Kompl Analiza 2

See
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275771203
Kompleksna analiza 2
BOOK JANUARY 2013
READS
64
1 AUTHOR:
Miodrag Mateljevi
University of Belgrade
134 PUBLICATIONS 828 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Available from: Miodrag Mateljevi

Retrieved on: 05 March 2016
Miodrag Mateljevi
KOMPLEKSNA ANALIZA 2
Kompleksna integracija, Analiticke funkcije, Konformna

preslikavanja, Ekstremalna qc preslikavanja
complex integration and analytic function, conformal mappings,
Extremal qc mappings
Beograd, 2012
Recenzenti
prof. dr Milo Arsenovi
prof. dr Dobrilo Toi
docent Vladimir Boin
Redaktor
prof. dr Dobrilo Toi
Urednik
prof. dr. Ljubomir Proti
Za izdavaa
dr Miloljub Albijani,
direktor i glavni urednik
Katalogizacija u publikaciji
Narodna biblioteka Srbije, Beograd
xx (xxx.x)
MATEEVI, MIODRAG, 1949-
CIP -
Kompleksna analiza 2
Miodrag Mateljevi 1. izd.Beograd: Zavod za udbenike, 2012 (Beograd: xxxxxxxxxx).
- xxx str. : graf. prikazi; xx cm
Tira xxxx.
ISBN xxx-xx-xx-xxxxx-x
COBISS.SR-ID xxxxxxxxx
ISBN XXX-XX-xx-xxxxx-x
c ZAVOD ZA UDBENIKE, Beograd 2012.
Ovo delo se ne sme umnoavati, fotokopirati i na bilo koji nain reprodukovati,

ni u celini, a ni u delovima, bez pismenog odobrenja izdavaa.
PREDGOVOR
Godine 2006. izala je iz tampe moja knjiga Kompleksne funkcije

1&2 (KA1-2,[1] ), u izdanju Drutva matematiara Srbije. Na inicijativu
italaca i Zavoda za udbenike prihvatio sam predlog da se ta knjiga rediguje
i podeli na dve knjige. Ovo je druga knjiga koja sadri sledee glave:
1. Dodatak B (holomorfne funkcije 2),
2. Osnovi geometrijske teorije.,
3. SCHWARZ LEMMA AND HYPERBOLIC METRICS, DISTORTION
OF CONFORMAL MAPPING AND CARATHODORY THEOREM.,
4. Extremal qc mappings smooth Jordan domains.
Glave 4 sadri originalne radove potpisanog (i njegovih koautora) i namenjene su da budu inspiracija za dalja istraivanja.
Ova knjiga je prvenstveno namenjena studentima Matematikih fakulteta koji sluaju predmet Kompleksna analiza, zatim studentima Fizikih
i Tehnikih fakulteta. Poznato je da materija, izloena u ovoj knjizi, ima
iroku primenu u prirodnim naukama.
U glavama 1 i 2, koje su uvodnog karaktera, italac e esto naii na dva
simbola: znai da se tekst moe izostaviti u prvom itanju; znai da
se tekst moe izostaviti u prvom itanju jer se dokazi sastoje iz sloenijih ili
apstraktnijih elemenata.
U glavama 1 i 2 ove knjige se pominju mnogi pojmovi iz knjige Kompleksna analiza 1 za koju je uvedena skraenica Ka 1.
Veliki doprinos su dali recenzenti profesori Milo Arsenovi i Vladimir
Boin. U ostvarenju ove knjige autoru su pruili veliku pomo dr Miloljub
Albijani (direktor Zavoda za udbenike i glavni inicijator), zatim profesor
Dobrilo Tosi (recenzent, redaktor i korektor) i moji asistenti Marek Svetlik
i Miljan Kneevi. M. Vuorinen,Riku Kln i Xiaohui Zhang dali su korisne
sugestije u vezi glave 3, koje su popravile izlaganje.
Glave 1 i 2 sa redigovane i sa malim izmena preuzete iz KA1-2,[1], tako
da su doprinos dali i recenzenti KA1-2 profesori Stevan Pilipovi, Mirko
Budinevi i Miroljub Jevti recenzenti autorove knjige .
Moja supruga Anelka i nae erke Nataa and Jelena pokazali su veliko
strplljenje u toku pisanja ove knjige.
itaoci mogu na veb strani autora http://www.matf.bg.ac.sr/ miodrag
nai neobjavljene autorove rukopise koji se citiraju u ovoj knjizi. Unapred
se zahvaljujem na svim predlozima i primedbama italaca.
Autor se duboko zahvaljuje pomenutim osobama.
4
U Beogradu, decembra 2011.
Miodrag Mateljevi
SADRAJ
Oznake i formule
1 FUNDAMENTALS OF GEOMETRIC THEORY

1.1
1.2
1.3
Geometric principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.1.1 The argument principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.1.2 The Open Mapping theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.1.3 The maximum modulus principle; The Schwarz's lemma
The Riemann's theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.2.1 Conformal isomorphism and automorphism . . . . . .
1.2.2 The Compactness principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.2.3 The Reimann's theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Correspondence of domains, boundaries and the symmetry
principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.3.1 Correspondence of boundaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.3.2 The Symmetry principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.3.3 Miscellaneous tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2 EXTREMAL QC MAPPINGS
1
2
3
4
5
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . .
Beltrami equation and Absolute
Integral transforms . . . . . . . .
Green's Formula . . . . . . . . .
Absolutely Continuous Functions .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
Continuity on Lines
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
Solutions of the Beltrami equation . . . . . . . . . . . .
New version of the Main Inequality . . . . . . . . . .
Extremal qc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.1
Compact surfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.2
New constructions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
12
12
12
24
29
35
35
38
41
46
46
49
55
65
65
73
84
85
89
90
92
101
112
138
151
References
152
Literatura
159
Indeks
160
5
OZNAKE I FORMULE
z = x + iy, w = u + iv Kompleksan broj
p
|z| = x2 + y 2 modul kompleksnog broja
S = S2 sfera
B = B(a; r) krug sa sreditem u taki a poluprenika r
B0 = B0 (a; r) probuen krug
K = K(a; r)] krunica sa sreditem u taki a poluprenika r
K = Kr = Kr (a) orijentisana krunica
C = C r = Cr (a) orijentisana polukrunica
Tr , Ur specijalno, krunica (respektvno krug) sa sreditem u koordinatnom poetku
T jedinina krunica
T = T \ {ei }
U jedinini krug
Ba ili Ua ] krug sa sreditem u a
ER = {z C : |z| > R} spoljanjost kruga
E = {z : |z| > 1} spoljanjost jedininog kruga
e euklidsko rastojanje
sferno rastojanje
H = H + gornja poluravan
H donja poluravan
+ desna poluravan
leva poluravan
Z = p(z) stereografska projekcija
limza f (z) granina vrednost
f 0 izvod
df diferencijal, linearni operator
H() klasa holomorfnih funkcija na
` linearni operator
h0 = g 0 (f (z))f 0 (z) izvod kompozicije h = g f
[z, w] segment
Oznake i formule
cis t = cos t + i sin t = eit

R+ = {x : x > 0}
R = {x : x < 0}
C = C \ {0}
arg grana argumenta arg
z = rcis trigonometrijski oblik kompleksnog broja
I = [0, 1] interval
I = (, + 2]
e = exp eksponencijalna funkcija
cos, sin trigonometrijske funkcije kosinus i sinus
z = rei polarna forma kompleksnog broja
= {ei : 0 < < +} poluprava
O = C \ oblast
= {z : < y < + 2} pojas
k = {z : + 2k < y < + 2(k + 1)}]
J = (, + 2) interval
Jk = ( + 2k, + 2(k + 1))
Arg vieznana funkcija argument
arg grana argumenta
Ln vieznana funkcija logaritam
ln glavna grana logaritma
lnk grana logaritma na O , sa vrednostima u k
argk grana argumenta, na O , sa vrednostima u Jk
argk = Im lnk imaginarni deo logaritma je argument
ln0k = J izvod logaritma je kompleksna inverzija
Ako je 0 < 2 pogodno je umesto = {rei : 0 < r < +, < < }
pisati kratko = { < < }
I = I = I f =
f dz kompleksni integral du konture
kontura deo po deo gladak put

luk deo po deo neprekidno-diferencijabilan put
G konturna oblast
pozitivno orijentisana granica
D elementarna oblast
Oznake i formule
A() klasa regularno-analitikih funkcija na

put
trag puta
= f kompozicija funkcije i puta
1
f = Df = (fx ify )
2
1
f = Df = (fx + ify )
2
0
KIT Koijeva integralna teorema o izvodu
Grel Oy Grinova teorema za elementarne Oy oblasti
OGrT Kompleksna verzija opte Grinove teoreme
OKITa Opta Koijeva integralna teorema za analitike funkcije
LKJRepA Lema o reprodukciji
M
|ck | k Koijeva nejednakost
TK Go1 Teorema Koi-Goursa

KIT Koijeva integralna teorema za trougao
KIT1 Koijeva integralna teorema za trougao sa isputenom takom
f (z) = K [f ](z) Opta Koijeva integralna formula za konturne oblasti
1
K(z, ) =
Koijevo jezgro
z
1
Ka (z) =
Koijevo jezgro
za
J ; J = K0 kompleksna inverzija
1 R
K [h](z) =
K(z, )h()d Koijeva transformacija
2i
Specijalno ako je h 1 piemo K ili Ind umesto K [h]
K z ili Ind z = Ind (z) Indeks zatvorenog puta u odnosu na z

n z ili n = n(, z) = n (z) broj obilazaka zatvorenog puta u odnosu na z
V = V(a, b; r, R) = {z : |z a| > r, |z b| < R} prsten
A = A(a; r, R) pravilan prsten
ili F primitivna za f , F 0 = f
1
f ()( a)k1
fk () = fk (, a) =
2i
R
ck = ck [] = ck [, f ] = fk ()d
f = F1 + f1 F1 glavni deo, f1 regularni deo Loranovog reda
Oznake i formule
F = f = f J
Res(f, a) rezidum funkcije f u taki a
Res(f, a) = c1
Res(f, a) =
(a)
gde je f = / , 0 (a) 6= 0
0 (a)
Ako funkcija f ima pol reda n u taki a, koristimo oznake
= (z a)n f i
=
(n1)
(n 1)!
Res(f, a) = c1 = (a)
f0
Ln Res(f, a) = Res
, a Logaritamski rezidum
f
Res(f, )] rezidum funkcije f u taki
Res(f, ) = c1 rezidum funkcije f u taki
S suma reziduma
S + suma reziduma u H
N = Nh = N(h, G) broj nula funkcije h u oblasti G
P = Ph = P(h, G)] broj polova funkcije h u oblasti G
P
R=
racionalna funkcija
Q
O() Ojlerov integral
R x1
O () = v.p.
vrednosti)
1x
dx = ctg() Ojlerov integral druge vrste (u smislu glavne
B = B(p, q) Beta funkcija

Id ili E identiko preslikavanje
1 R f0
I = I[f ] = I [f ] =
dz Logaritamski rezidum u odnosu na konturu
2i f
R f0
J = J[f ] = J [f ] =
dz
f
Arg promena argumenta du puta
Arg f promena argumenta funkcije f du puta
1
Arg Princip argumenta
N P =
2
M b M kompaktno pripada
10
Oznake i formule
C = { + < < + }, O = O
Ako je a = |a|ei 6= 0, pogodno je, respektivno, pisati a , Oa i Ca umesto ,
O i C
Sa f i g obino oznaavamo, respektivno, glavnu granu korena i logaritma
na O (odnosno C )
1
1+
i
, B = A1
B() =
i+
1
w = Z(z) = (z + z 1 ) Funkcija ukovskog
2
p
z = Z 1 (w) = w + (w2 1) Inverzna funkcija funkcije ukovskog
A() = i
Rz = iz , R1 = i
sin = Z R1 e R
Arcsin = R1 Ln R11 Z 1
Arcsin z = i Ln(iz + 1 z 2 )
cos = Z e R
Arccos z = i Ln(z +
z 2 1)
tg = A e R2 , R2 z = 2iz
1
iz
Arctg z =
Ln
2i
i+z
1
J ili J , J = Kompleksna inverzija
ctg = J tg
Arcctg = (Arc tg) J
B1 = B J = J B
1
z+i
Arcctg z =
Ln
2i
zi
F = (Ua , fa ) kanonski element
Ft = (Bt , ft ) kruni analitiki element
Ft = (t , ft ) analitiki element
Za konturne oblasti koristi se i naziv deo po deo regularne (ponekad kratko
regularne)
KA Kompleksna Analiza
RA Realna Analiza
PF Polarna Forma
JTF Jedinost Trigonometrijske Forme
Sadraj
JPF Jedinost Polarne Forme
EPF Jednakost Polarnih Formi
PMM Princip Maksimuma Modula
KIT Koijeva Integralna Teorema
OKIT Opta Koijeva Integralna Teorema
KIF Koijeva Integralna Formula
POOb Princip ouvanja oblasti
PKOb Princip korespodencije oblasti
LHP Lema holomorfnost proirenja
PKG Princip korespodencije granica
LPS Lema Princip Simetrije
L Min Lema minimuma
P Min Princip Minimuma Modula
P Ind Princip Indeksa
P Arg Princip Argumenta
C-R uslovi Koi-Rimanovi uslovi
11
GLAVA 1
FUNDAMENTALS OF GEOMETRIC THEORY

1.1 GEOMETRIC PRINCIPLES
1.1.1 The argument principle
Logarithmic residue
Let a function f be holomorphic on the punctured neighborhood
B 0 = {0 < |z a| < r}
of the point a C and f has no zeros in B 0 .
Denicija 1.1. Logarithmic residue of a function f in the point a C is

the residue of logarithmic derivative
f 0 (z)
= (Ln f (z))0
f (z)
(1.1)
of function f in the point a.

Let Log Resa f be logarithmic residue of a function f in the point a, i.e.
Log Res(f, a) = Log Resa f = Resa
f0
.
f
Function f may have a logarithmic residue that is dierent from zero

(in the zeros of f as well), except in isolated singular points (?? which are
unique).
Let us repeat: let a function f be holomorphic on the punctured neighborhood
B 0 = {0 < |z a| < r}
of the point a C and f has no zeros in B 0 . Let us consider some additional
assumptions:
1. function f is holomorphic in the point a and f (a) = 0, or
2. f has pole in the point a.
12
13
1. Further, let a C be the zero of order n of function f . It follows that
f (z) = (z a)n (z),

holds in some neighborhood V = Va , where is a holomorphic function with
no zeros in Va . Since we have
f 0 (z) = n(z a)n1 (z) + (z a)n 0 (z),

it follows that
f0
n
0
=
+ .
f
za
(1.2)
From this expression, we conclude the following: in a zero of order n the

logarithmic derivative of function f has a pole of the rst order with residue
n. In other words, the logarithmic residue in a zero is equal to the order of
that zero.
2. If point a is a pole of function f of order m 1, then in some
neighborhood V of the point a we have
f (z) = (z a)m (z),

where is a holomorphic function with no zeros in V . As in the case of
zero, we obtain
m
0
f0
=
+ ,
f
za
and further
Log Resa f = m.
It means that logarithmic residue is a pole equal to the order of that
pole, but with dierent sign.
It is convenient to regard the statements function f has pole of order
n 1 in the point a and function f has zero (in general sense) of order
n in point a as having the same meaning.
Lema 1.1 (Log Res). If a function f has a zero of order n Z in point

a C, then
Log Resa f = Resa
f0
= n.
f
(1.3)
From now on we will count each zero or pole of a function is as many

times as its order is.
14
Fundamentals of Geometric Theory
Denicija 1.2. Function f , which has no other singularities except its poles
in domain , is called a meromorphic function on .
Teorema 1.1 (Logarithmic

X residue regarding the contour, number
of zeros and poles, T Log Res). Let G be a regular domain, f a
meromorphic function on G and suppose that G contains no zeros or poles
of the function f .
If N and P respectively denote total number of zeros and poles of the
function f in G, then
Z 0
1
f
I = If =
dz = N P,
(1.4)
2i
f
where is the positively oriented boundary of the domain G.
Dokaz. Since f in G has only nite number of zeros, a1 , . . . , an and nite
number of poles, b1 , . . . , bm , and G contains neither zeros nor poles, funcf0

is holomorphic on domain G\{a1 , . . . , an , b1 , . . . , bm }. Therefore,
tion g =
f
by the fundamental Residue theorem, we have:
1
2i
j=1
j=1
X
X
f0
dz =
Resaj g +
Resbj g.
f
(1.5)
Considering the Lemma 1.1,

