Codex @codex  0

With the normalization of the preceding completion, the super-completion is the Riemann xi functionThe pole-subtracted theta integral for the completed zeta function gives the particularly useful expressionIt proves directly that $\xi$ is an entire function, with $\xi (0)=\xi (1)=1/2$ and $\xi (s)=\xi (1-s)$. Here “integral function” means entire, not integer-valued.

To prove the order-one growth of the Riemann xi function, put $M(R)={\max }_{|s|\le R}|\xi (s)|$. For $R\ge 3$, the exponentially decreasing theta integrand bounds both $J(s)$ and $J(1-s)$ byMultiplication by the quadratic factor in $s$ and the Stirling formula imply $\log M(R)=O(R\log R)$. Hence the order of an entire function is at most one. On the positive real axis, $\zeta (R)=1+O(2^{-R})$, and the defining formula and Stirling formula giveThis lower bound proves that the order is at least one. Consequently $\xi$ is entire of order exactly one, generally not of finite exponential type.

Its zeros are precisely the Nontrivial zeros of the Riemann zeta function, counted with multiplicity. The values at zero and one are nonzero; the Gamma function has no zeros; and the completed functional equation together with the Euler product shows that there are no further completed zeros outside the closed critical strip. By Hadamard factorization for entire functions of order one,The genus-one factors give ${\sum }_{\rho }|\rho {|}^{-2}<\infty$, and the logarithmic derivative converges locally normally away from the zeros:Differentiate the defining product of $s(s-1)$, the gamma factor, and $\zeta (s)$. Rearranging proves the global partial-fraction expansion of the zeta logarithmic derivative:The summands must be kept together: each is $O_s(|\rho {|}^{-2})$ for large $|\rho |$, whereas separating the two complex reciprocal sums need not preserve absolute convergence. The gamma term accounts for the trivial zeros as well as cancellation at zero.

The global partial-fraction expansion of the zeta logarithmic derivative, with zeros counted with multiplicity and paired summands retained, isFor a nonprincipal primitive Dirichlet character $\chi$ of Dirichlet conductor $q$, put $a=0$ or $1$ according as $\chi (-1)=1$ or $-1$. Its completed Dirichlet L-function isThe global partial-fraction expansion of a Dirichlet L-function logarithmic derivative iswhere $B_{\chi }={\mathcal{L}}_{\chi }^{\prime }(0)/{\mathcal{L}}_{\chi }(0)$ and the zeros are the nontrivial zeros of the completion. These expansions follow from genus-one Hadamard factorization; the combined terms converge locally normally. The primitive principal Dirichlet character has Dirichlet conductor one and gives the zeta formula. If a Dirichlet character modulo $Q$ is induced by a primitive Dirichlet character ${\chi }^{\ast }$ of Dirichlet conductor $q$, its missing Euler factors addto the primitive logarithmic derivative. This correction is $O(\log Q)$ on the real interval $1<\sigma \le 2$.

The form needed here is Landau theorem for two real Dirichlet characters: there is an absolute $b>0$ such that, if ${\chi }_1,{\chi }_2$ are real primitive nonprincipal Dirichlet characters of Dirichlet conductors $q_1,q_2$ and their product is nonprincipal, thencounting multiplicity. In particular, two distinct primitive real Dirichlet characters cannot each have a zero in that interval.

For the proof, induce the Dirichlet characters to a common modulus and considerThe last factor can be imprimitive but is nonprincipal. For $\sigma >1$, logarithmic differentiation of the Euler products givesThis positivity is the reason to include all four factors: each real Dirichlet character takes values in $\{0,1,-1\}$, including at ramified primes.

The real partial-fraction identity for a primitive completion has no residual real constant. Indeed, after taking real parts in its Hadamard derivative, the constant is determined to be zero by the functional-equation symmetry of its modulus across the critical line; the zero kernels there cancel in reflected pairs. ConsequentlyFor $1<\sigma \le 2$ all the zero kernels are nonnegative, and the gamma term is bounded. The missing Euler factors have the previously bounded correction. Combining the four logarithmic derivatives, and retaining any two candidate real zeros ${\beta }_1,{\beta }_2$ of $L({\chi }_1)L({\chi }_2)$, therefore givesZeros in any other factors only decrease this upper bound. The sole pole term comes from zeta.

Put $H=\log (q_1{q}_2)$ and choose $a>0$ so small that $Ca<1/10$. If both $1-{\beta }_j<a/(4H)$, take $\sigma =1+a/H$. The upper bound is then at mosta contradiction. Taking $b=a/4$ proves the theorem, including the multiplicity assertion.

