Notes on Complex Analysis
Export PDFGitHub

§4.3 Entireness and Meromorphy

4.3 Entireness and Meromorphy

We have previously defined the concept of an entire function in the chapter on complex differentiation. Let 𝑓 be entire with the unique Taylor expansion ∑𝑛=0∞𝑐𝑛𝑧𝑛. Since 𝑧=∞ is an isolated singularity, by the uniqueness of the Laurent expansion, the expansion at 𝑧=0 has the same form as the expansion at 𝑧=∞. We will now analyze the implications on the entire function 𝑓 given an isolated singularity.

  1. If the infinity point is a removable singularity, then lim𝑧→∞𝑓(𝑧) exists and is finite.

    Proposition 4.3.1.

    If 𝑓(𝑧) is entire and has a removable singularity at 𝑧=∞, then 𝑓 is constant.
    Proof.

    Let 𝑧=1𝜁, and let 𝑔(𝜁)=𝑓(1𝜁), which has a removable singularity at 𝜁=0. By Theorem 3.2.9Theorem 3.2.9Theorem 3.2.9, 𝑔 can be analytically continued to all of ℂ, especially at 𝜁=0. Let 𝑤=𝑔(0). Then, ∀𝜀>0, ∃𝛿>0 such that ∀𝜁∈𝐷(0,𝛿), |𝑔(𝜁)−𝑤|<𝜀. It follows that ∀|𝑧|>1𝛿, |𝑓(𝑧)|<|𝑤|+𝜀, and is bounded. For the complement, ∀𝑧∈𝐷(0,1𝛿)‾, 𝑓(𝑧) is continuous on a compact set, and by Theorem 1.2.22Theorem 1.2.22Theorem 1.2.22, is also bounded.

    Then by Liouville’s Theorem (Theorem 3.2.5Theorem 3.2.5Theorem 3.2.5), 𝑓 is constant. ⁠□

  2. If 𝑓(𝑧) has a pole at 𝑧=∞ of order 𝑚∈ℕ, then 𝑓 is a polynomial of degree 𝑚.

    Proof.

    By the classification of a pole at ∞, 𝑓 can be written as

    𝑓(𝑧)=𝑐𝑚𝑧𝑚+𝑐𝑚−1𝑧𝑚−1+⋯+𝑐0+𝑐−1𝑧+⋯.

    Since 𝑓(𝑧) is entire, it is holomorphic at 𝑧=0 and has a convergent Taylor expansion. By the uniqueness of Laurent expansions (Theorem 4.1.3Theorem 4.1.3Theorem 4.1.3), the two expansions are equivalent and therefore all terms with negative exponents vanish, and

    𝑓(𝑧)=𝑐𝑚𝑧𝑚+𝑐𝑚−1𝑧𝑚−1+⋯+𝑐0,
    and since 𝑐𝑚≠0, the statement is confirmed. ⁠□
  3. If 𝑓(𝑧) has an essential singularity at 𝑧=∞, 𝑓(𝑧) is known as a transcendental entire function.

Example 4.3.2.

The entire functions sin(𝑧), cos(𝑧), sinh(𝑧), cosh(𝑧), and exp(𝑧) are transcendental.

Definition 4.3.3 (Meromorphy).

Let 𝑈⊆ℂ be open, and let {𝑎𝑛}𝑛∈ℕ⊂𝑈 be a set of isolated points. Suppose 𝑓:𝑈∖{𝑎𝑛}𝑛∈ℕ→ℂ is holomorphic and has a pole at each of 𝑧∈{𝑎𝑛}. Then 𝑓 is meromorphic in 𝑈.

Similar to holomorphy, meromorphy on a compact set can be defined as meromorphy on a neighborhood of the set. In general, we imply for the set to be open unless stated otherwise. If the set is not implicitly specified, we assume meromorphy on ℂ.

All holomorphic functions are meromorphic functions (with poles on ⌀). Consequently, entire functions are meromorphic on ℂ. All rational functions (including polynomials) are also meromorphic on ℂ. In the study of meromorphic functions with an isolated singularity at ∞, rational functions are of important interest.

Let 𝑓(𝑧) be rational, written as 𝑓(𝑧)=𝑝(𝑧)𝑞(𝑧), where 𝑝 and 𝑞 are polynomials. Let

𝑝(𝑧)=𝑎𝑛𝑧𝑛+𝑎𝑛−1𝑧𝑛−1+⋯+𝑎0𝑞(𝑧)=𝑏𝑚𝑧𝑚+𝑏𝑚−1𝑧𝑚−1+⋯+𝑏0,

where 𝑎𝑛,𝑏𝑚≠0. Trivially, the poles of 𝑓 are the zeros of 𝑞. Since

𝑓(𝑧)=𝑧𝑛𝑧𝑚⋅𝑎𝑛+𝑎𝑛−1𝑧+⋯+𝑎0𝑧𝑛𝑏𝑚+𝑏𝑚−1𝑧+⋯+𝑏0𝑧𝑚,

we have

lim𝑧→∞𝑓(𝑧)={𝑎𝑛𝑏𝑚if𝑛=𝑚0if𝑛<𝑚∞if𝑛>𝑚.

Conversely, we have:

Theorem 4.3.4.