Resaj g = nj ,
Resbj g = pj
(1.6)
hold, where nj and pj are respectively the order of zero aj and pole bj .
By replacing (1.6) in (1.5), and by using the convention for calculating
zeros and poles, we have
X
X
N=
nj and P =
pj
, which further gives (1.4).
If we use the more general concept of zero (which takes into account both
zeros and poles), this proof can be given a more compact form. Namely, the
function f has nite number of zeros (in general sense): c1 , . . . , cs . By the
Lemma 1.1 (Log Res), we have Rescj g = kj , where kj is the order of zero
cj . Furthermore, by applying the fundamental Residue theorem, we obtain
15
1
2i
where k =
s
P
j=1
X
f0
dz =
Rescj g = k,
f
j=1
kj is the total number of zeros (in general sense).
Rouch's theorem
It is convenient to introduce the following notation::
Z 0
h
1
Ih = I [h] =
dz,
2i
h
when the integral exists. If h is meromorphic function in a domain G, by
Nh = N (h, G) and Ph = P (h, G)

we denote the number of zeros and poles of the function h on G.
Teorema 1.2 (Rouch). Let us assume that G is a regular domain and let
be a positively oriented boundary of the domain G. We assume that the
following conditions hold:
(a) f and g are holomorphic on G,
(b) |g(z)| < |f (z)|,
z G.
If h = f +g , then h and f have equal number of zeros in G, i.e. Nh = Nf .
Dokaz. Since
|h(z)| |f (z)| |g(z)|,
z G,
holds, From (b)it follows

that functions f and h have no zeros on G.
g
Since h = f 1 +
, it is convenient to introduce notation:
f
g
= , =1+
f
and to represent h as h = f . From (f )0 = f 0 + f 0 , we obtain Ih =
If = If + I , where integrals are calculated with respect to . Therefore,
from the Theorem 1.1 (Log Res), regarding the contour and the number of
zeros, it follows that
Nh = Nf + I .
Finally, the proof of the theorem follows from the next Lemma (see also
the Corollary 1.2 of the Lemma 1.3).
16
Lema 1.2. I = I () = 0.
Dokaz. From the assumption (b), we have:
|(z) 1| = |(z)| < 1,
z G
and, therefore, maps G to B = B(1; 1) + . Since on + there exists a

branch ln of a non-injective function Ln, function ln is primitive function
0
of
in some neighborhood of the contour . By the Theorem of CIT, it
follows that
Z
1
I =
(ln )0 dz = 0.
2
2i
Notice that the Lemma 1.3, Proposition 1.1, Corollary 1.2 and the Theorem 1.3 (that will be proved further in the text) may be considered as
generalizations of this Lemma.
According to the the Theorem 1.1, from the Lemma 1.2 we have the
equality n = p . In the next example, for the unit disc U , function has
the following properties :
1. (T ) + ,
2. has four zeros and four poles in U .
Primer 1. Determine the number of zeros of the function

h(z) = z 9 6z 4 + 3z 1 in U .
Rezultat. Let
Then,
f (z) = 6z 4
h = f + g,
and g(z) = z 9 + 3z 1.
|f (z)| = 6,
|g(z)| 5,
z T.
According to the Rouch's theorem, function h has four zeros in U . It follows that
h(z)
(z) =
is meromorphic in U ,
f (z)
N = 4,
P = 4
and I = N P = 0.
Note. The Rouch's theorem is also applied on multiply connected domains;
see Subsection 1.3.3 for an illustrative example (Rouch's statement and the
Mihajlov's lemma, Task 3).
Veba 1.1.1. In the proof of the Rouch's Theorem 1.2 (Rouch), it is showed that
(G) + .
a. If is holomorphic function on G, prove that (G) + holds.
b. Does (G) + hold in general sense?
17
Rezultat. The answer is NO in general sense. More precisely, b. holds i is

holomorphic function on G.
The Fundamental theorem of algebra

If n is positive integer and P (z) = z n + an1 z n1 + + a1 z + a0 , where
a0 , . . . , an1 are complex numbers, then P has at least one zero in the complex
plane.
Uputstvo. If p1 (z) = an1 z n1 + + a1 z + a0 , then P (z) = z n + p1 (z)
holds and there exists an R such that |z|n > |P1 (z)| on the disc boundary
TR . Function f (z) = z n has zero of the n-th order in the point 0. Therefore,
according to Rouch's theorem, polynomial P has exactly n zeros in the disc
UR .
4
The Argument Principle

Lema 1.3 (Integral of logarithmic derivative, Int Log0loc ). Suppose
that following conditions hold:

(a) f is holomorphic on a domain and has no zeros on the contour
that lies in the domain ;
(b) the trace of contour = f lies in a domain O - the plane without
rays starting from the origin of coordinate system.
Then, the equality
Z
f0
dz = ln f (b) ln f (a),
f
J=
(1.7)
holds, where a = (0), b = (1) and ln = logarithm branch in O.
Posledica 1.1. If the conditions of the Lemma 1.3 are satised and the
contour is closed, we have :
J = 0.
The proof of the Lemma 1.3. Notice that in O there exist branches arg
and ln such that arg = Im ln.

Since equality
(ln f )0 =
f0
f
na
18
holds, we further obtain
Z
J=
f0
dz =
f
Z
(ln f )0 dz,
and therefore, by recalling the complex version of the Newton-Leibinz formula (the Fundamental theorem of the Integral Calculus), we have:
b
J = ln f a = ln f (b) ln f (a).
Remember that Arg f denotes the increment of the function f along
the contour , i.e. the value of expression arg f (b) arg f (a). Now we are
able to re-write (1.7) in the form:
J = ln |f (b)| ln |f (a)| + i Arg f,

which concludes the proof.
(1.8)
Let us show that formula (1.8) is also valid in case when condition (b) of
the Lemma 1.3 doesn't hold.
Propozicija 1.1 (The Integral of logarithmic derivative and argument's

change). If the condition (a) of the Lemma 1.3 holds, we have:
Z
J=
f0
dz = ln |f (b)| ln |f (a)| + i Arg f.
f
(1.9)
Dokaz. Let us divide contour by points z0 = a, z1 , . . . , zn = b into nite
number of contours 1 , . . . , n such that each contour k = f k lies in

domain Ok -the plane without rays starting from the coordinate origin (k =
1, . . . , n). By applying the Lemma 1.3 on each contour k (k = 1, . . . , n), we
obtain:
Z 0
f
dz = ln f (zk ) ln f (zk1 ),
Jk =
f
k
i.e.
Jk = ln |f (zk )| ln |f (zk1 )| + ik Arg f.
As a result of summing these equations, and bearing in mind that

Arg f =
n
X
k Arg f,
k=1
holds, we get (1.9).
Denicija 1.3. In the case when f = E is the identity mapping, instead of

Arg f we will write Arg .
19
Note: In the classical literature, one can nd variations of the following
technique. Let f be holomorphic on a closed contour and dierent from

zero on (0 6 f ( )). Then we have:
Z 0
b
b
b
f
J=
dz = Ln f a = Ln |f |a + i Arg f a .
f
Since is closed, a = (0) = (1) = b holds, and therefore,
J = i Arg f.
The following example (see also the Example 3) shows that this method
has certain inaccuracies.
Primer 2. Let K1 be a positive oriented disc boundary, = K1 and f (z) = z . We

have proved that here is no branch Ln z on C . In the same way, we prove that
there is no branch Ln in the neighborhood V of the disc boundary K1 .
Still, the previous discussion makes sense if we divide K1 into the upper
disc boundary 0 and the lower disc boundary 1 (the idea used in Proposition 1.1). We leave it to a reader to ll in the details. If we put f (z) = z 2
into the previous example, then the disc boundary K1 may be divided into
four arcs whose traces belong to the rst, second, third and fourth quadrant
respectively.
Posledica 1.2 (Log Res with respect to a closed contour and Arg).
Let function f be holomorphic on a neighborhood V of the closed contour
and dierent from zero on . Then
Z 0
f
dz = i Arg f.
J=
f
holds.
Although the following result follows directly from the Corollary 1.2, we
will formulate it as a theorem, bearing in mind its important applications.
Teorema 1.3 (Log Res with respect to a cycle and a change of

argument). Let the following conditions hold:
(a) G is regular domain and f is meromorphic on G,
(b) G contains no zeros and poles of function f .
If is a positively oriented boundary of the domain G, then:
Z 0
f
1
1
I=
dz =
Arg f.
2i
f
2
(1.10)
20
Dokaz. From (a) i (b) it follows that function f is holomorphic on some
neighborhood G. Suppose that the cycle consists of exterior positively

oriented contour 0 and interior negatively oriented contours 1 , . . . , n . According to the Corollary 1.2 (integral Log Res is equal to i Arg),
Z 0
f
Jk =
dz = ik Arg, f, k = 0, 1, . . . , n.
f
k
By summing these equalities and introducing the natural denition

X
Arg f =
k Arg f,
we obtain (1.10).
The following result is a direct corollary of the Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 1.3.
Sl. 1.1: The Argument Principle
Teorema 1.4 (The Argument principle PArg). Under conditions of the

Theorem 1.3, the dierence between the number of zeros N and the number
of poles P of function f in the domain G is equal to the increment of the
argument of function f along positively oriented boundary of the boundary
G divided by 2 , i.e.
1
Arg f.
N P =
2
Dokaz. According to the Theorem 1.1, logarithmic residue with respect to
the cycle is I = N P . Bearing in mind Theorem 1.3, it follows that
I=
Primer 3. Let U = U
1
Arg f.
2
1 3
;
, K be positively oriented boundary of the domain
2 2
U and f (z) = z 2 .
a) Draw the trace of path = f K.
b) For given , determine the number of solutions of equation f (z) = in U .
Uputstvo. See Figure 1.2.
21
Sl. 1.2: Mapping of the disc by z 2
In order to give a more precise geometric interpretation of the Theorem

1.4, suppose that consists of a single contour and let = f . From
the denition of argument's change and discussions that arise at several
points through this book (e.g. in the proof of Rouch's theorem that will
follow, more precisely Proposition 1.3; the Principle of the correspondence
of domains (Section 1.3), etc.), we may intuitively understand that
1
Arg f
2
geometrically represents the number of tours of the vector w = f (z)
around the point w = 0 when z passes along (more precisely the the
number of tours of the vector w = (t) = f ((t)) while t I goes from 0
to 1). This number is named the index of path with respect to the point
w = 0 and denoted by the symbol Ind 0. Since
Arg f = Arg ,
(1.11)
we can give a formal denition:
Ind 0 =
1
Arg .
2
According to the Theorem 1.3, Log Res of identity mapping E with respect
to contour is:
Z
1
1
1
dw
=
Arg E =
Arg ,
2i
w
2
2
and we further obtain
1
Ind 0 =
2i
dw
.
w
(1.12)
In the books that avoid geometrical approach, formula (1.12) is taken as

the denition of Ind 0. The PArg may be now written as
N P =
1
Arg f = Ind 0.
2
Instead of the zeros of function f , we may consider its a-points, i.e. the
solutions of equation f (z) = a. Therefore, in our consideration it will be
22
enough to replace function f with fa (dened as fa (z) = f (z) a). If G

contains no a-points (and, by considering assumptions of the Theorem 1.3,
poles) of function f , according to the PArg, we have:
Na P =
1
1
Arg(f (z) a) =
Arg fa ,
2
2
(1.13)
where na is the total number of a-points of function f in the domain G.

The substitution of variable w = f (z) in the formula (1.13) motivates us to
dene index in respect to a:
Ind a =
1
1
Arg(w a) =
Arg a ,
2
2
where a denotes the contour dened as a (t) = (t) a. For more detailed
account of the denition of the index, we refer the reader to the Section The
change of argument along the path in the Chapter 1. Therefore, (1.13) can
be written as:
Na P = Ind a.
(1.14)
Finally, we have proven the following theorem.
Teorema 1.5 (The Index principle, PInd). Let the following conditions
hold :
(a) G is regular domain and f is meromorphic on G;
(b) G contains neither a-points, nor poles of the function f .
If na and p represent the total number of a-points and poles of the function
f in G respectively, then
Na P = Ind a,
where = f and is the positively oriented boundary of the domain G.

Let us sketch another proof of Rouch's theorem, which uses the PArg.
The proof of Rouch's theorem by using argument change

We will use the notation from Rouch's theorem . Let us repeat that
g
f
and = 1 + .
In the classical literature, we can nd variations of the following consideration. In the choice of the adequate argument values, we have:
23
1 Arg h = Arg(f ) = Arg f + Arg .

g(z)
The point (z) =
doesn't go out from the unit disc while z goes
f (z)
along . Then, vector (z) = 1 + (z) can not go around point 0 while
z goes along and, therefore, we have:
2 Arg = 0.
From 1 and 2 we obtain:
3 Arg h = Arg f and therefore, according to the PArg,
Nh = Nf .
The previous consideration is visually clear and attractive to students on the
basic course. For readers who have need to clear the concept and properties
of the argument change, we add the next property.
Uputstvo. (For 1 ): Let us divide into nite number of contours 1 , . . . , n ,

such that contours f k belong to half-planes k , and 0 6 k , k = 1, . . . , n.
For the proof of the property 1 we address to Proposition 1.4.
4
According to the Lemma 1.2 and Proposition 1.1, Arg = 0 holds,
i.e. 2 is valid. In our opinion, it is useful to provide direct proof of 2 (see
the Proposition 1.2).
The domain of special O-type, Denition 5.4. We say that domain
is of special O-type if O holds for some R.
Propozicija 1.2. If is positively oriented closed unit disc boundary, f is
continuous on and = f lies in the domain of O-type, then we have

Arg f = Arg = 0.
Dokaz. In domain , there exists a branch of argument arg. Then, bearing

in mind that is a closed contour, i.e. (0) = (1), it follows that:
Arg f = Arg = arg (1) arg (0) = 0.
Propozicija 1.3 (The polar representation of a path). Let : I C
be a given path. Prove that there exists a continuous function : I R,

such that
(t)
= ei(t) ,
tI
|(t)|
and
Arg = (1) (0).
Function is called continuous branch of the argument along the path .
24
Note that is a continuous branch of the argument along the path , if

: I R is continuous function and
(t) = |(t)|ei(t) ,
t I.
Therefore, we obtain:
(t) Arg (t),
t I.
Propozicija 1.4. If is a path, f, g : C are continuous functions
and 1 = f , 2 = g , prove that :
Arg(f g) = Arg f + Arg g.
Dokaz. Let 1 and 2 , be continuous branches of the argument along the

paths 1 and 2 respectively. Function
= 1 + 2
is continuous branch of the argument along the path = h , where h = f g .

2
1.1.2 The Open Mapping theorem

Local behavior of analytic functions
First, we prove a lemma that is simple corollary of the Uniqueness theorem.
(Theorem 2.19 (Ka1)).
Lema 1.4 (loc). Let us assume that f is a non-constant holomorphic function in some domain , z0 and w0 = f (z0 ). Then, there exists a disc
B = {|z z0 | r},
r > 0,
that contains, with exception of its center, no other w0 -points or zeros of

function f 0 .
Dokaz. Let us rst prove that there exists a disc B 1 = {|z z0 | r1 }
that contains, with exception of its center, no zeros of function f 0 . If we

assume the opposite, then there exists the sequence of dierent points zn
such that zn z0 and f 0 (zn ) = 0. According to the Uniqueness Theorem
(Theorem 2.19 (Ka1)), f 0 0 on and therefore, f const on . This
is contradiction with the assumption that f is a non-constant function on
. Similarly, by applying the Uniqueness Theorem again, we prove that
B = {|z z0 | r}, 0 < r r1 contains (with exception of its center) no
other w0 -zeros. Then, B = {0 < |z z0 | r} has no w0 -points and no zeros
of the function f 0 .
2
25
Lema 1.5 (m-leaf loc). Suppose that f is a non-constant holomorphic
function in some domain , z0 and w0 = f (z0 ). If m is the order of zero

of function f w0 in z0 , then there exists > 0 and a disc B = B(z0 , r)
such that for arbitrary w1 , 0 < |w1 w0 | < , equation f w1 (f w1 = 0)
has exactly m dierent solutions in B .
Dokaz. Using the Uniqueness Theorem (Theorem 2.19 (Ka1)) (more precisely, the Lemma 1.4), lets choose the disc B = {|z z0 | r}, such that
it doesn't contain (apart from its center) any other w0 -points or zeros of
function f 0 . Denote with K = {|z z0 | = r} the boundary of this disc, and
let
= min |f (z) w0 |.
(1.15)
zK
It is obvious that > 0. The modulus of a continuous function f w0

reaches its minimum on K and if = 0 holds, then K would contain w0 points of the function f , which is contradiction with the construction of disc
B . Let |w1 w0 | < . We further obtain:
f (z) w1 = f (z) w0 + (w0 w1 ),
while on K , according to (1.15), |f (z) w0 | holds. Since |w1 w0 | < ,

we have |f (z) w0 | > |w1 w0 |, and applying the Rouch's theorem we
conclude that function f w1 has the same number of zeros inside K as
function f w0 , i.e. m. Moreover, f 0 (z) 6= 0 holds for 0 < |zz0 | < r, which
implies that function f w1 for arbitrary value of w1 , 0 < |w1 w0 | < ,
has only simple zeros in B 0 = {z : 0 < |z z0 | < r} (see the Exercise 1.1.2).
Therefore, function f takes the value of w1 in exactly m dierent points of
the disc B . Note that relation
B = B(w0 ; ) f ().
specially follows from the previous consideration.
Veba 1.1.2. Let f be a holomorphic function in some disc B = B(z0 , r) and

f (z0 ) = w0 . If z0 is a zero of order s 2 of the function f w0 , then f 0 (z0 ) = 0
holds.
Uputstvo. f (z) = (z z0 )s (z), where is holomorphic on B , and
f 0 (z) = s(z z0 )s1 (z) + (z z0 )s 0 (z).
We present some important corollaries of the Lemma 1.5 (m-leaf loc).
26
The Principle of domain conservation

Teorema 1.6 (The Principle of domain conservation, PDC). If f
is non-constant, holomorphic function in domain , then = f () is a

domain.
Uputstvo. 1. We leave to a reader to verify that is connected set.
2. Let w0 , z0 f 1 {w0 } and B = B(z0 , r) . If f (m) (z0 ) = 0

for m 1, by applying the Taylor's theorem on disc B , we have f f (z0 )
on B and, therefore, according to the Uniqueness Theorem (Theorem 2.19
(Ka1)) ??), it follows that f f (z0 ) on . However, this is a contradiction
with the assumption that f is a non-constant function in . Hence, there
exists a positive integer m such that f (m) (z0 ) 6= 0 and, therefore, there is
minimal positive integer m for which
f (m) (z0 ) 6= 0.
is valid. From the Lemmal.ml.loc (m-leaf loc), it follows that can nd > 0
such that
B(w0 , ) .
holds.
Primer 4. Example f (z) = x2 + iy shows that the PAC doesn't hold for innitely
dierentiable mappings.
Uputstvo. Let
Br = {z : |z| < r},
r > 0.
Verify that
f (Br ) = Br ,
gde je
Br = {w : 0 u < r2 v 2 }
holds, and that the set Br is not open. If we set w = u + iv = x2 + iy , then u = x2

and v = y . Since z Br i x2 + y 2 < r2 , it follows that u + v 2 < r2 and u 0; i.e.
f (Br ) Br .
On the other side, if we assume w Br and x = u, y = v , then f (z) = w is

valid.
4
Teorema 1.7 (Local single-leaf property, Loc 1-1**). Suppose that

H(), z0 and 0 (z0 ) 6= 0. Then contains the neighborhood V of
point z0 such that :
(a) is 1-1 on V ;
(b) W = (V ) is open set;
(c) If : W V is dened by ((z)) = z , then H(W ).
27
Items (a) and (b) of this Theorem follow from the Theorem of implicit
function (see the Exercise 1.1.4). The proof that follows is based on the
Lemma1.5.
Dokaz. Set w0 = (z0 ). Since 0 is continuous function and 0 (z0 ) 6= 0,
there exists a disc B1 = B(z0 , r1 ) , such that 0 has no zeros in B1 .