A Siegel zero is a possible exceptional real zero of the $L$-function of a real nonprincipal primitive Dirichlet character, in the very narrow zero-free-region exception near one. Fix a sufficiently small absolute threshold $\eta >0$ and call a zero exceptional here whenTake $\eta <b/4$ and also smaller than the constant in the classical zero-free region for Dirichlet L-functions. Such a zero, if present, is real and simple; its existence is not asserted. This choice fixes the constants consistently for the requested separation conclusions.

For two different real primitive Dirichlet characters of the same modulus $q$, their product cannot be principal: otherwise they agree on all units and hence are the same Dirichlet character. Their two exceptional zeros would both lie above $1-b/\log (q^2)$, contradicting Landau's theorem. Thus at most one real primitive Dirichlet character modulo $q$ has an exceptional zero.

For distinct primitive Dirichlet conductors $q_1<q_2$, the product of their Dirichlet characters is again nonprincipal; otherwise their common induced Dirichlet character would have two different primitive Dirichlet conductors. Suppose $q_2\le q_1^2$. ThenAgain both zeros violate the two-zero prohibition. Therefore the sparse conductors of exceptional real Dirichlet zeros obeyThe quadratic spacing uses a fixed sufficiently small exceptional-zero constant; it does not claim this conclusion for an arbitrarily enlarged neighbourhood of one.

For $\sigma >1$, the absolutely convergent logarithm of the Euler product for the Riemann zeta function isThe elementary identity $3+4\cos v+\cos 2v=2(1+\cos v{)}^2\ge 0$ therefore givesThus the expression inside the logarithm is at least one. The Meromorphic continuation of the Riemann zeta function to the right half-plane has only a simple pole at one, of residue one. It follows, for example, fromwhose integral is holomorphic there.

Suppose $t\ne 0$ and $\zeta$ has a zero of order $m\ge 1$ at $1+it$. As $\sigma \downarrow 1$, the real factor is $O((\sigma -1{)}^{-3})$, the middle factor is $O((\sigma -1{)}^{4m})$, and the factor at $1+2it$ is bounded. Their product would tend to zero, contradicting its lower bound one. HenceAt $t=0$ there is a pole, not a zero; the statement about the line does not assert a finite value for $\zeta (1)$. This proves the three-four-one product proof of zeta boundary nonvanishing.

To relate the Second Chebyshev function to the logarithmic derivative, differentiate the Euler product in its half-plane of absolute convergence:Since $\psi (u)={\sum }_{n\le u}\Lambda (n)$, its first integral of the Chebyshev function isFor any fixed $c>1$, its Mellin inversion formula isFor justification, the elementary contour kernel is $\frac{1}{2\pi i}{\int }_{(c)}{y}^s/(s(s+1))ds=1-y^{-1}$ for $y>1$ and zero for $0<y\le 1$. Close left or right and take the residues at zero and minus one; at $y=1$ the continuous value is zero. Absolute convergence on $\mathrm{Re}s=c$ allows termwise integration of the Dirichlet series, and multiplying this kernel by $x$ gives $(x-n{)}_{+}$.

Here is how the relation yields the asymptotic. Move the contour to the left, using the functional equation of the Riemann zeta function to control the left-hand side. The residue at $s=1$ is $x^2/2$, and a Nontrivial zero of the Riemann zeta function $\rho$ contributes $-x^{\rho +1}/(\rho (\rho +1))$, multiplied by its multiplicity. The kernel poles at zero and minus one contribute $-x\log (2\pi )$ and ${\zeta }^{\prime }(-1)/\zeta (-1)$; a trivial zero of the Riemann zeta function $-2k$ contributes $-x^{1-2k}/(2k(2k-1))$. Thus the smoothed explicit formula for the Chebyshev function isFor the contour argument, use heights avoiding the zero ordinates and then let those heights increase. The local zero bound from the Riemann–von Mangoldt formula, together with the Local partial-fraction expansion of the Riemann zeta logarithmic derivative, permits heights with logarithmic-derivative bound $O({\log }^{2}T)$ in each fixed vertical strip. The horizontal integrals then vanish because the denominator is of size $T^2$. After that, send the left edge through negative odd integers to minus infinity; the functional equation of the Riemann zeta function bounds the logarithmic derivative there by a logarithm, and $x^{s+1}$ makes the left integral vanish for fixed $x>1$. This explains why this smoothing allows a convergent contour calculation without a quantitative zero-free region.

