Argument principle

From Companal
Revision as of 20:34, 19 April 2008 by Vipul (talk | contribs) (New page: ==Statement== Suppose <math>U \subset \mathbb{C}</math> is an open subset and <math>c</math> is a 0-homologous cycle in <math>U</math>. Suppose <math>f</math> is a [[meromorphic function]...)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Statement

Suppose UC is an open subset and c is a 0-homologous cycle in U. Suppose f is a meromorphic function on U such that no zero or pole of f lies in U. Then we have:

n(fc;0)=ord(zj)n(c;zj)

Where the sum is taken over all zeros/poles zj for f and ord(zj) is the unique integer n such that (zzj)nf(z) has neither a zero nor a pole at zj.

Equivalently, we can write this as:

n(fc;0)=n(c;zj)n(c;zj)

where the first summation is for zeros, counted with multiplicity, and the second summation is for poles, counted with multiplicity.