$f$ is analytic in the unit disk such that $|f(1/n)|leq e^{-sqrt{n}}$. Prove that $f$ Is identically zero.












1














$f(z)$ is analytic in the unit disk such that $|f(1/n)|leq e^{-sqrt{n}}$ for $n=2,3,...$ Prove that $f$ Is identically equal to zero.



My Attempt:



Consider the Taylor expansion $$f(z)=f(0)+f'(0)+frac{f''(0)}{2!}+frac{f'''(0)}{3!}+...$$By Cauchy estimate, for some $r=frac{1}{n}$, we have $$frac{|f^{(k)}|}{k!}leqfrac{e^{-sqrt{n}}}{(1/n)^k}$$



As $nrightarrow infty$, for each $k$, we have $frac{|f^{(k)}|}{k!}=0$. Then, Taylor expansion suggests that $f(z)$ is identically zero.



I feel like I'm missing a lot of pieces. Any help or input is appreciated.










share|cite|improve this question
























  • You're not applying Cauchy's estimate correctly. The RHS of Cauchy's estimate involves a $sup_{|z| = r} |f(z)|$ term, not just $|f(r)|$.
    – mathworker21
    2 days ago
















1














$f(z)$ is analytic in the unit disk such that $|f(1/n)|leq e^{-sqrt{n}}$ for $n=2,3,...$ Prove that $f$ Is identically equal to zero.



My Attempt:



Consider the Taylor expansion $$f(z)=f(0)+f'(0)+frac{f''(0)}{2!}+frac{f'''(0)}{3!}+...$$By Cauchy estimate, for some $r=frac{1}{n}$, we have $$frac{|f^{(k)}|}{k!}leqfrac{e^{-sqrt{n}}}{(1/n)^k}$$



As $nrightarrow infty$, for each $k$, we have $frac{|f^{(k)}|}{k!}=0$. Then, Taylor expansion suggests that $f(z)$ is identically zero.



I feel like I'm missing a lot of pieces. Any help or input is appreciated.










share|cite|improve this question
























  • You're not applying Cauchy's estimate correctly. The RHS of Cauchy's estimate involves a $sup_{|z| = r} |f(z)|$ term, not just $|f(r)|$.
    – mathworker21
    2 days ago














1












1








1







$f(z)$ is analytic in the unit disk such that $|f(1/n)|leq e^{-sqrt{n}}$ for $n=2,3,...$ Prove that $f$ Is identically equal to zero.



My Attempt:



Consider the Taylor expansion $$f(z)=f(0)+f'(0)+frac{f''(0)}{2!}+frac{f'''(0)}{3!}+...$$By Cauchy estimate, for some $r=frac{1}{n}$, we have $$frac{|f^{(k)}|}{k!}leqfrac{e^{-sqrt{n}}}{(1/n)^k}$$



As $nrightarrow infty$, for each $k$, we have $frac{|f^{(k)}|}{k!}=0$. Then, Taylor expansion suggests that $f(z)$ is identically zero.



I feel like I'm missing a lot of pieces. Any help or input is appreciated.










share|cite|improve this question















$f(z)$ is analytic in the unit disk such that $|f(1/n)|leq e^{-sqrt{n}}$ for $n=2,3,...$ Prove that $f$ Is identically equal to zero.



My Attempt:



Consider the Taylor expansion $$f(z)=f(0)+f'(0)+frac{f''(0)}{2!}+frac{f'''(0)}{3!}+...$$By Cauchy estimate, for some $r=frac{1}{n}$, we have $$frac{|f^{(k)}|}{k!}leqfrac{e^{-sqrt{n}}}{(1/n)^k}$$



As $nrightarrow infty$, for each $k$, we have $frac{|f^{(k)}|}{k!}=0$. Then, Taylor expansion suggests that $f(z)$ is identically zero.