>From the assumptions of the Theorem, we conclude that z0 is the rstorder zero of function w0 . Therefore, by applying the Lemma 1.5 (m-leaf
loc) on B1 , we conclude that there exist discs B B1 and B , respectively,
with centers in z0 and w0 , such that for every w1 B , equation = w1
has exactly one solution B and 0 has no zeros on B .
Since is continous function in z0 , there exist V = B(z0 ; ) B , such
that (V ) B . Therefore is 1-1 on V and, according to the PAC, W is
open set.
In order to prove item (c), let us x w1 W . Then (z1 ) = w1 is valid
for unique z1 V . If w W and (w) = z V , if follows that
(w) (w1 )
z z1
=
.
w w1
(z) (z1 )
Since is continous (prove!), z z1 when w w1 . Therefore, bearing in

mind that 0 6= 0 on B , we obtain
0 (w1 ) =
1
.
0 (z1 )
The following theorem is essentially contained in the Lemma1.5 (m-leaf

loc), but extracting it as an individual result seems to be useful.
Teorema 1.8 (single-leaf conformal**). Assume that is a domain,
f H() and f single-leaf on . Then f 0 (z) 6= 0 holds for every z and

inverse mapping f 1 is a holomorphic function.
Dokaz. If we assume that f 0 (z0 ) is equal to 0 for some z0 , the hypothesis
of the Lemma 1.5 (m-leaf loc) (see also the Theorem 1.9) will be valid for
some m > 1.Hence, f will be m-valent in some punctured neighborhood of
the point z0 , which is contradiction with the assumption that f is single-leaf
on .
Applying item (c) of the Theorem1.7 (Loc 1-1), it follows that f 1 is
holomorphic function.
2
The next theorem, which could be considered as analytic fom of the
Lemma 1.5 (m-leaf loc), gives us the formula for the local representation of
holomorphic function by a single-leaf holomorphic function.
28
Teorema 1.9 (Loc behavior holo). Suppose that f is holomorphic non-
constant function in some domain , z0 , and f (z0 ) = w0 . Let m be the

order of the zero of f w0 in z0 . Then, there exists a neighborhood V of the
point z0 , V , and H(V ), such that :
m
(a) f (z) = w0 + (z)
is valid for every z V ;
(b) 0 has no zeros in V and is an invertible mapping of neighborhood

V to disk B(0; r).
Dokaz. Without the loss of generality, we may assume that is small

enough circular neighborhood of the point z0 , such that f (z) 6= w0 for z
\ {z0 }. Hence, we have
f (z) w0 = (z z0 )m g(z)
(z ),
(1.16)
where g H() and has no zeros on . According to the Theorem on

existence of a continuous logarithm branch, g = exp(h) for some h H().
Let us dene
h(z)
(z ).
(z) = (z z0 ) exp
m
Therefore, (a) holds for every z . Moreover, (z0 ) = 0 and 0 (z0 ) 6=
0. The existence of neighborhood V , such that (b) holds, follows from the
Theorem 1.7 (Loc 1-1).
2
We will sketch another proof of the |Theorem 1.7 (Loc 1-1), which is
based on the Principle of domains correspondence (PAC, Section1.3).
Theorem A (Theorem 1.7, Local single-leaf property, Loc 1-1**).
If
0
H(), z0 and (z0 ) 6= 0, then contains the neighborhood V of
point z0 , such that :
(a) is 1-1 on V ;
(b) W = (V ) is open set;
(c) If : W V is dened by ((z)) = z , then H(W ).
Instruction. Show that contains a disc B = B(z0 ; r) with the following

property
1
|(z1 ) (z2 )| |0 (z0 )||z1 z2 |,
2
z1 , z2 B.
(1.17)
In order to prove inequality (1.17), the Lemma ?? can be used as well.

Hence, property (a) is true if we choose V = B . Let r be contours of f Kr ,
where Kr are positively oriented disc boundaries of radius r with center in
z0 . Hence, f (B) = Int(r ) follows from the PAC.
2
29
Note. The idea of the proof of the previous Theorem can also be used in the
proof of one version of the Theorem of implicit function. The proof in Sabat
[a] is based on the Rouch's principle, while in Rudin [94] on the PMM.
Veba 1.1.3. Prove the inequality (1.17), without referring to the Lemma ??.
Veba 1.1.4. Check if the properties (a) and (b) of the Theorem 1.7 (Theorem A)
hold, by using the Theorem of implicit function.
Uputstvo. Since J (z) = |0 (z)|2 , then Jacobian J is dierent from zero in some
neighborhood of the point z0 . Therefore, the Jacobian of mapping (x, y) (u, v)

is dierent from zero in the neighborhood of z0 , where = u + iv .
4
Veba 1.1.5. If f (z) = x + iy 3 , prove that f R is innitely dierentiable function
1-1 on C and that the Jacobian of function f is equal to 0 on x -axis.
Note. The Theorem 1.7, can not be applied, since f is not a holomorphic
function.
1.1.3 The maximum modulus principle; The Schwarz's lemma

The maximum modulus principle (PMM)
Teorema 1.10 (PMM1). If function f is holomorphic on a domain and
|f | reaches local maximum in some point z0 , then f is constant function.
Dokaz. Let w0 = f (z0 ). From the assumptions of the Theorem, it follows

that there exists a disc B = B(z0 ; r), such that |f | reaches its maximum
|w0 | = |f (z0 )| on B . If f is constant on , the assertion is proved.
It remains to consider the case when f 6= const on .
If f 6= const on , then, in accordance with the Uniqueness theorem ,
f 6= const on B as well. According to the PAC, there exists a disc
B = {w | |w w0 | < },
B f (B).
, for
|w0 |
w0 6= 0, and |w1 | < for w0 = 0), such that inequality |w1 | > |w0 | is valid.
Function f takes the value of w1 in some point z1 B , which is contradiction
with the assumption that |f | reaches its maximum on B in the point z0 . 2
There exists a point w1 in the disc B (w1 = sw0 , 1 < s < 1 +
Teorema 1.11 (PMM2). If function f is holomorphic on a domain and
continuous , then |f | reaches its maximum on .
Dokaz. Assume that f = const on . Considering the fact that f is continuous on , f = const on , the assertion is clear. If f 6= const, then,
30
applying the PMM1, |f | can not reach its maximum in the point from the
domain . Since, by the continuity of the function |f | on , |f | achieves its
maximum at some point z0 , we conclude that z0 .
2
Analogue assertion, for the minimum of modulus, in general case, is
not true. For example, the modulus of the function f (z) = z on the disc
U = {z : |z| < 1} reaches its minimum in the point z = 0. However, the
following theorem holds.
Teorema 1.12 (The minimum modulus principle P Min). If f is

holomorphic function in a domain and has no zeros in , then |f | reaches
its local minimum in z0 only if f = const on .
Dokaz. Since f is holomorphic function and has no zeros on , function
1
is holomorphic on . If |f | reaches local minimum in some point
f
z0 , then |g| achieves local maximum in z0 and, according to the PMM1, g is
constant on and, therefore, f is constant on .
2
g =
The modular surface of holomorphic function

Obtained results (The maximum and minimum modulus principle) show that
the modular surface of holomorphic function, i.e. the surface in the space
(x, y, ) dened by equation = |f (z)| (see Figure 1.3) has some structural
specialities.
Let us assume that f is holomorphic, non-constant function. Hence, it
has no lo local maximum (item a on the Figure 1.3), and has no local minimum, with exception of the case that a local minimum lies on the equation
= 0 (more precisely, if |f | has minimum in z0 , then f (z0 ) = 0) (see item b
on the Figure 1.3).
Sl. 1.3: The modular surface of the function
Tangent plane on this surface is horizontal in points in which partial

derivatives |f |x and |f |y are annulated (and only in these points), or equivalently, both derivatives D|f | and D|f | are annulated. These points are called
stationary points.
The formula (1.18) is simply derived: from
|f |2 = f f ,
31
follows that
2|f |D|f | = f f 0
and hence
D|f | =
and 2|f |D|f | = f 0 f
f 0
f (z),
2|f |
D|f | =
f 0
f (z).
2|f |
(1.18)
On the rst glance, stationary points of the function |f | can be its zeros
(the minimum of |f | on level-line = 0 (item c on the Figure??), or zeros
of its derivative (saddle-point of modular surface - item d on the Figure ??);
still it is necessary to provide more precise explanation of the formula (1.18)
in the points in which f is annulated.
For example, function (z) = |z| (which denes a cone surface) has no
partial derivatives in (0, 0) and therefore, we should provide more precise
interpretation of the formula (1.18) in point z in which f is annulated, i.e.
f (z) = 0.
Let us prove: if f (z0 ) = 0 and f 0 (z0 ) 6= 0, there are no partial derivatives
of function in z0 (i.e. there is no tangent plane in (z0 , 0)).
Without loss of generality, assume that z0 = 0 and let = |f 0 (z0 )|; then
(z) = |z| + o(z), z 0; and hence, right partial derivative in (0, 0) is
equal to , and the left .
Hence, stationary points of the function |f | are only zeros of its derivative.
Let f (z) = c + z 3 + 3z . Since f 0 (z) = 3(z 2 + 1), stationary points of the
modular surface of the function f are i.
The maximum modulus principle has important applications in function

theory. For example, by using this principle, it is simple to explain why the
Runge's theorem (in general sense) doesn't hold for multi-connected domains
(see Example 6).
First, let us formulate the Runge's theorem.
Teorema 1.13 (Runge's theorem). Let f be a holomorphic function in
simply connected domain D and K arbitrary compact subset of domain D.

Then, for every > 0 there exists a polynomial P Such that
kf P kK = max{|f (z) P (z)| : z K} < .
Primer 5. If f is holomorphic on the ring A(r, R), 0 < r < 1 < R, and there
exists a sequence of polynomials Pn that uniformly converges to f on T , then f is
holomorphically extended on U .
Uputstvo. From
||Pn f ||T = max{|Pn (z) f (z)| : z T } 0,
32
according to the Maximum modulus principle, it follows that Pn is a Cauchy's

sequence on U . Hence, the sequence Pn uniformly converges to a holomorphic
function f0 on U .
4
Primer 6. Example J(z) =

this function on domain U 0 .
1
shows that the Runge's theorem doesn't hold for
z
Primer 7. If f is holomorphic on U , continuous on U and |f | = 1 on T , then f is

a rational function.
For exercise, see for example, [a]: chapter IV, tasks 6, 9-17, 22.
The Schwarz's lemma*

Lema 1.6 (The Schwarz's lemma, LS). Let f be holomorphic on the
disc U = {z | |z| < 1},
|f (z)| 1
for every z U
and f (0) = 0.
Then, we have:
(1) |f (z)| |z|
(z U ),
(2) |f 0 (0)| 1.
If equality holds in (1) for some z U \ {0}, or equality holds in (2), then
f (z) = ei z,
where is a real constant.
Dokaz. >From the Taylor's theorem, we have

f (z) = c0 + c1 z + c2 z 2 + ,
z U.
Since f (0) = 0, we obtain c0 = 0. Therefore, function

(z) =
f (z)
= c1 + c2 z +
z
has a removable singularity in the point 0, hence, it is holomorphic on U .

Let us repeat that Ur = {|z| < r} denotes a disc, while Tr = {|z| = r}
represents its boundary.
Sl. 1.4: he Schwarz's lemma
33
Let 0 < r < 1. Applying the PMM2, function || on Ur reaches its

1
maximum on Tr . Since || on Tr (because |f | 1 holds by assumption),
r
it follows that inequality
1
|(z)|
(1.19)
r
is valid on whole Ur .
Let us x z0 U and let r tend to 1 Then, r0 = |z0 | < 1 holds, and for
every r0 r < 1, it follows that z0 Ur and therefore, applying (1.19), we
have:
1
|(z0 )| .
r
If we move to the limit value, when r tends to 1, we obtain:
|(z0 )| 1,
i.e. |f (z0 )| |z0 |.
Since z0 is arbitrary chosen from U , it follows that

|(z)| 1,
(z U ),
(1.20)
i.e.
|f (z)| |z|
holds for every z U.

Since
(0) = lim
z0
f (z)
= f 0 (0),
z
from (1.20) we obtain both inequalities (1) and (2).

If inequality holds in (1) for some z U \ {0}, or holds in (2), bearing in
mind the inequality (1.20), we conclude that || reaches local maximum in
some point of the disc U . Therefore, according to the PMM1, is constant
function, with modulus equal to 1 i.e. f (z) = ei z .
>From the Lemma 1.6 we conclude the following: a holomorphic mapping
of the disc U to itself, which maps the center to center, will map an arbitrary
disc boundary Kr = {|z| = r}, 0 < r < 1, to disc Ur = {|z| < r}, or function
f is a rotation around the point 0.
2
Lema 1.7 (The Subordination lemma, L Sub). Let is a conformal
isomorphism of domain D on U, z0 D and (z0 ) = 0. If F : D U is a

holomorphic mapping, then
|F 0 (z0 )| |0 (z0 )|.
34
Uputstvo. If F (z0 ) = 0, apply the Schwarz's lemma on function F 1 .
If w0 = F (z0 ) 6= 0, instead of function F , consider w0 F .
Therefore, if domain D is given, and z0 D, and if there exist a conformal isomorphism of domain D on U, such that (z0 ) = 0, then in the
class F of holomorphic functions mapping the domain D to U, the largest
stretching of z0 D has a conformal isomorphism .
This lemma gives us motivation for proving the Reimann's theorem.
Let us dene a pseudo-hyperbolic distance for a U

(z, a) = |a (z)|.
Using the Schwarz's lemma, we prove the following.
If F : U U is a holomorphic mapping, then

(F (z), F (a)) (z, a)
for every z, a U.
It follows that (see [63]) Holomorphic mappings F : U U don't enlarge
non-euclidian distance on U.
The Proof of the PMM by using The Mean-value theorem

Teorema 1.14 (The Integral mean-value theorem). For given disc
B = B(a; r) and f H(B), the following equality holds:

1
f (a) =
2
Z2
f (a + reit )dt.
(1.21)
Dokaz. According to the KIF applied to a disc,

f (a) =
1
2i
f ()
d,
a
Kr
where Kr is positively oriented disc boundary of radius r with center in the

point a. By using parametric equation of the disc boundary
Kr : = a + reit ,
0 t 2,
according to the formula for integration along the disc boundary, we obtain
(1.21).
35
Posledica 1.3. Let the assumption of the Mean-value theorem hold and
suppose that u = Re f . Then we have:
1
u(a) =
2
Z2
u(a + reit )dt.
0
Teorema 1.15 (PMM1). Let B = B(a; r).
If f H(B) and |f | has maximum in a, then f is constant on B .
Dokaz. Let b = f (a).
1 If b = 0, then |f | 0 on B and hence, f 0 na B .

