It is well-known that on any compact Riemann surface $X$ every non-constant meromorphic function $f:X\to\mathbb{CP}^1$ has as many zeros as poles, where each is counted according to multiplicities. Consider the holomorphic complex "charts" (a possible abuse of terminology) $\phi_{\alpha}:U_{\alpha}\to V_{\alpha}$ where $U_{\alpha}\subset X$ and $V_{\alpha}\subset\mathbb{C}$ are compact. Then by the argument principle, if $w:=\phi_{\alpha}^{-1}(z)$ for $z\in\mathbb{C},$ $$\frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_{\partial U_{\alpha}}\frac{f'(w)}{f(w)}dw=\frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_{\partial U_{\alpha}}\frac{f'(\phi_{\alpha}^{-1}(z))}{f(\phi_{\alpha}^{-1}(z))}d\phi_{\alpha}^{-1}=\frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_{\partial U_{\alpha}}\phi_{\alpha}^*\left(\frac{f'(z)}{f(z)}dz\right)=\sum_{k=1}^n\alpha_k-\sum_{k=1}^m\beta_k$$ vanishes, where $f(z)$ is analytic on $\overline{I(\partial U_{\alpha})}$ except for poles in $I(\partial U_{\alpha})$ at the points $b_1,..,b_n,$ $f(z)$ has finitely many zeros $a_1,...,a_m$ in $I(\partial U_{\alpha})$, but none on $\partial U_{\alpha}$ itself, and $\alpha_k$ is the order of $a_k$ and $\beta_k$ is the order of $b_k.$

However, if $f$ is entire (and thus meromorphic) then it has no poles and $$\frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_{\partial U_{\alpha}}\frac{f'(w)}{f(w)}dw=\sum_{k=1}^n\alpha_k-\sum_{k=1}^m\beta_k=\sum_{k=1}^n\alpha_k=0,$$ i.e. the sum of the orders of the zeros of an entire function $f$ in $U_{\alpha}$ is zero (note that $U_{\alpha}$ is a compact Riemann surface since $X$ is compact). Is this true?

Thanks in advance!

  • $\begingroup$ A chart cannot be compact. $\endgroup$ – user99914 Oct 14 '17 at 4:06
  • $\mathbb{CP}^1$ is a compact Riemann surface. A holomorphic function $f:X\to Y$ between two compact Riemann surfaces doesn't have any zeros/poles, but only branch points, ie. where locally in a chart $\phi,\psi$ around $a,f(a)$ : $\psi \circ f \circ \phi^{-1}(z)=C z^n+\mathcal{O}(z^{n+1}),n\ge 2$ so that $f$ is not locally biholomorphic.

  • So you meant $f$ is meromorphic $X\to \mathbb{C}$.

    Then the maximum modulus principle is enough to show if $f$ is holomorphic then it is constant (take $a\in X$ where $|f(a)|$ is maximum, it exists since $X$ is compact)

    Also you can define $f'$ only in some local chart, ie. $f'(\phi(z)) \phi'(z)$ (this is only a notation, $\phi'$ doesn't make sense) thus $f'(w)$ doesn't make sense. What makes sense are the meromorphic differentials $df$ and $\frac{df}{f}$ (in local chart it is $d f(\phi(z))$ and $\frac{df(\phi(z))}{f(\phi(z))}$) which by definition integrate (locally) to $f$ and $\log f$ in every chart.

    For a simple closed curve $\gamma$ in $X$ enclosing every point only once, you need to show $\gamma= \gamma_{1,+} \cup \ldots \cup \gamma_{n,+}\cup \gamma_{\sigma(1),-} \cup \ldots \gamma_{\sigma(n),-}$ where $\sigma$ is a permutation of $1 \ldots n$ and $\gamma_{i,+},\gamma_{i,-}$ are the same curve in $X$ traversed in opposite direction (this is so because to obtain a compact Riemann surface we identity the opposite edges of the boundary of a fundamental domain).

Therefore $$\int_\gamma \frac{df}{f} = \sum_{i=1}^n\int_{\gamma_{i,+}}-\sum_{i=1}^n\int_{\gamma_{\sigma(i),+}} \frac{df}{f} = 0.$$

And hence $f$ has the same number of poles and zeros.

  • $\begingroup$ Thank you! One last thing: suppose $\phi:U\to\overline{I(\gamma)}$ for $U\subset\mathbb{C}$ compact, then would $\int_{\gamma}\frac{df}{f}=\int{\partial U}\phi^*\left(\frac{df}{d}\right)=0?$ Also, how would one show show $\gamma= \gamma_{1,+} \cup \ldots \cup \gamma_{n,+}\cup \gamma_{\sigma(1),-} \cup \ldots \gamma_{\sigma(n),-}$ where $\sigma$ is a permutation of $1, \ldots, n$ and $\gamma_{i,+},\gamma_{i,-}?$ @reuns $\endgroup$ – Sergio Charles Oct 15 '17 at 4:49

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.