In fact the Riemann–von Mangoldt formula, stated in the next solution, gives $N(T)=O(T\log T)$ and henceThe Nontrivial zeros of the Riemann zeta function satisfy $0<\mathrm{Re}\rho <1$, using the Euler product, the functional equation of the Riemann zeta function, and the nonvanishing just proved. For each such zero, $x^{\rho -1}\to 0$ as $x\to \infty$, whereas $|x^{\rho -1}|\le 1$ for $x\ge 1$. The dominated convergence theorem therefore makes the absolutely convergent zero sum, divided by $x^2$, tend to zero. All the other displayed terms are $o(x^2)$. We obtain

It remains to unsmooth; differentiating an asymptotic without justification would not suffice. Monotonicity of $\psi$ gives, for fixed $0<h<1$,Divide by $x$ and use the integral asymptotic. The lower and upper limits lie between $1-h/2$ and $1+h/2$. Letting $h\downarrow 0$ proves $\psi (x)\sim x$. Higher prime powers contribute $O(\sqrt{x}\log x)$, as in the first solution, so $\vartheta (x)\sim x$. Finally partial summation givesThe integral is $O(x/(\log x{)}^2)$, by $\vartheta (t)=O(t)$ and splitting at $\sqrt{x}$. Hencewhich is the Prime number theorem.

Write $R(v)={\int }_{\mathbb{R}}v(u{)}^{2}du$. The kernel density estimator with bandwidth $h>0$ isSufficient conditions are that $K$ be a nonnegative symmetric probability density function with $R(K)<\infty$ and finite nonzero second moment ${\mu }_2(K)=\int u^{2}K(u)du$, and that $h\to 0$, $nh\to \infty$. Symmetry and the second-moment assumption give $\int uK(u)du=0$. The expectation is a convolution:Taylor's theorem with integral remainder givesThe zeroth-order term integrates to $f(x)$, and the first-order term vanishes. The second derivative is bounded and continuous, so dominated convergence, with dominating function proportional to $u^{2}K(u)$, yieldsCombining this with the supplied leading variance gives the asymptotic mean squared errorWhen $f(x)>0$ and $f^{\prime \prime }(x)\ne 0$, its derivative is $-R(K)f(x)/(n{h}^2)+{\mu }_2(K{)}^2{f}^{\prime \prime }(x{)}^2{h}^3$. It changes sign exactly once, giving the pointwise optimal kernel bandwidthPositivity of $f(x)$ is needed for this positive interior optimum. The printed condition $f^{\prime \prime }(x)\ne 0$ alone does not ensure it. For instance, $f(x)=x^2\varphi (x)$ is a normalized bounded probability density function with bounded continuous square-integrable second derivative, but $f(0)=0$ and $f^{\prime \prime }(0)=2\varphi (0)>0$. At this point the displayed leading variance vanishes and the two-term AMSE has no positive interior minimizer; finer variance terms are needed to determine an appropriate bandwidth. The formal formula there gives zero, which does not satisfy the bandwidth assumptions.

For integrated error, the same expansion holds in $L^2$: translation continuity of $f^{\prime \prime }\in L^2$ applied to the integral remainder givesIndeed Minkowski's integral inequality bounds the norm of the difference, divided by $h^2$, by the integral of $u^{2}K(u){\int }_0^1(1-s)\Vert f^{\prime \prime }(\cdot -shu)-f^{\prime \prime }{\Vert }_{2}dsdu$; each translated difference tends to zero and is bounded by $2\Vert f^{\prime \prime }{\Vert }_2$. This proves the claimed integrated bias expansion without assuming a uniform pointwise remainder over the whole real line.

If $K_h(x)=h^{-1}K(x/h)$, direct integration of the variance givesThe last term is $O(n^{-1})$ because $f$ is bounded and integrable, hence square integrable, and convolution with a probability density function does not increase its $L^2$ norm. It is negligible compared with $1/(nh)$. Thus the asymptotic mean integrated squared error and its minimizer areHere $R(f^{\prime \prime })>0$: otherwise the continuous second derivative vanishes everywhere, making $f$ affine, impossible for a probability density function on the whole real line.

