PlanetMath: Nevanlinna theory

(more info)

Math for the people, by the people.

Main Menu

sections Encyclopædia
Papers
Books
Expositions

meta Requests (230)
Orphanage
Unclass'd
Unproven (514)
Corrections (23)
Classification

talkback Polls
Forums
Feedback
Bug Reports

downloads Snapshots
PM Book

information News
Docs
Wiki
ChangeLog
TODO List
Legalese
About

Entry average rating: No information on entry rating

Nevanlinna theory

(Topic)

Nevanlinna theory deals with quantitative aspects of entire holomorphic mappings into complex varieties. Let $\omega=i\sum_{j,k}\omega_{jk}\,dz_j\wedge d\overline z_k$ be a smooth -form on a complex manifold . Suppose that $\omega$ is positive definite, i.e. the Hermitian matrix $(\omega_{jk}(z))$ is positive definite at every point. Thus $\omega$ can be viewed as a Hermitian metric on the tangent bundle .

If $f\colon\mathbb{C}\to X$ is an entire curve, the growth indicatrix of is the function

$\displaystyle T_{f,\omega}(r)=\int_{r_0}^rt_{f,\omega}(\rho)\,\frac{d\varrho}\varrho,$

where

$\displaystyle t_{f,\omega}(\varrho)=\int_{D(0,\varrho)}f^*\omega.$

It is clear that $t_{f,\omega}(\varrho)$ is nothing more than the area with respect to $\omega$ of the image $f(D(0,\varrho))$ of the disk in the complex line centered at 0 and of ray $\varrho$ . Now let

be an ample holomorphic line bundle over

(compact, connected). Then

carries an Hermitian metric

with positive curvature $\omega=\Theta_h(L)$ and so, in this case, one can suppose that our $\omega$ is in fact the curvature of this line bundle. Furthermore, it is clear that if one is merely interested in the order of growth $O(T_{f,\omega}(r))$ when

goes to infinity, then this order is independent of the choice of $\omega$ .

Let us consider an hypersurface $H=\{\sigma=0\}\subset X$ defined by a global section of : one would like to “ measure” the intersections of the entire curve $f\colon\mathbb{C}\to X$ with . For this purpose one looks at the holomorphic function $\sigma\circ f\colon\mathbb{C}\to L$ and introduces the enumerating of zeros function

$\displaystyle N_{f,\sigma}(r)=\int_{r_0}^rn_{f,\sigma}(\varrho)\,\frac{d\varrho}\varrho,$

where $n_{f,\sigma}(\varrho)=$ number of zeros of $\sigma\circ f$ on $D(0,\varrho)$ counted with multiplicities. Finally one introduces the function $m_{f,\sigma}$ , called proximity function, defined by

$\displaystyle m_{f,\sigma}(r)=\frac 1{2\pi}\int_0^{2\pi}\log\frac 1{\Vert(\sigma\circ f)(re^{i\vartheta})\Vert _h}\,d\vartheta.$

This function is non negative, once one has normalized $\sigma$ with a constant in such a way that $\Vert\sigma\Vert _h\le 1$ . Morally, $m_{f,\sigma}(r)$ is bigger and bigger when

often goes near $H=\{\sigma=0\}$ on the circle of ray

The first fundamental theorem of Nevanlinna states the following:

Let be an Hermitian line bundle with curvature form $\omega=\Theta_h(L)>0$ . For all section $\sigma$ of and all curve $f\colon\mathbb{C}\to X$ such that $f(\mathbb{C})$ is not entirely contained in the hypersurface $H=\{\sigma=0\}$ , one has

$\displaystyle m_{f,\sigma}(r)+N_{f,\sigma}(r)=T_{f,\omega}(r)+O(1).$

In particular, the order of growth of the left hand side when $r\to\infty$ does not depend on the choice of $\sigma$ , but only on the growth indicatrix of .

Classically, one introduces the defect of with respect to $H=\{\sigma=0\}$ , defined by

$\displaystyle \delta_\sigma(f)=\liminf_{r\to\infty}\frac{m_{f,\sigma}(r)}{T_{f,\omega}(r)}\in[0,1].$

In particular, the defect is equal to

if $\sigma\circ f$ is never zero, and equal to 0 if the enumerating of zeros function $N_{f,\sigma}(r)$ grows as much as possible. One of the most important results of Nevanlinna theory concerns the entire curves which map into the Riemann sphere $\mathbb{P}^1$ and states that the sum of defects $\sum_{a\in\mathbb{P}^1}\delta_a(f)$ is at most equal to

. One of the essential steps for the proof of this statement is an estimate of the proximity function of the logarithmic derivative of a meromorphic function.

More precisely the following logarithmic derivative lemma holds:

Let $f\colon\mathbb{C}\to\mathbb{P}^1$ be a meromorphic function and $D^p\log f$ the -th logarithmic derivative of . Then, for all $\varepsilon>0$ , there exists a set of finite Lebesgue measure in $\mathbb{R}_+$ such that

$\displaystyle m_{D^p\log f,\infty}(r)\le(p+1+\varepsilon)(\log r+\log_+T_{f,\omega}(r))+O(1),\quad\forall r\in\mathbb{R}_+\setminus E.$

An important consequence of the logarithmic derivative lemma is what is called the second fundamental theorem of Nevanlinna from which it follows immediately the estimate for the sum of the defects introduced above:

Let $f\colon\mathbb{C}\to\mathbb{P}^1$ be a meromorphic function. Define the ramification divisor of as the sum $\sum e_j[w_j]$ where the 's are the points where is zero and the 's are the multiplicities of zero of at (where $f(w_j)=\infty$ one looks at instead of ). Then, for all finite set $\{a_j\}\subset\mathbb{P}^1$ , there exists a subset $E\subset\mathbb{R}_+$ of finite Lebesgue measure such that

$\displaystyle N_{R_f}(r)+\sum_j m_{f,a_j}(r)\le 2T_{f,\omega}(r)+O(\log r+\log_+T_{f,\omega}(r)),\quad\forall r\in\mathbb{R}_+\setminus E,$

where $N_{R_f}(r)=\int_{r_0}^rn_{R_f}(\varrho)\,d\varrho/\varrho$ is the enumerating function of the ramification divisor.

Bibliography

J.-P. Demailly, Variétés projectives hyperboliques et équations différentielles algébriques. (French) $\lbrack$ Hyperbolic projective varieties and algebraic differential equations $\rbrack$ Journée en l'Honneur de Henri Cartan, 3-17, SMF Journ. Annu., 1997, Soc. Math. France, Paris, 1997.

Anyone with an account can edit this entry. Please help improve it!

"Nevanlinna theory" is owned by Simone. [ full author list (3) ]

(view preamble | get metadata)