(0).
Exercise 29. Prove Weyl's lemma 1.6; cf. (the proof of) Theorem 2.12.
Exercise 30. Show that u(z) = log(1/d(z,1 )) is subharmonic in fl.
Exercise 31. Find all subharmonic u in U such that u(z) = u(IzD.
Exercise 32. Show that m(r) = f u(re'B)dO is continuous if u is subhar-
monic. Hint: First suppose that u(z) = u(IzD.
Exercise 33. Let S be a doubly connected domain with smooth boundary,

and let us assume that the Dirichiet's problem can be solved with continu-
ous boundary data (which is true). Then there is a harmonic u(z) such that
u = 0 on the boundary of the bounded component and R > 1 on the other
one. Show that if R is appropriately chosen, then u has a harmonic con-
jugate v in Il that is well-defined modulo an integer multiple of 2-7r. Then
h(z) = exp(u(z) + iv(z)) is a well-defined analytic function in f2 whose
image is contained in the annulus A(1,expR). Show that h(z) is in fact a
conformal equivalence. Hint: First show that h is proper, i.e., h-1(K) is
compact for each compact K. Then apply the argument principle to cycles
in Q approximating an.
Definition. A set E C C is polar if there is a subharmonic u - oo such
that E C (u = -oo}.
Exercise 34. Show that each countable set is polar. Also show that any
polar set has measure zero, and supply a counterexample for the converse.
Exercise 35. Suppose that u, E SH(ft), sup,, u,, < M, where M is locally
bounded in 52, and lim sup,,-,,,, u,2 < 0 at each point in 52. Show that for
each compact K C S2 and e > 0 there is an N such that u < e on K for
n > N.
Exercise 36. Show the three-circle theorem: If f c A(A(1, R)), then
log If(z)1 S
log ll
log b/a logm(a) + tolog IIQa
z/ logm(b),
if 1 < a < Izl < b < R and m(r) = sup,z,_,. l f (z) I.
Notes
In 1R2, harmonic functions can be considered either as real parts (locally)
of analytic functions, or as homogeneous solutions to a real elliptic equa-
tion (the Laplace equation). I have tried to shed light on both aspects,
and consequently some facts are proved (at least implicitly) twice. For
instance, the maximum principle is derived from the mean value property
(1.1) (which in turn follows from the mean value property for analytic func-
tions, as well as from Jensen's formula (2.7)), and also directly from the
Laplace equation (see Lemma 2.10).
There is a close connection between Dirichlet's problem (DP) and the
Riemann mapping theorem. For instance, the latter implies solvability
of DP in all simply connected domains (with reasonable boundary). In
Exercise 33, it is suggested how one can obtain a conformal equivalence
from a solution to DP. Solvability of DP under weak assumptions of the
regularity of the boundary is studied in Potential theory, in which the
Notes 81
Newton and Green potentials, polar sets, and capacity are basic concepts;
see [Raj for a nice introduction.
The family of functions (?GF),>o in Proposition 2.9 and Exercise 27 is
called an approximate identity (in R2). The Poisson kernel Pr(t) is an
approximate identity on the circle T. Previously we have met approximate
identities in Section 6 and Exercise 23 in Ch. 3.
5
Zeros, Growth, and
Value Distribution
1. Weierstrass' Theorem
Our first aim in this chapter is to prove that any subset of S2 C C that has
no limit point in 0 is the zero set of some f E A(fl) (Weierstrass' theorem).
To this end we have to consider infinite products.
1.1 Lemma. If z are complex numbers, then
N N
(1 + zn) - 1 <M1+IznI)-1.
1
Proof. Since
k+1 k
(1 + 1 = (1 + zk+l) (11(1 + zn) - 11 + zk+1,
it follows by induction over k that \ J

k+1 k
(1 + 11 < (1 + Izk+1 I) + IznI) - + Izk+I I

(11(1
k+1
_ fl(1 + 1.
1.2 Proposition. If f E A(12), f 0 -oo on each component of Il, and

F 11 - fnI converges u.c., then
00 N
f(z) _ fl fn (z) = limflfn(z)
1 1
1. Weierstrass' Theorem 83
converges u.c. in Q. Moreover, the zeros off are the union of the zeros of
fn, counted with multiplicities.
Proof. Take fixed K C Q. Note that

N N N
1
fnI < 1 1 (1 + 11 - f n 1 ) < - exp E 11 - f n l < C
111JJ 1
on K, independently of N (where we use that 1 + x < expx). If N _> M,

then by the lemma (Zn = fn - 1) and (1.1),
N M M N
fn - fn fl fn 11 fn-1
1 1 1 M+1
r N N
_<C` I1-fnI-1
M+1 1 M+1
which tends to 0 uniformly on K when N > M -+ oo; therefore, the
product converges uniformly on K. Thus, the first statement is proved.
For the second statement, note that each z E S2 has a neighborhood where
at most a finite number of fn have zeros, since locally EM+1 11- ffI < 1/2
if M is large enough. Now rj fn = IIM In fM+I fn and
N N
11 fn-1 <exp1: 11-fn1-1<expl/2-1<1,
M+1 M+I
and therefore jlM+i fn has no zeros near z. 0
Let
p
z3
Wo=1-z, Wp(z)=(1-z)exp>-, p> 1.
1
1.3 Lemma. WW(z) = 0 if and onlyifz = 1; moreover, I1-Wp(z)I < jzlp+1

in U.
Proof. If h = 1 - Wp, then h(0) = 0 and h'(z) - zpexpE'z'/j. Hence,

O(z) = h(z)/zP+l is analytic and, since 0 has positive Taylor coefficients,
IO(z)I < O(IzI) < 4(1) < i for Izj < I.
We now are prepared to construct functions with prescribed zeros.
1.4 Weierstrass' Theorem. Suppose that {an} is a sequence in S2 C P

with no limit point in i, Il # P, and mn is a sequence of positive integers.
Then there is an f E A(fl) that has zeros of orders mn at an and no others.
84 5. Zeros, Growth, and Value Distribution
Proof. We may assume that oo E 0 and that oo # an for each n. Let

an be an enumeration such that each an occurs precisely mn times. Take
Qn E IP \ S2 such that 10n - an I = d(an, an). We claim that
0 RR
f(z)=HWf(an-Nn)
z - Qn
has the required properties. In fact, since oo is not a limit point of {an},
f3n - an I = d(an, 812) 0 when n -p oo, and hence there is for a given
K C Il an N such that Iz - f3nI > d(K,aSZ) > 2lan - Nnl if n > N and
z E K. Thus, fan - f3nl/Iz -#,I < 1/2 if n > N and hence, by Lemma 1.3,
/(-Nn
an-0 )I<2_n' n>N,zEK.
It now follows from Proposition 1.2 that f has the desired properties.
Certainly this theorem, as well as the next two corollaries, fail if 12 = P.
1.5 Corollary. If g is meromorphic in Il C C, then g = f /h for some
f,h E A(SZ).
Proof. Take an h that has zeros where g has poles, and with the same
multiplicities. Then f = gh is analytic.
1.6 Corollary. If aj is a sequence with no limit point in SZ C C, fj is
analytic near a and mj are positive integers, then there is an f E A(12)
such that f(z) - f, (z) = O(Iz - aj +m,+1) when z - a3.
Thus, the Taylor expansion of f can be prescribed up to order mj at
each aj.
Proof. Take g E A(12), which has zeros of orders mj + 1 at aj. According
to Mittag-Leffier's theorem, there is a meromorphic h in SZ having poles
only at aj such that h - fj/g is analytic near aj. Then let f = gh.
1.7 Corollary. There is an f c A(1) that cannot be continued to any
larger domain. More precisely: If a E Il, g E A(D(a, r)), and f = g near
a, then D(a, r) C S1.
Notice that for a general domain the statement about f is stronger than:
If a E SZ, g E A(D(a, r)) and f = g in D(a, r) f1 Il, then D(a, r) C 12. For
instance, if f2 = C \ {z; Im z = 0, Re z _> 0}, then log z in SZ satisfies the
latter statement but not the one in the corollary.
Proof of Corollary 1.7. Let an be an enumeration of all points in Il with
rational coordinates such that each such point occurs an infinite number
2. Zeros and Growth 85
of times. Let K be an increasing exhausting sequence of compact sets in

11, and choose for each n a w E 12 \ K such that Ia - w,1 < d(a,,,1911).
Since any fixed compact set is contained in some K, the sequence w
has no limit point in 1I, and hence there is an analytic function f with
zeros w and no others. Now, if a E 0 has rational coordinates, then the
largest open disk D(a, r) included in 11 will contain infinitely many points
w,,, and hence no function that equals f near a can be analytic (or even
meromorphic) in any larger disk with center a. Prom this the corollary
follows.
2. Zeros and Growth

So far we only have considered the existence of analytic functions with pre-
scribed zeros. We now shall study the connection between the "number of
zeros" and the growth. As a simple example, note that if an entire function
has m zeros (counted with multiplicities), then it must grow at least as fast
as lzlm when z oo. This is an instance of a general phenomenon which,
roughly speaking, means that "the more zeros f has, the faster If I must
grow." Conversely, if there are not too many prescribed zeros, one can find
a function with these zeros that does not grow too fast.
If f is analytic in the disk D(0, R), we can measure its growth by its
characteristic function
2n
T(r, f) = 2a f log 1 + If(re'B)I2dO - log 1 + Jf(o)i2.
Since z +-- log 1 + If (z) 12 is subharmonic (see Exercise 20 in Ch. 4),

T(r, f) is a nonnegative increasing function for r < R and T(0, f) = 0.
Note that
2,T
1
T(r, f) = f log+if(re'B)IdO+0(1)
0
when r / R, since log 1 + x2-log+ xI is less than some constant (log f)
for all x > 0. In the same way, one verifies that T (r, f - a) = T (r, f) + 0(1)
for each fixed a and that T(r, af) = T(r, f) +0(1) if a 54 0. Clearly, control
of T(r, f) puts some growth restriction on f, contrary to f log if (re'o) ado,
which is constant in r if f is nonvanishing. If f is analytic in the disk
D(0, R) and r < R, we let n(r, f) denote the number of zeros of f on the
closed disk { Iz r}; and if f (0) # 0, we let
N(r,f) =
f(f)dR
If f (0) = 0, the expression
ss
N(r,f) - N(ro,f) = f n(s,f) r.
is at least well defined, and its growth when r / R does not depend on the
choice of ro. If a1, a2, ... are the zeros of f (counted with multiplicities),
we claim that
r
N(r, f) = log . (2.1)
Ia,i I
Ia,i<r
In fact, if Iai I < la2l < .... we have
f(f)dS
r
=J 1
1 / Iak+l I
Iakl
n(s,f)+ f n(s,.f)s
s aMI s
M-1
r
klog lak+1l +Mlog IaMI M r
lakl log Iakl
A more suggestive verification can be obtained by noting that dn/ds =

Ei bIakl in the distribution sense, since (2.1) then immediately follows
from a (formal) integration by parts.
2.1 Jensen's Formula. Let f be analytic in D(0, R), r < R, and let an
be the zeros off on D(0, r), ordered such that Ian I < Ian+11. Assume that
f (0) # 0. Then
1
f2wlogif(re'o)Id9-logif(0)I.
N(r,f) _ log IanI (2.2)
In fact, this is simply Jensen's formula in Ch. 4 applied to u = log If 1.

An independent proof is outlined in Exercise 3. This formula implies a
restriction on the amount of zeros of f in terms of its growth. In fact, for
any f that is analytic in D(0, R) we get (if f (0) = 0 apply Jensen's formula
to f(z)/zM)
N(r, f) - N(ro, f) <T(r, f)+0(1). (2.3)
We now shall consider the class of functions in the unit disk with a
bounded characteristic function, the Nevanlinna class
((f
M=
ll
E A(U); sup
r<1 21r
1 j log+ If (re'e)Id9 < oo1 . 11
ll
The inequality (2.3) implies that N(r, f) is bounded for each f E H. This
can be rephrased in the following way.
2.2 Theorem. If a1, a2.... are the zeros, counted with multiplicities, to
an f E H, then they satisfy the Blaschke condition
E1-Ia,I<oo.
2. Zeros and Growth 87
Proof. We may assume that f (0) 54 0. The Nevanlinna condition and

Jensen's formula (or (2.3)) imply that
r
C> logak1- > (r - lakl),
latil<r lckl<r
for some constant C and all r < 1, which proves the theorem.
We now shall see that, conversely, any sequence satisfying the Blaschke
condition occurs as the zero set of some Nevanlinna function. Actually,
there is such a function that is even bounded. Let H denote the space of
bounded analytic functions in U with norm
IlfIIH- =SUP If I-
U
Clearly, H C N.
2.3 Theorem. If {an} is a sequence in U such that E 1 - Ian I < oo and

each an # 0, then
an - z lanl
B(z) = zk rl 1-G,z
CIO
(2.4)
an
1
is in H, IIBIIOO = 1, and B has precisely the zeros an and 0 (counted

with multiplicities). Moreover,
B'(e'B) = lim B(re'B)
r,1
exists for a.e. 0, IB'(e'B)I = 1 for a.e. 0, and
z
rj
lim 1
r71 2ir p
log IB(re'a)Id0 = 0. (2.5)
Proof. Since
z Ianl
1- 1an- -C,z (an + lanIz)(1 - Ianl) 11
< IzI < r,
an (1 - anz)an
it is clear that the product converges u.c., that B has the desired zeros, and
that 1131 < 1. For the existence of the radial limits B', see Theorem 2.2 in
Ch. 6. The limit (2.5) exists since log IBI is subharmonic and nonpositive.
If BN is the product of the N first factors in (2.4), then BN is continuous
on U and has modulus 1 on T; therefore,
1 2x
log I(B/BN)(0)I lim log I (B/BN)(Te'B)I d9
1J
f2r
= r/,'l
1. 27r
1 logB(reiO)IdO+0 < r logIB(e'e)IdG 0,
0
where the next to last inequality follows from Fatou's lemma (keeping in
mind that log CBI < 0). Since log I (B/BN)(0)I / 0 when N oo, (2.5)
and the equality IB'I = 1 a.e. follow.
A product of the form (2.4) is called a Blaschke product. These products

will play an important role in subsequent chapters.
2.4 Remark. The problem of finding an analytic function with prescribed

zeros and a certain growth can be rephrased as a problem for the inhomo-
geneous Laplace equation. For the sake of simplicity, let us assume that fl
is simply connected. The case when n is finitely connected works in essen-
tially the same way; see Exercise 11. If Au = F_6., (in the distribution
sense), we claim that there is an analytic f with zero set {aj} such that
u = log If 1. Thus the problem is to solve the Laplace equation with con-
trol of the growth of the solution. In fact, if h(z) is an arbitrary function
with the prescribed zeros, then u(z) - log Ih(z)I is harmonic and hence it
is Re g(z) for some analytic g(z). Then f (z) = h(z) exp g(z) works. Notice
that the Blaschke product is precisely the solution obtained in this way
from the solution to Au = >2 aa, given by the Green function; cf. 2.14 in
Ch. 4.
One also can construct entire functions with prescribed zeros and with
control of the growth. Let a be a sequence (with multiplicities) in C with
no limit point. Using the recipe in the proof of Weierstrass' theorem we
get the entire function
00
f(z) = H W,,, ('z/an)
1
with zeros a,,, where p = n - 1. However, if one has some control of the
sequence a,,, one can choose smaller p,,. For instance, if >2 1/janlp+l <
oo, one can take pn = p and form the product 11l which is
O(expIzIp+1) when IzI -4 oo; see Exercises 4 and 5. An entire function
that satisifies such a growth condition for some p is said to be of finite
order.
3. Value Distribution of Entire Functions

We now turn our attention to value distribution of entire functions. Since
T(r, f) = T(r, f - a) + 0(1), Jensen's formula also puts some restrictions
on how often the value a can be attained by the function f. If n(r, f, a)
n(r, f - a) and N(r, f, a) = N(r, f - a), then
N(r, f, a) - N(ro, f, a) < T(r, f) + 0(1). (3.1)
3. Value Distribution of Entire Functions 89
We will show that an entire function must attain all but a few exceptional
values as often as is possible in view of (3.1). In particular, the little Picard
theorem will follow.
We first notice that one can get uniform estimates from estimates of
the characteristic function. Without loss of generality we may assume
that f (0) = 0; otherwise, we can replace f with f - f (0). Since u(z) _
log 1 + If (z)12 is subharmonic,
f (O,r)
uda < T (r, f)7rrz (3.2)
for all r; and since u > 0, then

u(z) < 1
it Z z f (z,lz0
udA <
IT zIz J
D(o,zlzl)
ud. < 4T(21zl, f) (3.3)
for all z if f (0) = 0.
3.1 Lemma. If f is entire and
r-oo r' r ) < m,

lim inf log
then f is a polynomial of degree at most m.
Proof. First suppose that rn = 0. Then the condition implies that T(rj, f) <
E log rj for some sequence rj -- oo. Hence, by (3.3),
sup if(z)I < rye,
IzI<ri/2
and thus f is constant; cf. the proof of Liouville's theorem. Now one can
proceed by induction, noting that T(r, (f (z) - f (0))/z) < T(r, f (z) - f (0))-
logr+0(1) = T(r, f) - logy+0(1). 0
For a nonconstant entire function f, the defect with respect to the value
a is defined as
N(r, f, a)
6(f, a) = 1 - lim sup
r- 00 T(-7-,f )
so that the defect 6(f, a) is a number between 0 and 1 that measures to
what extent f fails to attain the value a as often as it possibly can in view
of (3.1).
3.2 Example. Consider f(z) = exp(zk) for some positive integer k. Since
f (z) has no zeros, N(r, f, 0) = 0 and hence 6(f, 0) = 1. On the other hand,
zn
T(r, f) = 2 fo log' exp(rk cos(kO))d9 + 0(1),
and therefore lim, T(r, f)/rk = 1/ir. Since n(r, f, 1) - krk/7r, we have
that N(r, f, 1) - rk/ir and hence b(f, 1) = 0. In the same way one can
verify that b(f, a) = 0 for all a # 0.
This example illustrates a general phenomenon.
3.3 Theorem (The Defect Relation). If f is entire and nonconstant,

and al, a2, ... , ak are distinct complex numbers, then
k
b(f,ai) < 1.
In particular, the defect must be zero for all but a countable set of
values. If f totally avoids some value, then the defect is zero for all other
values, i.e., the little Picard theorem follows. Moreover, if f attains some
value a only a finite number of times, then N(r, f, a) = m log r + 0(1),
and therefore the defect with respect to a is 1 unless f is a polynomial of
degree m (cf. Lemma 3.1). Hence, any entire f that is not a polynomial
attains all values, with one possible exception, infinitely many times. If f
is a polynomial, then the defect b(f, a) = 0 for all values a, and thus we
have strict inequality in the defect relation.
3.4 Remark. One also can define characteristic function and defect for
meromorphic functions; the corresponding result then is that for a noncon-
stant meromorphic f no sum of defects can exceed 2. Since an analytic
function is just a meromorphic one that avoids oo, this statement immedi-
ately implies Theorem 3.3.
The rest of this chapter is devoted to the proof of Theorem 3.3. Even
though we restrict ourselves to the case when f avoids the value oo, it is
natural to adopt an invariant view of P. If it is parametrized by z E C as
usual, then the measure
1 dA(z)
dA(z) = 'r (1 + Iz12)2
is invariant with respect to the unitary linear fractional transformations of
IP (cf. Exercises 33-36 in Ch. 2), i.e., the measure of a given (measurable)
set is not changed if it is moved by such a mapping. Moreover, we have
the invariant distance
Iz - wi
X(z, w) = V1_+ ,
VF + Iz12 Iwi2
X(z, w) = 0 if and only if z = w, and X(z, w) < 1 with equality if and only
if z and w are antipodal on P.
3. Value Distribution of Entire Functions 91
For a meromorphic f in D(0, R) and f (0) 0 a E P we define the proximity

function
m(r, f, a) = 1
27r Jo
2a
log 1 dA - log
X(f(0),a)
X(f(re`B), a)
It measures how close to a the values off are on the circle I z I = r. Jensen's
formula can be rephrased as (check!)
3.5 Proposition. If f is analytic in D(0, R) and a # f (0), then