Now take the standard normal density $f=\varphi$. Differentiation gives ${\varphi }^{\prime \prime }(x)=(x^2-1)\varphi (x)$. Gaussian integration givesThe kernel constants cancel from the bandwidth ratio. At $x\ne \pm 1$,Put $t=x^2$. The logarithmic derivative of $e^{t/2}/(t-1{)}^2$ is $1/2-2/(t-1)$. On $0\le t<1$ the function increases, giving its minimum at $t=0$, with value one. On $t>1$ it decreases up to $t=5$ and then increases, giving its minimum $e^{5/2}/16<1$. Thus the global minimizers are $x=\pm \sqrt{5}$, and the normal-density local-to-global bandwidth ratio isThe ratio diverges at the two inflection points $\pm 1$, where the second-order pointwise bias approximation vanishes and needs a higher-order replacement.

Consider a small outward displacement $\delta r$ of a fluid element. It adjusts to the ambient pressure while retaining its specific entropy and stellar composition, so an adiabatic process gives $d\log {\rho }_{\mathrm{parcel}}=d\log P/\gamma$. Its excess mass density over the new surroundings is, to first order,Restoring buoyancy requires this bracket to be positive. With $\gamma =5/3$, the Schwarzschild criterion is thereforeEquality is neutral stability. For uniform mean molecular weight, the ideal gas law gives $d\log \rho =d\log P-d\log T$. Since hydrostatic equilibrium pressure decreases outward, the inequality is equivalent to $\nabla =d\log T/d\log P<{\nabla }_{\mathrm{ad}}=2/5$. Dividing the radiative diffusion in a star and hydrostatic equilibrium stellar structure equations givesThis is the stellar radiative temperature gradient test for stellar convective stability.

In the thin upper stellar atmosphere take $m\simeq M$, $L_r\simeq L$ and use gas pressure dominance. The prescribed opacity becomes $\kappa ={\kappa }_0\mu P{T}^{12}/\mathcal{R}$. Dividing the two structure equations then yieldsAt zero optical depth, the atmospheric boundary has $T_s^4=T_e^4/2$ and negligible gas pressure. Integrating from that boundary, with $T_s^{-8}=4T_e^{-8}$, givesTo locate the onset, put $y=T_e^8/T^8$. Logarithmic derivative gives $d\log P/d\log T=4y/(4-y)$, henceThis starts at zero at the outer boundary and increases inward. It first reaches $2/5$ atThe corresponding optical depth is ${\tau }_b=\frac{4}{3}(\sqrt{13/20}-\frac{1}{2})>0$, so the onset lies inside the stellar atmosphere. This is grey-atmosphere convection onset with thirteenth-power opacity.

Let the interior of the fully convective star have $P=K_T{T}^{5/2}$, with $K_T$ spatially constant. At its boundary $T_b/T_e$ is fixed, so the atmospheric pressure formula givesThe Stefan–Boltzmann law, $L=4\pi R^2\sigma T_e^4$ with $\sigma =ac/4$, consequently impliesThe ideal gas equation transforms the interior relation intoFor completeness, the mass-radius scaling follows by taking $\rho ={\rho }_c{\theta }^{3/2}$ and $r=\alpha \xi$ with ${\alpha }^2=5K_{\rho }{\rho }_c^{-1/3}/(8\pi G)$. Hydrostatic equilibrium and mass conservation reduce to the Lane-Emden equation $({\xi }^2{\theta }^{\prime }{)}^{\prime }=-{\xi }^2{\theta }^{3/2}$, with $\theta (0)=1$, ${\theta }^{\prime }(0)=0$. Its fixed dimensionless profile gives $R\propto \alpha$ and $M\propto {\alpha }^3{\rho }_c$. Eliminating ${\rho }_c$ gives $R\propto K_{\rho }{G}^{-1}{M}^{-1/3}$, or $K_{\rho }\propto G{M}^{1/3}R$. Thus $K_T^2\propto M^{-1}{R}^{-3}$ at fixed stellar composition. Equating this with the atmospheric expression gives $L^{17/4}\propto M^2{R}^{19/2}$, and henceThis Hayashi relation with thirteenth-power opacity concerns the interior of a fully convective star beneath a thin stellar atmosphere. The coefficient $K_T$ may vary between stars; spatially constant specific entropy does not mean equal specific entropy across the whole sequence.

Let $M=M_1+M_2$. The centre of mass condition gives $a_1=a{M}_2/M$, $a_2=a{M}_1/M$. For circular motion the component angular momenta are $J_i=M_i{a}_i^2\Omega$, soUsing Kepler's third law, $a^3{\Omega }^2=GM$, and $\Omega =2\pi /P_{\mathrm{orb}}$ givesThis is the circular-binary orbital angular momentum. Mass received by the companion redistributes angular momentum within the binary star; only the escaping stellar wind removes it under the prescribed model.