2 If b 6= 0, then b = |b|ei .
If f1 = ei f , f2 = f1 (a) f1 and u = Re f2 , we conclude that u 0 on
B and u(a) = 0.
By the Mean-value theorem, for every , 0 r we have:
1
0 = u(a) =
2
Z
u(a + eit )dt.
Since u 0, it follows that u 0 on K = {|z a| = } and therefore, on

B . By using the C-R conditions we obtain that f2 is constant on B , and we
2
further conclude that f is constant on B .
1.2 THE RIEMANN'S THEOREM

1.2.1 Conformal isomorphism and automorphism
Denicija 1.4. Conformal 1-1 mapping f of a domain 1 to a domain 2
is called conformal isomorphism, and domains that allow such a mapping

are isomorphically or conformally equivalent.
An isomorphism of a domain to itself is named conformal automorphism
One can prove the following statement:
The family of automorphisms of an arbitrary domain forms a group
called the Group of automorphisms of that domain and it is denoted by Aut .
Teorema 1.16. If f0 : 1 2 is a xed isomorphism, then any isomorphism f : 1 2 can be represented as:
f = f0 ,
Aut 2 .
(1.22)
36
Dokaz. If Aut 2 is an automorphism of the domain 2 , the composition f0 is conformal mapping of 1 to 2 . On the other side, let f be an
arbitrary isomorphism. Then = f f01 is a conformal mapping of 2 to
itself, i.e. an automorphism of 2 . Hence, (1.22) holds.
We will further consider canonical domains C, C i U = {|z| < 1}.
Veba 1.2.1. Prove that two dierent canonical domains are not mutually isomorphic.
Uputstvo. Apply the Liouville's theorem.
Teorema 1.17. Every conformal isomorphism of a canonical domain is a
bilinear function.
Dokaz. Let be an arbitrary automorphism C. There exists the unique point
z0 C, which is mapped to innitely distant point, (z0 ) = . Hence, is

holomorphic on C \ {z0 }, and has a pole in the point z0 . In the neighborhood
of a pole of order n 2, function is non-one-leaf (prove!) and therefore,
has a pole of the rst order in z0 . According to the Theorem on the form
of a holomorphic function with nite number of poles in C (Theorem 2.36
(Ka1)), has the following form:
(z) =
A
+ B,
z z0
if z0 6=
or (z) = Az + B , if z0 = (A and B are constants).

Therefore, is bilinear mapping.
The case of an open plane C is considered in analogue way. It is sucient
to prove that (z) when z . On the contrary, there exists a
sequence zn , such that |zn | +, and wn = (zn ) w0 C. Let
z0 = 1 (w0 ), etc.
Let us now consider the case of an open unit disc U . Remember that for
a C, we have dened mapping
a (z) =
za
.
1a
z
Assume that is an arbitrary automorphism on U . Let us introduce the

notation (0) = a and consider the composition f = a , which represents
an automorphism on U , and f (0) = 0. Since |f (z)| < 1 is valid for every
z U , then, by applying the Schwarz's lemma, from the previous paragraph,
we obtain: |f (z)| |z| for every z U . But, since the inverse mapping z =
37
f 1 (w) also satises conditions of the same lemma, we have |f 1 (w)| |w|
for every w U . Therefore, by replacing w = f (z), we obtain:
|z| |f (z)|
za sve z U.
In this way, we conclude that |f (z)| = |z| for every z U and then, according
to the Schwarz's lemma, it follows that f (z) = ei z . But, then = 1
a f =
a (ei z) is bilinear mapping.
2
For the characterization of the isomorphism , it is more convenient to
consider point a, such that (a) = 0 holds and function f = a . In the
similar way we will prove the following result.
Propozicija 1.5. If Aut U and (a) = 0 for some a U , then

= ei a
for some R.
Dokaz. Function f = a is an automorphism of U and f (0) = 0 holds.
As in previous consideration, we conclude that f = ei E , where E is identity

mapping. It follows that ei E = a , i.e. = ei E a = ei a .
2
By improving the results of the paragraph on bilinear mappings, we completely characterize all (conformal) automorphisms of the canonical domains.
(1) Closed plane:
az + b
Aut(C) = z
: ad bc 6= 0 .
cz + d
(2) Open plane:
Aut(C) = {z az + b : a 6= 0}.
(3) Unit disc:
Aut(U ) =
za
z ei
: |a| < 1,
1a
z
R .
Veba 1.2.2. Verify that

0a (z) = (1 |a|2 )(1 az)2
holds, and therefore:
0a (0) = 1 |a|2 ,
0a (a) = (1 |a|2 )1 .
38
1.2.2 The Compactness principle

Denicija 1.5. Family F = {f } of functions dened in domain , is called
uniformly bounded inside , if for an arbitrary subset K b exists a constant M = M (K) such that :
|f (z)| M
holds for every z K and every f F .
Denicija 1.6. Family of functions F dened in a domain is called com-
pact in , if from every sequence {fn } F we can extract a sub-sequence fnk

that uniformly converges on arbitrary K b (we say : uniformly converges
on compacts).
Teorema 1.18 (Montel, TM). If family F of holomorphic functions on

the domain , is uniformly bounded in , then F is compact in .
For the proof of this Theorem see [94], [a] and [Ah].
Denicija 1.7. Let F be a family of functions dened on . The mapping

J :F C
is called functional on F . In this way, we dene a correspondence that

assigns a complex number J(f )) to every f F .
Functional J is called continuous, if for an arbitrary {fn } F that
uniformly converges to f0 F on arbitrary K b , it follows that:
J(fn ) J(f0 ).
Primer 8. Let H() be the family of all functions f that are holomorphic on .
Let a be an arbitrary point in . If
J(f ) = ck (f ) =
f (k) (a)
,
k!
k 0,
then J is continuous functional on H().
Rezultat. If fn f uniformly on every K b , and if K is the disc boundary

Kr = {|z a| = r} b ,
then, for an arbitrary > 0 there exists N such that |fn (z) f (z)| < for every
n > N and every z Kr . From the Cauchy's inequality, for n > N we obtain that
|ck (fn ) ck (f )| k ,
r
which means that functional ck (f ) is continuous.
39
Denicija 1.8. The compact family of functions F is called compact in itself,
if the limit f0 of an arbitrary sequence {fn } F that uniformly converges

on every K b , belongs to F , i.e. f0 F .
Teorema 1.19 (Continuous functional reaches its maximum). Every
functional J , which is continuous on the family F and compact in itself,

reaches its supremum on F , i.e. there exists f0 F , such that
|J(f0 )| > |J(f )|
for every f F .
Dokaz. Let A = sup{|J(f )| : f F}. By the denition of supremum, there

exists a sequence fn F , n N, such that |J(fn )| A, when n +.
Using that F is compact in itself, there exists a sub-sequence fnk , k N,
which uniformly converges on every K b to some function f0 F . Since
functional J is continuous, we obtain
|J(f0 )| = lim |J(fnk )| = A.
k7+
Therefore, it rst follows that A < + and, second, |J(f0 )| > |J(f )| for
every f F .
2
Teorema 1.20 (The Weierstrass's theorem). If the sequence of functions fn that are holomorphic on the domain , uniformly converges on a
compact to function f , then f is holomorphic on .
that f is continuous. Let be a
Dokaz. As in real analysis, one can prove
R
triangle that compactly lies in . As
fn dz = 0 holds, by the denition of

R
uniform convergence, it follows that
f dz = 0. Therefore, according to the
Morera's theorem, f is holomorphic on .
Teorema 1.21 (The Hurwitz's theorem). Let the sequence of functions
fn that are holomorphic on the domain uniformly converges on a compact

to some function f 6= const and let f (z0 ) = 0 for some z0 . Then, for
an arbitrary disc
B = Br = {|z z0 | < r}
there exists n0 such that functions fn are annulated in B for n > n0 .
40
Dokaz. By the Weierstrass's theorem, f is holomorphic on and, by the

Uniqueness theorem there exists
B0 = {0 < |z z0 | } b
on which f 6= 0 (we can assume that < r). If we dene K as

K = {|z z0 | = }
and = min{|f (z)| : z K },
then > 0 holds. Since fn f on K , there exists N such that

|fn (z) f (z)| <
for every z K and every n > N . For such n we have

|fn (z) f (z)| < |f (z)|
for every z K .
Therefore, according to the Rouch's theorem, function fn = f + (fn f )

has the same number of zeros as f inside K , which means exactly one zero
in B , and therefore, at least one zero in Br .
2
z
uniformly converges to zero on a comn
pact in H , although functions fn (z) are not annulated on H .
Primer 9. The sequence fn (z) = exp i
Posledica 1.4. If the sequence of functions fn that are holomorphic and

single-leaf in domain , uniformly converges on every K b , then the limit
function f of this sequence is either single-leaf or constant.
Dokaz. Let f (z1 ) = f (z2 ) on z1 6= z2 (z1 , z2 ) and f 6= const. Let us
consider the sequence of functions
gn (z) = fn (z) fn (z2 )
in disc B = {|z z1 | < r}, where r |z1 z2 |.

The limit function g(z) = f (z) f (z2 ) is not identically equal to a constant on B , it is annulated in the point z1 , and therefore, (according to the
Hurwitz's theorem), all functions gn , starting from some index n, are annulated in this disc. However, this is a contradiction with the single-leaf
property of function fn .
2
nz
converges on C
nz + 1
to function f , which takes only two values 0 and 1, i.e. f (C) = {0, 1}.
Primer 10. The sequence of single-leaf functions fn (z) =
41
1.2.3 The Reimann's theorem

Let us repeat (see Section 5.2 (Ka1)) that the polygonal line, which consists
of horizontal and vertical intervals, is called special polygonal line. Also,
domain D C is simply connected (polygonal) if Int belongs to D for
every special closed simple polygonal line belonging to domain D.
In the literature one can nd dierent denitions of a simply connected
domain.
We will state some of them:
1. Domain is simply connected if is connected in C (shortly, the

denition by means of the boundary).
2. Domain C is simply connected if C \ is connected (shortly, the

denition by means of the complement).
3. Domain C is simply connected if every closed path in is ho-
motopic to a point in , i.e. it can be continuously deformed in the

point (shortly, the homotopic denition).
Let us repeat that the denition by means of the boundary is given, for
example, in [a], and the denition by the complement in [Ah].
The two denitions given above are equivalent, which is usually proved
on graduate courses (see for example Chapter 1 and also [63]).
Let us emphasize that is not connected set in C, but it is connected
in C. This example shows that it is important to consider the connectivity
in respect to C in the denition no. 2.
Domains U , C, C, H , + , strips , C = D and Warsaw's disc 1 and
2 (see Example 90 that follows) are simply connected domains. If is simple
(not closed) Jordan's path, then C \ is simply connected domain. If is
additionally simple closed path, then Int() is simply connected domain.
Domains U 0 , C and ring are doubly connected domains.
Veba 1.2.3. Prove that:
(a) Domains U , H , + , strips , C and Warsaw's disc 1 and 2 are simply

connected domains and conformally isomorphic.
(b) Domains C and C are not mutually conformally isomorphic and they are
not conformally isomorphic with domains from item (a).
Uputstvo. Construct explicitly conformal isomorphisms, which will show that do-
mains U , H , + , strips and C are conformally isomorphic. The Warsaw's disc

is conformally isomorphic with these domains, which follows from the Reimann's
theorem.
4
42
Veba 1.2.4. Let D C be a simply connected domain. Check if the boundary

of domain D, in the sense of topology on C), contains at least one point i D 6= C.
Note. Let D C be a simply connected domain. Assume that the boundary
of domain D, in the sense of topology on C, contains more than one point. By

using bilinear mappings, we may suppose that the boundary of D contains
at least two points: and a C. Hence, the boundary of the domain D
intersects every disc boundary with the center in a and the boundary D is a
connected set. In the examples that we consider, there usually exists a path
, such that its trace is equal to D. However, the example of Warsaw's disc
shows that it is not true in general case.
In the proof of the Reimann's theorem we use Exercise 1.2.6, i.e. the
fact that from the simply connected domain, which doesn't contain zero, we
can extract the branch of a root. Therefore, for the proof the Reimann's
theorem it is convenient to use the polygonal or homotopic denition of
simply connected domain.
Teorema 1.22 (The Reimann's theorem). An arbitrary simply con-
nected domain D in C, whose boundary contains more than one point, is

conformally equivalent to unit disc U .
The idea of the proof of the Reimann's theorem:
Let S be the
family of all holomorphic and and single-leaf functions in D, limited (by
module) by 1. Let us rst x a point z0 D. By using the continuality of
the functional J(f ) = f 0 (z0 ), we will show that there exists function f0 with
maximal stretching |f00 (z0 )| in z0 . Finally, we will prove that f0 maps D to
U.
The proof of the Reimann's theorem:**

(a) S 6=
This is proved in the section Analytic extensions (Ka1). From the pedagogical point of view, the proof that follows is interesting, and also the proof
obtained by using the Exercise 1.2.7.
By assumptions
of the Theorem, D contains two dierent points and
r
z
. The root
has analytic extension along arbitrary path in D and,
z
since D is simply connected, according to the Monodromy theorem, the
analytic function allows the extraction of unique regular branches 1 and
2 , of dierent sign, i.e. 2 = 1 . Branches 1 are 2 singe-leaf in D,
43
because j (z1 ) = j (z2 ) (j = 1 or j = 2) gives us:
z1
z2
=
.
z1
z2
(1.23)
Since bilinear functions are single-leaf, we further conclude that z1 = z2 .

These branches map D to D1 = 1 (D) and D2 = 2 (D), which have no
common points. If we assume the opposite, there exist z1 , z2 D such that
1 (z1 ) = 2 (z2 ).
>From the last equation, we obtain (1.23) again, and from (1.23) we have
z1 = z2 = a, i.e.
1 (a) = 2 (a) = 1 (a).
We further obtain:
1 (a) = 1 (a),
tj. 1 (a) = 0.
Therefore, we get contradiction, using that j 6= 0 in D.

The domain D2 contains a disk B = {|w w0 | < }.
Since 1 in D doesn't take values from disc B , function
f1 (z) =
1 (z) w0
(1.24)
belongs to S .
(b) The subfamily S1 of the family S , which consists of all functions
f S for which
|f 0 (z0 )| |f10 (z0 )| > 0,
(1.25)
holds, is compact in itself. According to the Montel's theorem, S is compact
family, and hence, S1 is compact as well. By the corollary of the Hurwitz's
theorem, the limit of the sequence {fn } S1 that uniformly converges on
every K b D, is single-leaf (and therefore belongs to S1 ) or constant, which
is not possible by 1.25.
Consider the functional
J(f ) = |f 0 (z0 )|.

According to the assertion proved in the previous paragraph, J is continuous and, by the Theorem 6.19, there exists f0 S1 , which realizes its
maximum, i.e.
|f 0 (z0 )| |f00 (z0 )|
(1.26)
44
for every f S1 .
(c) f0 (z0 ) = 0.
Assume the opposite, i.e. w0 = f0 (z0 ) 6= 0. Let us dene
w0 (w) =
w w0
1 w0 w
Since
0w0 (w0 ) =
we have
|g 0 (z0 )| =
and g = w0 f0 .
1
,
1 |w0 |2
1
|f 0 (z0 )| > |f00 (z0 )|,
1 |w0 |2 0
which is contradiction with relation (1.26). Therefore, the initial assumption

is wrong.
(d) Finally, let's prove that f0 (D) = U . This can be proved in two ways
(see (d1) and (d2) that follow).
Assume the opposite, i.e. there exist a U \ f (D). Since domain
V = a f0 (D) U
is simply connected in 0 6 V , then, by the Monodromy theorem, there exists
the unique branch of function w, dened for w V . Let b = (a) and
h = b a .
Sl. 1.5: The Reimann's theorem, na part
(d1) Function h is holomorphic on
W = f0 (D) U
From
and |h0 (0)| > 1.
|h0 (0)| = |0b (b) 0 (a) 0a (0)|,
bearing in mind that
|0b (b)| =
1
1
=
,
2
1 |b|
1 |a|
1
| 0 (a)| = p ,
2 |a|
0a (0) = 1 |a|2 ,
45
we obtain:
|h0 (0)| =
1
1
1 + |a|
p (1 |a|2 ) = p
> 1.
1 |a| 2 |a|
2 |a|
By using d1 , we will now prove d.