I feel like I'm missing a lot of pieces. Any help or input is appreciated.







complex-analysis analytic-functions






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 2 days ago









José Carlos Santos

152k22123226




152k22123226










asked 2 days ago









Ya GYa G

47629




47629












  • You're not applying Cauchy's estimate correctly. The RHS of Cauchy's estimate involves a $sup_{|z| = r} |f(z)|$ term, not just $|f(r)|$.
    – mathworker21
    2 days ago


















  • You're not applying Cauchy's estimate correctly. The RHS of Cauchy's estimate involves a $sup_{|z| = r} |f(z)|$ term, not just $|f(r)|$.
    – mathworker21
    2 days ago
















You're not applying Cauchy's estimate correctly. The RHS of Cauchy's estimate involves a $sup_{|z| = r} |f(z)|$ term, not just $|f(r)|$.
– mathworker21
2 days ago




You're not applying Cauchy's estimate correctly. The RHS of Cauchy's estimate involves a $sup_{|z| = r} |f(z)|$ term, not just $|f(r)|$.
– mathworker21
2 days ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















3














I don't know what you mean when you write “for some $r=frac1n$”.



It follows from the squeeze theorem that $lim_{ntoinfty}fleft(frac1nright)=0$. So, unless $f$ is the null function, the Taylor series of $f$ about $0$ will be of the type$$f(z)=a_kz^k+a_{k+1}z^{k+1}+cdots$$with $kinmathbb N$ and $a_kneq0$. So $left(leftlvert fleft(frac1nright)rightrvertright)_{ninmathbb N}$ behaves as $frac{lvert a_krvert}{n^k}$. But $left(e^{-sqrt n}right)_{ninmathbb N}$ goes to $0$ much faster than that:$$lim_{ntoinfty}frac{frac{lvert a_krvert}{n^k}}{e^{-sqrt n}}=lvert a_krvertlim_{ntoinfty}frac{e^{sqrt n}}{n^k}=infty.$$






share|cite|improve this answer























  • I'm just curious about the last line. What's the purpose of that in the proof? How does showing the ratio diverges show that $f$ is identically zero?
    – Ya G
    2 days ago










  • I assumed that $f$ is not the null function. Then I reached a contradiction (that final limit shouldn't be $infty$). Therefore, $f$ is the null function.
    – José Carlos Santos
    2 days ago










  • @JoséCarlosSantos Nobody is saying $f$ behaves as $e^{-sqrt{n}}$, just that $f$ decays quicker than it. The inequalities implicit in your proof work in your favor though, so all is fine.
    – mathworker21
    2 days ago










  • @mathworker21 You are right. I've edited my answer. I hope that everything is correct now.
    – José Carlos Santos
    2 days ago










  • @JoséCarlosSantos I think you mean "with $k in mathbb{N}$ and $a_k not = 0$"
    – mathworker21
    2 days ago











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3062782%2ff-is-analytic-in-the-unit-disk-such-that-f1-n-leq-e-sqrtn-prove-t%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









3














I don't know what you mean when you write “for some $r=frac1n$”.



It follows from the squeeze theorem that $lim_{ntoinfty}fleft(frac1nright)=0$. So, unless $f$ is the null function, the Taylor series of $f$ about $0$ will be of the type$$f(z)=a_kz^k+a_{k+1}z^{k+1}+cdots$$with $kinmathbb N$ and $a_kneq0$. So $left(leftlvert fleft(frac1nright)rightrvertright)_{ninmathbb N}$ behaves as $frac{lvert a_krvert}{n^k}$. But $left(e^{-sqrt n}right)_{ninmathbb N}$ goes to $0$ much faster than that:$$lim_{ntoinfty}frac{frac{lvert a_krvert}{n^k}}{e^{-sqrt n}}=lvert a_krvertlim_{ntoinfty}frac{e^{sqrt n}}{n^k}=infty.$$






share|cite|improve this answer























  • I'm just curious about the last line. What's the purpose of that in the proof? How does showing the ratio diverges show that $f$ is identically zero?
    – Ya G
    2 days ago










