# If an entire function grows slower than a polynomial, then it is a polynomial!

I was investigating the following corollary to Liouville's Theorem in Complex Analysis: if $$f(z)$$ is entire and $$\lim_{z\rightarrow \infty}z^{-n}f(z)=0$$, then $$f(z)$$ is a polynomial in $$z$$ of degree at most $$n-1$$.

My proof uses the complex L'Hospital Rule and Induction on $$n$$. The base case $$n=0$$ is obvious. To illustrate the idea: for the case $$n=2$$ Suppose that $$f(z)$$ is not bounded, so that $$\lim_{z\rightarrow \infty}{f(z)}=\infty.$$ Then by using L'Hospital, we have $$\lim_{z\rightarrow \infty}{\frac{f(z)}{z^2}}=\lim_{z\rightarrow \infty}{\frac{f'(z)}{2z}}.$$ If $$f'(z)$$ is not bounded, then we have further $$\lim_{z\rightarrow \infty}{\frac{f(z)}{z^2}}=\lim_{z\rightarrow \infty}{\frac{f'(z)}{2z}}=\lim_{z\rightarrow \infty}{\frac{f''(z)}{2}}=0.$$ Thus, by Liouville's Theorem, we know that $$f''(z)$$ is equal to some constant, and since it approaches 0 at infinity, is simply 0. Then $$f'(z)=A$$ (technically this actually leads to a contradiction though, since then $$f'(z)$$ is bounded, contrary to assumption) for some complex number $$A$$, and thus $$f(z)=Az+B$$ for complex numbers $$A$$ and $$B$$. To complete the case analysis, if either $$f(z)$$ or $$f'(z)$$ were bounded, we could have applied the Liouville's Theorem to see that they were both constants, and thus $$f(z)$$ would be a polynomial in $$z$$ of degree at most 1.

Now suppose for the induction hypothesis that $$\lim_{z\rightarrow \infty}{\frac{f(z)}{z^n}}=0$$, we know that $$f(z)$$ is a polynomial in $$z$$ of degree at most $$n-1$$, and consider the case $$n+1$$. Then if $$f(z)$$ is not bounded, we know that $$\lim_{z\rightarrow \infty}{\frac{f(z)}{z^{n+1}}}=\lim_{z\rightarrow \infty}{\frac{f'(z)}{nz^n}}=0$$ so that by our induction hypothesis we know that $$f'(z)$$ is a polynomial in $$z$$ of degree at most $$n-1$$, and thus $$f(z)$$ is a polynomial in $$z$$ of degree at most $$n$$.

Is this proof correct? My main concerns are the use of L'Hospital's Rule, for which there seems to be little information about its validity for complex valued functions. Searching around I could find the following link, but it deals with complex-valued functions of a real variable, rather than the more general complex-valued functions of a complex variable.

• The main problem with your appoach is that even though $f$ is not bounded, you can't conclude that $\lim_{z\to\infty} f(z) = \infty$. (In fact, that is only true for polynomials. Note for example that $f(z) = e^z$ is not bounded, but $\lim_{z\to\infty} e^z$ doesn't exist; not even as $\infty$.) – mrf Mar 7 '14 at 18:39
• @mrf, ah, I didn't realize how different the limits at infinity were of complex functions versus real functions. – Hayden Mar 7 '14 at 19:51

This exercise is solved using Cauchy's Integral Formula: $$f^{(m)}(0)=\frac{m!}{2\pi i}\int_{|z-z_0|}\frac{f(z)\,dz}{z^{m+1}}$$ and hence, for $m\ge n$: \begin{align} \lvert f^{(m)}(0)\rvert&=\frac{m!}{2\pi}\left|\int_{|z-z_0|=R}\frac{f(z)\,dz}{z^{m+1}}\right| \le \frac{m!}{2\pi}\cdot \frac{2\pi R}{R^{m+1}}\max_{|z|=R}\lvert f(z)\rvert =m!\frac{\max_{|z|=R}\lvert f(z)\rvert}{R^m}\\&= \frac{m!}{R^{m-n}}\frac{\max_{|z|=R}\lvert f(z)\rvert}{R^n}. \end{align} By hypothesis $$\lim_{R\to\infty}\frac{\max_{|z|=R}\lvert f(z)\rvert}{R^n}=0,$$ and thus $f^{(m)}(0)=0$, for all $m\ge 0$, which means that the power series of $f$ at $z=0$ is a finite sum missing all the terms higher than the $(n\!-\!1)$-th. Hence $f$ is polynomial of degree at most $n-1$.