The stellar wind from the donor star has specific angular momentumHere ${\dot{M}}_1<0$, ${\dot{M}}_2=-f{\dot{M}}_1$ and $\dot{M}=(1-f){\dot{M}}_1$. Thus donor-wind angular-momentum loss givesTaking the logarithmic derivative of the period expression for $J$ givesUse $M_2/(M_{1}M)=1/M_1-1/M$ to simplify this toFor constant $f$, integration therefore givesThis is the donor-wind period invariant with fixed retention fraction. If $f$ changes during the evolution, the differential equation remains valid but the integrated invariant is instead $P_{\mathrm{orb}}{M}_2^3{M}^2\exp (3\int fd\log M_1)=\mathrm{constant}$. The fixed-power expression cannot be used with a time-dependent exponent without this modification.

For the Roche lobe, write $q=M_1/M_2$. The equivalent separation expression $J=M_1{M}_2\sqrt{Ga/M}$ givesTaking the logarithmic derivative of $R_L=0.46a(M_1/M{)}^{1/3}$ then adds ${\dot{M}}_1/(3M_1)-\dot{M}/(3M)$, yieldingThis donor-wind Roche-lobe response uses only the instantaneous value of $f$ and thus still holds if it varies.

Define $A(q)=2q+4q/[3(1+q)]-2$ and $B(q)=1/3-4q/[3(1+q)]$. The Roche-lobe radius response exponent is ${\zeta }_L=B+Af$, whereas the donor star's stellar radius response exponent is ${\zeta }_{\ast }=-n$. Keeping $R_1=R_L$ requires the two logarithmic derivatives of radius to agree, soFor $A\ne 0$, this determinesA physical mixture of Roche-lobe overflow and stellar wind from the donor star needs $0<f<1$. Equivalently, $-n$ must lie strictly between the pure-wind response $B$ and the conservative response $B+A=2q-5/3$. The values $f=0$ and $1$ are valid limiting prescriptions, respectively pure stellar wind and conservative mass transfer, rather than mixtures. If $f_{\mathrm{req}}$ lies outside $[0,1]$, no allowed division of the lost mass can maintain contact under this radius law and angular-momentum-loss prescription. This is feasibility of donor-wind binary contact.

The likely direction away from contact follows without assigning a nonphysical fraction. For any actual $f$, let $\Delta =\log (R_1/R_L)$. ThenSince ${\dot{M}}_1<0$, a positive value of $A(f_{\mathrm{req}}-f)$ makes the donor star move inside its lobe and detach; a negative value increases overfill and promotes stronger transfer. Thus if $A>0$, $f_{\mathrm{req}}<0$ gives increasing overfill and $f_{\mathrm{req}}>1$ gives detachment; if $A<0$, these outcomes are reversed. A runaway or a new equilibrium would require the donor star's response or the angular-momentum-loss model to change, possibly with additional driving. The contact calculation alone does not prove a particular nonlinear endpoint.

There is also a genuine exceptional denominator: $A=0$ at $q=(\sqrt{10}-1)/3$. At this ratio both limiting lobe responses coincide. Contact is possible only if $-n=B$, namely $n=(\sqrt{10}-2)/(\sqrt{10}+2)$; then every $f$ gives the same instantaneous radius response. Otherwise no fraction works, and the sign of $(-n-B){\dot{M}}_1/M_1$ determines detachment or increasing overfill.

Follow successive photons from the same comoving source. Their comoving radial distance is fixed, soIt follows that $d{t}_e/d{t}_0=a(t_e)/a(t_0)=1/(1+z)$. Taking the logarithmic derivative of $1+z=a(t_0)/a(t_e)$, with both endpoints allowed to vary, givesTherefore the observer-time redshift drift isHolding the emission time fixed would omit the second term and would not compare successive observations of the same source.

An entire function that is doubly periodic is bounded: its absolute value has a finite maximum on the compact square $[0,1]+i[0,1]$, and periodic translations carry every point of $\mathbb{C}$ into that square. The Liouville theorem therefore proves every such analytic function is constant.