Let = h f0 . Then S . Since
|0 (z0 )| = |h0 (0)||f00 (z0 )| > |f00 (z0 )| and S1 ,

we conclude that f0 is not extremal.
It is interesting that, by using the Schwarz's lemma , we can show that
0
|h (0)| > 1.
(d2) By introducing notation s(w) = w2 , we obtain that h1 is equal to
F = a s b
on h(U ).
Since F is holomorphic on U , F (U ) U , F (0) = 0 and F is not single-leaf,

by using the Schwarz's lemma, we obtain |F 0 (0)| < 1. Since
h0 (0) =
1
(h1 )0 (0)
1
F 0 (0)
holds, we conclude that |h0 (0)| > 1.
Sl. 1.6: The branch of inverse function is 1-1
Veba 1.2.5. Suppose that a complex function g is dened on some domain and
1 = g().
Every branch of non-injective function F = g 1 is 1-1.
If g is holomorphic on the domain and if there exist continuous branches f1
and f2 of the function F on 0 1 , then functions f1 and f2 are equal to 0 , or
subsets f1 (0 ) and f2 (0 ) are disjoint.
Uputstvo. Let z = g(), z0 0 and 0 = f1 (z0 ). Then g is single-leaf in some
neighborhood V0 of the point 0 . Let us dene W0 = g(V0 ). Hence, we have
f1 = g 1 na W0 . If
f1 (z0 ) = f2 (z0 ),
46
it follows that f1 and f2 are equal on W0 . Therefore, according to the Uniqueness

theorem, f1 and f2 are equal on 0 .
In case that sets f1 (0 ) and f2 (0 ) are not disjoint, there exist points z1 and
z2 in 0 , such that
f1 (z1 ) = f2 (z2 ).
Since g is a function, from
f1 (z1 ) = f2 (z2 )
it follows that z1 = z2 . Therefore, functions f1 and f2 are equal on 0 .
Veba 1.2.6. (a) Let G be a simply connected domain in C and 0 G. Then,

there exists a branch of the root on G.
(b) If is branch of the root on G, then 1 = and 2 = are the only
branches of the root on G.
Functions 1 = and 2 = are 1 1 on G. Sets 1 (G) and 2 (G) are
disjoint.
Uputstvo. Let be a simply connected closed special polygonal line in G. Since
G is simply connected, Int() G and hence, 0 Ext(). It further follows that
Ind 0 = 0, i.e. Arg = 0. Therefore, by the Theorem on existence of branch
of the root and of the logarithm (Sections
5.2 and 5.3 (Ka1)), there exist regular
branches of non-implicit functions Ln and n , n 1 in the domain G.
4
Veba 1.2.7. By using the two previous exercises, show that S 6= holds.
Uputstvo. Let
(z) =
z
z
and (D) = D .
By the two previous exercises, there exist a logarithm branch s of the root in domain
D . Consider function = s .
4
1.3 CORRESPONDENCE OF DOMAINS, BOUNDARIES

AND THE SYMMETRY PRINCIPLE
1.3.1 Correspondence of boundaries
A curve is called analytic if it is dened as a path z = (t), t [, ], such
that:
(1) is analytic function of variable t [, ];
(2) 0 (t) 6= 0, t [, ].
(1) means that can be represented as power series involving the powers
of t t0 in some neighborhood of the point t0 [, ]. From the HB
(Heine-Borel's) theorem it follows that can be extended to the holomorphic
47
function of complex variable t in some neighborhood V = [, ] (, ),
> 0 of the interval [, ]. Hence, analytic curve is holomorphic smooth
mapping of the segment [, ].
A closed analytic curve is holomorphic mapping of the disc boundary
T = {|t| = 1}
in the plane of parameter t, while 0 (t) 6= 0 for t T . If mapping z = (t) is
additionally injective (1-1), we say that is analytic Jordan's (closed) curve.
The following theorem was proven in Chapter 1.
Teorema 1.23 (The Caratheodory's theorem, TCa). If domains D
and D are bounded by Jordan's curves D and D , then the conformal

mapping f : D D , which is 1-1 and na, is extended on the boundary of
the domain D to a homeomorphism D on D .
This theorem is named The Principle of boundaries correspondence (shortly,
PCB).
The next theorem we will prove in special case, if co-domain is a disc
(see the Theorem 1.27).
Teorema 1.24 (The Schwartz's theorem, T). Let the assumptions of
the Caratheodory's theorem hold and let D and D be analytic Jordan's

curves (in the sense of complex analysis). Then, f is extended to a holomorphic function on D.
The Principle of domains correspondence

We will sketch one proof of the Principle of domains correspondence. More
precise proof will be presented in the Section on Boundary correspondence.
Let us repeat, M compactly belongs to the domain if M ; The
compact belonging is denoted by M b . For the denition of homotopy
see subsection 2.1.13 (Ka1) and Chapter 1.
Teorema 1.25 (The Principle of domains correspondence, PAC).
Let domains D and D with Jordan's boundaries and compactly belong

to C. If function f that is holomorphic on D, is continuous in D and denes
a 1 1 mapping from to , then the mapping f : D D is conformal
isomorphism of domain D to D .
48
Note:
The Theorem holds if D is an arbitrary Jordan's domain in C and

D compactly belongs to C.
Dokaz. Let w0 be an arbitrary point in D .
Since f = holds (according to assumptions of the Theorem), it

follows that f 6= w0 on and, using that f is continuous in D, there exists
D, such
a Jordan's curve in D, which is a boundary of some domain D
that f 6= w0 holds in G = D\D. The term dened as

N=
1
Arg f (z) w0
2
(1.27)
(where, roughly speaking, Arg denotes the continuous branch of argument

along the path and the increment of this branch along ) is continuously changed by the homotopic deformation of path in G (for a more precise
denition of homotopy see Chapter 1). Since term (1.27) takes only integer
values, it remains constant in these transformations. By the assumption of
the Theorem, the mapping f : is homeomorphic, and therefore, we
get:
1
Arg(w w0 ) = 1,
N=
2
because, if point z goes once around the curve , the vector w w0 (where
w = f (z)) rotates once around the point w0 (the point w goes once around
the curve in positive direction). By to the consideration given above, we
conclude that:
1
Arg f (z) w0 = 1.
N=
2
b D, bounded by curve , the Argument principle can be
On domain D
(and
applied, showing that equation f (z) = w0 has exactly one root in D
therefore, also in D, since there are no w0 -points in strip G).
In the same way, we prove that for an arbitrary point w1 6 D , the
number of zeros of the function f (z) w1 in the domain D is equal to
N1 =
1
Arg(w w1 ).
2
When point w goes around the curve , the vector ww1 makes no complete
turns around the point w1 and hence, it follows that N1 = 0. From the
open mapping theorem, we conclude that f (D) has no common points with
the trace of path , because, in the contrary, f (D) would have non-empty
intersection with the complement of the set D .
2
49
1.3.2 The Symmetry principle

Lema 1.8 (Holomorphic extension , LHE). Let us assume that:
domains D1 and D2 are disjoint,
open segment is the common part of their boundaries and D = D1
D2 is a domain,
functions f1 and f2 , respectively, are holomorphic on D1 and D2 and
continuous on D1 and D2 (Fig. 1.8),
f1 (z) = f2 (z) for every z .
Then, the function f , dened by
f1 (z), z D1
f (z) =
f2 (z), z D2
is holomorphic on D.
Primer 11 (*). Let D2 = {z |z D1 } be the domain symmetric with D1 , with
respect to the real axis. The open interval L = (0, 1) belongs to the common
boundary of D1 and D2 , but D1 L D2 is not a domain. If is conformal
(single-leaf) mapping of D1 to the unit disc, it can be proved that is continuously
extended on D1 L, such that (z) = ei for every z [0, 1], where is a real
number.
Primer 12 (The Warsaw circle 2). Let

n
1
D1 = (x, y)| 0 < y < ,
1 o
1 < x < sin .
y
This domain is called the Warsaw's circle (see Figure 1.7).
Sl. 1.7: The Warsaw circle 2
Uputstvo. Use the Carathodory's theorem.
In the classical literature, the LHE is formulated without condition that

D = D1 D2 is a domain. The previous example shows that such
statement is not correct.
The proof of the LHE is founded on the CIT 2 and CIT n-sided polygon, which is proved at the end of section.
50
Proof LHE . The conditions imposed on clearly indicate that f is contin-
uous on D. For the proof of holomorphic property of f on D by the Morera's

theorem (Theorem 2.17 (Ka1)), it is sucient to check that integral f on the
boundary of an arbitrary triangle b D is equal to zero. If compactly
belongs to D1 or D2 , the proof follows from CIT .
It still remains to consider the case when 6= . We have two
possibilities:
(1) the intersection of and is only vertex or edge;

(2) separates in two parts: triangle 1 and quadrilateral Q.
In the case of (1), the proof follows from CIT 2 , and in the case of (2),
the proof is obtained from the CIT n-sided polygon (for n = 3 and n = 4).
2
Sl. 1.8: The holomorphic property of extension
We leave to a reader to prove the case of (2) in more elementary way, by

using the division of the quadrilateral Q on triangles. Then, as it is showed
on the Figure 1.8, the quadrilateral Q can be divided into triangles 2 and
3 . Using the properties of the integral and CIT2 (see the Theorem 1.28),
we obtain:
Z
Z
Z
f dz =
f dz +
f dz = 0
(1.28)
Q
and, therefore,
Z
f dz =
Z
f dz +
f dz = 0.
(1.29)
Lema 1.9 (Symmetric holomorphic function, L*-holo). Let function
f be holomorphic on domain G, G = {z|

z G}. If function f is dened
on G by f (z) = f (
z ), then f is holomorphic on G .
Dokaz. Let z0 G is an arbitrary point. Let us prove that there exists
nite derivative (f )0 (z0 ). We have:
f (z + h)
f (z0 )
f (z0 )
f (z0 + h)
0
= lim
,
h0
h0
h
h
(f )0 (z0 ) = lim
i.e.
(f )0 (z0 ) =
f (z0 )
f (z0 + h)
= f 0 (z0 ).
h0
h
lim
51
The proof can be concluded by using Taylor's series of the function f in

z0 or using the formulae for (see the Exercise 1.3.1).
2
Teorema 1.26 (The Schwartz's Principle, SP). Let us suppose that:
(a) L is segment in R, G+ is a domain in H + , and

(b) every t L is the center of open disc Bt , such that Bt H + belongs
to G+ .
Let G be the reection of domain G+ with respect to real axis, i.e.
G = {z|
z G+ }.
(1.30)
Lets further assume that f is holomorphic on G+ , continuous on G+ L

and f (x) is real for every x L.
Under assumptions given above, there exist a function F, holomorphic in
G = G+ L G , such that F (z) = f (z) for z G+ . This function satises
the following relation:
F (z) = f (
z ),
z G .
Dokaz. Let us dene

F (z) = f (
z)
for z G
and F (z) = f (z) for z G+ L.
When point z G tends to x L, then z x and F (z) = f (

z ) f (x) =
f (x).
Hence, F is continuous on G. From the Lemma 1.9, it follows that F is
holomorphic on G+ G and therefore, by the LHE, we conclude that F is
holomorphic on G.
2
In the Example 12 (the Warsaw circle), segment L = [0, 1] is the part of
the boundary of domain G = D1 . Verify that D1 = G doesn't satisfy condition (b) on L. Considering that (b) "seems" abstract, from the pedagogic
point of view, it can be replaced by equivalent condition:
(b0 ) There exists a domain G, which is symmetric with respect to R, such
that G H + = G+ (i.e. G+ L G is domain).
Lema 1.10 (The Symmetry principle, LPS). Let G be a domain, which
is symmetric with respect to the real axis, and let an open segment L = (, )
on the real axis belong to domain G. If f is holomorphic on G and real on
L, then f (
z ) = f (z).
52
Dokaz. According to the Lemma 1.9, function f, dened by

f(z) = f (z) f (
z ),
is holomorphic on G.
For x L = (, ), according to the assumption, f (x) is real, and then,
f (x) = f (x). Hence,
f(x) = f (x) f (x) = 0.
Therefore, by the Uniqueness theorem, we conclude that f 0 on G, i.e.
f (
z ) = f (z) for z G.
2
Primer 13. Functions z n , sin, cos, exp, tg, sh are real on real axis and symmetric
with respect to the real axis, i.e. symmetric points with respect to the real axis are
mapped to symmetric points.
Let f (z) = eiz . Then, f (R) = T holds. Verify that this function satises the
following relation: f (z) = f (z) .
Teorema 1.27 (The Extension over analytic arc). If the boundary of

a domain D contains an analytic arc , the conformal mapping of domain
to unit disc U may be analytically extended over .
Dokaz. For an arbitrary t0 [, ], there exist a disc B = B(t0 ; r) in which

is extended as holomorphic function. According to the condition 0 (t0 ) 6= 0,
it may be assumed that is 1-1 on B . Let us denote by the diameter of
disc B , which consists of points on real axis, and by B + one of half-discs
B \ , which maps to D. Function = satises conditions of the
Symmetry principle (maps to circular arc) and hence, it is analytically
extended to B . Since ()1 = , function is analytically extended over
arc 0 = (), i.e. to domain (B).
2
Teorema 1.28 (CIT2). Let function f be continuous on closed triangle
and holomorphic on the interior of . Then, we have
Z
I=
f (z)dz = 0.
Sl. 1.9: CIT2
53
Uputstvo. Without the loss of generality, we may assume that 0 is an interior point of triangle . Let 0 < < 1 and
= {z | z }.
Since f is holomorphic on , it follows that

Z
1
f (w)dw = 0.
By using substitution w = (z) = z, we nd that
f (z)dz = 0 holds.
Therefore,
Z
I=
(f (z) f (z))dz.
(1.31)
Let > 0 be an arbitrary number. Since f is uniformly continuous on ,

there exists 0 such that |f (z)f (z)| < for z and 0 < < 1. hence,
by using the inequality for absolute integral value, we obtain the following
estimation:
Z
|I|
|f (z) f (z)|dz ||
Since we can choose arbitrary small positive number for , we conclude that
I = 0.
4
Teorema 1.29 (CIT n-sided polygon). Let be a closed simple polygonal

line in the complex plane C and P = Int(). If function f is continuous on
P and holomorphic on P , then :
Z
f dz = 0.
Sl. 1.10: CIT n-sided polygon
Dokaz. If the set P is starlike with respect to some point z0 P , we can
assume, without the loss of generality, that z0 = 0 and apply the procedure
from the proof of the CIT2.
In general case, a n-sided polygon P can be divided into triangles (as
Figure 1.10 shows) and the CIT2 can be applied.
2
54
Uputstvo. Prove that there exist two nonconsecutive vertices A and B of
polygon , such that [A, B] P and that the length of [A, B] divides P into
two domains, P1 and P2 , bounded by polygons.
By continuing this procedure, show that triangles i P , i = 1, . . . , n,
satisfy:
n
X
=
i ,
i=1
where i , i = 1, . . . , n and have, for example, positive orientation.
Veba 1.3.1. Prove the Lemma 1.9 by using the formula for .
Dokaz. Let
g(z) = f (
z ) = f (x, y) and h = g,
where g() = g().
Since
gx (z) = fx (
z ) and gy (z) = fy (
z ),
gx (z) = gx (z) and gy (z) = gy (z),
= 0 in G (since f is holomorphic on G), we nd that:
f
1
1
(
gx (z) + i gy (z)) = (gx (z)) + i gy (z))
2
2
1
1
(
z) = 0
(z G ).
= (fx (
z ) i fy (
z )) = (fx (
z ) + i fy (
z )) = f
2
2
h(z) =
g (z) =
which concludes the proof.
Veba 1.3.2. Formulate and prove the LPS if interval is replaced by the part of
circular arc, and reection with respect to the real axis by the symmetry with
respect to the boundary of the disc.
1
z
Uputstvo. f (z ) = f (z) , where z = .
Veba 1.3.3 (C onformal mapping of the plane without the cross to the
plane without disc). By using the Exercise 1.3.2, prove that bilinear mapping
preserves the symmetry of points with respect to line and disc. (See the related
result in the section on Bilinear mappings)
Veba 1.3.4. Let

D = C \ ([1, 1] [i, i]).
Find a conformal mapping of the domain D to the exterior of the unit disc.
55
Sl. 1.11: Conformal mapping of the plane without cross to the plane without disc
Rezultat. Let D1 = H \ [0, i]. Function z 2 maps domain D1 to C \ [1, +). Let
f0 be a branch of the root, dened in the domain C1 = {0 < < 2}. Function ,
dened by (z) = z 2 + 1, maps D1 to C1 and hence, f1 = f0 maps D1 to H .
Let
` = (, 1) (1, +) and ` = (, 2) ( 2, +).
f1 is uniformly extended to D1 ` and maps ` to `. Therefore, by the Symmetry principle, it follows that f1 (we kept the same notation for the extension) is
analytically extended to the domain D1 ` D1 , where D1 is domain symmet
rical to domain
1 in respect to real axis, and maps D to D2 = C \ [ 2, 2].
1 D1
Let = ( 2) Z , where Z 1 is the inverse branch of the Joukowski function,
dened by Z 1 () = . Function f1 maps D to C \ U .
2
Veba 1.3.5. Let
n
o/h i
G = | Re z| <
0,
.
2
2
Construct a conformal mapping of domain G to theupper half-plane.
1.3.3 Miscellaneous tasks