  • I assumed that $f$ is not the null function. Then I reached a contradiction (that final limit shouldn't be $infty$). Therefore, $f$ is the null function.
    – José Carlos Santos
    2 days ago










  • @JoséCarlosSantos Nobody is saying $f$ behaves as $e^{-sqrt{n}}$, just that $f$ decays quicker than it. The inequalities implicit in your proof work in your favor though, so all is fine.
    – mathworker21
    2 days ago










  • @mathworker21 You are right. I've edited my answer. I hope that everything is correct now.
    – José Carlos Santos
    2 days ago










  • @JoséCarlosSantos I think you mean "with $k in mathbb{N}$ and $a_k not = 0$"
    – mathworker21
    2 days ago
















3














I don't know what you mean when you write “for some $r=frac1n$”.



It follows from the squeeze theorem that $lim_{ntoinfty}fleft(frac1nright)=0$. So, unless $f$ is the null function, the Taylor series of $f$ about $0$ will be of the type$$f(z)=a_kz^k+a_{k+1}z^{k+1}+cdots$$with $kinmathbb N$ and $a_kneq0$. So $left(leftlvert fleft(frac1nright)rightrvertright)_{ninmathbb N}$ behaves as $frac{lvert a_krvert}{n^k}$. But $left(e^{-sqrt n}right)_{ninmathbb N}$ goes to $0$ much faster than that:$$lim_{ntoinfty}frac{frac{lvert a_krvert}{n^k}}{e^{-sqrt n}}=lvert a_krvertlim_{ntoinfty}frac{e^{sqrt n}}{n^k}=infty.$$






share|cite|improve this answer























  • I'm just curious about the last line. What's the purpose of that in the proof? How does showing the ratio diverges show that $f$ is identically zero?
    – Ya G
    2 days ago










  • I assumed that $f$ is not the null function. Then I reached a contradiction (that final limit shouldn't be $infty$). Therefore, $f$ is the null function.
    – José Carlos Santos
    2 days ago










  • @JoséCarlosSantos Nobody is saying $f$ behaves as $e^{-sqrt{n}}$, just that $f$ decays quicker than it. The inequalities implicit in your proof work in your favor though, so all is fine.
    – mathworker21
    2 days ago










  • @mathworker21 You are right. I've edited my answer. I hope that everything is correct now.
    – José Carlos Santos
    2 days ago










  • @JoséCarlosSantos I think you mean "with $k in mathbb{N}$ and $a_k not = 0$"
    – mathworker21
    2 days ago














3












3








3






I don't know what you mean when you write “for some $r=frac1n$”.



It follows from the squeeze theorem that $lim_{ntoinfty}fleft(frac1nright)=0$. So, unless $f$ is the null function, the Taylor series of $f$ about $0$ will be of the type$$f(z)=a_kz^k+a_{k+1}z^{k+1}+cdots$$with $kinmathbb N$ and $a_kneq0$. So $left(leftlvert fleft(frac1nright)rightrvertright)_{ninmathbb N}$ behaves as $frac{lvert a_krvert}{n^k}$. But $left(e^{-sqrt n}right)_{ninmathbb N}$ goes to $0$ much faster than that:$$lim_{ntoinfty}frac{frac{lvert a_krvert}{n^k}}{e^{-sqrt n}}=lvert a_krvertlim_{ntoinfty}frac{e^{sqrt n}}{n^k}=infty.$$






share|cite|improve this answer














I don't know what you mean when you write “for some $r=frac1n$”.



