Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let $f_n :U \to \mathbb{C}$ be a sequence of analytic functions on an open and connected set $U$. Suppose that the sequence is locally bounded and that for the set $$D:= \{z \in U : f_n(z) \, \, \mathrm{converges} \}$$ has an accumulation point in $U$.

How would you show that then the whole sequence $f_n$ converges locally uniformaly to an analytic function $f$?

share|improve this question

1 Answer 1

up vote 1 down vote accepted

By Montel's theorem, the sequence $(f_n)$ has a subsequence which converges locally uniformly to some analytic function $f: U \to \mathbb{C}$. Assume, $f_n \not \to f$ locally uniformly. Then there exists a compact set $K$, $\varepsilon>0$ and a subsequence $(f_{n_k})_k$ of $(f_n)$ such that $$\forall k: \|f_{n_k}-f\|_K \geq \varepsilon \tag{1}$$

By Montel's theorem, $(f_{n_k})$ has a locally uniformly convergent subsequence $(f_{n_{k_j}})_j$, $$f_{n_{k_j}} \to \tilde{f} \quad \text{locally uniformly}$$ By assumption, $\tilde{f}|_D = f|_D$. Since $f$, $\tilde{f}$ are holomorphic and $D$ has an accumulation point, we conclude $f = \tilde{f}$ (by the identity theorem). Contradiction to (1)!

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks, I understand everything up to the part where $\tilde f |_D = f|_D$. How have we used the fact that $D$ has an accumulation point? –  user53076 May 10 '13 at 7:18
    
Ok I see how that the identity theorem uses the fact that there is an accumulation point, but how we justify that if $\tilde f = f$ then this is a contradiction to (1)? Even if $f_{n_k}$ and $f_{n_j}$ are completely different sequences? –  user53076 May 10 '13 at 7:53
1  
@user53076 Note that $(f_{n_{k_j}})_j$ is a subsequence of $(f_{n_k})$ and therefore (by assumption, (1)) we have $$\|f_{n_{k_j}}-f\| \stackrel{f=\tilde{f}}{=} \|f_{n_{k_j}}-\tilde{f}\| \geq \varepsilon$$ and this is a contradiction to $f_{n_{k_j}} \to \tilde{f}$. –  saz May 10 '13 at 14:56

Your Answer

 
discard

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.