T(r, f) = m(r, f, a) + N(r, f, a), r < R. (3.4)
Note that (3.4) is exact, i.e., not modulo 0(1). By the invariance of dil
and X it follows (Exercise 17) that fP m(r, f, a)d(a) = 0 and hence
f N(r, f, a)dj (a) = T(r, f);

therefore, at least N(r, f, a) equals T(r, f) in the mean. Moreover, it fol-
lows that the proximity function m(r, f,a) is negative for some values a.
Nevertheless, we have
3.6 Lemma. If f is an entire function, then

N(r, f, a) - N(ro, f, a) < T(r, f) + 0(1),
where 0(1) is uniform in a E P.
Proof. Without loss of generality we may assume that f (0) = 0. For

a 0,
N(r, f, a)-N(ro, f, a) < N(r, f, a)

(3.5)
= T(r, f) - m(r, f, a) < T(r, f) + log 1
X(f (0), a)
On the other hand, for a near 0 (recall that T > 0)
N(r, f,a) - N(ro, f, a) < T (r, f) - (m(r, f, a) - m(ro, f, a))
1 2a
< T(r,f) + 1 f log X(f(roeie) a) dB
ST(r,f)+C--
Tir
"
f loglf(roeie)-aldO<T(r,f)+Cl.
0
(3.6)
To see the last inequality, note that the integral is >_ -C2 for a near 0 since
f 0 on Izl = ro if ro is small and the integral is an increasing function of
ro. From (3.5) and (3.6) the lemma follows.
Proof of Theorem 3.3. Let p(a) be a positive function on P with total

mass I with respect to d(a), and let
- f2,
AP(r) p(f(re'B))(1+f'(reiO0l)I2)2dO.
A principal part of the proof is contained in the following estimate.

3.7 Lemma. For r > 0 outside a set E C (0, oo) of finite measure,
log AP(r) < log r + 4 log T(r, f) + 0(1).
Proof. First notice that

1 1A
fp
n(r, f, a)p(a)d1L(a) = - J +a 2)2 = f r AP(t)tdt,
where the integral in the middle is over(1the multivalued image of D(0, r)
under the mapping f. Hence, in view of Lemma 3.6 we get
r ds
.P(t)tdt
rf s fo
(3.7)
= f(N(r,f,a) - N(ro, f, a)) p(a)d(a) T (r, f) + C.

To conclude the lemma from (3.7), let
a
L(s) = f
0
Ap(t)tdt and K(r) = fL(s). p
Let E' be the set where )P(s) > (L(s))2/s. If rl is such that L(rl) > 0,
then
sAP(s)ds dL(s) I
E niry oo)
ds <
r, L(s)2 r, L(s)2 < L(rl < oo.
Similarly, if E" is the set where L(r) > rK(r)2, then

dK(r) < dK(r) < 1
fE,,n(rl,-) dr fE"fl[) r L(r) r, K(r)2 K(rl)
< o0
For r outside E = E' U E", we have

L(r)2 r2K(r)4
AP(r) < < < r(T(r, f) + C)4,
and hence the lemma is proved.
We now can conclude the proof of Theorem 3.3. By Jensen's inequality,
-f
2w
log tp(f(reie))(1+fIf(Te)I)I2)2)dO <logAP(r,f)-log 2,
27r l
and hence
1 zwlog p(f(Teie))de < 4T(r,f) +logA,(r,f) +O(1) (3.8)

2rr J0
when r -+ oo since log I f'(z)12 is subharmonic. Let ao, a1,. .. , ak be distinct
points on IP and set
tog p(a) = 2 E log 1 - 2 log
(1: log 2 I - C.
x(a, a, j) X(a, as)
Then p(a) is integrable with respect to dp(a), and we can choose C so that
the total mass of p is 1. We may assume that f (0) differs from each of
a0. . . . . ak. If we apply (3.8) to this choice of p, we get
2Em(r, f,aj) <4T(r, f) +logA,(r)
zn
+1f (E
Jensen's inequality and (3.4) (recall that N > 0) yield that
2,r
o
logX(f(re''),
(slog a?
1 ) dB<ClogT(r,f)+O(1),
and hence by Lemma 3.7 we get
k
m(r, f, aj) < 2T (r, f) + log r + Clog T(r, f) + 0(1) (3.9)
0 2
for r outside E. Since we already know that the theorem holds for polyno-
mials, in view of Lemma 3.1 we may assume that
lim sup log r
r-.oo T(r, f)
.0.
Letting ao = oo we now obtain Theorem 3.3 from (3.9) since
N(r, f, a) m(r, f, a)
6(f, a) = 1 - lim sup = lim inf
r-oo
r-.oo T(r,f) T(r, f )
(if f(0) # a) and 6(f, ao) = 1.
Exercise 1. Suppose that f c A(U). One says that a E T is a regular
point for f if there are r > 0 and g E A(D(a,r)) such that f = g on
U n D(a, r). Show that if .f = E and lim sup la.1'1' = 1, then some
point on T is singular (i.e., nonregular).
Exercise 2. Let aj be points in the upper half-plane. Find a condition on
{aj } so that fl(z - aj)/(z - a3) defines an analytic function there.
Exercise 3. Prove Jensen's formula (2.2) without any reference to Jensen's

formula in Ch. 4. First show that the mean value property for the function
r
logIf(z)11 z -an
implies the desired equality modulo the sum
E 1 j21r
log I1 - e-'Ban/rldO.
2x
Then show that each of these integrals actually vanishes.
Exercise 4. Suppose that aj is a sequence in C such that
E 1/Iaj)P+' < 00-
Show that
f (z) _ [J WP(z/aj )
defines an entire function such that I f(z)I < expCIzIP+i

Exercise 5. Show that if f is an entire function of finite order, i.e.,
log If (z)I = O(Izlm) for some m when IzI -+ oo, then
f (z) = zneg(z) [J WP(z/aj)
for some p and n. What is the connection between m and p?

Exercise 6. Suppose that aj are the zeros of some f E A(U) and that
lai I <- Ia2I < . < 1. Show that fo n(r, f, 0)dr = E 1 - laj I.
Exercise 7. Suppose that f E HI and f (1 - 1/n) = 0 for all n E Z+.
Show that f = 0.
Exercise 8. Suppose that 0 < Al < 1\2 < ... < no. Show that there is
a bounded analytic function f 0- 0 in the right half-plane that vanishes at
each .1j if and only if E 1/aj < no.
Exercise 9. Suppose that 0 < .11 < A2 < ... < no and that E 1/Ak =
no. Show that the space of finite linear combinations of the functions
X is dense in C([0,1]). Hint: Use the Hahn-Banach theorem
and the preceding exercise.
Exercise 10. Suppose that aj is a sequence in U. Show that the Blaschke
product (2.4) converges (if and) only if al satisfies the Blaschke condition.
Exercise 11. Suppose that Sl is finitely connected, h is analytic, and u
is a real solution to Au = Olog Ih1. Take one point bj from each bounded
component of P \ Sl. Show that there are real numbers aj with Ian 7r
and a function f (z) with the same zeros as h(z) such that
-
I f(z)I < eu(z)nmIz - b3I
Hint: Determine aj such that u-log Ihi- E aj log Iz-b3 i has a well-defined
harmonic conjugate modulo 27r.
2
T(r, f) < J Ilogif(re'B)IIdO+O(1) < 2T(r, f)+O(1)
27r 0
when r / R. Hint: Use the fact that u = log If I is subharmonic, so that
-00 < 2- f
2x u(Tpe:e)
< 2 r2x u+(reie)d8 -
0
1f
T, r
u(reo)d8
0
for ro < r < R.
Exercise 13. Verify the claims in Example 3.2.
Exercise 14. Show that if f is meromorphic in D(0, R) and f (0) # a, b E
P, then
m(r, f, a) + N(r, f, a) = m(r, f, b) + N(r, f, b), r < R.
Exercise 15. Let f be an entire function that attains each value at most
m times. Show that f must be a polynomial of degree at most m.
Exercise 16. Define the potflog
ntial of p as
P(w) = X(w, a)
p(a)dFu(a),
and show that

mo(r, f) = 2-7r
f p(f (re'0))dO - p(f(0))
0

T(r, f) = fN(rfa)dii(a).
Exercise 18. Suppose that f is an entire function that attains two distinct
values at most a finite number of times. Show that f must be a polynomial.
rT'(r, f) = f n(r, f, a)dp(a) =: A(r, f)-
P
Derive the formula
T(r,f) = f0 rA(t,f)dt
Note that A(r, f) is the area (counted with multiplicities) of the image of
the set {IzI < r} under the mapping z H f (z).
logIf (reie) I dO - logIf (0) I + N(r, f, ese)dO
f21T ,
o
if f is analytic D(0, R) and r < R.
Notes
A thorough treatment of the relationships between zeros, growth, and Tay-
lor coefficients of entire functions can be found in [B].
The value distribution theory was developed by Nevanlinna in the begin-
ning of the 1920s. Proposition 3.5 is called the first fundamental (or main)
theorem, and formula (3.9) is called the second fundamental (or main) the-
orem. The proof given here is due to Ahlfors. A thorough discussion of
these matters, including the more general result for meromorphic functions
and further references, can be found in [Hi].
Since we assume that f is analytic and not merely meromorphic, we
easily get (3.8), which in turn simplifies the proof of (3.9).
The converse of the result in Exercise 9 is also true; see, e.g., [Rul] for a
proof. This characterization is called the Miintz-Szasz theorem.
6
Harmonic Functions and
Fourier Series
1. Boundary Values of Harmonic Functions

If u is a function in U, we let ur(e'o) = u(reò) for r < 1. Let
1 2Ib(e;t)lPdt)
,r 1/P
II0IILa = ( 1 f
be the LP-norm on T (for p < oo); and for 1 < p < oo, let hP denote the
space of harmonic functions in U such that
IIuIIhP =SUP IItirIILP < 00-
r<1
Note that r IIurIILP is increasing since IuIP is subharmonic, and therefore

sup may be replaced by lim. One readily verifies that hP is a Banach space.
Let M(T) be the space of complex measures ju on T with norm
IIAII = - f dljl.
2 -7r T
It is convenient to identify measures (and functions) on T with 2ir periodic
measures (and functions) on R, so that, e.g.,
jr 2,f
2 (t)dp(t),
2 J
where the integration is to be performed over, e.g., (0, 21r). For p E M(T)
we define the Poisson integral of p as
Pp(reie) = 2, P,.(9 - t)dp(t), r < 1;

2a 0
if dp = fdt and f E C(T), this definition is consistent with the previous
one in Ch. 4. Note that Pp is harmonic in U. To begin with, we shall
generalize Proposition 1.4 in Ch. 4.
98 6. Harmonic Functions and Fourier Series
1.1 Theorem.
(a) If f E LP(T), 1 < p < oo, then Pf E hp and IIPf!IhP = IIfIILP- If
1 < p < oo, then
1 f1 I I(Pf)r - f(ILP = 0.
If f c- LOO(T), then (Pf )r f tweak', i.e.,

f(Pf)rc--+JTfq for all LI(T).
(b) M14 E M(T), then Pp E h', IIPllh3 = Ilpll, and (Pp), --* p weak', i.e.,
f(Pz)rc -+ J Ldp for all E C(T).
(c) If f E C(T), then Pf E hO n C(U), and (Pf)r f uniformly.
Proof. First notice that (c) follows from (the proof of) Proposition 1.4 in
Ch. 4. To prove (b) notice that if p E .M (T), then
12,
Pp(re'B)I < Pr(B - t)dlpl (t);
I 21r
and if we integrate this inequality and use Fubini's theorem, we get that
IIP,IIh= < IIpi. Then take 0 E C(T). By Fubini's theorem,
f0
2ir fzA Pr(9
=2zr f
1
0
zn(P4')r(e")dp(t);
- t)dp(t)(e'9)d9
0
= 27r
but since (PO), --+ 0 uniformly according to (c), the right-hand side tends
to 2" Odp/2ir. Finally (cf. Exercise 4),),
1 f27r 1 2T
Illiil = sup Odu = sup lim q(Pp)r
Iml_:5I 1
27r I0151 r 27r 0
1 2n
< lim I(Pp),I =
r 2i
and thus (b) is proved. For (a), notice that (Jensen's inequality)
Ii. j27r Pr (e - t)f(ee)dtf Pr(t)
`f(et(e-tl)rdt
0
for 1 < p < oo. Integrating this inequality we get II Pf II hP <_ II f II LP Take
e > 0 and 0 E C(T) such that IIf - tIILP < E. Then
II(Pf)r - fIILP <- II(P(f - O))rlI LP + II(PO)r - .IILP
+II0 - f (I LP < If -'IILP + II(P4i)r - 4IIL+IIf - OIILP < 3E

1. Boundary Values of Harmonic Functions 99
if r is near 1 because of (c), and hence (Pf),. -+ f in LP(T); in particular,

II Pf II hn = limf II (P f ),. II LN = 11f II LP The case p = oo is proved analogously
to (b). C3
We now consider the converse of Theorem 1.1.
1.2 Theorem. If u E hp, 1 < p < oo, there is a unique f E LP(T) such
that u = Pf. If u E h1, there is a unique p E .M(T) such that u = Pp.
Thus, we have a one-to-one correspondence (in fact, an isometric isomor-
phism) between hp and LP(T) for p > 1 and between h' and M(T). In one
direction the correspondence is given by the Poisson integral, p -+ Pp, and
in the other direction by u --+ limr u, in the sense described in Theorem 1.1.
Note that Theorem 1.2 differs from Theorem 1.1 in the sense that it is an
existence theorem; it states that an object with certain properties exists.
The key is the Banach-Alaoglu theorem, a proof of which is outlined in
Exercise 5.
1.3 The Banach-Alaoglu Theorem. If B is a separable Banach space,

{Aa} C B`, and IIAaII 5 M, then there is a subsequence Aa; and A E B'
such that A.,u - Au for all u E B, i.e., Aa, -. A weak'.
1.4 Example. In general, I I A II <_ lim inf II Ai II if Aj -+ A weak' (Exer-
cise 4) and strict inequality can occur. Take, e.g., B = L1(T) and let
A = eiie Then, according to the Riemann-Lebesgue lemma (see next
section), 0 for all f E LI(T), although IIAfIIL- = 1
Proof of Theorem 1.2. Suppose that p > 1 and u E hp. Then {u,.} is a
bounded family of elements in LP(T) and therefore there is a subsequence
u,-, (such that ri / 1) and f E LP(T) such that f u,.,0 -p f f for all
0 E LQ(T). We have to verify that u is the Poisson integral of f. Note that
z ' u(rjz) is harmonic in a neighborhood of U and therefore
P (B rzn
u(rrje'B) = 2n - t)u,., (e")dt.

