COMPLEX ANALYSIS HOMEWORK 7

ATHARV SAMPATH

Exercise 5
𝑒 −2𝜋𝑖𝑧|𝜉|
Proof. Let 𝑓 (𝑧) = (1+𝑧 ) . Set the contour 𝛾 to be the semicircle with radius 𝑅 above the
2 2

𝑥-axis, i.e. 𝛾 = 𝛾1 ∪ 𝛾2 , where 𝛾1 = [−𝑅, 𝑅] and 𝛾2 = 𝑅𝑒 𝑖𝜃 , 𝜃 ∈ [0, 𝜋] Within 𝛾, there is a

double pole of 𝑓 at 𝑧 = 𝑖. By the residue theorem,
𝜋 2𝜋|𝜉|
∫ 𝑓 (𝑧)d𝑧 = 2𝜋𝑖 Res(𝑓 , 𝑖) = 2 (1 − 2𝜋|𝜉|)𝑒 .
𝛾
As 𝑅 → ∞,
| | 𝜋 −2𝜋𝑖𝑅𝑒 𝑖𝜃 |𝜉| 𝜋
| 𝑓 (𝑧)d𝑧 | ≤ 𝑒 𝑖𝑅𝑒 𝑖𝜃 𝑅𝑒 2𝜋|𝜉| sin 𝜃 𝜋𝑅𝑒 2𝜋|𝜉|
|∫ | ∫ 2 d𝜃 ≤ ∫ (𝑅2 − 1)2 ≤ → 0.
| 𝛾2 | 0 (1 + 𝑅2 𝑒 2𝑖𝜃 ) 0 (𝑅2 − 1)2
Therefore,
∞
𝑒 −2𝜋𝑖𝑥|𝜉| 𝜋 2𝜋|𝜉|
∫ (1 + 𝑥 2 )2 d𝑥 = 2 (1 − 2𝜋|𝜉|)𝑒
−∞
as desired. ■

Date: April 2023.

1
2 ATHARV SAMPATH

Exercise 7
Proof. Use the unit circle as the contour 𝛾. Then, we have
2𝜋
𝑑𝜃 1
∫ =∫ 𝑑𝜃
(𝑎 + cos 𝜃) 2
𝛾 (𝑎 + 𝑒 𝑖𝑡 𝑒 −𝑖𝑡 2
0
2
+ 2 )
𝑖𝜃
𝑧=𝑒
1
𝑑𝜃 = 𝑑𝑧
𝑖𝑧
1
∫ −1 2
𝑑𝑧
𝛾 𝑖𝑧 (𝑎 + 𝑧 + 𝑧 )
2 2
Which simplifies to:
4𝑧
∫ 𝑖 (𝑧 2 + 2𝑎𝑧 + 1)2 𝑑𝑧
𝛾
4𝑧
∫ √ 2 √ 2 𝑑𝑧
𝛾 𝑖 (𝑧 + 𝑎 + 𝑎 − 1) (𝑧 + 𝑎 − 𝑎2 − 1)
2

Has one pole inside√the contour. By the residue theorem, this integral is 2𝜋𝑖 times the
residue at 𝑧 = −𝑎 + 𝑎2 − 1 which is
𝑑 4𝑧
2𝜋𝑖 √
𝑑𝑧 𝑖 (𝑧 + 𝑎 + 𝑎2 − 1)2
√
evaluated at 𝑧 = −𝑎 + 𝑎2 − 1, which simplifies to
𝑖𝑎 2𝜋𝑎
−2𝜋𝑖 2 =
(𝑎 − 1)3/2 (𝑎2 − 1)3/2
as desired. ■
 COMPLEX ANALYSIS HOMEWORK 7 3

Exercise 8
Proof. Again using the unit circle as the contour 𝛾, we have
2𝜋
𝑑𝜃 𝑑𝑧 −2𝑖 2 𝑑𝑧
∫ =∫ 𝑏 1
=∫ 2
𝑑𝑧 = ∫ 2 2𝑎 .
0 𝑎 + 𝑏 cos 𝜃 𝛾 𝑖𝑧 (𝑎 + 2 (𝑧 + 𝑧 )) 𝛾 (𝑏 + 2𝑎𝑧 + 𝑏𝑧 ) 𝑖𝑏 𝛾 𝑧 + 𝑏 𝑧 + 1
√
2
The integrand has a simple pole inside 𝛾 at 𝑧 = − 𝑎𝑏 + 𝑎𝑏2 − 1 = 𝛼1 and a simple pole
√
2
outside 𝛾 at 𝑧 = − 𝑎𝑏 − 𝑎𝑏2 − 1 = 𝛼2 . However, the residue at 𝑧 = 𝛼1 is
1 𝑏
= √ 2 ,
𝛼1 − 𝛼2 2 𝑎 − 𝑏2
and therefore, by the residue theorem, the integral evaluates to
2 𝑏 2𝜋
2𝜋𝑖 √ =√ 2
( 𝑖𝑏 ) ( 2 𝑎2 − 𝑏2 ) 𝑎 − 𝑏2
as desired. ■
4 ATHARV SAMPATH

Exercise 13
Proof. If we multiply both sides by |𝑧 − 𝑧0 | we get
|(𝑧 − 𝑧0 )𝑓 (𝑧)| ≤ 𝐴|𝑧 − 𝑧0 |𝜖 .
Then, letting 𝑧 → 𝑧0 gives res𝑧0 𝑓 = 0, and by the residue theorem, the integral of 𝑓 (𝑧) over
𝐷𝑟 (𝑧0 ) vanishes, which implies that the analytic continuation of 𝑓 over a region containing
𝑧0 is holomorphic, which means that the singularity of 𝑓 at 𝑧0 is removable. ■
Exercise 14
Proof. Assume 𝑓 is an entire injective function. Then 𝑓 is nonconstant, so 𝑔(𝑧) ∶= 𝑓 (1/𝑧)
has either a pole or an essential singularity at 𝑧 = 0. We will show first that the singu-
larity at 0 cannot be an essential singularity. If it were an essential singularity, then the
Casorati-Weierstrass theorem would imply that the set 𝑔(𝐵(0, 1)\{0}) is dense in ℂ. How-
ever, for example, 𝑔 (𝐵 (2, 21 )) is an open set. Therefore these two sets intersect, which
shows that 𝑔(𝑧) and hence 𝑓 (𝑧) is not injective.

Therefore, the singularity at 𝑧 = 0 must be a pole, implying that 𝑓 (𝑧) is a polynomial.

Suppose 𝑓 (𝑧) is a polynomial of degree 𝑚. Then 𝑓 has 𝑚 roots, counting multiplicity.
Evidently, if 𝑓 has two distinct roots, then 𝑓 is not injective. Thus 𝑓 (𝑧) = 𝑐 (𝑧 − 𝑧0 )𝑚
for some complex numbers 𝑐 and 𝑧0 . However, for 𝑚 ≥ 2 such functions are also non-
injective: 𝑓 (𝑧0 + 1) = 𝑐 = 𝑓 (𝑧0 + 𝑒 2𝜋𝑖/𝑚 ). Thus 𝑚 = 1 and 𝑓 (𝑧) is a linear polynomial
(evidently 𝑐 ≠ 0 since 𝑓 is nonconstant). ■