Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I am doing a multiple choice test for complex analysis, and I am stuck a bit at the following one.

Let $f$ be holomorphic with an essential singularity at $0$. Then for every $z_0\in \mathbb{C}$ the Laurent expansion around $z_0$ has a nonvanishing principal part.

My idea is that it is wrong, but I didn't found a counterexample. My idea is taking a function with an essential singularity like $e^{-x^{-2}}$, adding a term with no singularity like $\frac{1}{1-z}$ and choosing $z$ so that the Laurent series around $z$ has a smaller radius of convergence than the distance to the essential singularity. Does it work?

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 1 down vote accepted

If $f$ is holomorphic on a neighbourhood of $z_0$, the Laurent expansion of $f$ around $z_0$ will be the same as the Taylor expansion around $z_0$. (I.e. the principal part vill vanish.)

(Assuming you mean the Laurent series that converges on some $0 < |z-z_0| < r$. There are other possible interpretations.)

share|cite|improve this answer
So the Statement is false and my counterexpamle works ? – Dominic Michaelis Feb 26 '13 at 13:10
@DominicMichaelis The statement is false. Take any $f$ with an essential singularity at $0$ and see what will happen, e.g. $f(z) = \exp(1/z)$. – mrf Feb 26 '13 at 13:12

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.