For fixed r < 1 and 0, t P,(O is continuous, in particular, in L9(1'),
and therefore we get that
r2 P,.(9
u(re'i) - t)f(eu)dt,
2 0
i.e., u = P f . From Theorem 1.1 it now follows that u,. = (P f ),. f

and so f is unique; therefore, the proof is complete for p > 1. Notice that
L1(T) C M(T), which is the dual of C(T); therefore, if u E h', then the
Banach-Alaoglu theorem provides a p E M (T) such that f u,.)0 -+ f Odp
for all 46 E C(T). Then the proof is concluded analogously to the case
p>1. 0
If we combine Theorem 1.1 with the observations about the Green po-
tential Gp in Remark 2.14 in Ch. 4, we get the following decomposition
of a subharmonic function u. The special case when u = log If I for some
analytic function f will be fundamental in subsequent chapters.
1.5 Theorem (The Riesz Decomposition). Let u be a subharmonic
function such that
1 2n
sup -J
r<1 2rr
u+(re'B)dO < oo.
o
Then
f(1 - Kl)Lu < 00,

and there is a unique measure p on T such that
u(z) = G(Du)(z) + Pp(z), z E U.
Moreover, u, pt weak' and ur pe in L'(T) if is absolutely continuous.
Proof. According to Corollary 2.16 and Remark 2.14 about the Green
potential, G(Au) is subharmonic and its Laplacian is equal to Au. It
follows (see Exercise 31) that u - G(Du) is harmonic in U. In view of
Exercise 22 in Ch. 4, it is in fact in h1, and by Theorem 1.2 it is therefore
the Poisson integral of a measure p on T. 0
We now are going to study pointwise convergence of the Poisson integral.
To this end we first recall the Lebesgue-Radon-Nikodym decomposition of
a measure into an absolutely continuous and a singular part,
A =Ua+I2o,
i.e., where pt, is concentrated on a null set (with respect to dB) and pa = fd9
for some f E L' (T). If
Lt (s) I 1/2t, Isj < t

2t Xf t( ) = 1
s
0, Isl > t,
then
B+t
f Lt(9 - s)dp(s) = 1 r
2t J9-t
dp(s) --. f(ese) for a.e. 0 when t \, 0, (1.1)
i.e., the mean values over small intervals around e'8 tend to f (e'') for a.e.
0 when the lengths tend to zero. If dp = f dO and f E C(T), this is trivial
and can be rephrased as Lt (s) --, 6 weak' as measures when t \ 0. We
now will consider instead the mean values (1/27x) j Pr(s - B)dp(s) of p
when r / 1. Also, P,.(t)/27r - S weak' as measures when r / 1. One
can think of Pr(t) as regularized characteristic functions. Figure 1 below
shows Pr(t) for r = 1/2, r = 3/4, and r = 7/8.
-1 0 1 2 3
t
FIGURE 1
One may guess that the analogue of (1.1) holds for P,./27r.
1.6 Theorem. If u = p. + f dB, then

(P),. -# f for a.e. 0 when r (1.2)
In particular,
(Pf)r -ffora.e.0when r/1iffEL"(T), 1<p<oo.
Thus, any u C h1 has radial boundary values u' a.e.; and if u = P,

then u' is equal to the absolutely continuous part of /2.
Proof. We first recall that the standard proof of (1.1) depends on only
two facts: that (1.1) holds for continuous f and that one has the weak type
(1,1)-estimate,
{Mp > all < 1114, (1.3)
of the Hardy-Littlewood maximal function
sup f Lt(9 - s)dI11I (s)

M/(0)
Since we know (1.2) for continuous functions, we just have to show the
analogue (1.3)' of (1.3), where My is replaced by the new maximal function
Mll(8) = sup
r<1 27r
1 f2l Pr(B -
We shall reduce (1.3)' to (1.3), and we begin with representing Pr(s)/27r
as a superposition of the functions Lt(s),
2_Pr(s) = Pr(ir)L.,,(s) + 2 if0
-Pr(t)2tLt(s)dt. (1.4)
In fact, fo -P,(t)2tLt(s)dt/27r = f"ICI P,(t)dt/27r; an integration by parts

then gives (1.4). By (1.4) we get
1 i(9) =
sup [Pr(ic)fLit(s - O)dlul(s) + 2n f -Pi (t)2t f Lt(s - e)dirli(s)dt)
0
_< sup Ma(O) [Pr(ix) +

27r
/ -Pr(t)2tdtl = Mp(8),
o J
from which (1.3)' follows, and hence also Theorem 1.6. O
Recall that for each real harmonic u in U there is a unique analytic

function Gu such that u = Re Gu and Gu is real at the origin.
1.7 Theorem. Suppose that 1 < p < oo. If u e hP is real, then its
harmonic conjugate v = Im Gu (which vanishes at the origin) also belongs
to hP and IIVIIhP 5 APII'ullhp, where AP depends only on p.
A conformal mapping of U onto the strip {I Re w I < 1} shows that the

theorem is not true for p = oo and hence (Exercise 8) not true for p = 1
either.
A finite sum F, a trigonometric polynomial. Any real
trigonometric polynomial is the restriction to T of the real part of an ana-
lytic polynomial g(z) = a(z) + iJ3(z) with X3(0) = 0. The theorem implies
in particular that 1IQ11LP <_ APIIoIILP
If I < p < oc, then
Z"Gu(z)
=
f eit - zuM(eie)dt, lzI < 1,
since the integral is analytic, real at the origin, and its real part equals
u = Pu'. If we try to estimate the boundary values of Gu by letting
z = e'8 formally, we get e't - e`9 = O(It - BI) in the denominator, and
therefore that integral does not exist in the usual sense; it is a so-called
singular integral. There is a theory for such integrals which can be used to
deduce Theorem 1.7, but here we supply a more elementary proof.
Proof. First suppose that 1 < p < 2, f = u + iv is analytic, v(0) = 0, and

u > 0. Since 2au/az = f', a simple computation gives that
AuP = p(p - 1)If'I2up`2
and
olflp = p2If'I2lflp-2;
therefore,
p
AlfI" < 1
AuP (1.5)
(keep in mind that 1 < p < 2). Notice that Green's formula (see A in the
preliminaries) gives that
rf -OdO
0 or = J ISI<r
From (1.5) we then get
f2, p
f2r
If(reie)IPd8 < u(reB)IPdO;
dr 1 dr
but v(0) = 0, and thus
f21T
If(reie)IPd9 < p p l f zn
Iu(re`9)IPdG
for r = 0 and hence for any r < 1. Thus IIGuflhP < CpIlullhP if 0 < u E
hP, since (by the maximum principle) a nonnegative harmonic function is
strictly positive unless it is identically 0. If u E hP, then u' is in LP(T) and
hence so are u'+ and u'-. Now u = Pu'+ - Pu", where both terms are
nonnegative and in hP. Moreover, Gu = GPu'+ - GPu"-, and therefore
we get that
IIGullhp < CpIIPu*+IlhP +CpIIPu' IIhl S 2CPIIuIIhp.
This proves the theorem for 1 < p < 2 with AP = 2Cp = 2p/(p - 1).
Now suppose that 2 < p < oo and let p-1 + q-1 = 1. Take an arbitrary
real trigonometric polynomial a = Re g, where Im g = /3 and /3(0) = 0.
For such a g, Nur + avr = Im gfr is harmonic and vanishes at the ori-
gin, and therefore f u(reie)/3(e`B)dO = - f v(reie)a(eie)dO. Thus, Holder's
inequality gives
1 z, 1 f2,
I2 f 0VradOl = 121
ur/3dO IIurIILPIIaIILQ < AgllurIILpIIaIILQ,
where we have applied the theorem to a and /3. The (real) trigonometric
polynomials a are dense in (real) Lq(T) (see below), and thus it follows
that IIVrIILP < AgIIurIILP and so IIVIIhP S Agllullhp 0
By virtue of Theorems 1.1, 1.2, and 1.7 we can define a bounded operator,
the Hilbert transform,
H: LP(T) 1 < p < oo,
LP(T),
in the following way: For a real 0 in LP(T) we let HO be the boundary
values of the unique harmonic conjugate to PO that vanishes at the origin.
The operator so defined is certainly real linear, and it then is extended to
complex-valued functions by linearity.
2. Fourier Series
For p E M(T) we define the Fourier coefficients
2x e_intdp(t),
_77p(n) = !i(n) = 2rr J n E Z.
0
Note that I!l(n)I < IIpII, and so we have a bounded operator
Y: M I' (Z).
Moreover,
-F(a)(n) _ Fu(-n). (2.1)
For an integrable function on T,

2n
.Ff(n) = f(n) = e-int f(ect)dt;
2 .- J 0
and if f is in C' (T), then
.F (d8) (n) = in-Ff(n). (2.2)
An easy computation reveals that

00 00 00
{z(n)eine = 1:
Pp(re'B) = E rl nl 2'(n)zn
+ #(0) + E zn/1(-n). (2.3)

-00 1 1
Thus, PM and hence /p are completely determined by the Fourier coefficients

(n), and Ppt is analytic in U if and only if j2(n) = 0 for all n < 0.
To each measure p e M(T), we associate the trigonometric polynomials
N
.FN,u(e'B) = E Fi(n)e n9
-N
In view of (2.3), it is natural to ask whether .N tends to p in any rea-
sonable sense when N --+ oo. It follows from (2.2) that Ff (n) = O(1/InI2)
when Inl no if f E C2(T), and hence the series in (2.3) converges uni-
formly even for r = 1, i.e., FN f f uniformly. In fact, it is enough that
2. Fourier Series 105
f E C1(T); see Exercise 13. Since C2(T) is dense in LP(T) (use, e.g., The-
orem 1.1), it follows that the space of trigonometric polynomials is dense
in LP(T). In particular, this implies that {e"91 is a complete ON-system
in L2(T), and therefore we have Parseval's equality
00
(f, 9) = E f (n)9(n), (2.4)
where
1 2ir
(f, 9) =
fo 2-7r
f (e")9(e't)dt, (2.5)
and hence the isometric isomorphism

' F: L2(T) 12(Z).
Moreover, 11-FNf - fflL2 -+ 0 when N - oo. It is also true that IIFNf -

f II LP --+ 0 for f E LP(T) if 1 < p < oo; see Exercise 21. In Exercise 40 in
Ch. 1 we saw that
.F:LP (T)-3QQ(Z), 1 <p<2
(the Hausdorff-Young inequality). Furthermore, we have the Riemann-
Lebesgue lemma, which states that
97: L1(T) -+ co(Z),
where co(Z) is the space of sequences e. such that c,. -+ 0 when Ink -
oo. This follows quite immediately from the fact that the trigonometric
polynomials are dense in L1(T). It is easily verified that
2- f Ei (n)O(n) = 2-
-N
fdu(e) (2.6)
for p E M(T), from which it follows that .FNP - p at least in the weak
sense that
fO
0
zn
NU- f o
2n
Oda, 0EC2(T).
If 0 E C(T), then, by (2.2), F (n) = O(In1-M) for all M when In! -+ 00,
and therefore (2.3) converges uniformly even after an arbitrary number of
differentiations. Therefore, Pq5 E C(U), and in particular FNq 0 in
C0(T) (i.e., uniformly with all its derivatives).
2.1 Remark. Let P(Z) be the space of sequences c that are O(InJM)
for some M when In! -+ oo. For any distribution f E D'(T), let Tf (n) =
f(e-:n,). As T is compact, f has finite order, so .Ff(n) = O(Inj M) for
some M. Therefore,
.F: D'(T) --+ P(Z). (2.7)
Since (2.6) extends to distributions f, it follows that FNf --+ f in V(T).

Conversely, one easily sees that if c, is any sequence in P(Z), then the cor-
responding Fourier series converges in IY(T), and therefore (2.7) is actually
an isomorphism.
Let us express the Hilbert transform in terms of the Fourier coefficients.

Let u be a real function in L2(T), and let v = Hu. As the harmonic
extension of v vanishes at the origin, v(0) = 0_ Furthermore, as (the
harmonic extension of) u + iv is analytic, u(n) + iv(n) = 0 for n < 0. In
view of (2.1), we then must have that
-iu(n), n > 0
Hu(n) = S 0, n=0 (2.8)
l tiu(n), n < 0.
Notice that (2.8) and Parseval's equality (2.4) imply a very simple proof of
Theorem 1.7 for p = 2 and that the best constant A2 is 1. From (2.8) and
(2.4) it also follows that
HHf = -f + f (0) and H` = -H, (2.9)
i.e., (Hf,g) = -(f,Hg) for all f,g E L2(T).
We now introduce the spaces H' = hP rl A(U), 1 < p < no, which are
closed (why?) subspaces of h', and we first consider the case p > 1.
2.2 Theorem. Suppose that 1 < p< on. If f E HP, then

f.(e'e) = lim f(reie)
r/1
exists for a.e. 9, f' E LP (T),
f(z) = (Pf')(z) = 1:
2'r
r .f'C z(()d( (2.10)
z
UIIHP = Ijf'l LP and for p < no also )If. - f'IILP - 0 when r / 1. A
function in LP(T) is f * for some f E HP if and only if its negative Fourier
coefficients vanish.
Proof. Everything but (2.10) is already proved. If r < 1, then
f (rz) = 1 f(rC)dC
27ri JT C-z
and since fr -* f" in L1(T), (2.10) follows. 0
Thus, for p > 1, HP may be identified with the closed subspace {u E
LP(T); u(n) = 0, n < 0} of LP(T). In particular,
H2-12(N)= {aE12(Z); an=0forn<0},
2. Fourier Series 107
and therefore we have the orthogonal projection

S: L2(T) H2,
referred to as the Szego projection. We claim that
f(n), n > 0
SJ(n) = (2.11)
0, n<0.
In fact, since Sf is analytic (in the sequel we identify Sf with its Poisson
integral) for any f and f - Sf is orthogonal to the analytic functions with
respect to the inner product (2.5), (2.11) follows from Parseval's equality.
Now
00 00 1 2n
S f(z) _ f(n)zn = 00 2x f f(eit)e-intZndt
0
1 j2w f(e't)dt 1 f f (()d

27r 1-e-itz 2lri T C- z
and therefore the (harmonic extension of) the Szegb projection is given by
the Cauchy integral. However, the Cauchy integral makes sense for any
fELP(T),p>1.
2.3 Theorem. Suppose that 1 < p < no. Then
(a) the Szego projection extends to a bounded mapping
S:LP(T)-.H".
(b) any bounded functional on HP is represented by a unique element h in
HQ via the pairing (2.5), and the functional norm is equivalent to the
HQ norm of h.
Part (b) can be rephrased as (HP)' = H.

Proof. From (2.8) and (2.11) we get the relation
Su = 2 (u + iHu + Pu(0)), u E L2(T). (2.12)
Since H is bounded on LP(T), so is S, and hence the first statement is
confirmed.
Any bounded functional A on HP extends by the Hahn-Banach theorem
to a functional on LP(T) with the same norm, and it therefore is represented
by a 0 E L9(T) with IItIILQ = IIAII. In particular, Af = (f,0) for f E HP,
but then also A f = (f, SO) for all f E HP, since S f = f and S' = S.
Thus, g = SO E Hq represents A. Then clearly IIAII < II9IINQ, and by the
boundedness of S, 1I91IHQ CII04Q = CIIAII for some constant C that
only depends on q. 0
Let us now take a look at the space H'. From Theorems 1.2 and 1.1
we know that if f E H1 C h', then f*(e'B) exists for a.e. 0 and f = P,
where u = M. + f'dO. Since f is analytic, we also know that (n) = 0 for
n < 0. The crucial fact is that then u. is in fact absolutely continuous and
thus equal to f'dO.
2.4 The F. & M. Riesz Theorem. If p E M(T) and u(n) = 0 for n < 0,
then p is absolutely continuous, i.e., p = gd8 for some g E L'(T).
By an obvious argument we then have the following extension of Theo-
rem 2.2.
2.5 Theorem. If f E H', then f'(e'B) = limy/, f(re") exists for a.e. 0,
f' E L1(T),
f(z) = (Pf*)(z) = 21 f(()d(
JT
7ri
II AH' = II f' Il L' and Il fr - f' II L' 0 when r l 1. A function in L1(T) is

f' for some f E H1 if and only if its negative Fourier coefficients vanish.
On the other hand, the F. & M. Riesz theorem follows immediately from
Theorem 2.5. To prove the latter, we must use that f is analytic and not
merely harmonic. In the next paragraph we shall see that any f E H1
can be factorized as f = gh, where f, 9 E H2; if f is nonvanishing, this is
trivial, we just take g = h = 0, where 02 = f. Now Theorem 2.5 easily
follows:
Ilfr - f'ilL' =I1grhr-9*hÌIL' <I1ghr-g*hrIIL1+II9*hr-9'h'IIL'
5 II9r-9*IIL2IIhrhbL2 + II9+IIL-IIhr - hÌIL2 -+ 0 when r / 0,
i.e., fr - f" in LI(T). However, then f = Pf', and everything follows.
Exercise 1. Show that hP is a Banach space, i.e., that II Ilho is a complete
norm on hp.
Exercise 2. Show that if u is harmonic and positive in U, then u E hl
and u = Pp, where u > 0.
Exercise 3. Give an example of a u E hP \ 1i if 1 < p < p' < oo.
Exercise 4. Let A3 be a sequence of elements in the dual space B' to a
Banach space B. Show that IIAil < liminf IIA,11 if A3 - A weak'.
Exercise 5. Fill in the details in the following sketch of a proof of
the Banach-Alaoglu theorem. Let D = {u1, u2, ... } be an enumeration
of a dense subset of B. Take a subsequence A1,J from {AQ} such that

limJ_.,, A1,,,ul exists. Extract from {A1,J} a subsequence A2,J such that
1im,.. A2,JU2 exists, and so on. The diagonal sequence AJ,J then converges
at each Uk. One then defines Auk as this limit and extends by continuity
to an element in B', which has the desired properties.
Exercise 6. Suppose that u = Pp and IIUIIhI < IIu'IIL1. Show that p is
absolutely continuous.
Exercise 7. Give an example of a real u E h such that its harmonic
conjugate is not in h.
Exercise 8. Show that in general the harmonic conjugate v of a real u E h'
is not in h1. Is this true if u = Pu"?
Exercise 9. Give an example of a real u E hl such that its harmonic
conjugate is not in h'.
Exercise 10. Let p = p+ - a- be the Jordan decomposition of the real
measure p E M(T), and let u = Pp. Show that f u,+dt -+ f dpc+(t) when
r / 1.
Exercise 11. Suppose that u = P(u' +,u.). Show that f u,+ -+ fu*+ if
and only if A. < 0.
Exercise 12. Show that the space of trigonometric polynomials is dense
in C(T).
Exercise 13. Show that the partial Fourier sums .F f tend uniformly to
f if f E C1(T) (or if df/d9 is only in L2(T) in the distribution sense).
Exercise 14. Verify that Hp is a closed subspace of hp.
Exercise 15. Verify (2.12) by means of the integral representations of
Gu = P(u + iHu) and Su.
Exercise 16. Prove the Riemann-Lebesgue lemma, i.e., that F maps
L1(T) into co(Z).
Exercise 17. Show that .F: M -+ 1(Z) is not surjective. Can you find
an explicit example of an a E 1(Z) that is not in the image?
Exercise 18. Let DN(t) = .FN6(t) = END, e'^t. Show that
DN(t) - sin ((N + 1/2)t)
sin(t/2)
and that IIDNIIL1 -' oo when N -+ oo.
Exercise 19. Show that (cf. the preceding exercise)
FN f (0) =
- Zo
f (t)DN(-t)dt/21r
and that f -+ FNf (0) is a bounded linear functional on C(T) with norm
equal to IIDNIILI. Then show that there are functions f E C(T) for which
,FN f (0) does not converge when N ---+ oo. Hint: Use the Banach-Steinhaus
theorem and the preceding exercise.
Exercise 20. Show that F: L1(T) ---+ co(Z) is not surjective. Hint: Use
Exercise 18 and the open mapping theorem for Banach spaces.
Exercise 21. Show that the partial Fourier sums TN f tend to f in LP(T)
norm for f E L'(T), 1 < p < oo. Hint: First show that the set of partial
sums is bounded in LP(T).
Exercise 22. Show that a harmonic function u in U is in hz if and only if
fu (1- I(I2)IVuI2 dA(() < coo.
Exercise 23. Show that the Szego projection is unbounded on L(T) and
L'(T).
Exercise 24. Let a E U. Show that f -+ f (')(a) is a bounded linear
functional on Hz and find the g E Hz that represents this functional. How
large can If (-)(a)l be if IIfJIH2 :5 1?
Exercise 25. Show that if p E M(T) and 11(n) = 0 for all n > N, then
is absolutely continuous.
Exercise 26. Let p be a real measure on T, and show that
rzi Jim SUP r
limsup 2x J P,.(0 - s)dp(s) < / Lt(8 - s)d/.c(s).
r/1 o C%O J
Show that P,u has radial limits at each point where the measure derivative
of p exists.
Exercise 27.
(a) Show that if p > 0 on T and
lim inf Lt(O - s)dp(s) = 0
t-0 J
for all 0 in an open interval I, then (I) = 0.
(b) Suppose that u > 0 and is harmonic and that u(re4o) -+ 0 when r / 1
for all e's # 1. Show that u(re'g) = cP,(O) for some constant c > 0.
Exercise 28. Show that u(z) = Im[(1 + z)'/(1 - z)2] has radial limits 0
for all 0. Show that u is not Pp for any measure p.
Exercise 29. Show that the Hilbert transform is an isomorphism on D'(T).
Exercise 30. Is it true that each f E A(U) is equal to g(m) for some m
and some g E Hz?
Notes 111
Exercise 31. Suppose that u and v are subharmonic in f? and that Au =

