<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<record version="7" id="669">
 <title>domain</title>
 <name>Domain2</name>
 <created>2001-11-04 21:49:10</created>
 <modified>2006-11-03 12:24:00</modified>
 <type>Definition</type>
 <creator id="3" name="drini"/>
 <author id="6075" name="rspuzio"/>
 <author id="3" name="drini"/>
 <author id="4430" name="archibal"/>
 <classification>
	<category scheme="msc" code="30-00"/>
 </classification>
 <related>
	<object name="Region"/>
	<object name="Topology"/>
	<object name="ComplexNumber"/>
	<object name="IntegralDomain"/>
 </related>
 <keywords>
	<term>Complex Analysis</term>
 </keywords>
 <preamble>\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{xypic}</preamble>
 <content>A connected non-empty open set in $\mathbb{C}^n$ is called a \emph{domain}.

The topology considered is the Euclidean one (viewing $\mathbb{C}$ as $\mathbb{R}^2$). So we have that for a domain $D$ being connected is equivalent to being path-connected.

Since we have that every component of a region $D$ will be a domain, we have that every region has at most countably many components.

This definition has no particular relationship to the notion of an \PMlinkname{integral domain}{IntegralDomain}, used in algebra.  In number theory, one sometimes talks about fundamental domains in the upper half-plane, these have a different definition and are not normally open.  In set theory, one often talks about the \PMlinkname{domain}{Function} of a function.  This is a separate concept.  However, when one is interested in complex analysis, it is often reasonable to consider only functions defined on connected open sets in $\mathbb{C}^n$, which we have called domains in this entry.  In this context, the two notions coincide.</content>
</record>