1. The maximum modulus principle, PMM
The maximum modulus principle 2 also holds for unbounded domains in the
following sense:
Let be a domain in C, f : C continuous mapping and f holomorphic on . Then |f | reaches the maximum in .
Here is dened in C. Therefore, if is an unbounded domain, then
.
iz
. Prove:
i+z
a. B is continuous function on C \ {i}.
b. |B| = 1 on H = R {}, such that |B| reaches its maximum on H , in
every point H = R {}.
Veba 1.3.6. Let B(z) =
Veba 1.3.7. Let

f (z) = exp(exp z),
and
g(z) = exp( exp z),

n
o
D= z: <y<
.
2
2
h(z) = g(z)
1
z i
56
a. Prove that whole function f is bounded on boundary of the domain D (here

boundary is dened with respect to C), but unbounded on D;
b. sup{|g(z)| : z D} = 1
c. h is continuous on D and |h| reaches the maximum on D in point , which

2
is equal to
2
max{|h(z)| : z D} =

Uputstvo. By the addition formula, we obtain exp x i = iex . Therefore,
2
for z D, it rst follows f (z) = exp(iex ) and then, |f | = 1 on D. However,
f (x) very quickly when x + along the positive part of the xaxis. 4
Related to The maximum modulus principle, let's highlight the following:

d. f is not continuous on D, where closure is dened with respect to C.
e. domain D is bounded by parallel lines
n
n
o
o
and `2 = z : y =
.
`1 = z : y =
2
2
The boundary of domain D in C is ` = `1 `2 , the union of these two
lines, and f is continuous on `.
f. h is continuous on D, if D is considered as the frame space; D
(closure is dened with respect to C), but h is not continuous in .
Veba 1.3.8. If f is holomorphic function in some neighborhood of the point a,

which is stationary point of the function |f |, then f (a) = 0 or f 0 (a) = 0.
Uputstvo. |f |2 = f f , f =
1 f 0
1 f 0
f , f =
f.
2 |f |
2 |f |
2. Geometric theory
Veba 1.3.9. Let D = H = {z : Im z > 0}, D = H = {z : Im z > 0} and
f (z) = z 3
Prove that:
a. f is 1-1 mapping of the boundary D = R of domain D to D = R,
b. f is not 1-1 on H and f (H) = C .
Veba 1.3.10. Let A(z) = i
1z
, B = A1 , f (z) = z 3 ; g = B f A and
1+z
D = C \ {1, 1}.
Prove:
a. A is conformal isomorphism of U to H.
iw
.
b. B(w) =
i+w
c. g is 1-1 mapping of the unit disc line to itself.
57
d. Find the singularities of the function g in C. Does g have singularity in U ?
e. g(U ) = D
Uputstvo. B has the simple pole in i and function g has the simple pole in 0.
Therefore, assumptions of the PAC do not hold.
Veba 1.3.11. For 0 < k < 1, let p() = (1 2 )(1 k2 2 ),
1
f () = p
, and
p()
1
I1 = 1,
, L = I1 (I1 ) and D = C \ L.
k
Prove:
a. There exist a regular branch of non-injective function f on D, which is
positive on I = [0, 1).
Rz
b. If (z) = d , maps H on the rectangular.
0
Uputstvo. See subsection 5.2 (Ka1) (the existence of branches).
Veba 1.3.12. Let 0 < a < 1, L = [a, 1] and D = U \ L.
Prove:
a. There exists a regular branch = n of non-injective function n on a (D),

b. Does it exist a conformal automorphism of the disc such that
|h0 (0)| > 1,

where h = a ?
c. Draw the domains D1 = a (D), D2 = (D1 ) and D3 = (D2 ).
Sl. 1.12: Special case of the Reimann's theorem
Uputstvo. Prove point (d) from the proof of the Reimann's theorem; = b ,
where b = (a).
4
Primer 14. Let U = |z| < 1 and f (z) = z
n() =
2z 1
. Verify that
2z
2, || < 1,
0, || 1,
where n() is the number of solutions of the equation f (z) = 0 in the domain
U.
About the Schwarz-Christofel transformations, see for example [Ch-Br].
For the exercise see, for example, [Je-Ma]: conformal mappings, tasks 5.08, 5.11,
5.14, 5.21, 5.23-24, 5.27-28, 5.31-33, 5.36-38, 5.41, 5.44-45, 5.54-55; the symmetry
principle 5.56- 5.61; miscellaneous tasks 10.01, 10.13-14, 10.18-21, 10.28-29, 10.4348.
58
Note that examples 14, 5.27 and 8.40 (from [Je-Ma]) are the same tasks, but
solutions are dierent.
3. The Rouch's principle and Mihajlov's lemma

The Mihajlov's lemma
Let P = a0 z n + + an , a0 6= 0, be a polynomial of degree n, with no

zeros on imaginary axis, and let be a contour dened by (y) = P (iy),
< y < +.
If n+ and n are respectively the number of zeros in the right and left
half-plane, then:
1
n
Arg ,
2 2
n n+
1
=
Arg .
2
2
n+ =
(1.32)
(1.33)
Uputstvo. Let
+
BR
= {z : |z| < R,
and
Re z > 0},
R > 0;
+
KR = KR
: z = Reit ,
lR : z = it,
R t R
t .
2
2
Let p = a0 z n and P = ph.

For large enough R, by applying the PArg, we nd that
n+ =
1
1
KR Arg P
l Arg P.
2
2 R
(1.34)
According to the Proposition 1.4, we obtain

KR Arg P = KR Arg p + KR Arg h.
Therefore, as
KR Arg p = n
and since h tends to 1, when R tends to +, it follows that

KR Arg P
tends to n when R tends to + (explain!).

Therefore, by applying (1.34) (repeat the PArg), we obtain (1.32).
Since n = n+ + n , from (1.32), it follows that (1.33) holds.
59
Veba 1.3.13. Determine the number of solutions of the equation z 9 6z 4 +3z1 =

0 in the unit disc U .
Uputstvo. Let f (z) = 6z 4 and g(z) = z 9 + 3z 1.
Since |f | = 6, |g| 5 on T , it follows that |g| < |f | for z T .

According to the Rouch's principle , functions h = f + g and f have the same
number of zeros in U . Since function f = 6z 4 has four zeros in U , then function
h = f + g also has four zeros in U .
Hence, the polynomial P (z) = z 9 6z 4 + 3z 1 has four zeros in U .
4
Veba 1.3.14. Prove that polynomial P (z) = z 11 + 2z 5 + 1 has at least one zero
in the unit disc U .
Uputstvo. Since P (1) = 4 and P (1) = 2, P has at least one real zero.
Alternative solution. Let f (z) = 2z 5 and g(z) = z 11 + 1. Prove that there
exist r (0, 1), such that 25 > 1 + 11 for (r, 1). By the Rouch's principle,
polynomial P has ve zeros in U = {|z| < } for every (r, 1) and hence, ve
zeros in U .
Verify that polynomial P has ve zeros in U .
4
Veba 1.3.15. Determine the number of zeros of polynomial P (z) = z 5 + 12z 3 +

3z 2 + 20z + 3 in the ring A = A(1, 2) = {z : 1 < |z| < 2}.
Uputstvo. Let f (z) = 20z and g(z) = z 5 + 12z 3 + 3z 2 + 3.
Since |f | = 20, |g| 19 on T , then P has one zero in U .

Let U2 = {|z| 2}, T2 = U2 , f (z) = 12z 3 and g(z) = z 5 + 3z 2 + 20z + 3.
Since |f | = 96, |g| 87 on T2 , P has three zeros in U2 and hence, two zeros in A.
Alternative solution: Let f (z) = 12z 3 + 20z and P = f + g . Then |f | > |g|
on A and f has two zeros in A. Therefore, by applying the Rouch's theorem on

A, we conclude that P has two zeros in A.
4
Veba 1.3.16. Determine the number of zeros of function h(z) = ez 1 + 2z 2 in

the unit disc U .
Uputstvo. f (z) = 2z 2 , g(z) = ez 1.
|g(z)| e 1 < 2 for z T (two zeros in U ).
Veba 1.3.17. Prove that equation z + ez = k, k > 1, has one and only one real
root in the right half-plane + .
Uputstvo. Let
f (z) = k z,
g(z) = ez ,
R > 0;
and
+
BR
= {z : |z| < R, Re z > 0},
lR = {z = it : R t R}
+
KR
= {z : |z| = R, x 0}.
60
Since
|g| 1 for Re z 0, |f (z)| k for z lR and |f (z)| R k > 1

+
+
for z KR
and R > k + 1, it follows that |g| < |f | for z BR
.
By the Rouch's principle, functions h = f + g and f have the same number
+
+
of zeros in BR
. Since function f = k z has one zero z = k in BR
, then function
+
h = f + g also has one zero in BR .
Verify that h has one positive zero.
4
Veba 1.3.18. How many solution has the equation z 2 = aez in the unit disc U ,
if 0 < a <
1
?
e
1
e
Uputstvo. f (z) = z 2 , g(z) = aez . |g(z)| |a|ez < e = 1 for z T ; two zeros
in U .
Veba 1.3.19. Let 0 < r < . Show that, for large enough n, polynomial Fn (z) =
2
2n
z2
z
1
+ + (1)n
has no zeros in the disc B , where B = B(0; r).
2!
(2n)!
Uputstvo. Fn (z) are partial sums of the Taylor's series of function cos. Since the
Taylor's series of function cos uniformly converges on B , and cos has no zeros on B ,
by the Rouch's principle, it follows that (explain!), for large enough n, polynomial
Fn (z) has no zeros in the disc B .
More details. Since cos z = 0 i z = zk = +k , k Z, function cos has no zeros

2
in B . Therefore, = min{| cos z| : z B} > 0. Since the sequence Fn uniformly
converges to cos on B , there exist n0 such that inequality | cos z Fn (z)| < holds
2
for n n0 and z B .
Further, according to the Rouch's principle, if n n0 , functions cos and Fn
have the same number of zeros in B .
4
Veba 1.3.20. If
P (z) = z 3 3z 2 + 4z 3
and is a contour dened by (y) = P (iy), < y < +, then:

(a) Sketch the trace of the contour .
(b) Verify that Arg = 3.
(c) Prove that all zeros of the polynomial P belong to the right half-plane.
Uputstvo. The trace of contour can be sketched by using parametric equations
of this contour: u = 3(y 2 1), v = y(4 y 2 ).

Let + , 0 and be respectively the restrictions of on (, 2], [2, 2] and
[2, ). 0 is closed negatively oriented contour around 0 and therefore,
Arg 0 = 2.
61
Since
lim
v(y)
= +,
u(y)
lim
v(y)
= ,
u(y)
we obtain (b).
(c) follows according to the Mihajlov's lemma.
For the exercise see, for example, [Je-Ma]: the Argument principle, 8.37 8.45,
10.01.
Task 7 is similar to task 8.39, while the following task 8.38 (from [Je-Ma]), can
be solved by using the Mihajlov's lemma.
4
Veba 1.3.21. Determine the number of zeros of polynomial P (z) = z 2n +4z 2n1 +
1 in the right half-plane + .
Sl. 1.13: The zeros of polynomial
Uputstvo. The parametric equation of the contour is:

u = (1)n y 2n + 1,
v = 4(1)n+1 y 2n1 , < y < +.

v s
If, for example, n is odd, we nd that u = 1
, < v < +, where
4
2n
> 1. Since
s=
2n 1
v(y)
lim
= 0,
y u(y)
it follows that Arg = 2 and, by the formula (1), n+ = n 1.
Similarly, if n is even, we obtain Arg = 0 and, according to the formula (1),
n+ = n holds.
Result: n 1 if n is odd; n if n is even.
4
Veba 1.3.22. Let > 2, P (z) = z 3 z + and g(z) = ez (z + 2). Verify that
a. |g| < |P | on + .
b. Equation P = g has two solutions in the right half-plane +
Uputstvo. Denote by zk zeros of polynomial P . As P (0) = and P () = ,

we conclude that P has a negative zero, for example z1 . From z1 + z2 + z3 = 0,
since z2 = z3 , it follows that Re z3 = Re z2 = z1 > 0.
4
Veba 1.3.23. *Let P = z n + + an and Q = z m + + bm be polynomials of
degree n, m 1 respectively and = P 1 (T ). Prove that max{|Q(z)| : z }

1.
Veba 1.3.24. Suppose that f is holomorphic on U and continuous on U .
a. If f : U U , then f has a xed point in U .

b. Give an example of a mapping whose all xed points belong to the boundary
of disc U .
62
Rezultat. a. Let
rn = 1
1
,
n
fn (z) = rn f (rn z)
and denote by E the identity mapping. Since |fn | < |E| on T , functions E and
Fn E have the same number of zeros in U . Therefore, since E has one simple
zero in U , it follows that Fn E has one zero in U , i.e. there exists zn U such
that fn (zn ) = zn . Since zn U , there exists a subsequence that converges to some
point z0 U and, therefore, by taking the limit value, we obtain f (z0 ) = z0 .
b. Assume that and are real numbers and let
(z) =
z ei
.
z ei
The required mapping is dened by (w) = k(z), where k > 0.

More precisely, w = 1 (k(z)).
Veba 1.3.25. * Let f be entire function and f (T) T. Prove that f (z) = ei z n ,
where R and n N .
Uputstvo. (i) f is constant.
(ii) f is not constant. Dene C(t) = f (eit ), 0 t 2 . Hence, f (D) D

and there exists w0 f (D). Since the index function IndC is constant on D,
IndC w = IndC w0 for all w D. In particular, IndC 0 1 and there exists z0 D
such that f (z0 ) = 0. By the Symmetry Principle (The Schwarz reection principle)
it follows that f (z0 ) = and hence, z0 = 0 i f () = . From f 1 (0) = 0, it
follows f (z) = ei z n .
4
Veba 1.3.26. * (i) Prove that equation z cos z = 1 has precisely two solutions in
the set C \ R of purely complex numbers.

(ii) Let p, q 1 and p, q N . Can we say something about purely complex
solutions of the equation z p sinq z = 1?
Uputstvo. (i) Let R = R(k, n) = [2k, 2k][n, n] be a rectangle, where k, n
N , L is positively oriented boundary of R, g(z) = cos z and f (z) = g(z) 1/z . Let
us dene oriented intervals L1 = [2k in, 2k in], L2 = [2k + in, 2k + in],
K1 = [2k in, 2k + in] and K2 = [2k + in, 2k in]; X(z) = eiz /2 and
Y (z) = eiz /2. Check whether for large enough k and n, the following statements
hold:
1. f has 4k 1 real zeros on the interval L0 = [2k, 2k];
2. (f ; L) = (g; L);
3. g(2k + it) = cosh t 1, and therefore (g; K1 ) = (g; K2 ) = 0;
4. X(2k in) = en /2, Y (2k in) = en /2, and therefore, g(2k in) =
cosh n. In particular, g maps L1 on a closed curve.
For t R, X(t in) = eit en /2, Y (t in) = eit en /2 and therefore, (g; L1 ) =
(X; L1 ) = 2k2 i. In similar way we conclude
(g; L
2 ) = (Y ; L1 ) = 2k2 i;
5. (f ; L) = (g; L) = (g; L1 ) + (g; L2 ) + (g; K1 ) + (g; K2 ) = 4k2 i;
63
Dene n = N (f, R) and p = P (f, R). Since n p = 4k , p = 1, it follows n = 4k + 1.
By 1. number of real zeros of f is n0 = (4k + 1) (4k 1) = 2.
(ii) Try to use a similar considerations as in the case of (i).
4
Kurepa's hypothesis. We shall assume the following notation. We shall

denote by N the set of natural numbers (nonnegative integers), N + denotes
positive integers The greatest common divisor of integers a and b is denoted
by (a, b). Kurepa dened in [Ku71] an arithmetic function K(n) P
that he
n1
denoted by !n and called it the left factorial, by K(n) =!n =
i=0 i!,
+
n N . In the same paper, Kurepa asked
n!) = 2, n = 2, 3, .
R ift(!n;
tn 1
He announced a proof using that K(n) = 0 e t1 dt. As far as we know
the problem is still open.
4. Beskonani proizvodi
Q
Ako je zk niz kb i ako postoji z = lim nk=1 zk kaemo da je z beskonani
proizvod brojeva zk i piemo
Q
z=
k=1 zk . Q
Neka je pn = nk=1 zk
Pret zk 6= 0, z 6= 0
pn
pn1 = zn Kako je z 6= 0 i pn z , sledi zn 1
Ako je zk = a za svako k 1, tada je pn = an , i ako je
Q
k
|a| < 1, tada pn 0 i dakle 0 =
k=1 a
Ako prizvod nije 0, tada zn 1 i nije restrikcija da pretpostavimo da je
Rezn > 0 za sve n.
P
P
Q
sn = nk=1 ln zk , exp sn = exp( nk=1 ln zk ) = nk=1 zk = pn
Propozicija
1.6. Pretpostavimo Rezk > 0. Tada
P
red
ln zk konvergira.
k=1 zk
konvergira akko
neka je z = rei , < , pn = |pn |ein , gde je < n + , i

`(pn ) = ln |pn | + in
tada je sn = `(pn ) + 2kn
Pretpostavimo sada da pn z . Tada (kn kn1 ) 0. Otuda kako su
kn celi brojevi, sledi da postoji prirodni brojevi n0 i k tako da je kn = k za
n n0 ; tako da sn `(z) + 2k
ako je |z| < 1/2, tada 12 |z| | ln(1 + z)| 23 |z|
Propozicija 1.7.
P Pret Rezk > 1. Tada red
lutno akko red
zk konvergira apsulutno.
ln(1 + zk ) konvergira apsu-
64
Q
ako jeQzk = 1, tada |zk | = 1 i proizvod
k=1 zk konvergira ka 1, a
n
proizvod k=1 zk je 1
Ako apsulutna konvergencija povlai konvergenciju, ??
Q
Def Pret Rezk > 0. Tada
kaemo
da
beskonani
proizvod
k=1 zk konP
vergira apsulutno ako red
ln zk konvergira apsulutno.
Q
Propozicija 1.8. Pret
Rez
>
0
.
Beskonani
proizvod
k
k=1 zk konvergira
P
apsulutno akko red (zk 1) konvergira apsulutno.
ln zk = ln(1 + wk ), wk = zk 1
? Kako zk 1, tada wk 0 i ln(1 + wk ) wk
2
p
E0 (z) = 1 z, Ep (z) = (1 z) exp(z + z2 + zp , p 1
Ako |ak | i ak 6= 0 i pk niz prirodnih brojeva tako da
X
r pk +1
)
<
(
|ak |
(1.35)
k=1
za sve r > 0, tada
f (z) =
Epk (z/ak )
k=1
konvergira u H(C).
f je cela funkcija
Neka je f cela funkcija. Pret da f ima nulu reda m u z = 0; i neka su ak
nule f . Tada postoji cela funkcija g i niz niz prirodnih brojeva pk tako da
f (z) = z m eg(z)
Epk (z/ak )
k=1
limz0 ln(1+z)
=1 Q
z
Q
Beskonani proizvod
k=1 (1 +
k=1 (1 + zk ) konvergira apsulutno akko
|zk |) konvergira.
P
ak z
Neka je an niz kb 0 < |an | < 1, (1 |an |) < i Bk (z) = |aakk | 1a
.
kz
Pokazati da beskonani proizvod
B(z) =
Y
k=1
konvergira u H(U ) i da je |B(z)| 1.