Av. Show that u - v is harmonic in Q.
Notes
In this chapter as well as in the later ones we restrict ourselves to the unit
disk. Most results have analogues in the upper half-plane lI+. For instance,
h.P(II+) is the space of harmonic functions in n+ such that sup,>0 fR iu(x+
iy)IPdx < oo. There is a one-to-one correspondence between LP(R) and
hP(II+) for p > 1 and between M(R) and hl(1T+), which is given by the
Poisson integral
Pf (x, U) = n JR Y2 + (x)_t)2 ;
cf. Exercise 23 in Ch. 3.
A further discussion about weak* compactness and the Banach-Alaoglu
theorem can be found in [Ru2].
Theorem 1.6 was first proved by Fatou in 1906 for p = oo. Therefore,
results about pointwise convergence at the boundary often are referred to
as Fatou theorems. Any u E h' actually has nontangential boundary values
u': If r(o) = {re" E U; 10 - ti < 1 - r}, then
u"(e'B) = lira u(z)
r(ete)3z-.e,e
exists for a.e. 0; see, e.g., [G). See also Exercise 28 in the next chapter.
For 1 < p <- oo, there is C, > 0 such that II Mf IILP <_ CPII f IILP, f E
LP(T), i.e., M is bounded on LP(T); see, e.g., [G].
Theorem 1.7 was first proved by M. Riesz in 1927. The proof here is due
to P. Stein. The Hilbert transform is the simplest example of a singular
integral; see [S] for a thorough discussion.
Carleson proved in 1966 that FN f -+ f for a.e. 8 if f E L3(T), Acta
Math., vol 116 (1966), 135-157. It was generalized to p > 1 by Hunt, Proc.
Conf. Edwardsville, Ill. (1967), 235-255, Southern Illinios Univ. Press, Car-
bondale, Ill. (1968).
For further results about Fourier analysis and periodic distributions, see
[Ho].
The theorem of F. and M. Riesz is from 1916. For generalizations to lit",
see [S].
7
HP Spaces
1. Factorization in Hp Spaces
We extend the definition of the Hardy spaces Hp to p > 0:
r 2 1/p
Hp = ilf E A(U); If II Ho = sup
r<1
1f
21r o
if (reie) I pd9} < oo
For 0 < p < 1, the triangle inequality does not hold; but Ilf + 9IIHP <
IIf IIHP + IIgIIH,,,
and therefore Hp is at least a vector space. Moreover,
HcHP cHI cN, oo>p>s>0,
and therefore the zero set of any f E Hp satisfies the Blaschke condition.
In fact, it is possible to divide out all the zeros without affecting the norm.
1.1 Theorem. If f E N is not identically zero and B is the correspond-

ing Blaschke product, then f /B E N: If f E Hp, then f /B E Hp and
IIf/BIIHP = IIfIIHP.
Proof. Note that log+ I f/BI < log+ I f I + log+ I1/BI = log+ I f I - log IBI.
Since (Theorem 2.3 in Ch. 5) log IBrI -+ 0 in L' (T) when r / 1, f 1B E
N. Now suppose that f E HP, and let B be the first n factors in B.
Then clearly IIf /BnIIHP = IIf II HP since I Bn (reie) I 1 uniformly when
r / 1. Moreover, If /Bn I j If /B I when n -+ oo, and thus by monotone
convergence we have that
f1
f2lF
I (f/B)(re'B)Id9 = linm . I (f/Bn)(re`B)Ipd0
27r 27r
lnmllf/BnIIHP = IIfIIHP,
and therefore IIf / B I I HP S Il f I I HP Since the converse is trivial, the proof is

complete.
Theorem 1.1 is the key to the Hp-theory.

1. Factorization in H' Spaces 113
1.2 Theorem. If f E HP, 0 < p < oo, then f ` = limrll fr exists for a.e. 8,
IIfIIHP = II.f'IILP, and for p < oo it is also the case that Ilf, - f'IILP -. 0
when r/1.
Proof. Since the case p > 1 already has been dealt with in Ch. 6, we may
assume that 0 < p < 1. Take f E HP and let B be the corresponding
Blaschke product. Then f /B is nonvanishing, and hence it is equal to 01
for some 0 E A(U). From Theorem 1.1 we get that IIOIIH, r = IIf II iiP < oc,
and so if pm > 1, then 0' = limn qr exists for a.e. 9 and II' 11 LP- = IIOIIHp-
according to Section 1 in Ch. 6. However, f = B(O', and therefore f'
exists a.e. and IIf'IILP = II B*(O*)rII LP = II0'IIi P = II0IIHmP = II fII HP.
For 0 < p < 1 , I fr I P + If * I P - I fr - f' I P > 0, and an application of Fatou's
lemma yields the last claim. O
The Nevanlinna condition on f means precisely that u = log if I satisfies

the hypothesis in Theorem 1.5 in Ch. 6, and hence it admits a Riesz de-
composition. Let us repeat the argument anyway. Assume that f E N is
not identically zero and B is the corresponding Blaschke product. Then
log I f /BI is harmonic and f /B E N; therefore, by the the mean value
property,
sup 1 j"jlogI(f/B)(re'O)I1dO<oo,
r<1 27r
i.e., log If /BI is in h'. Thus, there is a real measure p on T such that
log If /BI = Pp. Now
1
/2xe't z +
f (x) = cB(z) exp J e" - z dp(t), c c T, (1.1)
a_
since both sides are analytic and have the same modulus. Conversely, if p
is a real measure and f is defined by (1.1), then it is in the Nevanlinna class
and the representation (1.1) is unique. If we make the Jordan decomposi-
tion It = p+ - p.-, we find that f = g/h, where II9IIH= 5 1, IIhhhH= < 1,
and h#0.
1.3 Theorem. If f E N and f 0 0, then the radial limits f'(eie) exist
for a.e. 8 and log If * I E L' (T). Moreover,
z,
f(z) =
1 e"+z 1
eit+z dp(t)(1.2)
cB(x)exp
J eit - z log
27r
If ' (e::)Idt exp
27r o eit -
where p is a unique real singular measure and c E T.
Proof. Decompose p in (1.1) as la = Od8 + p where 0 E LI (T) and p, is

singular. Since IB*I = 1 a.e., limlog IfrI = O for a.e. 8. If f E H, then f'
114 7. H" Spaces
exists (Theorem 1.2) and consequently log If* I = lim log I fj = ELI (T),
and so f' # 0 for a.e. 0. However, an arbitrary f E N is f = g/h
for some g, h E H, and since h` # 0 a.e., f = g*/h' exists a.e. and
log if*I = limloglfrI.
1.4 Corollary. If f,g E Al and f = g* on a set with positive measure,
then f = g.
Proof. If f E N and f' = 0 on a set with positive measure, then log If* I V
L' (T) and thus f = 0. From Exercise 2 it follows that f -g E Al if f, g E N,
and hence the corollary follows.
1.5 Proposition. If f E HP, 0 < p < oo, then p < 0, if p is defined by
(1.2).
The class of all f E N such that p < 0 -is denoted N+. Thus the
proposition says that HP C N+.
Proof. To begin with, we may assume that f is nonvanishing, i.e., B = 1.
Then log if I = Pp, and we have to prove that the singular part of is non-
positive. After taking an mth root if necessary, we also may assume that
f E H'. Now, I log+ x - log' yI $ Ix - yI (check!), and since f,. f' in
L' (T), u+ -+ u'+ in L' (T) if u = log If 1. By the Banach-Alaoglu theorem
some subsequence tends weak' to a positive measure A when r?
Since u,, - p (Theorem 1.1 in Ch. 6), we get
u'+-A=pp=,a'-,u
By the minimality of the Jordan decomposition it now follows that p+ <
u'+. Thus, p+ is absolutely continuous and the proof is complete.
Definition. A function M E H' is an inner function if IM' I = 1 for a.e.
0.
1.6 Proposition. A function M E HP (or in N+) is an inner function if

and only if it has the form
1 / 2n e`t + z
M(z) = cB(z) exp
a_
J est - zdp(t), (1.3)
0
where p is singular and < 0.

Proof. If M has the form (1.3), then it is clear that IM'I = 1 and
II M II xo = 1. Conversely, if M is inner and it is decomposed as in (1.2),
then (1.3) follows from Proposition 1.5.
Definition. We say that an inner function S is singular if its Blaschke
product is a constant, i.e., if S is nonvanishing.
51. Factorization in H' Spaces 115
Hence, any inner function M has a unique factorization M = BS, where

B is its Blaschke factor and S is a singular inner function.
Definition. If >_ 0 and log 0 E L' (T), then

1 z' e" + z
Q(z)=exp2rr j0 eu_z1gO(e't)dt (1.4)
is called an outer function.
Notice that IQ*I = (P for a.e. 9 according to (1.2).
1.7 Proposition. If Q is an outer function, then Q E HP if and only if

E LP(T), 0 < p < oc. In this case, IIQIIHP = IIQ'IILv = II'IILP
Proof. First assume that ' E LP(T). By Jensen's inequality,
I Q(re'B)IP = exp
2' r
0
zn
Pr(9 - t) log9dt < 2 fz P,.(9 - t)
0
'dt.
Integrating with respect to 9 and applying F'ubini's theorem, we get that
Q E HP and IIQII Hv <_ II0II L" . Conversely, if Q E HP, then IIQ' II LP =
IIQIIHP by Theorem 1.2; but log IQ'I = log 0, and therefore 0 E LP(T) and
11011D, = IIQ'IILP El
We now are prepared for the main theorem.
1.8 Main Theorem. Any f E N+ (in particular, f E HP) has a unique

factorization
f = MfQf = B1SfQf,
where Mf = Bf Sf is an inner function, Bf and Sf are its Blaschke factor
and singular factor, respectively, and Q f is the outer function
1 't + z
Q f (z) = exp
If z" ee"
+z
log If- Idt. (1.5 )
Moreover, If' I = IQ' I for a.e. 9 and f E HP if and only if Q f E HP, which
holds if and only if f' E LP(T). In that case,
IIfIIHP = IIQfIIHP = IIf'IILP.
If f E M, we have f = MfQ f/Sf = B fSfQ f/Sf, where 9f also is a
singular inner function.
Proof. The existence and uniqueness of the factorization and the equality
1f1 = (Q ' I follow from Theorem 1.3. In view of Theorem 1.7, Q f E H"
if and only if f' E LP(T). If f E HP, then f' E LP(T) by Theorem 1.2,
116 7. H Spaces
and thus Qf E H. Since IfI S IQiI if f E N+, it follows that f E Hp if

Q f E H9. The norm equalities now follow from Theorem 1.2. 0
If f E N and f' E LP(T), it does not follow in general that f E H.
If f = 1/S, where S is a singular inner function, then If *I = 1 a.e.; but
nevertheless, f is not in any H9-space, not even in N+, unless it is constant,
because of the uniqueness of the factorization.
1.9 Example. Taking u as minus the point mass at e't = 1, we get the
singular inner function
l+z
S(z)=exp -1-z
One easily sees that IS*(e't)I = 1 for e't 54 1 but 0 for e't = 1. Thus,
+
f (z) = 1/S(z) = exp 1 z
is a function in N \ N+ such that I f'(e't)I = 1 for all e't # 1.
2. Invariant Subspaces of H2
We now are going to use the main theorem in Section 1 to study certain
subspaces of H2. If 0 is an inner function, then OH2 = 141f; f E H2} is
a closed subspace of H2. In fact, since II41f11HP = IIf1IHA, it is clear that
OH2 C H2. If lbfj -+ g in H2, then q5fj is a Cauchy sequence in H2; but
II fj - fk II H2 = II 41fj - 41fk II Hz . Hence, f j is a Cauchy sequence in H2, and
therefore fj -- f for some f E H2; therefore, g = Of E 0H2.
If (Sf)(z) = z f (z), then clearly
S: H2 --. H2
is a bounded operator with norm 1. If 0 is an inner function, then SgH2 C
H2, and therefore OH2 is a closed S-invariant subspace of H2. The con-
verse is also true.
2.1 Theorem. If V is a closed S-invariant subspace of H2, then V = OH2

for some inner function 0.
Proof. Take f E V with minimal order of its zero at the origin, i.e., such
that g1 f is analytic at the origin for all g E V. Then f V zV = { zg; g E V},
and therefore zV is a proper closed subspace (for the same reasons as above)
of V. Thus, there is an element 0 E V such that 0 1 zV and II4IIH2 = 1.
However, since V is S-invariant, zV is also and hence 0 1 z"V for all
2. Invariant Subspaces of H2 117
n > 0, implying that

1 2n
'
10 (e `
it
)I2a-int dt=0, n=1,2,3....
The function 10 2 is real and in L'(T), and therefore it follows that it is
equal to a constant a.e. Moreover, since II0` lI Lz = 1, 10' 1 = 1 a.e. and hence
q5 is an inner function. As Z' O E V for all n > 0, p46 E V for all polynomials
p. However, the polynomials are dense in H2 (partial sums of power series
converge in the H2-norm; see below), and therefore OH2 C V. It remains
to show that this inclusion is an equality. To this end, it is enough to show
that if h E V and h 1 OH 2, then h = 0. If h is such a function, then
h l zn for n = 0, 1, 2, ... , i.e.,
0 2w
n = 0, 1, 2, ... .
27r 0
However, since h E V, z"h E zV for n = 1, 2.... and 0 1 W, we therefore

have
0 r 2x n = 1, 2,...
27r 0
Hence, all Fourier coefficients of h'c vanish and therefore 0 a.e.