It follows from the squeeze theorem that $lim_{ntoinfty}fleft(frac1nright)=0$. So, unless $f$ is the null function, the Taylor series of $f$ about $0$ will be of the type$$f(z)=a_kz^k+a_{k+1}z^{k+1}+cdots$$with $kinmathbb N$ and $a_kneq0$. So $left(leftlvert fleft(frac1nright)rightrvertright)_{ninmathbb N}$ behaves as $frac{lvert a_krvert}{n^k}$. But $left(e^{-sqrt n}right)_{ninmathbb N}$ goes to $0$ much faster than that:$$lim_{ntoinfty}frac{frac{lvert a_krvert}{n^k}}{e^{-sqrt n}}=lvert a_krvertlim_{ntoinfty}frac{e^{sqrt n}}{n^k}=infty.$$







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited 2 days ago

























answered 2 days ago









José Carlos SantosJosé Carlos Santos

152k22123226




152k22123226












  • I'm just curious about the last line. What's the purpose of that in the proof? How does showing the ratio diverges show that $f$ is identically zero?
    – Ya G
    2 days ago










  • I assumed that $f$ is not the null function. Then I reached a contradiction (that final limit shouldn't be $infty$). Therefore, $f$ is the null function.
    – José Carlos Santos
    2 days ago










  • @JoséCarlosSantos Nobody is saying $f$ behaves as $e^{-sqrt{n}}$, just that $f$ decays quicker than it. The inequalities implicit in your proof work in your favor though, so all is fine.
    – mathworker21
    2 days ago










  • @mathworker21 You are right. I've edited my answer. I hope that everything is correct now.
    – José Carlos Santos
    2 days ago










  • @JoséCarlosSantos I think you mean "with $k in mathbb{N}$ and $a_k not = 0$"
    – mathworker21
    2 days ago


















  • I'm just curious about the last line. What's the purpose of that in the proof? How does showing the ratio diverges show that $f$ is identically zero?
    – Ya G
    2 days ago










  • I assumed that $f$ is not the null function. Then I reached a contradiction (that final limit shouldn't be $infty$). Therefore, $f$ is the null function.
    – José Carlos Santos
    2 days ago










  • @JoséCarlosSantos Nobody is saying $f$ behaves as $e^{-sqrt{n}}$, just that $f$ decays quicker than it. The inequalities implicit in your proof work in your favor though, so all is fine.
    – mathworker21
    2 days ago










  • @mathworker21 You are right. I've edited my answer. I hope that everything is correct now.
    – José Carlos Santos
    2 days ago










  • @JoséCarlosSantos I think you mean "with $k in mathbb{N}$ and $a_k not = 0$"
    – mathworker21
    2 days ago
















I'm just curious about the last line. What's the purpose of that in the proof? How does showing the ratio diverges show that $f$ is identically zero?
– Ya G
2 days ago




I'm just curious about the last line. What's the purpose of that in the proof? How does showing the ratio diverges show that $f$ is identically zero?
– Ya G
2 days ago












I assumed that $f$ is not the null function. Then I reached a contradiction (that final limit shouldn't be $infty$). Therefore, $f$ is the null function.
– José Carlos Santos
2 days ago




I assumed that $f$ is not the null function. Then I reached a contradiction (that final limit shouldn't be $infty$). Therefore, $f$ is the null function.
– José Carlos Santos
2 days ago












@JoséCarlosSantos Nobody is saying $f$ behaves as $e^{-sqrt{n}}$, just that $f$ decays quicker than it. The inequalities implicit in your proof work in your favor though, so all is fine.
– mathworker21
2 days ago




@JoséCarlosSantos Nobody is saying $f$ behaves as $e^{-sqrt{n}}$, just that $f$ decays quicker than it. The inequalities implicit in your proof work in your favor though, so all is fine.
– mathworker21
2 days ago












@mathworker21 You are right. I've edited my answer. I hope that everything is correct now.
– José Carlos Santos
2 days ago




@mathworker21 You are right. I've edited my answer. I hope that everything is correct now.
– José Carlos Santos
2 days ago












@JoséCarlosSantos I think you mean "with $k in mathbb{N}$ and $a_k not = 0$"
– mathworker21
2 days ago




@JoséCarlosSantos I think you mean "with $k in mathbb{N}$ and $a_k not = 0$"
– mathworker21
2 days ago


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3062782%2ff-is-analytic-in-the-unit-disk-such-that-f1-n-leq-e-sqrtn-prove-t%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Mario Kart Wii

The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth/Afterbirth

What does “Dominus providebit” mean?