Let $f:X\rightarrow Y$ be a non-constant holomorphic map between compcat riemann surfaces, we need to show $f^{-1}(y),\forall y\in Y$ is finite and discrete subset of $X$.

What if $X$ and $Y$ are non compact?

well, $f$ is onto clearly, and I understand some how I need to use the fat that $Zeros$ of $f$ is a discrete set, but I am not able to write rigoriously the answer.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Your description of $S$ doesn't make sense (or describes the empty set in a benevolent interpretation). $\endgroup$ – Georges Elencwajg Jul 24 '12 at 21:22
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Patience In a compact space any infinite set has an accumulation point. So any closed and discrete set is finite. $\endgroup$ – azarel Jul 24 '12 at 21:44
  • $\begingroup$ @GeorgesElencwajg I am sorry!! I will do that from next time, If $X$ and $Y$ are non compact, how will I conclude? $\endgroup$ – Marso Jul 24 '12 at 21:50

a) If $X$ and $Y$ are non compact it certainly is not clear that $f$ is onto since it is false: think of the inclusion of a disk into $\mathbb C$.
b) It is not true either that the fibers $f^{-1}(y)$ are finite: think of the sinus function $\sin:\mathbb C\to \mathbb C$ with $\sin^{-1}(0)=\pi \mathbb Z$, an infinite set.
c) It is however true that the fibers $f^{-1}(y)\; (y\in Y)$ are discrete closed subsets of $X$: closedness follows from continuity of $f$ and discreteness can be checked locally at points of $x\in X$.
This means that in order to check it you may assume that $X$ and $Y$ are disks containing the origin and that $x=0, f(x)=0$.
You may then invoke the result that zeros of non-constant holomorphic functions are isolated.


I will add a little bit to George's fine answer. I believe that the property you're looking for is properness. A map is called proper if inverse images of compact subsets are again compact. As georges pointed out, the fibers will be discrete and since a point is clearly compact, the fiber will be compact discrete, hence finite.

When i learned about this theorem in class, the teacher gave it for compact surfaces and mentioned its extension to the proper case. Therefore i believe that this is the most general statement of the theorem.

Hope that helps.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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