However, since 10' = 1 a.e., it follows that h' = 0 a.e. and hence h = 0.
We claim that OH2 C ipH2 if and only if is an inner function. In

particular, OH2 = t'H2 if and only if 46 = ctb for some c E T. In fact,
if 46H2 C t/iH2, then = 1bMhQh for some h E H2, and thus 0 = ipMh
because of the uniqueness of the factorization in inner and outer functions.
Conversely, if 0/7P is an inner function, then certainly OH2 C (iH2. If
OH2 = -OH 2, then both 01V) and t'/0 are inner functions, and hence O/i/i
is constant.
Notice that c/?/i is an inner function if and only if B4,/By, and S,6/S1,
are analytic, which in turn means that each zero of is also a zero of
0 (counted with multiplicity) and that d,6 - d,, is a negative singular
measure. Thus the family of closed S-invariant subspaces is a partially
ordered set with a rather complicated structure.
2.2 Remark. Recall that H2 is isometrically isomorphic to
11C,112
12(N) _ {a ` (ao,ai,... ); _ jai12 < oo}
(cf. Section 2 of Ch. 6) if f = o anzn is identified to (ao, al, ...) E 2(N).
The operator S corresponds to the shift operator
S(ao,ai,...) = (0,ao,ai.... )
on 12(N).
118 7. H" Spaces
We conclude this section with an approximation theorem. If g c H2,

let P(g) be the closure of {pg; p polynomial}, which certainly is a closed
S-invariant subspace. We already know that P(1) = H2.
2.3 Theorem. Let f and g be in H2. Then

(i) P(g) = M9H2 = P(M9).
(ii) f E P(g) if and only if Mj/M9 is an inner function.
(iii) P(f) = P(g) if and only if M f = cM9.
(iv) P(f) = H2 if and only if f is an outer function.
Proof. To begin with, P(g) C M9H2 since g E M9H2 and P(g) is the
least S-invariant closed subspace that contains g. By Theorem 2.1, P(g) =
H2 for some inner function 0. However, then M9Q9 = g = OMhQh; so
M9 = 0Mh and hence M9H2 C H2 = P(g). We therefore obtain the first
equality in (i). The second equality follows if g is replaced by Mg. The
other statements are immediate consequences.
3. Interpolation in HO
In Corollary 1.6 in Ch. 5 we saw that for a given sequence of points aj in U
with no limit points, and complex numbers f3j, one can find an f E A(U)
such that f (aj) = ftj . One says that aj is an interpolation sequence (for
H) if for each ft = (i30i ftl, ...) E lOD there is an f E H that interpo-
lates, i.e., such that f(aj) = f3j. It is easily verified that any interpolation
sequence must satisfy the Blaschke condition (Exercise 20). However, the
Blaschke condition is not sufficient. The points also must be sufficiently
spread out in U.
3.1 Theorem (Carleson). The sequence aj is an interpolation sequence

for H if and only if there is a 6 such that for each fixed k
- ak I > 6.
n
, I 1 - ajak (3.1)
Proof of the Necessity. Suppose that aj is an interpolation sequence

and let T: HO -+ l be the bounded linear operator defined by (T f )j =
f(aj). Now, aj being an interpolation sequence means precisely that T
is surjective. The quotient space H/ Ker T is a Banach space with the
usual quotient norm, and the induced operator T: HO/ KerT -+ l is thus
bounded, injective, and surjective; and so by the open mapping theorem
there is M > 0 such that
kEKf IIf +kIIn= = If +KerTllxw <_ 2 IIf3Ii1-

3. Interpolation in H 119
if T f = /3. Hence, for each /3 E 1 there is an f E H such that T f = /3

and I1fIIH- <- MIIQIIto- In particular, there are fk with IlfkllH- <_ M
such that fk(aj) = bjk. Let
Fk(z) = fk(z) 'f a'-z aj z aj

Iai l
Then IIFkIIH. < M (since we can divide out the zeros without affecting
the norm), and if we let z = ak, we get
l aj - ak
111 1 -ajak > 1/M.
i#k
The hard part of Theorem 3.1 is to prove that the condition (3.1) is suf-
ficient. The proof we give here is elementary and completely constructive.
In Exercise 21 in Ch. 8, a proof is outlined where one first takes an appro-
priate smooth solution to the problem and then modifies it to an analytic
solution by solving a 8/8z-equation.
First, we reformulate condition (3.1). We say that the sequence aj is
separated if
aj - ak c>0, j#k,
1-ajak >
uniformly.
3.2 Lemma. The sequence aj satisfies the condition (3.1) if and only if it
is separated and there is C6 > 0 such that for all k
(1 - Ia,12)(1 -Iakl2) < C6. (3.2)
j=1
11 - ajakl
Proof. If 0 < c < x < 1, then 1 - x < - logx < C(1 - x) for some C. If
the terms in the sum in (3.2) are denoted Ajk, then
1 - A;k = Ia' . - akl2
I1-ajakl2
Ifc<1-Ajk < 1, then
EAjk < - log(I - Ajk) C
j#k 73Ek j#k
and hence the lemma follows. 0
Proof of the Sufficiency. It is enough to find Fk(z) such that
Fk(aj) = bjk (3.3)
120 7. H' Spaces
and
00
IFk(z)I < C, (3.4)
since then f (z) = Ei,8kFk(z) solves the problem.

A first attempt to find such Fk would be
z - aj ak-a2
Fk(z) =
jo 1 - ajz/ 1 - ajak'
which converges, since aj satisfies the Blaschke condition; in fact, Fk(z) _
Bk(z)/Bk(ak) if Bk denotes the Blaschke product with zeros in {aj; j # k}.
The problem is that these Fk do not satisfy (3.4). Therefore we shall modify
the construction with weight factors and let
; z aj / ak - aj \ r 1 - IakI2 12
Fk(z) W(ak, z), (3.5)
1-ajz 1- ajak/) 1-akz J
where W (C, z) is analytic in z and W((, C) = 1. Then Fk still satisfy
(3.3), and we are going to show that W can be chosen so that (3.4) also is
satisfied.
We assume that ... Iakl 5 Iak+1I < ... and first define
(12Z_1(l_IajI2),
1-djz 1-aj(
Ia;l?IGI
Since E 1 - Iaj I < oo, the series converges uniformly for fixed C and IzI <
r < 1, and therefore z ,-4 ip((, z) is analytic and ?P(C, C)\= 0. Moreover,
(1 -Iaj 12IzII2
Re,i((, z) _
qC-
I1- ajxl
- 1I1-
- Ia' 121 12) (1 - Iaj 12).
&j(12
Ia; 21G1
Observe that 1 - Iajl2l(I2 < 2(1 - 1(12) if Iajl ? ICI; so if W = exp(-Vi),

then by (3.2),
IW(ak,z)1 5 exp2C6 exp - E (1- IajI2)(1-1ajI2Izl2)

11 - ajzl2
(3.6)
Ia;l?Iakl
and W(ak, ak) = 1.

From (3.1), (3.5), and (3.6) we now get that
lFk(z)I <
exp C6ckexp
-Ecj
j>k
where
is
Iakl2
ck-
\I1-akzll
4. Carleson Measures 121
If cl, c2.... are any positive numbers, then

r-,>k C]
-
L
ck exp cj < 1E,>k+lci e dt;

j>k
therefore,
cc
I:IFF(z)I < CEckexp < jCJe-`dt=C,
k k -Ecl
j>k o
and thus (3.4) holds. 0

We now are going to study the meaning of the condition (3.1). To begin
with, let us assume that all of the points lie on the positive real axis, i.e.,
ak = rk = 1 - Ek and 0 < r1 < r2 < ... < 1. Notice that 1 - rk 1 - rk
and 1 - rkrj max(1 - rj, 1 - rk). If rk is separated, we thus have that
rk - rk+1
c/ <
Ek - Ek+1
1 - rkrk+1 Ek
and therefore Ek+1 <- cEk for some c < 1. Conversely, if this inequality
holds, then rk actually satisfies (3.1). In fact, then it is certainly separated
and since Ek < ck-jej if k > j, we have that
00 (1r2)(1-rk)\1-rk 1-rj
j=o
(1 - rjrk)2 j<k 1 - rj j>k 1 - rk
E ck-j+ r c_c<1,
j<k jL>ik
independently of k. By Lemma 3.2, (3.1) therefore holds. Notice that, for

example, rk = 1-1/k2 satisfies the Blaschke condition but is not separated,
and hence it is not an interpolation sequence. In the next section we shall
see, however, that if rk satisfies the Blaschke condition, one can always
choose Bk such that the sequence ak = rke'Bk satisfies (3.1) and hence is an
interpolation sequence.
4. Carleson Measures
The interpolation condition (3.1) does not only involve the modulii of the
points ak, but also means that they are spread out in U in a certain sense.
In order to understand this further one has to introduce the concept of a
Carleson measure. If z, ( E U, then
I1-(zl--max{1-IzI+1 -I(I)+Iargz-arg(I, (4.1)
122 7. H Spaces
if the arguments are chosen so that the last term is less than or equal to
it. This simple observation will be used repeatedly in this section. Let
w(e'B, t) = {C E U; 11 - e-iezl < t}, t>0
be the so-called Carleson tents at 09. A positive measure p in U is a
Carleson measure if
p(w(e:s, t) < Ct,
uniformly for all t and 0. The infimum of all possible constants is called
the Carleson norm of p.
4.1 Proposition. A positive measure p in U is a Carleson measure if and

only if
1 - I zit
f 11 - CzI2
dp(C) < C (4.2)
uniformly in z E U.
The exact shape of the tents is not important. In this context it is often
convenient to use dyadic cubes and a dyadic decomposition of U. Let
Qk,t = {re'; 2-k(t - 1) < 0/7r < 2-ke, 0 < 1 - r < 2-k} ,
where k = 0, 1, 2, ... and f= -2k + 1, -2k + 2,... - 1, 0, 1, ... , 2k. Then
each set w(e`B, t) is contained in the union of at most two dyadic cubes Qk,t
with t < C2 -k for some absolute constant C (cf. (4.1)), and therefore p is
a Carleson measure if and only if p(Qk,t) < C2 -k for all k and t. We also
introduce the sets
Bk,t = {re'B; 2-k(f - 1) < 0/7r < 2-kt, 2-(k+1) < 1 - r < 2-k
which constitute a partition of U; cf. Figure 1.
Proof of Proposition 4.1. First assume that (4.2) holds and take an
arbitrary cube Qk,t. If z E Bk,t and C E Qk,t, then 1 - Iz12 - 2-k and
11 - CzI - 2_k (cf. (4.1)), and if we restrict the integration in (4.2) to Qk,t,
we thus get that p(Qk.1) < C2-k. Conversely, fix z E U. By invariance we
may assume that z E Bko,1. If C E Qka,t, then 11 - (zj - 2-4(l + 111) by
(4.1), and hence
CZ12dp(C) (1+11)224p(Qko,t) 5 C,
independently of ko. It remains to estimate the integral over the boxes

Bk,t for k < ko. However, on each such box we have the trivial estimate
p(Bk,t) < p(Qk,t) <- C2-1 and, moreover, I1-s;zj - 2-k(1+Itj) if C E Bk,t,
4. Carleson Measures 123
FIGURE 1
and therefore we get

2 -ko
C2_M1 < C.
t k>2 2-2k(1 + IPi)2
D
Condition (3.2) means precisely that p = (1 - i(l) >2 6a, is a Carleson

measure. In one direction it is obvious since condition (4.2) means that
(3.2) holds for all z; in particular, for z = ak. For the other direction, fix
a dyadic cube. Again we may assume that it is Qko,l. If there is some
ak E Bko,1, then by (3.2)
(1 - jajl2)a(1a_2akl2) <
C
e
aj EQkp,l
which implies that p(Qk.,I) (1 - laj l) 5 C2-ko. If there is

no ak in Bko,l, we instead can apply the same argument to the two cubes
below Bko,, and so on. In this way we obtain an exhausting sequence of
subsets of Qko,I in which the measure of each set is bounded by C2-ko.
4.2 Example. Now suppose that 0 < r2 < r2 < ... < 1 and E(1 -
rj) < oo. We claim that one can choose Bj such that aj = rje:ei is an
interpolation sequence. Let Ek = {r;; 2-(k+1) _< 1 - rj < 2-k}, and let ck
be its cardinality. Then Ek 2-kCk < oo. Notice that c points always can
be distributed into two boxes so that no box contains more than c/2 + 1/2
points. Now fix a k. We can choose points aj = rjeie., rj E Ek, such that
124 7. HP Spaces
the union of all Bk,t that are contained in the same Qk',l' contains at most
2-kick + 2-` points. In fact, first arrange the points so that at most
ck/2 + 1/2 of them lie in each Qo,l,, e' = 0,1; then proceed so that at most
(ck/2 + 1/2)/2 + 1/2 points occur in each Ql,e,, and so on. Let T = E 6Q'
and u = (1 - lzl)T. If now Qko,,*o is a fixed cube, then
00
(Qko.co) 2-k T(Bk,t) < 2-k(Ck2-k' + 1) < C2 ko.

k=ko Bk,(CQkp,[o k=ko
We leave it as an exercise to verify that one also can arrange things so that
the sequence becomes separated and hence an interpolation sequence. A
simple way to do this is instead just to distribute aj in Bk,t with positive e
when for example k is odd and with negative f when k is even. Furthermore,
if the points in each box are appropriately spread out, the sequence will be
separated.
We now shall consider another interpretation of condition (4.2). If we

write dp(() = (1- I(?2)dv((), where dv is another positive (possibly infinite)
measure, then the condition becomes fu K(t;, z)dv < C, where
1c12)
(I - Jz12)(1 -
K(C, z) _ 11_CZ12
By the proof of Lemma 3.2, K((, z) is of the same size as the Green kernel
away from the singularity ( = z. Thus K((, z) can be seen as a regulariza-
tion of the Green kernel, and condition (4.2) then says that a regularization
of dv can be written as the Laplacian of a bounded function. (For measures
related to the interpolation theorem, this is the content of condition (3.1).)
This point of view leads to a simple proof of the following inequality for
Carleson measures.
4.3 Theorem (Carleson's Inequality). Suppose that p is a positive

measure in U. Then Fc is a Carleson measure if and only if
f if(()JPdp(() 5 ClI,fJ&,, f E Hp, p > 0. (4.3)
Clearly, (4.3) holds for all p > 0 if it holds for some fixed p since we
can divide out the zeros and then take arbitrary p'th roots. In view of
Theorem 1.7 in Ch. 6, it also holds for hp if p > 1 (though only with a
constant that depends on p). In Chs. 8 and 9 Carleson measures occur,
but only as measures satisfying (4.3).
Proof. First suppose that u satisfies (4.3) for p = 2. Since C r+ (1 - ( z)-1

is analytic for z E U, it follows that (4.2) holds and therefore is a Carleson
measure according to Proposition 4.1.
Conversely, assume that p is a Carleson measure. It is enough to show

the inequality for say p = 1 and f E A(U) that are smooth up to the
boundary. By Proposition 4.1
2
Mtl(z)
-f 11 - LzI2 dA(C)
is a bounded function, -C < Mp < 0, and COO in U. Moreover, a straight-
forward computation shows that it is subharmonic and, more precisely,
_ ll2
4 L M`(z) = fu 11- C du(()

a
By formula (2.6) in Ch. 8 (applied to the disks D(0, r) and letting r increase
to 1) we get
I (1- IzI2)If(z)IAM14(z)da(z) <- CIIfIIH,.

In view of Fubini's theorem it is therefore enough to show that
(1 - IC12)(1 - Iz12)If(z)IdA(z).
If(C)I < C f 11 - CzIa (4.4)
u
However, for any h E A(U)/n C1(U),
IIz 2)
h(() _ _ J (1
(I - () I C E U;
U
see, e.g., Exercise 15 in Ch. 3. Hence (4.4) follows by taking h(z) =
f(z)l(1 - Cz)
4.4 Remark. The inequality (4.4) is true for any positive subharmonic u
instead of If 1. In fact, if O(z) = (k((z) z)/(1 - z(), then u o 0-1 is
subharmonic and hence
u o g-1(0) < C u o q-1(w)dA(w);
JIwI<E
and so we get that
-IzI)
2 2
UM 5 C f (1
11
u(z)dA(z).
IO(z)I ( - CzIa
However, in the set I5(z)I < e, I - ICI - 1 - IzI and hence (4.4) follows.
Exercise 1. Show that f E A(U) is in N if and only if f = g/h for some

f, g E HOO where h is nonvanishing.
126 7. Hp Spaces
Exercise 2. Show that N is in fact a linear space.

Exercise 3. Suppose that f e A(U). Show that f E Hp, 0 < p < oo,
if and only if there is a harmonic u in U such that If (z)II < u(z). Also
show that if there is some harmonic majorant, then there is at least one
uf. Finally, show that IIfIIHp = uf(0).
Exercise 4. Suppose that f E A(U). Show that f E N if and only if
log+ IfI has a harmonic majorant.
Exercise 5. Show that the polynomials are dense in Hp, p > 0.
Exercise 6. Suppose that f E A(U). Show that f is a Blaschke product
if and only if limrzl(1/2ir) f IlogIf(re'e)II d9 = 0.
Exercise 7. Suppose that f E A(U) and Ref > 0. Show that f is an
outer function. Hint: Notice that arg f is bounded.
Exercise 8. Show that f(z) _ (1-z)-' log(1-z) is in Hp for all 0 < p < 1
and that f has unbounded Taylor coefficients.
Exercise 9. Suppose that f E N and f' E L'(T). Does it follow that
.Ff'(n) = 0 for n < 0? (Answer: No!)
Exercise 10. Suppose that f c N. Show that f E N+ if and only if
logI f logI f*(ce)Ide0
lim 2- f27T f (Te`B)I d6 =
.
Hint: Compare to Exercise 11 in Ch. 6.

