All questions below are over $C$,complex number or over $C^n$.

$\textbf{Q1:}$ Given a $u$ holomorphic function not vanishing identically at $0\in C^n$, then one can assume $u$ is non-vanishing along $z_1$ axis(i.e. restriction of $u$ to $z_1$ axis leads to non-trivial series expansion in $z_1$) by a linear transformation. I do not see why this is obvious. I used a technique adopted to prove Noether normalization in infinite field by transforming the basis by linear transformation. Then argue there is a $P^{n-1}$ point along which $u$'s lowest homogeneous degree component is non-vanishing and this gives the axis $z_1$. For general case, I need non-linear transformation. Am I thinking too complicated here or was there a simpler argument?


Given $u,v$ holomorphic functions vanishing at $0\in C^n$, then we can suppose $u,v$ both non-vanishing along $z_2=\dots=z_n=0$ axis by a linear transformation.

$\textbf{Q2:}$ Is above assertion correct? Suppose $u(z_1,\dots, z_n)=z_1^k+\dots$ and $v(z_1,\dots, z_n)=z_2^k+\dots$ where $\dots$ contains all terms of degree $k$ at least. Why there is a linear transformation to make this happening? I did prove this statement by reducing to $P^1_C$ case by looking at mixing $z_1,z_2$ terms and this is basically reusing the result from $Q1$. Once again, am I thinking too complicated? Should there be simpler answer to above questions?

Ref: Analytic Theory of Abelian Varieties by Swinnerton-Dyer pg 26. It seems that the author find the argument very obvious.

$\textbf{Additional Question:}$ What is the intuitive reason to expect $Q1$ and $Q2$?


Maybe not obvious but this type of argument shows up a lot in local theory of holomorphic functions. Any book in several complex variables may discuss this right before Weierstrass Preparation Theorem.

Since $u$ does not vanish identically, there is a line $L$ through the origin such that $\left. u\right|_L $ does not vanish identically. Then take a linear change of coordinates that sends $L$ to the $z_1$-axis.

Notice that the same holds for any finite number of functions. If you have $u_1, \dots, u_m$ non-trivial holomorphic functions, then $\{ u_1 =0 \} \cup \dots \cup \{u_m = 0 \} = \{ u_1\dots u_m =0 \}$. You can find a line where the restriction of the product, hence the restriction ofeach $u_i$, does not vanish identically.

  • $\begingroup$ Why does weierstrass preparation theorem holds for finite number of functions here? The version I have seen is associated to a function. How to deduce that I can find an axis for finite number of functions non-vanishing? Thanks. $\endgroup$ – user45765 May 29 '18 at 19:32
  • $\begingroup$ Any non-trivial holomorphic function can vanish on at most a finite number of these lines. Once you have a finite number of such functions you still have a finite number of lines to avoid. $\endgroup$ – Alan Muniz May 29 '18 at 19:38
  • $\begingroup$ I think the holomorphic function vanishing on the open ball implies that function vanishes on the connected component. Why there must be finite number of lines to guarantee non vanishing here? $\endgroup$ – user45765 May 29 '18 at 19:42
  • $\begingroup$ If I have $z_1z_2$ in $C^5$, I could have a lot of line vanishing on $z_1=0$ hyperplane. $\endgroup$ – user45765 May 29 '18 at 19:44
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, my mistake. I meant hyperplanes instead of lines there. I will make it precise in a moment. $\endgroup$ – Alan Muniz May 29 '18 at 19:54

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.