Closed discrete subset 2026-10-14
In a plane domain, a closed discrete subset is exactly a set meeting every compact subset in finitely many points. This local finiteness is necessary for a nonzero holomorphic function to have the subset as its entire zero set. A merely isolated-point subset can have an accumulation point outside the subset but inside the domain, as does.
// Destination: analysis.bigb
Enumerate all intervals with rational endpoints, using the countability of the rational numbers and listing pairs of enumeration indices by increasing sum. If every point of is an isolated point, some such interval contains and no other point of . Assign to the least index of such an interval. Distinct points cannot have the same index, so this gives an injective function into and proves that is a countable set. The argument uses isolation in the subspace topology, not closedness: the discrete subset illustrates that an accumulation point outside is allowed.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2006 iii Paper 10 2 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
The zero-prescription claim requires a closed discrete subset, meaning no accumulation in . If “discrete” means only that each listed point is isolated, it is false: is a discrete subset, but any holomorphic function vanishing there is identically zero by the identity theorem for holomorphic functions, and then has additional zeros. In the usual zero-set interpretation, discreteness includes local finiteness. We prove the claim with this necessary interpretation.
First choose an increasing compact exhaustion of by relatively filled sets: every component of meets . Such an exhaustion is obtained by exhausting with finite unions of small closed squares lying in , then adding all complementary components relatively compact in . The filled sets remain compact in : a complementary component containing a point within distance of the complement could join that complement through a ball disjoint from , and hence would not be filled. Their boundedness follows by using a disk containing the initial compact. Nesting can be ensured by enlarging each stage first. This is also the geometric description of the holomorphic convex hull proved below.
A finite prescribed set is realized by a finite product of linear factors. For an infinite closed discrete subset, enumerate the distinct points as . Every compact contains only finitely many of them, so there are indices with . Finitely many initial factors can be handled without an approximation requirement. For the remaining factors, let be the complementary component containing . It also contains a point or infinity. Join to by an arc in that component, or to infinity by a ray-like arc. DefineEach is a holomorphic function on , has exactly one simple zero, at , and no other zeros there.
The arc is disjoint from , and has a holomorphic logarithm near that compact. To justify the logarithm, any closed curve avoiding the arc has equal winding numbers about its finite endpoints, so the integral of around it is zero. For a ray to infinity the winding number about is zero. A primitive of , adjusted by a constant on each component, supplies the logarithm.
The Runge theorem proved in Question 4 approximates uniformly on by : all needed finite poles can be chosen outside because every complementary component meets its complement. Choose the error small enough thatEach still has exactly the simple zero . On every fixed compact, all sufficiently late factors satisfy the summable bound above. Hence their infinite product converges locally uniformly. It has a nonzero tail because, once , its logarithmic tails satisfy and converge absolutely. Thus multiplying by the finitely many earlier factors gives a holomorphic function with precisely the prescribed zeros, and no additional zeros. Repeating a factor to any prescribed finite positive multiplicity gives the corresponding multiplicity version. This is prescribed zeros in a plane domain via Runge approximation, not an invocation of the existence theorem being asked for.
For the specified infinite product, put . On any compact annulus ,The logarithmic-tail estimate therefore proves locally uniform convergence on and nonvanishing wherever no individual factor vanishes. At a zero of one factor, the product is zero and the remaining product converges to a nonzero value. ConsequentlyAll these zeros are simple and distinct: their moduli distinguish the two strings and their indices. At the reciprocal factors are undefined, so the given expression has no convergence value there. The infinite sequence of zeros tending to zero also rules out continuation across that point as a holomorphic function.
Set . Absolute local convergence allows reindexing:Since , for every . No division by a vanishing factor is involved, so the identity also holds at all the zeros.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2010 ia Paper 4 8E Solution Created 2026-09-24 Updated 2026-10-14
A set is countable if it admits an injective function into , equivalently if it is finite or can be listed in a sequence. The empty set is included; an infinite countable set has a bijection with .
Every rational number has a representation with and . For each , there are only finitely many such pairs with . List these finite levels successively, ordering each level by , and discard repeated fractions when they first recur. Every rational number appears in some finite level, proving .
For the uncountability proof, suppose all numbers in could be listed as . Choose each decimal expansion not to end in an infinite string of nines, and denote its th digit by . Set when , and otherwise. Then the decimaldefines a number in with a unique such expansion, since its digits are only and . It differs from at digit for every , contradicting the enumeration. This Cantor diagonal argument proves because its subset already is.
For the union of two countable sets , take injective functions and . The mapis injective: it is injective within each branch, and their images have different parity. Thus , regardless of overlap.
The property of says that both and its complement are dense subsets of the real line. Both possible cardinalities occur. To establish the needed density directly, given and , choose an integer . Then is rational and differs from by less than . For an irrational approximation, choose a rational within of and a positive integer large enough that . The number is irrational and lies within of ; irrationality follows from that of , since otherwise subtracting and multiplying by would make rational. To recall the latter fact, a reduced fraction would satisfy , forcing even and then even, contrary to coprimality. ThereforeThe second set is uncountable because, if it were countable, its union with would make countable. The same two density arguments give the required approximations from and from its complement in either example.
Finally, the condition on makes every one of its points an isolated point, so is a discrete subset of the real line. Enumerate all rational intervals with ; enumerate pairs of indices of the rational list by increasing sum and keep those whose endpoints have the required order. For each , its isolating neighbourhood contains a rational interval containing and no other point of . Assign to the least such index . Two distinct points cannot receive the same index, because that interval would then contain two members of . This gives an injective function and proves that discrete subsets of the real line are countable:Using the least index makes the assignment explicit and requires no arbitrary selection of an uncountable family of intervals.