Exercise 11. Suppose that 0 < r < s < oo. Show that the inclusions
N i H'' D H D H are proper.
Exercise 12. Suppose that f E A(U) and that f (U) is not dense in C.
Show that f' = lim f, exists for a.e. 0.
Exercise 13. Suppose that K is a compact proper subset of T. Prove that
each f E C(K) can be approximated uniformly by analytic polynomials.
Hint: Use the Hahn-Banach theorem.
Exercise 14. Show that if f E N+ and 1/f E N+, then f is an outer
function.
Exercise 15. Show that if f,g E H' and Ifl $ IgI, then IMf1 < IM91 and
IQiI <_ IQ91.
Exercise 16. Show that if f EN+, then
zn
log if (0) 1 < 2?r f log If8 ldt, (4.5)
0
with equality if and only if Mf is constant.
Exercise 17. Suppose that f E N and (4.5) holds. Does it follow that
f E N+?
Exercise 18. Show Theorem 2.3 without referring to Theorem 2.1: Since
trivially P(g) C M9H2, we have to prove the opposite inclusion. Since
IIM9f - gp1IH2 = Of - Q9PIIH2, it is enough to show that P(g) = H2 if g
is outer. If h 1 P(g), then
1 2w
0, n < 0,
1 f
and therefore g"h' = k' for some k E H1. However, since g is outer,
k/g E N+ and (k/g)' = h` E L2(T), and therefore k/g E H2. It now
follows that h' is constant and hence h = 0, since otherwise g E H2 and
f g' = 0, which would imply that g were divisible by z.
Exercise 19. Show Theorem 2.3 for 1 < p < oo instead of just p = 2.
Hint: Recall Theorem 2.3 in Ch. 6.
Exercise 20. Show directly that any interpolation sequence must be the
zero set of some bounded f 0 0.
Exercise 21. Show that if a,,3 E U have given modulii, then Ia - 0I/I1 -
a/3I is minimal if and only if they lie on the same radius.
Exercise 22. Let T be the operator in the proof of the necessity part of
the interpolation theorem. Show that KerT = {gB; g E H}, where B is
the Blaschke product with zeros a3.
Exercise 23. Show that the sequence rk = 1-1/k2 is not separated. Does
it satisfy (3.2)?
Exercise 24. Suppose that aj is a sequence in U with no limit points and
0 E 1'. Show that if there is some f E H that interpolates 3 in a then
it is unique if and only if E 1 - Ia3I = oo.
Exercise 25. Show (4.1). Hint: Notice that 11 -- roe-ielr2e&O2I is the
Euclidean distance between rlr2e`(e'-e1) and the point 1.
Exercise 26. Let be a finite measure in U. Show that one can rearrange
the mass on each level {2-(k+1) < IzI < 2- k} = UtBk,t so that the new
measure is a Carleson measure.
Exercise 27. Fill in the details in the construction in Example 4.2.
Exercise 28. Let M f be Hardy-Littlewood's maximal function; see Sec-
tion 1 in Ch. 6. Use Carleson's inequality to prove that
I IMf'Ipde < CIIfIIHo (4.6)
T
for p > 0. The same holds for hp if p > 1. Hint: First prove it for
M instead of M. Choose a piecewise C' curve 0 --+ r(B)e'B such that
128 7. H' Spaces
If (r(O)e'B)J > 1/2Mf (e'B). Define a measure on this curve so that the
measure of any segment is precisely the length of its projection onto T.
Then this measure is a Carleson measure if it is considered as a measure
in U. Now Carleson's inequality implies (4.6).
The hyperbolic distance d(z, w) between the points z and w in U is defined
in the following way:
1
d(O,z) = d(z,0) = log 1 + ÌZI
zl,
2
and
d(z, w) = d(0, q=(w)).
Exercise 29. Show that d(z, w) is well defined for all z, w E U, that
d(z, w) = d(w, z), and that
d(z, w) = d(t(z), O(w))
for any that is either an automorphism or the conjugate of some auto-
morphism of U.
A hyperbolic line in U is the intersection of U with a circle in C that
intersects T orthogonally. Thus, hyperbolic lines through the origin are
just ordinary lines.
Exercise 30. Show that through each disjoint pair of points there is one
and only one hyperbolic line.
Exercise 31. Show that all automorphisms and their conjugates map
(hyperbolic) lines onto (hyperbolic) lines.
d(z, w) < d(z, z') + d(z', z)
with equality if and only if z, z', and w are consecutive points on the same
hyperbolic line.
Exercise 33. Show that there are constants c and C such that
d(z, w) < I _ w < Cd(z, w),
for all z, w such that d(z, w) < c.
The unit disk with this geometry provides a model for non-Euclidean
geometry. In fact, all of the Euclidean axioms hold except the axiom of
parallels.
Exercise 34. Show that through any point outside some given hyperbolic
line there are infinitely many lines that do not intersect the given line.
Notes 129
Notes
We recommend (D] and [G] for further results and references.
The key to the HP-theory here is Theorem 1.1. There is an analogous
result in the upper half-plane. Instead of Theorem 1.1, one can rely on
the fact that if 1P is subharmonic for all p > 0. There is a generalization
of the Hr-theory to the upper half-space in R"+' for p > (n - 1)/n, but
then there is no analogue to Theorem 1.1. This theory instead is based on
subharmonicity; see (S].
Theorem 1.1 is due to F. Riesz, 1923, and the main theorem (Theo-
rem 1.8) is due to Smirnoff, 1929. See [D] for more historical remarks.
Theorems 2.1 and 2.3 are due to Beurling, 1949. These theorems have
been generalized by Gamelin to p > 0; see TAMS, vol. 124 (1966), 158-167.
See also Exercise 19.
The interpolation theorem (Theorem 3.1) was proved by Carleson in
1958. The hard direction is to prove that (3.1) is sufficient. The explicit
proof given here was discovered by Jones (Acta. Math., vol. 150 (1983),
137-152).
There is a generalization of the interpolation theorem (Theorem 3.1) to
HP, p > 0; see [D].
If the sequence Ck in Example 4.2 satisfies E 42-k < oo, which is more
restrictive than the Blaschke condition, then for almost all choices of 9k (in-
terpreted in an appropriate sense) ak = rkeiek is an interpolation sequence;
see Rudowicz, Bull. London Math. Soc., vol 26 (1994), 160-164.
The proof given here of Carleson's inequality (Theorem 4.3) is due to
Berndtsson. The underlying idea that essentially all Carleson measures
are of the form (1 - I(I)o0, where 0 is a bounded subharmonic function,
is from Proc. Univ. of Maryland 1985--86, Springer-Verlag (1987). The
usual proof of Carleson's inequality proceeds via an LP(T)-estimate for the
Hardy-Littlewood maximal function. Incidentally, this estimate follows
quite easily from Carleson's inequality; see Exercise 28.
8
Ideals and the Corona Theorem
1. Ideals in A(S2)
We begin with
1.1 Theorem. If gi, ... , gn E A(Q) have no common zeros in S2, then
there are u1, ... , u, E A(1l) such that F_i gjuj = 1.
One can obtain Theorem 1.1 quite easily from Weierstrass' and Mittag-
Leffier's theorems (see Exercise 1), but we will give a proof ttlat relies on
the existence of solutions to the inhomogenous Cauchy-Riemann equation
(Theorem 2.3 in Ch. 3). The advantage is that one obtains estimates of
the solution (u1, . . . , u,) if one can solve the 8/82-equation with estimates.
This will be used in the proof of the corona theorem in the next section.
Proof of Theorem 1.1. Consider g = (gl, ... , g,) as a row matrix and
u = (ui, ... , un)t as a column matrix (thus t denotes transpose). We are
looking for an analytic u such that gu = 1. If IgI2 = Igi I2 and
9t
y
IgI2
then y E CO(I2) and gy = 1. We then want to modify y to be an analytic

solution, and to this end we set
u = y + wgt,
where w is an antisymmetric (n x n)-matrix, i.e., wt = -w. Since gwgt is
a scalar (a 1 x 1-matrix), gwgt = (gwgt)t = gwtgt = -gwgt, which gives
gwgt = 0, and hence u solves gu = 1. If w is now an antisymmetric solution
to
(1.1)
2. The Corona Theorem 131
(alai of course acts componentwise on matrices; observe that the right-

hand side in (1.1) is antisymmetric), then
On ay aw t _ ary t t a-,
+ az g + 9 (920 ) g IgI2 az
a a1 1
= 9` ai (9 Y)`/I9I2 = gt
az lgl = 0'
and hence u is in fact an analytic solution as desired. 0
Let
In
[gi,.,gn] _ Ev.igj, vi E A(SZ)}
1
denote the ideal in A(1) generated by gi,... , gn. Theorem 1.1 then says
that [gl, , 9n] = [1] = A(S1) if (and only if) gi,... , gn have no common
zeros.
1.2 Corollary. For given hl , ... , hn E A(1Z) there is a 0 E A(S2) such that
[hl,...,hn] _ [Y'].
Thus, each finitely generated ideal in A(Q) is a principal ideal.
Proof. According to Weierstrass' theorem there is a 0 E A(Q) that has

zeros with right multiplicities exactly where all hj have common zeros (this
is a set with no limit points unless all hi vanish on some component).
However, then the functions gj = hj /4) have no common zeros, and hence
by Theorem 1.1 there are uj such that >ujhj/4) = 1, i.e., Eujhj = 0,
and therefore 0 E [hi, ... , hn]. Since hj E [] for each j, the corollary is
proved. 0
2. The Corona Theorem

Suppose that gl, ... , gh E H' = H(U) and there are uj E HOD such that
E gjuj = 1. Then by Cauchy-Schwarz' inequality, E Igj I2 > 62, where
1 /6 = f maxi II uj II H= Conversely, we have
2.1 The Corona Theorem. Suppose that gi, ... , g,, E H and there is
a 6 > 0 such that
Igj I2 > P. (2.1)
1
132 8. Ideals and the Corona Theorem
Then there are u1, ... , u E H such that

Egjuj=1.
The corona theorem was stated as a conjecture in the 1940s in connec-
tion with the study of Banach algebras (this is where the name "corona
theorem" originates). It was first proved by Carleson in 1961, and a differ-
ent proof based on functional analysis was found by Hormander in 1967.
Around 1980 this proof was simplified by Wolff. The proof we give here is
a slight modification of Wolff's proof.
To begin with, one can reduce to
2.2 Proposition. There is C6,,, > 0 such that if g1, .., g E HO n coo(U)
and b < lgJ < 1, then there are uj E HO with Jul < C6,,, such that
E9iu.i=1.
Proof that Proposition 2.2 Implies Theorem 2.1. In fact, we may
assume that b < IgI < 1 in the corona theorem. Then g''(z) = g(rz)
satisfies the assumptions in Proposition 2.2, and therefore we get analytic
u' with Iu'i < C6,,, and g''ur = E gju7 = 1. Since {ur},<, is a normal
family (Proposition 1.7 in Ch. 2), we can extract a-convergent subsequence
u''i - u when ri / 1. Then of course Jul < C6,,, and gu = 1, and thus the
corona theorem follows.
In what follows we therefore may assume that g satisfies the hypotheses

in Proposition 2.2. We shall reformulate it as a 8/32 problem; but in order
to give the precise statement, we need the following formalism. Suppose
that 8V/8z = f, V E C(U), and v = VAT. Then, by Stokes' theorem
((1.5) in Ch. 1),
r
2i
JU f hda = fvhdz, Vh E A(U) n C(U). (2.2)
If f E L1(U), v E L1(T) (or v E M(T)) and (2.2) holds, one says that v
solves the 8/02 equation on the boundary and writes
8bv = f.
Note that 8b is linear, and that 8bav = of if a E A(U) n C(U) and
8bv = f. To be precise, Zibv defines an element in the quotient space
L'(U)/{g E L'(U); ghdA = 0 t1 h c A(U) n C(U)}.
u
We claim that if, for example, f E C(U) and 8bv = f, then v is the
restriction to the boundary of a unique solution V to 8V/8z = f. In fact, let
W be an arbitrary solution in C(U) to 8W/8z = f (such a solution always
exists; however, the reader may just as well assume that f is smooth in a
neighborhood of U; see also Exercise 10). If W = WIT, then ab(v - w) = 0,

which means in particular that fT(v - w)z" dz = 0, n = 0, 1, 2, ... , i.e., all
negative Fourier coefficients of v - w vanish; and therefore, v - w is the
boundary values of an analytic function H E Hi. However, then v is the
boundary values of the function V = W + H that solves 8V/8z = f.
We shall use the following weak formulation of the a equation.
2.3 Proposition. Suppose that f E CO(U). The equation abv = f has a

solution v with IIvIILO < C if and only if
12 /U fhd.) < C ,h EA(U) n CO'(U). (2.3)
Proof. Suppose that (2.3) holds; for (the restriction to T of) h E A(U) n
C(U), let
Ah = 2i fu f hdA.
U
Then iAhi < C fT. ihidO and by the Hahn-Banach theorem, A can be ex-
tended to a bounded linear functional on L'(T) with norm < C. Hence
there is an a E L(T) such that ilallL= < C and
2i f f hda - Ah = J ha dB, h E A(U) n C (U).
U T
If now v(z) _ -i2a(z), then (cf. (2.2)) abv = f. The converse is trivial and
we leave it as an exercise. 0
So far we only have made a preliminary reduction (Proposition 2.2) and
expressed it in terms of a system of ab-equations. The next theorem due
to Wolff is in fact the heart of the matter.
2.4 Theorem. There is a C > 0 such that if 0, f E C (U), 0 real, 101 < 1,
IfI2 < Aq, (2.4)
and
az :SAO, (2.5)
then there is a solution v E L (T) to Obv = f with IiviiL= < C.
Proof of Proposition 2.2. If y = gt/Igf2, then -y E COD(U), gy = 1, and

IyJ < 1/6. Assume that we can find an (antisymmetric) solution to
_
abw = g) - a g 1 =F
g1-2
such that w E L(T) and Iwl < Can, where C6,,, depends only on 6
and n. If u = ry + wgt, then (as before) 8bu = 0, gu = 1 on T, and
Iu1 < 1/6 + C6,n = C6,n. However, then u is the boundary values of a
U E H'; and since IIuIIL- 5 C6,n, U is actually in H and IIUIIH- 5 C6,n.
Finally, gU - 1 since gU - 1 E H and the equality holds on T.
Thus, we have to solve 8bw = F with L (T)-control of the solution.
Note that
8ry a
= 8x 191-2g = + -2(81914)9
8z
1912,
and therefore Iary/8zi 5 lg'l, which implies that

IF12 < 19'12 _ 01912.
Here, "<" means "less than or equal to C6,n times... ," where C6,n depends
only on n and 6. By a similar computation one finds that
azl0 I91+1 I (91z2-a,-1

`1912_ 01912.
Therefore, Proposition 2.2 follows from Theorem 2.4 with 1912 = t . C1
What remains is to prove Theorem 2.4, and to this end we will apply the
following simple but useful lemma.
2.5 Lemma. If g, Eli E C' (U), 0 real, and g is analytic, then

1 f(i - z2)(D+G)19e< f T91edO, (2.6)
f(i - Iz12)(A 1')IgI <4eIIOIIL-(U) f T

I9IdO, (2.7)
f
and
2 1 (1 _ I91dO. (2.8)
U 19I T
The inequality (2.7) means that (1 - Izl2)o?p is a Carleson measure; cf.

Section 4 in Ch. 7.
Proof. First suppose that g - 1. Then

2)
4
f(i - Iz12)O ev' < f(i - 1212) ((a 1 + e''
1
-I
fU(1_Iz12)a12
=
e"
f e'`d9<2
I e&d9,
where we have used Green's identity in the last equality. To obtain (2.6) in
the general case, note that log(IgI2 + e) is subharmonic, then replace z/i by
+/, + (1/2) log(IgI2 +e), and finally let e \ 0. One gets (2.7) from (2.6) if 0
is replaced by /2II0IIL (U) From the computation above it also follows
that
lz e0
f(i-_ I zI2) I az <
2 fT
if 0* > 0, and (2.8) follows if one takes ?p = (1/2) log(IgP2 + f) and lets
e\ 0.
Proof of Theorem 2.4. In view of Proposition 2.3 we have to estimate
fu f h, and we first rewrite it:
f fh= f IzI2fh+ f(i -

u u
hzaz (IzI2 - 1) = JU(1 - iz12)ez

fu IzI2f h = fu f (zf h)
= fu (1 - Izi2) z zh + fu(1 - Iz12) f a (zh),
where the second equality follows from Stokes' theorem (the boundary in-
tegral vanishes). Thus,
(1 - IzJ2)f (1fu fu ez (zh) +fu - Iz12)fh
zh + fu
fh - (1- IzI2) az
=I1+I2+I3i
and we have to show that
IliI fTIhI, j=1,2,3. (2.9)
From (2.7) we immediately get
11, 1 < f(i - IzI2)A.0 hl < f T

Ihi.
If g = zh, we have
11212
-- (f(i - IzI2)vlg'I) 2
< fu (1 - IzI2)o0191 f (1
- Iz12)
111
I9II2
. (I I91)2 =
CfT
Ihi\ 2
by (2.7) and (2.8), and therefore (2.9) holds for j = 2. The estimation of
13 is left as an exercise.
2.6 Remark. Wolff's original formulation of Theorem 2.4 reads: Suppose

that the Carleson norms of (1 - I zI) I f I2 and (1- Izj) ja f/azj are < 1. Then
there is a solution v E L0(T) to abv = f with IIvIIL- <- C, where C is an
absolute constant. See Exercise 19. The discussion preceding Theorem 4.3
motivates the relation between the two formulations. Notice that, contrary
to the case of the interpolation theorem, the Carleson measures that appear
in the proof of the corona theorem are already smooth, and therefore we
do not need to worry about regularizations. See also Exercises 20 and 22.
In this context it is natural to mention that there is a very general result

due to Hormander about L2-estimates of solutions to the inhomogeneous
Cauchy-Riemann equation(s) in several complex variables. Here is the
one-variable case. A proof is outlined in Exercises 23 and 24.
2.7 Theorem. Suppose that n C C is bounded and 1(i is any subharmonic

function in S2. For any smooth function f there is a (smooth) solution u to
au/a2 = f such that
fn
Iu,I2e-P < C2 r I f I2e-0,
o
where C is the diameter of Q.
Exercise 1. Here is an outline of an alternative proof of Theorem 1.1:
Suppose that it is true for n - 1 generators. Take a 0 that has exactly the
zeros that are common to gl , ... , gn_ 1. Then by the induction hypothesis
there are vj such that glv1 + ...9n_1Vn_1 = 0. Since gn is nonvanishing
at the zeros of (P, there is by Corollary 1.6 to Weierstrass' theorem a h
such that (1 - gnh)/0 = f is analytic. Hence, 1 = Of - gnh = gl fv1 +
-9nh.
Exercise 2. For N = 1, 2, 3, ... , let
00 2
91v(-)= n(1-n2).
n=N
Show that the ideal in the ring of entire functions, generated by 19N), is
not a principal ideal.
Exercise 3. Show that the solution -y = gt/Ig12 is the solution to gy = 1
that has the pointwise minimal Euclidean norm.
Exercise 4. Suppose that p is a measure on T. Show that = fdO for
some f E L2(T) if and only if (1 - ICI2)IVP(()I2 is integrable over U.
Exercise 5. Suppose that f is C in a neighborhood of U, p E M(T),

and ab = f- Show that p, is absolutely continuous.
Exercise 6. Prove the "only if" part of Proposition 2.3.
Exercise T. Suppose that h, g1, ... , g E H' and IhI < Igl3. Show that
there are ul,... , u,a E HO such that > gjuj = h. Hint: Copy the proof of
the corona theorem.
Exercise S. Show that 3 in the preceding exercise may be replaced by
2 + E. First show that
l9'i2/92-2e < CeAjg12`
Exercise 9. Suppose that gj E HO, j = 1,... , n and egg I2 > 62. Let
z) =
- Ki2)a I9i(9i
a>0.
C11 - z /) E ()V2 JJ
Show that if E A(U) flC(U), then
O(z)
- -n f
and that z)/((' - z) E C(U x U). Give explicit u3 = TjO E
A(U) fl C(U) such that >gjuj = 0. Show that T3q E H' if E Hp,
1<p<00.
u(z) f f (()dA(()
is a C(UU)-solution to 8u/8z = f if f E C(U). Hint: First show that