If 𝑓(𝑧) is meromorphic on ℂ and has a pole or removable singularity at 𝑧=∞, then 𝑓 is a rational function.
Proof.

Since 𝑓 is meromorphic on ℂ, its singularities are isolated poles. The assumption that 𝑓 has either a pole or a removable singularity at ∞ implies that this singularity is also isolated. Thus, there exists some 𝑅>0 such that 𝑓 is holomorphic on the punctured neighborhood {𝑧∈ℂ:𝑅<|𝑧|<∞} of ∞.

Consider the Laurent expansion of 𝑓 at ∞, obtained by substituting 𝑤=1𝑧 and expanding around 𝑤=0:

𝑓(𝑧)=∑𝑛=−∞∞𝑎𝑛𝑧𝑛,

where the series converges for sufficiently large |𝑧|. If ∞ is a removable singularity, the coefficients 𝑎𝑛=0 for all 𝑛>0. If ∞ is a pole of order 𝑚, then 𝑎𝑛=0 for all 𝑛>𝑚, and 𝑎𝑚≠0. In either case, the principal part at ∞ is

𝜓∞(𝑧)=∑𝑛=1𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑧𝑛,

which is a polynomial (identically zero if degree is 0).

Next, observe that 𝑓 has only finitely many poles in the closed disk 𝐷(0,𝑅)‾={𝑧:|𝑧|≤𝑅}. Suppose otherwise. Then the set of poles in 𝐷(0,𝑅)‾ would be infinite. By Bolzano–Weierstrass (Theorem 1.1.10Theorem 1.1.10Theorem 1.1.10), this set would have an accumulation point in 𝐷(0,𝑅)‾. At such an accumulation point, 𝑓 would have a non-isolated singularity, a contradiction of the meromorphy of 𝑓 on ℂ.

Let 𝑧1,…,𝑧𝑛 denote these finitely many poles in 𝐷(0,𝑅)‾. For each 𝑘=1,…,𝑛, the Laurent expansion of 𝑓 at 𝑧𝑘 has principal part

𝜓𝑘(𝑧)=∑𝑗=1𝑚𝑘𝑐𝑘,−𝑗(𝑧−𝑧𝑘)𝑗,

where 𝑚𝑘 is the order of the pole at 𝑧𝑘. Define the auxiliary function

Φ(𝑧)=𝑓(𝑧)−𝜓∞(𝑧)−∑𝑘=1𝑛𝜓𝑘(𝑧),

which is meromorphic on ℂ, with potential singularities only at 𝑧1,…,𝑧𝑛 and ∞.

We now show that each of these singularities is removable. First, fix 𝑗∈{1,…,𝑛} arbitrarily. Since the poles are isolated, there exists 𝜀𝑗>0 such that the punctured disk 𝐷∗(𝑧𝑗,𝜀𝑗)={𝑧:0<|𝑧−𝑧𝑗|<𝜀𝑗} contains no other poles 𝑧𝑘 for 𝑘≠𝑗.

  1. Since 𝑓(𝑧)−𝜓𝑗(𝑧) is the holomorphic part of the Laurent expansion at 𝑧𝑗, it is holomorphic on 𝐷(𝑧𝑗,𝜀𝑗) (including at 𝑧𝑗).
  2. ∑𝑘≠𝑗𝜓𝑘(𝑧) is holomorphic on 𝐷(𝑧𝑗,𝜀𝑗), as each 𝜓𝑘 has its singularity elsewhere.
  3. 𝜓∞(𝑧) is a polynomial, hence entire.

Thus,

Φ(𝑧)=[𝑓(𝑧)−𝜓𝑗(𝑧)]−𝜓∞(𝑧)−∑𝑘≠𝑗𝜓𝑘(𝑧)

is holomorphic on 𝐷(𝑧𝑗,𝜀𝑗), including at 𝑧𝑗. Therefore, we can define Φ(𝑧𝑗) to make Φ holomorphic at 𝑧𝑗.

Since 𝑓(𝑧)−𝜓∞(𝑧) is the holomorphic part of the expansion at ∞, consisting of terms with nonpositive powers of 𝑧, lim𝑧→∞𝑓(𝑧)−𝜓∞(𝑧) exists and is finite. Additionally, each 𝜓𝑘(𝑧) consists of negative powers of 𝑧−𝑧𝑘, so lim𝑧→∞𝜓𝑘(𝑧)=0 for each 𝑘, and thus lim𝑧→∞∑𝑘=1𝑛𝜓𝑘(𝑧)=0. Therefore, lim𝑧→∞Φ(𝑧) exists and is finite, so ∞ is a removable singularity of Φ. Without the finite singularities at each 𝑧𝑘, Φ is entire. Since Φ has a finite limit at ∞, it is bounded on ℂ. By Liouville’s theorem, Φ(𝑧)≡𝑐 for some constant 𝑐.

Hence,

𝑓(𝑧)=𝑐+𝜓∞(𝑧)+∑𝑘=1𝑛𝜓𝑘(𝑧).

The right-hand side is a sum of a constant, a polynomial, and finitely many principal parts (each a rational function with a single pole), so 𝑓 is rational. ⁠□

If 𝑧=∞ is not a pole or removable singularity of a meromorphic function 𝑓(𝑧), then it is either an essential singularity or an accumulation point of poles. In this case, 𝑓 is not rational and is known as a transcendental meromorphic function.