0
$\begingroup$

It is known that $\mathbb{H}$ (upper hyperplane), $\mathbb{C}$, $\mathbb{C} \cup \infty$ (riemann sphere) are riemann surfaces. $\mathbb{H} \cup i\infty$ is not, but what is the principal difference between this case and $\mathbb{C} \cup \infty$?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Boundary of $\mathbb H$ is homeomorphic with $S^1$, but in this case you are only adding a single point in the boundary. $\endgroup$ – Anubhav Mukherjee Oct 24 '16 at 16:53
  • $\begingroup$ $\mathbb{H}$ is homeomorphic with disk. anyway, thanks $\endgroup$ – Sasha Mayer Oct 24 '16 at 17:30
  • $\begingroup$ so what?? I didn't get the meanng of your comment? Do you know the boundary of of upper half plane? $\endgroup$ – Anubhav Mukherjee Oct 24 '16 at 18:02
  • $\begingroup$ @Anubhav, i've missed the word "boundary " in your previous comment, sorry. i agree with you, that the problem is with neighbourhood of that point. $\endgroup$ – Sasha Mayer Oct 24 '16 at 18:06
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The issue is the same with adding $0$ to the open upper half-plane (no neighborhood of $0$ in $\mathbf{H} \cup \{0\}$ is biholomorphic to an open disk) versus adding $0$ to the punctured plane. $\endgroup$ – Andrew D. Hwang Oct 25 '16 at 14:14
1
$\begingroup$

To answer this, one must understand that there is no isomorphism between an annulus $A_a=\{a<\vert z\vert <1\}$ and the punctured disk $\{0<\vert z\vert <1\}$.

Let us think about $\bf H$ as a disk ${\bf D}=\{ \vert z\vert <1\}$, and consider the annulus $A= A_{1/2}$ ; assume that there exists a complex structure on ${\bf D}\cup \infty$ which restricts to the given structure on $A$. Then $A\cup \infty$ would be a simply connected Riemann surface, hence either $\bf C$ of $\bf D$.

It cannot be $\bf C$ as $\bf C\setminus \{1pt\}$ is not isomorphic to a punctured disk (the universal cover of $\bf C\setminus \{1pt\}$ is $\bf C$). So it must be $\bf D$, and (as $:bf D$ is homogeneous) removing a point would provide an isomorphism between the punctered disk and $A_{1/2}$.

This proof is perhaps to complicated (it uses Poincaré Koebe uniformisation) hopefully there is a simpler one using just the Riemann mapping theorem?

$\endgroup$

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.