if there is some solution in C(U) or at least in Cc(U), then u(z) is in
C1E-1(U). To this end use Cauchy's formula 1.6 in Ch. 1. (Since f has some
Ck-extension (in fact a C-extension) to a neighborhood of U, it also has
a Ck-solution on U.)
Alternatively, one can verify the formula
_ _M "z (a"` f/ '")(C)da(C)
49-u
8zm 7r
f `1-z1
1
1(12
z
Exercise 11. Show the corona theorem in A = {1 < Iz) < 2}. Hint:
Note that the corona theorem is true in any simply connected domain, in
particular in D = {0 < Re z < log 2}. There is a one-to-one correspondence
between functions in A and functions in D such that g(z + m.2ai) = g(z).
If fj e HO(D) are periodic in this way and IfjI2 > 62, show that there
are periodic u3 E H(D) such that F_ h u3 = 1.
Exercise 12. Show that if f E C (U), then

u(z) l Ju
2f (() (() z E T,
is a solution to 8bu = f.
Exercise 13. Show that if 0 E HP, 1 < p < oe, and f satisfies (2.4) and
(2.5), then
1 r zf(().O(()dA(()
(Z)
V (z) z E T,
*7r u 1 - (z
is a solution to 8bu = f o and
<CPf P.
IT T
What happens for p = 1?
Exercise 14. Prove (2.9) for j = 3. Show that
j(i - Iz12)lhI < C J T
lhldO
for holomorphic h.
Exercise 15. Suppose that f E H. Show that (1- IzI)I f'12 is a Carleson
measure.
Exercise 16. Assume that g E H2. Show that
2f (1 - Iz12)Ig'I2 < f IgI2dO. (2.10)
U T
Exercise 17. Show that for the proof of Theorem 2.4 all one needs is
(2.10). Note that 04 is actually only (a constant times) Ig'I2 for a (sum
of) bounded analytic functions.
Exercise 18. Suppose that a/' is bounded and subharmonic in U. Show
that it = (1 - K(I)o,'dA(() is a Carleson measure. Hint: Cf. (2.7).
Exercise 19. Prove Wolff's theorem as it is stated in Remark 2.6. Hint:
Use Theorem 4.3 in Ch. 7.
Exercise 20. Suppose that is a Carleson measure in U. Prove that
there is a solution v E L(T) to 8bV = .
Exercise 21. Here is an outline of a proof of Carleson's interpolation
theorem (Theorem 3.1 in Ch. 7) based on the ab equation: The separation
hypothesis ensures that we can find Xi E Co (U) with mutually disjoint
supports such that Xj = 1 when d(z, aj) < e and vanish when d(z, a3) > 2e
(d(z, w) - Iz - wI /II - 2w 1). Then 0 _ E,3IX.i is a smooth solution to the
interpolation problem. Let B be the Blaschke product with zeros at aj.

Then
F=j>j az'lB
is a Carleson measure (note that f JaXj/a&1 < C(1 - tajl)). Solve abv = F
and take g such that g1T = 0 - v. One can in fact assume that there
are only a finite number of points aj since the occurring constants will be
uniform. The general case then follows by a normal family argument.
Exercise 22. In Carleson's original proof of the corona theorem one of
the main steps was to find a CO solution -y to g-y = 1 such that day/azJ
is a Carleson measure. Given such a -y, complete the proof of the corona
theorem.
Exercise 23. If t4' E C2(1l) is real and A > 0, then
au
az
=f (2.11)
has a solution (in the distribution sense) such that

Iu12e--O < 4 j Jf 12e->v/OVG
Jst n
provided the right-hand side is finite. Sketch of proof: Let (g, X) = fo gXe-0,
and let
19 01V
az + Oz
Then X) = (g, '9X) for X E C. 00(Q). Show that (2.11) has a solution
with (u, u) < C2 if and only if J(f, X)J2 < C2('9X, i9 ) for X E Co (St).
Verify the equality
a
-z9 + z9 = 4 Ozli.
Use it to prove that , X)

J(f.
12 < 4(29X, t9X)(f /(O4/'), f) and conclude the

theorem.
Exercise 24. Use the results in the preceding exercise to prove Theo-
rem 2.7.
Exercise 25. Let A = A(U) r1 C(U), the so-called disk algebra. Suppose
that g ' , . . . , g,,, E A and E Jgj I > 0. Show that there are uj E A such
that 1: gjuj = 1. Hint: First, construct a solution yj to 1: gjryj = 1 such
that ryj,aryj/az E C(U). To this end, take preliminarily yj as 1/gj times
the characteristic function of the set Ej = {z E U; lgj(z) I > 0} and use a
smooth partition of unity. Then proceed as in the proof of Theorem 1.1.
Notes
A thorough discussion of the history of the corona problem and various
aspects of proofs are given in [G). The best known constant (in Proposi-
O(6-2
tion 2.2), due to Uchiyama, is C6 = log 6), which is independent of
the number of generators n. For the proof and various vector-valued ver-
sions of the corona theorem, see [N] Appendix 3, and the references given
there.
The corona theorem is closely related to the interpolation theorem (Theo-
rem 3.1 in Ch. 7). Both can be reduced to the problem of finding a bounded
solution to a certain 8b-problem. In the case of the interpolation theorem,
the occurring right-hand side is a Carleson measure (cf. Exercise 21) and
is therefore readily solved by Carleson's inequality (Theorem 4.3 in Ch. 7)
and Proposition 2.3. However, in the case of the corona problem, the most
obvious right-hand side occurring from the smooth solution y = gt/[g[2
requires the more involved Theorem 2.4 to get a bounded solution. How-
ever, in Carleson's original proof a more refined -y occurs such that 8y/82
is actually a Carleson measure. By this choice of -y the corona theorem
readily follows; cf. Exercise 22.
In the paper by Jones referred to in the notes to the previous chapter,
an explicit bounded solution to 8bu = f is constructed, provided f is a
Carleson measure. No such formula is known if f satisfies the hypothesis
in Wolff's theorem.
The corona theorem holds in, e.g., multiply connected domains (a finite
number of holes), but the general case is not known; cf. Exercise 11.
The analogue question for A = A(U) fl C(U) is true, i.e., if gj E A has
no common zeros, then there are uj E A such that F_ gjuj = 1. This is a
simple result in the theory of Banach algebras; see, e.g., Ch. 18 in [Rul].
See also Exercise 25, where another proof is suggested.
Hormander's theorem (of which Theorem 2.7 is a special case) was pub-
lished in Acta Math., vol 113 (1965). This is of particular importance in
the theory of several complex variables.
If the power 3 in Exercise 7 is replaced by 1, the statement is false. The
case with power 2 is unknown; see [G] and [N].
9
H' and BMO
1. Bounded Mean Oscillation

Recall from Ch. 6 that a function u on T is in LP(T) if and only if its
Hilbert transform Hu is. By virtue of (2.8) in Ch. 6, we can define the
Hilbert transform even for u E L1(T) as a formal Fourier series; in general,
it will not belong to L'(T) but merely be a distribution; cf. Remark 2.1 in
Ch. 6. More precisely, Hu is in L1(T) if and only if u = Ref` for some
f E H1.
Definition. HR is the space of (complex-valued) functions in u E L1(T)
such that also Hu E L1(T) with norm
IIuIIH; = IIuIIL1 + IIHuIILI
Some observations are immediate:

(i) Since H is a real opererator, u is in HR if and only if both Re u and Im u
are.
(ii) The Hilbert transform H maps HR into itself.
(iii) There are strict inclusions
L1(T) D HR' D LP(T) if p>1. (1.1)
(iv) If u is real, then u E Hal if and only if u = Re f' for some f E H1 and
there is a constant C > 0 such that
1
IlfllWW <_ CIIuII H, (1.2)
if f (0) is real.
(v) If functions in H1 are identified by their boundary values, then H1 is a
subspace of HR and the Szego projection maps S: HR -+ H'.
Thus, HR is a somewhat smaller space than L1(T), but with the advan-
tage that the Hilbert and Szego transforms are bounded. In some respect
HR therefore serves as an approriate surrogate for L1(T). Because of the
142 9. H1 and BMO
inclusions (1.1) the dual space of HR has to be something between L(T)
and LP(T), and the main objective in this chapter is to determine this
dual space. It should be pointed out that the HR condition is not a simple
condition on the size of if 1. In fact, if If I is in HR, then f also is, but the
converse is not true; see Exercises 6 and 7.
1.1 Proposition. HR is a Banach space and COO (T) is a dense subspace.
Proof. It is enough to consider the subspace of real functions. By (1.2)

this subspace is isomorphic to { f E H'; f (0) is real}, which is clearly a
Banach space. Moreover, any f in this space can be approximated by, e.g.,
the C'-functions fr(e't)= f (re'') in H1 norm; cf. Theorem 1.2 in Ch. 7.
If I is an interval on T and u is an integrable function, let u, denote the

mean value over I,
u, _ III 1 u(t)dt,
where III is the length of I (for simplicity we often write u(t) rather than
u(eit))
Definition. BMO is the space of all functions u E L2(T) such that

f"Iu(t)I2dt
IIuII: = sup IIII J Iu(t) - u,i2dt+27r
1 0
(1.3)
is finite, where the supremum runs over all intervals I on the unit circle.
It is readily verified that 11 11. is a norm and BMO actually is a Banach

space; in fact, any Cauchy sequence in BMO must have a limit at least
in L2(T), and it is easy to see that this sequence actually converges to
this limit in the BMO norm. (Sometimes the last term in (1.3) is omitted
in the definition. Then II II. is just a seminorm since it is independent of
additive constants, and BMO then becomes a space of functions modulo
constants.) Moreover,
IIuII < VIItIIL.o,
and therefore BMO contains L(T). However, the inclusion is proper; one
can show directly from the definition that, e.g., log Its (or log Ii - e" 1) is
in BMO, whereas on the other hand (t/ItI) log ItI is not; see Example 1.5
below and Exercise 2. However, if f belongs to BMO, then If I also does
(Exercise 3).
Exercise 1. For u E L2(T) let ur(e't) = Pu(re't), where Pu is the Poisson
integral of u. Prove that IIurli. Ilull when r / 1 if u E BMO.
1. Bounded Mean Oscillation 143
1.2 Remark. BMO stands for bounded mean oscillation, and in our def-
inition we have measured this mean oscillation in the L2(T)-norm. It is
more common to define BMO with L' (T)-norms instead. This definition
is as follows: An f E L'(T) is in BMO if
f2,
slip
III J
If - flldt + 2 If Idt
is finite. It is trivial that f satisfies this definition if it is in BMO in our

sense. The converse is also true and is a consequence of the John-Nirenberg
theorem, and so these two definitions are equivalent. The reason to use L2
instead of L' is merely practical; it simplifies the proofs of the main results.
The main result in this chapter is Fefferman's theorem, which states that
BMO is the dual of HR (Theorem 2.1). However, we first shall consider
some useful alternative ways to express the BMO norm (Proposition 1.3
below). To this end we need the Riesz decomposition in its simplest form
for functions that are smooth up to the boundary; cf. (2.6) in Ch. 4: If
e E C(U), then
l; (z) = P(z) + 9(0e)(z), z E U, (1.4)
where P is the Poisson integral and G the Green potential.
1.3 Proposition. Suppose that u E L2(T). Then

sup
I
1
IFI I
Iu - u112dt
(1.5)
ti sup P(ju - Pu(a)12)(a) = sup -GG(IOPuI2)(a).
aEU aEU
In particular, all of them are finite if one of them is.
1.4 Corollary. The Hilbert transform maps BMO into BMO boundedly.
Proof. Let u E L2(T). Since Pu + iPHu is analytic,

(8/8z)Pu = -i(8/82)PHu;
so
IOPHuI2 = IVPuI2 (1.6)

for real u. The complex case then follows. Hence, by Proposition 1.3, u is
in BMO if and only Hu is.
1.5 Remark. The function v(t) = log 11 - e'tI is in BMO since it is the
Hilbert transform of the bounded function arg(1 - e't).
144 9. H' and BMO
Proof of Proposition 1.3. First suppose that u E C(T). Then Pu E
C(U) and we therefore can apply the Riesz decomposition (1.4) to _
IPu - Pu(a)12. If we evaluate at the point z = a, we get that
-Q(IVPul2)(a) = P(lu - Pu(a)12)(a),
which shows the second part of (1.5) for smooth u. For the general case we
approximate u with u, as in Exercise 1. Then it is enough to verify that
for fixed a E U,
P(Iur - Pur(a)12)(a) -+ P(Iu - Pu(a)12)(a)
and
G(IVPurI2)(a) -+ c(IVPuI2)(a)
when r / 1. The first limit is quite trivial, and so we concentrate on the
second one. Since the Green kernel is 0(1 - I(I) for fixed z E U, it is enough
to verify that
Ju (1 - ICI)IVPUr12 -+ f(1 - I(I)IVPu12.

Noting that Pur(() = Pu(ro) and therefore VPur(() = rVPu(ro), this
follows by a substitution of variables and monotone convergence.
We now prove that the first expression in (1.5) is dominated by the second
one. By rotation symmetry it is enough to consider intervals I, centered at
the origin. If X. denotes the characteristic function of the interval (-p, p),
then there is a constant C, independent of p, such that
ZpXv(t) 5 CPr(t),
where Pr(t) is the Poisson kernel and r = 1 - p. Thus,

1
lu(e`1) - Pu(r)I2dt < CP(lu - Pu(r)I2)(r),
2p J P
and now the < part of - follows by
1.6 Lemma. If u E L2(T) and to each interval I we have a number aj,

then
Jtlu-uj12 <SUP JflU-aj12.

4s1 Ill III
1. Bounded Mean Oscillation 145
Proof. Denote the right-hand side by A2. Then
fu -uI12< Fill J 1u-af12+ ij J Jul-a112

Ail
<A+luI - all < A+ / lu - aj < 2A.
F11
In the next to last inequality we have applied Jensen's inequality.
It remains to show the > part of (1.5). By the variant of Lemma 1.6
where the Poisson kernel and the XP are interchanged, it is enough to find
for each a E U a number a' such that SUp0EU P(lu - a'12)(a) is dominated
by the left-most expression in (1.5). We may assume that a = r > 0. Then
we choose a' = u, = u(_p,p) (again r = 1 - p). Now
P(Iu - _P12)(r) = f Pr(t)u(t) - ul2dt + f Pr(t)Iu(t) - u12dt_

l<p <ItI<ir
The first of these integrals is easily estimated by the expression on the left
in (1.5) since
Pr(t) 5 C2pXP(t)
if Itl < p. For the last one, first note that
1 - r2 P
Pr(t) = <
I 1 - re't l2 p2 + t2 - t2
if Itl > p_ Thus, the proof is concluded with
1.7 Lemma. If u E L2, then

r
t hu(t) - up12dt < Cslp III J Iu - uIl2 = CB2,
where C is an absolute constant.
Proof of Lemma 1.7. Note that

2
1.
I'I,(,2k--1P - u2kp12 - Jf/ ('ll - u2kp)1
2k- P itl52k-'P
2k
1
P f I<2kp
Iu - u2kp12 < 2B2,
so that lu2k-lp - u2kpl < fB. Therefore,

lu2kp - Upi < k v/ B
146 9. H' and BMO
and hence
lu - upl2 < 2kp2(1 + 2k2)B2. (1.7)

J111<24'p
(Here we have the convention that the integration is performed over the
whole unit circle if 2kp > 7r.) Hence,
00
Iu( t) - ul2dt Iu(t) - u2dt
J2 -1p<ItlG2kp t
< p2(1 + 2k2)2kpB2
(2k_lp)2 B2
and thus the lemma is proved.
As noted above, Proposition 1.3 now is also proved.
2 The Duality of H1 and BMO

Now we are prepared for the main theorem. In this chapter the notion of a
Carleson measure refers to a positive measure in U that satisfies Carleson's
inequality (4.3) in Ch. 7.
2.1 Theorem (Fefferman). Suppose that u E L2(T). Then the following

four statements are equivalent:
(i) u E BMO.
(ii) (1 - I(I2)IVPul2 is a Carleson measure in U.
(iii) u operates on HIt in the sense that the functional
2n
(0, u) = 2r f uq5dt
0
has a continuous extension from C(T) to H.