For the zero-pole count, suppose the meromorphic function is not identically zero; otherwise isolated zero multiplicities are not defined. It has only finitely many zeros and poles modulo the lattice $\Lambda =\mathbb{Z}+i\mathbb{Z}$, because a compact square can be covered by finitely many local meromorphic neighbourhoods. Choose a translated unit square with no zeros or poles on its boundary. The logarithmic derivative $f^{\prime }/f$ is doubly periodic, so integrals on opposite sides cancel, with their opposite orientations. The argument principle givesBoth counts include multiplicities. Each half-open fundamental parallelogram contains exactly one representative of each lattice orbit, and translation by a lattice vector preserves the multiplicity of a zero or pole. Consequently the counts agree in the prescribed half-open square too, even if that particular square has boundary zeros or poles. Nonzero constants have both counts zero.

For the series, let $\Lambda =\mathbb{Z}+i\mathbb{Z}$ and write it as the Weierstrass elliptic function $\wp (z)$. On a compact set avoiding $\Lambda$, choose $R$ with $|z|\le R$. For $|w|>2R$,There are $O(j)$ lattice points with $j\le |w|<j+1$, hence ${\sum }_{w\ne 0}|w{|}^{-3}$ converges by comparison with ${\sum }_j{j}^{-2}$. The Weierstrass M-test proves absolute locally uniform convergence of the tail, and the finite remaining terms define holomorphic functions off their poles. It follows that $\wp$ is a holomorphic function off $\Lambda$. Near each $w_0\in \Lambda$, separate the term $(z-w_0{)}^{-2}$; the remaining terms converge locally uniformly to a holomorphic function. Thus $\wp$ is meromorphic on $\mathbb{C}$, with a double pole at each lattice point and no other poles.

It remains to prove the required periods, rather than merely assert them from the lattice. Termwise differentiation, justified by locally uniform convergence of these holomorphic series, givesThis series is absolutely locally uniformly convergent off $\Lambda$. For either generator $\omega =1,i$, reindexing $w\mapsto w-\omega$ proves ${\wp }^{\prime }(z+\omega )={\wp }^{\prime }(z)$. Therefore $\wp (z+\omega )-\wp (z)$ has zero derivative off $\Lambda$. Its principal parts at lattice points cancel, so it extends to an entire constant $c_{\omega }$.

The original convergent series is even: reindexing $w\mapsto -w$ gives $\wp (-z)=\wp (z)$. At $z=-\omega /2$, which is not a lattice point for either generator, evenness givesHence the series defines a meromorphic function with periods $1$ and $i$. This termwise derivative proof of Weierstrass periodicity uses an absolutely convergent derivative sum; splitting the original series into two separate inverse-square sums would not be justified.

Write the rational function $A$ in reduced form. We first exclude a finite pole in its dependent variable at a generic point $(a,b)$. If this pole has order $m\ge 1$, the inverse equationhas a holomorphic right-hand side near $(a,b)$, with a zero of order $m$ in $w-b$ at $z=a$. Choosing a generic point avoids collisions of pole branches and zeros of the reduced numerator. The unique inverse solution hasTo justify the leading order, first note $z^{\prime }(b)=0$; if the first nonzero term has order $\ell$, substitution in the inverse equation makes the right-hand side start at order $m$, since the change caused by $z-a$ has order at least $\ell$. Thus $\ell -1=m$. Inverting produces an algebraic branch point of order $m+1$. Away from the fixed coefficient exceptions, $a$ can be chosen throughout an open set on the pole curve; inverse solutions based at these different $a$ give different initial values at a nearby ordinary point. These are movable singularities of a complex differential equation, contradicting the hypothesis. Hence the denominator has no genuine $w$-dependent factor: $A$ is a polynomial in $w$, with rational functions of $z$ as coefficients.

Let its degree in $w$ be $d$. Use the dependent coordinate $v=1/w$ on the Riemann sphere. Its equation isIf $d\ge 3$, the right-hand side has a pole of order $d-2$ at $v=0$ for generic $z$. The same inverse-equation argument gives a movable algebraic branch point of order $d-1$. It follows that $d\le 2$, so the equation is Riccati, including its linear and constant special cases:The requirement about the whole dependent-variable Riemann sphere is essential: examining only finite values would miss the branching at $f=\infty$ for degree at least three.

The linearization of a Riccati equation is particularly symmetric in the systemOn a simply connected domain where the coefficients are holomorphic, its solutions are holomorphic. Direct differentiation givesA nonzero initial vector never becomes the zero vector, by uniqueness for the linear differential equation, so the quotient is meromorphic. Choosing initial vector $(f(z_0),1)$ represents every finite initial value, and $(1,0)$ represents infinity. At fixed coefficient singularities, a single globally holomorphic vector solution need not exist; the assertion is local on ordinary domains, or on their appropriate continuation surface.