B(z) se naziva Blaschke proizvod.
Bk (z)
GLAVA 2
EXTREMAL QC MAPPINGS
1 INTRODUCTION
A. The problem of Grtzsch

If Q is a square and R is a rectangle, not a square, there is no conformal
mapping of Q on R which maps vertices on vertices. Instead, Grtzsch asked
for the most nearly conformal mapping of this kind and took the rst step
toward the creation of a theory of quasiconformal mappings.
Let w = f (z) be a mapping from one region to another. Recall that we
use notation
df = pdz + qdz,
where p = f
and q = f.
The complex (Beltrami) dilatation is:
f = Belt [f ] =
The dilatation of f is:
Df =
q
p
|p| + |q|
.
|p| |q|
We pass to the Grtzsch problem and give it a precise meaning by saying

that f is most nearly conformal if sup Df is as small as possible.
Let R, R0 be two rectangles with sides a, b and a0 , b0 . We may assume
that K =
b0 b
: 1. The mapping f is supposed to be C 1 -homeomorphism
a0 a
from R onto R0 , which takes a-sides into a-sides and b-sides into b-sides.
Next, let x be the vertical segment which is the intersection of the line
Re z = x with R and x the curve which is the image of x under f .
Using the geometric obvious inequality b0 length(x ) and the CauchySchwarz inequality one gets K sup Df .
The minimum is attained for the ane mapping.
Note that the restriction to C 1 -mapping is not essential.
66
Miodrag Mateljevi
?? The last inequality holds for quasiconformal mapping (see, for example,
[5, 6, 72]).
B. Teichmller approach
Teicmller, following Grtzsch, showed that any homotopic equivalence
class of quasiconformal mappings from a compact Riemann surface M to
a compact Riemann surface N contains a unique mapping whose maximal
dilatation K is minimum.
Moreover, this unique mapping can be described geometrically in terms
of holomorphic quadratic dierentials on M . Such a dierential gives a way
of cutting up the surface M into the euclidean rectangles. These quadratic
dierentials locally have the form = (z)dz 2 , where is holomorphic
and they admit a picture as an orthogonal pair of foliations (horizontal and
vertical lines),
R pgiven locally by lines {Re = const} and {Im = const},
where =
(z)dz , away from zeros of , is natural parameter. The
Teichmller map has the form of a stretching by a factor K 1/2 along the
horizontal lines in this rectangles and a shrinking by a factor K 1/2 along
vertical lines.
C. The Main Inequality

This expository paper consists of the various uniqueness theorems which
follow, in general, from the length -area principle of Grtzsch. A powerful
version of this principle was given by Marden and Strebel. They called it
the minimum norm property for holomorphic quadratic dierentials.
Marden and Strebel stated the principle by way of comparison with harmonic quadratic dierentials. Gardiner gave two improvements of this principle. In the rst version, one takes a minimum over all L1 -measurable
quadratic dierentials.
These dierentials satisfy an inequality of line integrals taken over arcs
which are segments of regular vertical trajectories of a given quadratic differential. In the second version, the minimum is taken over all conformal
quadratic dierentials satisfying an inequality of line integrals over all homotopy classes of simple closed curves. These principles lead to the following
results: The Main Inequality of Reich and Strebel, the uniqueness part of
Teichmller's theorem, the suciency of the Hamilton-Krushkal condition
for extremal dilatation.
67
Let D denote the unit disc and
(z) 2
1 (z)
|(z)|
T (z) =
.
1 |(z)|2
We will refer to the following result as the Reich-Strebel inequality or
the Main Inequality.
Theorem 1.1 (Reich and Strebel). Suppose that f is a quasiconformal
homeomorphism of D onto itself which is the identity on D. Then, with

= f
ZZ
ZZ
|(z)|dxdy
|(z)|T (z)dxdy,
D
for every analytic integrable function on D.

Various forms of this result play a major role in the theory of quasiconformal mappings and have many applications.
For applications to extremal and uniquely extremal quasiconformal mappings, we refer the interested reader to the book by Gardiner [28], and for
some recent results to [73, 15, 14] and [89].
D. The energy integral

Let M and N be two Riemann surfaces with local conformal metrics
(z)|dz|2 and (z)|dw|2 and let f : M 7 N .
It is convenient for us to use the notation in local coordinates df = (f )dz +
)d
.
(f
z and p = f, q = f
The energy integral (Douglas-Dirichlet functional) of f is
Z
E(f, ) = e(f )dxdy,
M
where e(f ) is the energy density dened by
e(f )(z) = (|p|2 + |q|2 )
f (z)
.
(z)
If is the euclidean metric ( = 1 on N ) then the energy integral of f is

Dirichlet integral.
A critical point of the energy functional is called harmonic mapping. The
Euler-Lagrange equation for the energy functional is:
fz z + (log ) f pq = 0.
68
Miodrag Mateljevi
Moreover, if the Jacobian J(f ) > 0, the Euler-Lagrange equation can be

rewritten as
( f p
q ) = 0;
namely, f p
q is holomorphic on D. Here f p
q dz 2 , as a quadratic dierential, is called the Hopf dierential of f .
Thus harmonic maps arise from a geometric variational problem and as
far as we know, one can not study solutions of this equation, using classical
theory of elliptic equations.
In order to explain our ideas and results it is convenient to suppose that
M and N are domains in C.
Recall that D denotes the unit disc.
Now, we will state a simple, but useful, property of harmonic maps (related to natural parameter).
Again, we suppose, as at the beginning, that f is a harmonic mapping between Riemann surfaces M and N . Then (z)dz 2 is a holomorphic quadratic
dierential on M , where = f p
q in a local coordinate.
Let P be a regular point for (z)dz 2 on M and let be a natural parameter centered at P .
If we compute p and q with respect to natural parameter then we have useful
formula
f p
q=1
In the chapter II we will give an outline of proofs of some properties
of harmonic maps, using dierent tools: Dirichlet's principle, minimizing
sequences, dierent versions of Reich-Strebel inequality, etc.
For general properties of harmonic maps we refer the interested reader to
Eells and Lemaire [24], [25], Jost [41], Schoen [96], Schoen and Yau [? ] and
further references there.
E. The Main Inequality and Dirichlet's principle

Now we will state a formula for the energy density which explains connection between Dirichlet principle for harmonic maps (in general sense) and
via the Main Inequality with Grtzsch principle (an integral version of this
formula appears in [93], see also [112], [61] and [60]).
Suppose that is a metric density on D, f is C 1 function on D and let h
be a dieomorphism of D onto itself which is the identity on the boundary
of D. If = Belt[h], then
1 + ||2
1
e(f h ) =
e(f ) 4 Re
,
1 ||2
1 ||2
69
where = (f ) = f p
q . Hence,
e(f h1 ) e(f ) = 2(||T ||) + r(h),

where
r(h) = r(h, f ) =
2||2
(e(f ) 2||) 0.
1 ||2
If f is a harmonic mapping (with respect to ), then = (f ) is a holomorphic function on D. Hence, using the Main Inequality we obtain a version of
Dirichlet principle for harmonic mappings (in general sense):
E(f h1 ) E(f ).
We expect further applications of the Main Inequality in this direction.
In order to illustrate this we will outline a short proof of Dirichlet's principle (Theorem DP) for the euclidean harmonic functions using trajectories
of holomorphic quadratic dierentials.
Theorem 1.2 (Dirichlet's principle). Suppose that
(a) g is continuous function on D.

(b) g has the rst partial derivatives which are continuous on D.
(c) The energy integral of g is nite.
If u is continuous on D, harmonic on D and if u = g on the boundary of D

then
D(g) D(u),
where the inequality equals if and only if u = g on D.
Proof. Suppose that g and u are real functions and u is harmonic on D.
There exists holomorphic function f on D such that Ref = u on D. If we

consider this mapping f as a natural parameter, we can divide D on a nite
number of disjoint quadrilaterals k . In each k the mapping f is univalent
and maps each k on a horizontally convex domains Dk . Using an approach
as in Grtzsch principle, one can conclude
ZZ
ZZ
|g|2 dxdy area(Dk ) =
(u2x + u2y )dxdy.
k
Summing these inequalities we get the Dirichlet's principle.

In chapter II we state a version of Dirichlet's principle for harmonic
mappings and generalize the classical area theorem in dierent directions
70
Miodrag Mateljevi
(see [60]). Also, in chapter II we study uniqueness of harmonic mappings

using Dirichlet's principle, minimizing sequences and dierent versions of
the main inequality (see [54], [55] and [73]) and we give a proof of Beurling
theorem (Theorem B2) using the vertical trajectory of the corresponding
holomorphic function. A review of known results in this direction is given
in this chapter too.
F. Extremal dilatation
In this section we give a short report concerning extremal mappings.
The interested reader can learn more about extremal mappings from
Strebel's survey article [102], Reich's paper [84] and Earle-Li Zhong's [23],
all of which we highly recommend.
Extremal mappings have been one of the main topics in the theory of
quasiconformal mappings, since its earliest days, when Grtzsch solved the
extremal problem for two rectangles. In order to discuss them we need to
review some familiar denitions.
A homeomorphism f from a domain G onto another is called quasiconformal if f is ACL (absolutely continuous on lines) in G and |fz| k|fz | a.e.
in G, for some real number k , with 0 k < 1.
It is well known that if f is a quasiconformal mapping dened on the
region G then the function fz is nonzero a.e. in G. The function
f =
fz
fz
is therefore a well dened bounded measurable function on G, called the

complex dilatation or Beltrami coecient of f .
Let QC denote the space of all quasiconformal mappings from D onto
itself. Two elements f, g QC are equivalent if f = g on D.
For a given f QC we denote the equivalence class of f QC by Qf = [f ]
or [], where = f . We also use the notation,
k0 ([f ]) = inf{||g || : g Qf }.
We let L = L (D) be the space of essentially bounded complex-valued
measurable functions on D, and let M be the open unit ball in L . For any
in M there exists a quasiconformal solution f : D 7 D of the Beltrami
equation
(F1)
f = f
unique up to a postcomposition by a Mbius transformation.
71
We let f be the solution f of (F1) normalized by f (i) = i, f (1) = 1 and

f (1) = 1.
Two elements 0 and 1 in M are equivalent if f 0 and f 1 coincide on
D.
For given M the equivalence class [] contains at least one element
0 such that
||0 || = inf{|||| : []}.
Such a 0 is referred to as an extremal complex dilatation and f0 = f 0 as
an extremal quasiconformal mapping (abbreviated EQC mapping).
Let Q be the Banach space consisting of holomorphic functions , belonging to L1 = L1 (D), with norm
ZZ
|||| =
|(z)|dxdy < , Q.
D
Instead of Q the notations A and L1a are also used.

For L we consider the linear functional
() = (, ), Q,
where
ZZ
(, ) =
(z)(z)dxdy,
D
and denote by
|||| = || ||
the norm of as an element of the dual space of Q.
For L we say that it satises the Hamilton-Krushkal condition if
|||| = |||| .
We are now ready to state the main result about extremal complex dilatations.
Theorem 1.3 (Hamilton-Krushkal and Reich-Strebel). Let M .

A necessary and sucient condition that f is an EQC mapping is that
|||| = |||| .
72
Miodrag Mateljevi
G. Unique extremality
Ahlfors and Bers showed that T has a complex structure with tangent
space at the basepoint isomorphic to Banach space Q . Two tangent vectors
and in the tangent space to M determine the same tangent vector in T
if and only if
Z
Z
= , for all Q.
D
If and have this property, we say that they represent the same Teichmller innitesimal equivalence class or, more briey, that they are innitesimally equivalent. The space of equivalence classes is denoted by B .
A given is said to be extremal in its innitesimal Teichmller class if
|||| |||| , for any innitesimally equivalent to and write .
Recall that Hamilton, Krushkal, Reich and Strebel showed that a Beltrami coecient in M is extremal in its class in T if and only if is
extremal in its class in B . It was natural to consider whether the analogous
statement holds for the unique extremality. In several articles Reich showed
that in many special situations the two notions of unique extremality coincide and he conjectured that the notions may coincide in general. In [14]
(see also [73] and [15]) we have recently proved the answer to this conjecture
is armative.
Theorem 1.4 (The Equivalence Theorem I). is uniquely extremal in

its Teichmller class if and only if is extremal in its innitesimally class.
The proof of this theorem is based on estimates which allow us to compare

two Beltrami coecients and in the same global equivalence class and
two Beltrami dierentials in the same innitesimal equivalence class. These
estimates generalize Reich's Delta inequality for Beltrami dierentials in
the same equivalence class (see [84]). Unlike Reich's forms of the Delta
inequalities, our forms do not require either one of the Beltrami coecients
to have constant absolute value.
The generalized Delta inequality is our rst step towards obtaining the
criterion for the unique extremality of Beltrami dierentials. The next important step is the analysis of the proof of Hahn-Banach theorem and its
applications to our setting. In particular, we obtain the following necessary
and sucient criterion for the unique extremality of given Beltrami coecient .
73
Theorem 1.5 (Characterization Theorem I). Beltrami coecient is
uniquely extremal if and only if for every admissible variation of there

exists a sequence n in Q(D) such that
(a)
(b)
(n ) = kn kkk Re
n 0
lim inf|n (z)| > 0, for almost all z E().
Here, an admissible variation of is any Beltrami dierential that does

not increase the L norm of , and which is allowed to dier from only
on the set where |(z)| s < kk , where s is a constant, and the extremal
set E() is the set where (z) = kk . This criterion is analogous to the
Hamilton-Krushkal, Reich-Strebel necessary and sucient criterion for the
extremality. Namely, is extremal if and only if there is a sequence n of
holomorphic quadratic dierential of norm 1 such that
Z
kk Re n 0.
D
This criterion is among listed in the theorem in [14, Section 11], which
we called the Characterization Theorem. The Characterization Theorem
applies to many interesting situations. For instance, we can say precisely
when a Beltrami dierential of the form k|(z)|/(z), with a holomorphic
quadratic dierential with |||| = , is uniquely extremal.
There are many examples of extremal Beltrami dierentials with nonconstant modulus, but all examples of uniquely extremal Beltrami dierentials
known up to our papers [14] and [15] were of the general Teichmller type.
Moreover, many results obtained studying the extremal problems speak in
favour of the conjecture that all uniquely extremal Beltrami dierentials
satisfy |(z)| = |||| , for almost all z . Surprisingly, we disprove this conjecture and show that there are uniquely extremal Beltrami dierentials with
nonconstant modulus.
2 BELTRAMI EQUATION AND ABSOLUTE CONTINUITY

ON LINES
In this section we study dierentiablity of quasiconformal mappings. Our
main goal is to outline a proof that a quasiconformal mapping is dierentiable
almost everywhere in the sense of the Lebesgue measure. We also generalize
the analytic denition of quasiconformal mappings which was earlier studied
in the special case of quasiconformal dieomorphisms only. We sketch some
proofs or state only some results. For details we refer to [5, 6, 47, 72].
74
Miodrag Mateljevi
Let f be a complex valued function dened on subinterval [a, b] of R.