(iv) u=a+Hbfor some a,bEL(T).
The BMO-norm of u is equivalent to the functional norm in (iii), and
to the square root of the Carleson norm in (ii) plus the L2(T)-norm of u.
Before the proof we consider a few consequences and corollaries of this

theorem. The equivalence of (i) and (iii) can be rephrased as
(HR')* = BMO.
In fact, (i) --+ (iii) means that any u E BMO corresponds to a (unique)
functional on HR and any functional on HR is in particular a functional on
L2(T), and so it is given by some u c- L2(T). However, then (iii) -+ (i)
means that actually u E BMO.
2 The Duality of H1 and BMO 147
It also follows that we have a continuous inclusion

BMO C LP(T)
for allp<oo.
Definition. We let BMOA denote the space of analytic functions in H2
such that their boundary values are in BMO.
As we sometimes consider HP (1 < p< oo) to be a subspace of LP(T), it

is reasonable to think of BMOA as a subspace of BMO. Since the Hilbert
transform is bounded on BMO, it follows that the Szego projection is also.
In view of Theorem 2.1, any b E BMOA operates on H1 via the pairing
(f, b), a priori defined for f E H2, and we get the following extension of
Theorem 2.3 in Ch. 6 (by a similar argument).
2.2 Theorem.
(a) The Szego projection is a bounded map
S:BMO -* BMOA and S:HR-+H'.
(b) BMOA operates on H1 in the sense that the pairing (f, b) has a contin-
uous extension from H2 to H1 if b c BMOA. Conversely, any bounded
functional on H1 occurs in this way, and the functional norm is equiva-
lent to the BMOA norm of b.
Proof of Theorem 2.1. (i) -+ (ii): By Proposition 1.3

C2 = sup -s(IVPul2) IIuII!.
Recall that OQX = X if X is smooth up to the boundary. If f is analytic,
then (2.7) in Ch. 8 gives (first replace u by u, and then take limits)
1111(1 - I(12)IVPul2 = f If(1- I(12)c(IVPuI2)

U
C21TIflde.
(ii) -- (iii): It is enough to show that there is a constant such that
I(O, u)I <- C11011HQ Ilull
for real u, 0 E C(T). Then the inequality follows for any b E BMO by
an approximation as in Exercise 1. By Jensen's formula (2.7) in Ch. 4,
fen uodt
(u, 0) = 2 = f log Il VPu VPdA(() + Pu(O)P(0).
J
Since-log(I1-(I for 1/2<ISI < 1, we get that
1(0,u)I <- 1(1 - I(I)IVPuIIVPIdA+C sup lPu11PI. (2.1)
Ic151/2
148 9. H' and BMO
However,
Sup IPuIIP4I IIuIIL-110I1L2
I(I51/2
and so it remains to estimate the integral in (2.1). Let f be the unique
element in H1 such that Im f (0) = 0 and Ref = P4,. Then IIuIIH,, - IIflIHw
and IVP4I - I ff'I. Thus, the square of the integral is
< Cfv(I - IoIf'IIVPuI)2

f (1 - I(I) I
fII 2
jU(1 - I(I)If IIVPuI2 < (f Ifld9) ,
where the last inequality follows from (2.8) in Ch. 8 and the assumption
(ii).
We now prove that (iii) implies (iv). If u satisfies (iii), then it defines a
bounded functional A on Hat, but HR can be isometrically identified with
the subspace of L1 (T) x L' (T) of elements of the form (0, HO); and so by
the Hahn-Banach theorem, A can be extended to a bounded functional on
L1(T) x L'(T). Thus, it is represented by an element (a, -b) E LOO(T) x
LOO(T), and for all (4,, H) we thus have
(0, u) = AO = (0, a) + (HO, -b) = (0, a + Hb)
for smooth 0 (cf. formula (2.9) in Ch. 6), and hence u = a + Hb. Also note
that IIaIIL. + IIbIIL= is equivalent to the functional norm of u.
The implication (iv) (i) follows from Corollary 1.4, and hence Theo-
rem 2.1 is completely proved.
Exercise 2. Show directly from the definition that log ItI is in BMO but
that (t/ItI) log Iti is not. Also show that log 11 - e'uI is in BMO.
Exercise 3. Show that 111f 111* 5 211f II..
Exercise 4. Suppose that f E L1(T) (or that f is in M(T)). Show that
if Hf E M(T), then f c H.
Exercise 5. Suppose that f E L'(T) (or that f is any distribution on T).
Show that f E HR if and only if I f fbI G CIIbhj. for all b E C' (T). Hint:
Use the preceding exercise.
Exercise 6. Show that If I E HR implies that f E H. Hint: Use the
preceding exercise and Exercise 3.
Exercise 7. Show that there are f E HR such that If I do not belong to
H.
Notes 149
Exercise 8. Show that there is a continuous inclusion BMO C LP(T) for

allp<cc.
Exercise 9. Show that if 0 E C' (T), then the operator u - Ou is bounded
on BMO and HR.
Exercise 10. Suppose that h E H. Show that the mapping b -* hb is
bounded from BMOA to BMO. Is it still bounded if h is replaced by h?
Exercise 11. Let BMOo = If E BMO; f (0) = 0} and define HR,o-anal-
ogously. Show that H: BMO -+ BMOo and H: HR -+ HR o are surjective.

Exercise 12. Show that S in fact maps L(T) onto BMOA.
Exercise 13. Derive Theorem 2.1 from Theorem 2.2.
Exercise 14. Let X be a smooth function on T, and let dQ = e-XdG. Show
that BMO is the dual of HR with respect to the pairing
1 21r
(f, 9) = 27r
fgda.
fo
Exercise 15. Let P be the orthogonal projection P: L2(T) - H2 with
respect to ( , ). Show that P maps LP(T) onto H9, BMO onto BMOA,
and HR onto H'. Moreover, show that H9 is the dual of H9 and BMOA
is the dual of H' with respect to this pairing. Also show that P: L(T)
BMOA is surjective. Hint: Note that SP = P and PS = S, and so
S'P = S' if the star denotes adjoint with respect to ( , ). Hence P =
S' + (S" - S)P. First, assume that f is in LP(T), 2 < p < oo or in BMO.
Then Pf E L2(T).
Exercise 16. Let p be a Carleson measure in U. Show that
u(z) _ - 1 / zdjc(() z E T,
ir U 1-@z
is in BMO and that 8bu = /2.
Notes
The space BMO was introduced by John and Nirenberg in Comm. Pure
Appl. Math., 14 (1961). The John- Nirenberg theorem states that if f E
BMO (defined with L' instead of L2 norms; cf. Remark 1.2), then
I{t E I; If - frt > All < CIII exp (ifCA ) ,
- iI
see [G]. It implies that the two definitions agree; it also immediately implies
that BMO C LP(T).
Fefferman's duality theorem is from 1971; see [G].
150 9. H' and BMO
The space HR can be defined by atoms. An atom is either the function 1
or a function a(t) E L(T) that has support on some interval I and such
that fr adt = 0 and IaI < 1/III. One can prove that HR is the space of all
sums
f(t) =>2A,aj(t),
where aj are atoms and A3 Eel, and the norm of f is equivalent to the
infimum of all > IA3I over all possible representations of f. This definition
has considerable advantages; basically, many results are reduced to check-
ing its validity for a single atom; for instance, it is almost immediate that
any b E BMO defines a functional on HR, and also that usual singular
integral operators are bounded. This definition with atoms was introduced
by Coifman (Studia Math. 269-274 (1974)), and has several important gen-
eralizations to Hp spaces for p < 1 in one and several dimensions in lR'
and on spaces of homogeneous type.
In general, the operator b --+ hb is not bounded on BMO if h is only
a bounded function. There is a precise characterization (due to Stegenga,
Amer. J. Math. 98 (1976), 573-589) of the multiplicators of BMO: A
function h is a multiplicator if and only if it is in L(T) and
logIIIf Ih - hJIde<C. (2.2)
III
The condition is satisfied if h has some regularity (C1 is more than enough);
cf. Exercise 9. An analytic function h is a multiplicator on BMOA if and
only if f E H and (2.2) holds.
There is no linear operator that provides a bounded solution to i9bu =
for each Carleson measure ; however, Exercise 16 shows that the Cauchy
integral at least gives a solution in BMO.
Bibliography
[Al] L.V. Ahlfors, Complex Analysis, 2d ed., McGraw-Hill Book Company,

New York, 1966.
[A2J , Conformal Invariants, 2d ed., McGraw-Hill Book Company, New

York, 1973.
[B] R.P. Boas, Entire Functions, Academic Press Inc., New York, 1954.
(D] P. Duren, Theory of H9 Spaces, Academic Press Inc., New York, 1970.
(F) G. Folland, Real Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, New York Chichester Bris-
bane Toronto Singapore, 1984.
[G] J. Garnett, Bounded Analytic Functions, Academic Press, 1981.
(Hi] E. Hille, Analytic Function Theory, vols. I & 11, Ginn and Company,
Boston, 1959 & 1962.
(Ho] L. Hormander, The Analysis of Linear Partial Differential Operators I,

2nd ed., Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York, 1990.
[NJ N.K. Nikolskii, Treatise on the Shift Operator, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Hei-
delberg New York Tokyo, 1986.
(Ra] T. Ransford, Potential Theory in the Complex Plane, Cambridge Univer-

sity Press, Cambridge, 1995.
[Rul] W. Rudin, Real and Complex Analysis, 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill Book Com-
pany, New York, 1986.
[Ru2] , Functional Analysis, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York,

1973.
152 Bibliography
IS) E.M. Stein, Singular Integrals and Differentiability Properties of F ac-

tions, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1970.
[S-W) E.M. Stein & G. Weiss, Introduction to Fourier Analysis on Euclidean

Spaces, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1971.
List of Symbols
A(Q) 6 M,u 101

B f 56 M,u 102
Bef 57 Mf 115
Bf 115 N 86
Bk,j 122 N+ 114
BMO 142 n(r,f), N(r,f) 85
BMOA 147 n(r, f, a), N(r, f, a) 88
C5 P f 69, 97
ab 132 Pr(t) 68
D(oo, r) 33 P 33
6(f, a) 89 Qk,l 122
a/az, a/az 5 Qf 115
.Fp(n) 104 Res(f,a) 16
FLAIL 104 Sf 107
0a 30 Sf 115
G((, z) 76 S 35
Gu 102 Sf 116
1f 76 SH(S2) 71
H f 104 T(r, f) 85
HP 106, 112 ur(ei8) 97
h' 97 u'(e'B) 101
HR 141 WP(z) 83
H. 56 Z(f) 14
Indr(z) 19 ,4(n) 104
LP(T), 11 Ilz.a 97 142
.M (T), 11 II 97 (,) 105
M(r, f, a) 91
Index
Ahlfors, 96 Carleson's inequality, 124

analytic Cauchy's estimate, 14
continuation, 51 Cauchy's formula, 8
function, 6 Cauchy's integral theorem, 8, 20, 22
functional, 55 Cauchy-Riemann equation, 6, 49
area theorem, 36 characteristic function, 85
atom, 150 Coifman, 150
automorphism, 30 complex interpolation, 26
conformal equivalence, 29
Banach-Alaoglu theorem, 99 conformal mapping, 29
Banach algebra, 132 convex
Bergman projection, 51 function, 78
Bergman space, 51 set, 56
Berndtsson, 129 corona theorem, 131
Beurling, 129
Bieberbach, 45 defect, 89
Bieberbach's conjecture, 37 defect relation, 90
Blaschke condition, 86 Dirichlet's problem, 44, 66, 69
Blaschke product, 88 disk algebra, 139
Bloch, 45 dyadic decomposition, 122
Bloch's theorem, 39
constant, 45 essential singularity, 16
Borel transform, 56 exponential type, 56
bounded mean oscillation, 143
de Branges, 37,45 Fatou, 111
Fefferman's theorem, 146
carrier of an analytic functional, 55 finite order, 88
capacity, 81 first fundamental (main) theorem,
Carleson, 66, 111, 118, 129, 132, 140 96
measure, 122 form ((1,0)-form and (0,1)-form), 34
tent, 122 Fourier-Laplace transform, 56
156 Index
Fourier coefficients, 104 Main theorem, 115

Fourier series, 104-106 maximum principle
function element, 51 for analytic functions, 12
for harmonic functions, 68
Gamelin, 129 for subharmonic functions, 71
gamma function, 52 mean value property
Goursat's theorem, 6 for analytic functions, 9
Green potential, 76 for harmonic functions, 67
Mergelyan's theorem, 58
Hardy--Littlewood maximal function, meromorphic, 17
101
Minda, 45
Hardy space, 112 Mittag-Leffler's theorem, 48
harmonic function, 67 monodromy theorem, 53
Harnack's theorem, 70 Morera's theorem, 11
Hausdorfi-Young inequality, 27, 105 multiplicity of pole, 16
Hermite's formula, 27 multiplicity of zero, 14
Hilbert transform, 104
holomorphic function, 6 Miintz-Szasz theorem, 96
homologous, 20
homotopic, 21 Nevanlinna class, 86
Hormander, 132, 136, 140 Nevanlinna condition, 87
Hunt, 111 Nevanlinna, 96
hyperbolic Newton potential, 76
distance, 128 Nirenberg, 149
line, 128 nontangential boundary values, I11
null-homologous, 20
ideal, 131
index of a curve, 19 outer function, 115
inner function, 114
interpolation sequence, 118 Paley-Wiener's theorem, 57
invariant subspace, 116 Picard's theorem, 16, 38-40
isolated singularity, 15 big Picard theorem, 16, 38-40
little Picard theorem, 38-39, 90
Jensen's formula Poisson
for analytic functions, 86 kernel, 68
for subharmonic functions, 77 integral, 69, 97
John, 149 polar set, 80
Jones, 129 pole, 16
order of, 16
Koebe, 44, 45 ,Polya's theorem, 56
Koebe's theorem, 36 polynomial convexity, 55, 62
potential theory, 80
Landau's constant, 45 principal part, 16, 34, 48
Laurent series expansion, 15 principle of argument, 20
Liouville's theorem, 13 Phragme n-Lindelof, 26
Liu, 45 projective space, 33
logarithm, 19 proximity function, 91
Index 157
removable singularity, 15 Smirnoff, 129

residue, 16 Stegenga, 150
Riesz decomposition, 76, 100 Stein, P., 111
Riesz, F., 129 subharmonic function, 71
Riesz, M., 111 Szego projection, 107
Riesz theorem, F. & M., 108
Riemann-Lebesgue lemma, 105 three-circle theorem, 80
Riemann mapping theorem, 30 trigonometric polynomial, 102
Riemann sphere, 33
Rouche's theorem, 18 Uchiyama, 140
Rudowicz, 129 uniqueness theorem, 14
Runge's theorem, 46 univalent, 32, 35
Schottky's inequality, 40 Weierstrass' theorem, 83
Schwarz' lemma, 30 Weyl's lemma
Schwarz' reflection principle, 70 for analytic functions, 10
second fundamental (main) theorem, for harmonic functions, 70
96 Wolff, 132, 136
separated sequence, 119
shift operator, 117 zero
simply connected, 22 order of, 14
singular inner function, 114 set, 14, 82
Universitext
Tracts in Mathematics
This book provides a concise treatment of topics in complex analy-
sis, suitable for a one-semester course. It is an outgrowth of
lectures given by the author over the last ten years at the University
of Goteborg and Chalmers University of Technology. While treat-
ing classical complex function theory, the author emphasizes
connections to real and harmonic analysis, and presents general
tools that might be useful in other areas of analysis. The book
introduces all of the basic ideas in beginning complex analysis
and still has time to reach many topics near the frontier of the sub-
ject. It covers classical highlights in the field such as Fatou theorems
and some Nevanlinna theory, as well as more recent topics, for
example, the corona theorem and the H '-BMO duality.
The reader is expected to have an understanding of basic inte-

gration theory and functional analysis. Many exercises illustrate
and sharpen the theory, and extended exercises give the reader
an active part in complementing the material presented in the text.
IseH 0-387-94754-M
9
IIII III
780387"947549
ISBN 0-387-94754-X

Topics in Complex Analysis Mats Andersson PDF

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Topics in Complex Analysis Mats Andersson PDF

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

TOPICS IN

Aksoy/Khamsi: Nonstandard Methods in Fixed Point Theory

(continued after index)

Editorial Board (North America):

Mathematics Subject Classification (1991): 30-01, 30C20, 30C15, 32A35

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Printed on acid-free paper.

1997 Springer-Verlag New York, Inc.

This book is an outgrowth of lectures given on several occasions at Chalmers

Goteborg, Sweden Mats Andersson

1. Some Basic Properties of Analytic Functions 5

2. Properties of Analytic Mappings 28

3. Analytic Approximation and Continuation 46

4. Harmonic and Subharmonic Functions 67

5. Zeros, Growth, and Value Distribution 82

6. Harmonic Functions and Fourier Series 97

8. Ideals and the Corona Theorem 130

9. H' and BMO 141

List of Symbols 153

Almost all necessary background material can be found in [F] or [Rul],

Ir1 = f =f l7'(t)12dt = fb + ((t))2dt

(uLv - vAu)dA = faW (u 8v - v M da,

C. Integration theory. From integration theory we use the standard

ffxt If'(x, t) ldp(x)dt < oo,

for all a, b E I. Since h is continuous, g' = h.

We also refer to the Fourier transform, Plancherel's formula, and the

Some Basic Properties of

1. Definition and Integral Representation

Note that A = a2/ax2 + a2/ay2 = 4a2/8zaz.

1.1 Proposition. If f is differentiable at the point a, then the limit

Proof. The differentiability off is equivalent to

Thus, (1.2) exists if and only if

{:: -vx (1.3)

Definition. A function f E C'(SZ) is analytic (or holomorphic) in S2 if

1.3 Example. If f E A(Q) and f'(z) = 0 for all z E 1, then df = 0 and

fdz + gdz = f (f (r(t))r'(t) + g(r(t))r'(t))dt,

<- f IfIIdzI <- Irlsrplf1. (1.4)

Proof. fdz = (aF/az)dz = (aF/az)dz + (aF/(9z)dz = dF; therefore,

In complex notation Green's formula` becomes (check!)

From th is we immediately get

The next theorem in particular tells us that the values of an analytic

1.6 Cauchy's Formula. If f E C' (w`) and z E w, then

Since z)-' is locally integrable, the theorem follows from (1.6)

1.7 Some Simple but Important Consequences.

(b) If the curve r starts at a and ends up at b, then, by Proposition 1.4,

OW _ - f (80/,%) ((dA(() = aza m(()d z(())

Thus in particular we have that A(Q) C C(1l) for any Q.

Proof. Take 0 E C, (w), 0 < 0 _< 1, such that 0 = 1 in a neighborhood of

In this integral, IC - zj > 6, and therefore we get the estimate

sup lf(m)t < ,rb-+i Sup I a f If(()IdA(().

Then there is a g E A(n) such that f = g a.e.

g(z) 1 f (aolaCf (S) dA((), z E w.

If f is analytic, then (1.9) says that g = f in w; we are going .to show

is in Co (St) (why?). According to (1.7), the second integral is

We say that fj - f u.c. (uniformly on compact sets) if for each K C S2,

1.10 Proposition. Suppose that fj E A(c).

Proof. Since analyticity is a local property, we may assume that S2 is

F(z + w) - F(z) = wf (z) + J (f (() - f (z)) d( = wf (z) + o(IwI)

Proof of Goursat's Theorem. Assume that 0 is convex, take an arbi-

fdz > 4-kI. (1.11)

Choose a point a E nAk. Given e > 0 there is a 6 > 0 such that

<6. Taken so large that On C {Iz - al < b}. Then

Proof. Take a point a E Sl such that (f (a) I = supra If I. If a E 1911, the