Suppose that for all > 0 there exists > 0 such that
n
X
|f (ak ) f (bk )| <
k=1
for all a = a1 < b1 . . . an < bn = b such that

n
X
|ak bk | < .
k=1
Then f is said to be absolutely continuous in [a, b]. Obviously, an absolutely continuous function is continuous. It is easy to see (see [94]) that an
absolutely continuous function is dierentiable a.e. in [a, b].
Recall that if f L1 [a, b] and
Zx
F (x) =
f (t)dt,
a x b,
then F is absolutely continuous on the segment [a, b]. If F is absolutely

continuous on segment [a, b], then F 0 exist a.e. on [a, b], F 0 L1 [a, b], and
Zx
F (x) F (x0 ) =
f (t)dt,
x0
where f = F 0 . Then we say F 0 = f in the distributional sense.

We make the following assumptions: the function F is continuous on
segment [a, b], F is dierentiable a.e on the segment [a, b], and F 0 L1 [a, b].
This does not imply that, in general, F is absolutely continuous on segment
[a, b]. The standard counterexample is the Cantor function.
A continuous real function is said to be absolutely continuous on lines
(ACL) in C if for each rectangle [a, b] [c, d] the functions x
u(x + iy) is absolutely continuous on [a, b] for almost all y [c, d], and
the functions y u(x + iy) is absolutely continuous on [c, d] for almost all
x [a, b]. If and 0 are domains in C, a homeomorphism f : 0 is
called ACL if the restriction of f to \ {, f 1 } is in ACL.
An ACL-mapping f : C has partial derivative a.e. in . The function f is said to be ACLp , where p 1, if the partial derivatives of f are
locally Lp -integrable. In this case, we also say f has Lp -generalized derivatives. For convenience, we have restricted ourselves to continuous mappings
(see [47]). A homeomorphism f : 0 is called ACLp if the restriction of
f to D \ {, f 1 } is ACLp .
75
Geometric Denition of Quasiconformality

Next we will consider briey our motivating problem, quasiconformal dieomorphisms between rectangles. Denote by R and R the rectangles
R = R(a; b) = {z = x + iy : 0 < x < a, 0 < y < b}

and
R = {w = u + iv : 0 < u < a , 0 < v < b }.

Let s = a/b and s = a /b and K A = K(R, R ) = max{s /s, s/s }.
Instead of R(a; 1) we write R(a).
In the introduction, the item A, we considered briey the Grtzsch problem and outlined a proof of the following:
Proposition 2.1. If f is a K -quasiconformal dieomorphism of R onto
R , with homeomorphic boundary extension, and if f maps vertices onto

corresponding vertices, then
(2.1)
K(R, R ) K .
In particular, if a/b a /b , then

a /b Ka/b .
Recall that a quadrilateral Q1 = Q(; z1 , z2 , z3 , z4 ) consists of a Jordan
domain together with four distinct boundary points given in the positive
order. The parts of the boundary arc connecting the points z1 , z2 and
z3 , z4 are called the a-sides, and the two remaining sides the b-sides of the
quadrilateral, respectively. Suppose that f maps the quadrilateral Q1 conformally onto a rectangle with sides of length a and b so that a-sides are
mapped onto the a-sides of the rectangle.
Then the conjugate quadrilateral is Q2 = Q(; z2 , z3 , z4 , z1 ). In other
words, it is the same as Q with complementary arcs, the b-sides, considered
as its a-sides. It was shown in the previous section that if is the family of
curves connecting the b-sides, then the module of Q is
M (Q) = ()1 =
b
,
a
and the module of the conjugate quadrilateral
e = M (Q)1 = a .
M (Q)
b
Now we are ready to state the geometric denition of quasiconformality.
76
Miodrag Mateljevi
Denition 2.1 (Geometric Denition). Let f : f () be a home-
omorphism. We say that f is K -quasiconformal if for every quadrilateral

Q
M (Q)
M (f (Q)) K M (Q).
K
Regularity of Quasiconformal Mappings and the Analytic

Denition
Let be a domain and f a sense-preserving homeomorphism of . A quadrilateral Q = Q(1 ; z1 , z2 , z3 , z4 ) where 1 is mapped by f onto quadrilateral Q . Then the number
K() = Kmod (f ; ) := sup
M(Q )
,
M(Q)
where supremum is taken over all quadrilaterals Q is called the maximal

modulus dilatation of f in .
Occasionally we write shortly Kmod () or Kmod (f ) for maximal modulus
dilatation of f in .
Next we will study the behavior of the Jacobian of a quasiconformal
mapping. Our aim is to give in the general case an analytic denition of
quasiconformality that is similar to the one we discussed for the quasiconformal dieomorphisms. We shall also prove that it is equivalent to the
geometric denition. We start by noting that Denition 2.1 is equivalent to
the following:
Denition 2.2. A sense-preserving homeomorphism f of is called quasi-
conformal (in the geometric sense) if its maximal modulus dilatation is nite.
If K() = Kmod () K < , then f is called K -quasiconformal (in the
geometric sense).
If f is dierentiable at a point z, and its Jacobian Jf (z) does not vanish,
we say that z is a regular point of f. The dilatation quotient (distortion) at
a regular point is then
|fz | + |fz |
Df (z) =
.
|fz | |fz |
Lemma 2.1. Let be a domain and f a sense-preserving homeomorphism
(difeomorphism) of . Between the maximal dilatation and the dilatation

quotient of a regular quasiconformal mappings holds
Kmod () sup Df (z) .
z
(2.2)
77
Proof. Let K = supz Df (z). We have to prove that mod-dilation of an
arbitrary quadrilateral Q is at most K.

Consider a quadrilateral Q, Q , and its image Q = f (Q). Dene
M = M(Q) and M = M(Q ). Now we need to show that
M K M.
(2.3)
Suppose that f1 maps Q conformally onto a rectangle R = R(M ) with

sides of length 1 and M, preserving the vertices. Let f2 map the quadrilateral
Q = f (Q) conformally onto a rectangle R = R(M ). Consider the mapping
g = f2 f f11 which maps R onto R and thus preserves vertices. Because f
is K - quasiconformal, the mapping g is K -quasiconformal and K(g) = K(f ).
The inequality (2.3) follows from the Proposition 2.1.
Remark 2.1. We have now proved that if for a sense-preserving dieomorphism f
of holds Df (z) K everywhere in , i.e. f is K -quasiconformal in the analytic

sense, then f is K -quasiconformal in the geometric sense. Conversely, every K quasiconformal mapping f satises the inequality Df (z) Kmod (z) at any point
of regularity, see the next Lemma. It follows that the inequality (2.2) holds, in
fact, always as an equality. Thus, a sense-preserving dieomorphism f of is K quasiconformal in the geometric sense if and only if Df (z) K everywhere in ,
i.e. f is K -quasiconformal in the analytic sense.
The class of K -quasiconformal dieomorphisms is not compact. This is

one reason to replace the classical denition of Grtzsch with a more general
one, which will be given next.
Let Uz denote a neighborhood of z and K(Uz ) = Kmod (Uz ) the
maximal dilatation of f in Uz . The number
Kmod (z) = inf K(Uz ) ,

where inmum is taken over all Uz is called the maximal dilatation of
f at the point z.
Theorem 2.1. Let f be a K -quasiconformal mapping on in the geometric

sense. If f is dierentiable at z0 , then
|fz | + |fz | (z0 ) K |fz | |fz | (z0 ) .
(2.4)
Proof. The idea of the proof is to consider a small square centered at z0
and regard it as quadrilateral with the vertices. The area and the distance of
the sides of f (Q) can be approximated by expressions involving the partial
derivatives of f at z. Application of Rengel's inequality then yields a lower
78
Miodrag Mateljevi
estimate for M(f (Q)) from which the inequality follows. Without loss of
generality we can suppose that z0 = 0 and we may choose r such that the
closure of the domain
Q = Qr = {z : |x|, |y| < r}

is a subset of .
By using a translation and rotation we may assume that f (z) = ax +
i by + o(z), for some a, b R and a |b| 0. Let Q = f (Q). Then
u(z) = ar + o(r) on the b-sides of Q, and hence sb (Q ) = 2ar + o(r).
Because M (Q) = 1, by the assumptions
M (Q ) K M (Q) = K,
where K = K(Qr ). By using Rengel's inequality, we estimate M (Q ) from
the below:
s2b
M (Q ).
M (Q )
We have the estimate M (Q ) = 4abr2 + o(r2 ), and hence s2b Km(Q ), i.e.
4a2 r2 + o(r2 ) 4 K abr2 + o(r2 ).

Hence a Kb. Since f (0) = a and f (0) = b, the proof follows.
From the proof of Theorem 2.1, we obtain the following estimate for the
dilatation of f.
Corollary 2.1. For a quasiconformal mapping f : C it holds

Df (z) Kmod (z)
(2.5)
at every regular point z . In particular, Df (z) K at every regular point.
Exercise 2.0.1. A regular quasiconformal mapping of a domain satises

D(z) = Kmod (z),
at every point z .
By Lemma 2.1 and Corollary 2.1, we have shown the following:
Proposition 2.2. If f is a dieomorphism, then geometric and analytic

denitions of qc are equivalent.
79
Exercise 2.0.2. Let f : f () be a sense-preserving homeomorphism. Prove

that
a) f is K -quasiconformal in the sense of Denition 2.2 if and only if for every
quadrilateral Q ,
m(Q)
m(f (Q)) Km(Q).
K
Note that the condition m(f (Q)) Km(Q) implies the double inequality
m(Q)
m(f (Q)) Km(Q).
K
b) K() = supz Kmod (z).
c) f is K -qc if and only if Kmod (z) K at every point z .
We leave to the reader to verify the following properties of quasiconformal

mappings.
(a) f is K -quasiconformal f 1 is K -quasiconformal.
(b) If g is conformal and f is K -quasiconformal, then f g and g f are
K -quasiconformal.
(c) If g is K1 -quasiconformal and f is K2 -quasiconformal, then f g and
g f are K1 K2 -quasiconformal.
(d) If f is C 1 , then the two denitions of quasiconformality agree.
Theorem 2.2. Every 1-quasiconformal map is conformal.

Lemma 2.2. A qc mapping (in the geometric sense) f of a domain is
absolutely continuous on lines in .
From Lemma 2.2, it follows that a quasiconformal mapping has nite

partial derivatives almost everywhere. Hence, further conclusions can be
derived using the following result of Gehring and Lehto:
Theorem 2.3. Let f : C be a continuous and open mapping of a plane

domain which has nite partial derivatives a.e. in . Then f is dierentiable a.e. in .
Application of this theorem to the quasiconformal case yields the following basic result:
Lemma 2.3. A K -quasiconformal mapping f of the domain is dierentiable and satises the dilatation condition (2.4) a.e. in .
80
Miodrag Mateljevi
Note that, by Corollary 2.1, f satises the dilatation condition (2.5) at

its regular points.
Let f be a homeomorphism of a domain . Dene f (E) = m(f (E)).
We say that 0f (z) is the volume derivative of f at z , where
0f (z) = lim
r0
m(f D(z, r))

.
r2
From Lebesgue's theorem we obtain (see [94], Theorem 8.6, for a more general result) the following:
0f (z) < + a.e.,

0f is measurable.
The integral
ZZ
0f d m(f (B))
B
for every Borel set B .

If f is dierentiable at z , 0f (z) = |J(z, f )|.
Our aim is to prove Theorem 2.4 which states that integrating the Jacobian of the quasiconformal mapping over a Lebesgue measurable set gives
the measure of the image set. First we need some lemmas.
Lemma 2.4. If the homeomorphism f of a domain has nite partial

derivatives a.e. in , then
ZZ
Jf dxdy m(f (B)),

B
for every Borel set B . Furthermore f is absolutely continuous in if

and only if
ZZ
Jf dxdy = m(f (E)),
E
for every measurable set E .
Lemma 2.5. A K -quasiconformal mapping (in the geometric sense) f of a

domain has L2 -partial derivatives in .
81
Proof. The dilatation condition (2.5) implies

|fx (z)|2 KJ(z) and |fy (z)|2 KJ(z), a.e. in .
It follows by Lemma 2.4 that the Jacobian of an almost everywhere dierentiable homeomorphism is locally integrable, and thus fx and fy are locally
L2 -integrable.
Lemma 2.6 ([47]). A homeomorphism f = u + iv of the domain , which

has L2 -partial derivatives in , is locally absolutely continuous in and
Z
Jf dxdy = m(f (E)),
(2.6)
E
for every Borel (measurable) set E .
Proof. Let (E) =
Jf dxdy and f (E) = m(f (E)). We show rst the
equality if E is the closed rectangle R with sides parallel to the axes.

Because f is in ACL() and the integral (2.6) depends continuously on
E , we can, by enlarging R if necessary, ensure that f is absolutely continuous
on R. Then f is also of the bounded variation od R and the image of R
under f is consequently rectiable. By applying generalized Green's formula
[47] (note the partial derivatives of u and v belong to L2 ) to the domains R
and R = f (R), we obtain
ZZ
Z
udv =
Jf dxdy
R
and
ZZ
Z
uf
dv(f
)=
dxdy.
R
By the invariance property of the Stieltjes integral the left sides of the above
equation are equal. We note that an open set of the nite plane consists of
countably many non-intersecting half-open rectangles with sides parallel to
the coordinate axes.
For general Borel set E , for every > 0 there exists an open set G ,
E G , G , with m(G \ E) < . Because the integral (2.6) is a set
function, we have
Z
Z
Jf dxdy = lim Jf dxdy = lim m(f (G )) m(f (E)).
E
0
G
82
Miodrag Mateljevi
By Lemma 2.4 the equality holds, and therefore the claim is proved.
Note that it is also true that lim m(f (G )) = m(f (E)) and therefore the
0
equality holds.
Question: Suppose that f is a homeomorphism of the domain , which
has L1 -derivatives (or is in ACL) in . Is it true that f is locally absolutely

continuous in and the formula (2.6) holds (see also Lemma 3.3 [47])?
Exercise 2.0.3. Let 0 < < 1/2, rk , k 1 sequence of rational numbers in

I := (0, 1) and
Jk = rk 2k1 , rk + 2k1 (0, 1),
where
A =
k=1 Jk ,
Dene f (x) =
Rx
B = (0, 1) \ A.
KA (t)dt and F (z) = f (x) + iy . Then f 0 = KA a.e. on I , F is
0
2
homeomorphism on I 2 , JF (z)
= f (x)a.e on I , JF = 1 a.e on A I , JF = 0 a.e
on B I , m(B I) > 0, m F (B I) = 0, and F maps a set of positive measure
on null-set. Verify that the formula (2.6) holds for F .
Theorem 2.4. If f is a quasiconformal mapping of a domain then

Z
Jf dxdy = m(f (E)),
(2.7)
for every measurable set E .

Thus, under a quasiconformal mapping the image area is an absolutely
continuous set function. This means that null sets are mapped on null sets,
and that the image area can always be represented by (2.7).
Applying (2.7) to f 1 , we conclude that J(z) > 0 almost everywhere.
Hence, by Lemma 2.3, we have proved the following:
Lemma 2.7. A K -quasiconformal mapping f of a domain is regular and

satises the dilatation condition (2.5) a.e. in .
Example 2.0.1. Let f (z) = z + C(x) = (x + C(x), y). Then f maps the line
ly = {x + iy : 0 x 1} onto ly0 = {x + iy : 0 x 2}, where y I . Hence f

maps the square Q = I I onto the rectangle R = [0, 2] I , KA = 2, and Kf = 1
a.e. on the square Q = I I . Because the inequality KA Kf does not hold f
does not satisfy qc geometric denition.
83
Example 2.0.2. Let f (z) = z + iC(x), where C is singular Cantor function on

I . Because C 0 (x) = 0 a.e. on I , i.e. C 0 (x) = 0 a.e. on I \ A, where A I and
m1 (A) = 0. Thus, for z A I , fx0 (z) = 1, fy0 (z) = i, and therefore Df (z) = 0
and f = 0, Kf = 1 a.e. on the square Q = I I . In spite of this, the mapping
f is not quasiconforlma. It is not absolutely continuous on any of the segment
ly = {x + iy : 0 x 1}, y I .
Let f (z) = C(x) + iC(y). Check that fx0 = fy0 = 0 a.e. on I 2 in the classical
sense, but not in distributional (generalized) sense.
Denition 2.3. If a homeomorphism f : satises

(i) f is ACL on ,
K 1
(ii) |fz | k|fz | almost everywhere in , where k =

, we say that f
K +1
is K -quasiconformal in the analytic sense.
Remark: This denition is equivalent to the following: f is a homeomor-
phism and it has locally integrable distributional derivatives which satisfy

(ii).
From Lemma 2.2 and Lemma 2.3, it follows that: if a homeomorphism
f : is K -quasiconformal in geometric sense then f is K -quasiconformal
in the analytic sense. A proof that the converse is true can be based on the
fact that analytic denition is invariant under conformal mapping. For the
higher dimensional case by Fuglede's theorem, see [110, p. 95].
Theorem 2.2 (The analytic denition). A homeomorphism f :

is K -qc i
(i) f is ACL on ,
(ii) |fz | k|fz | almost everywhere in , where k =
K 1
.
K +1
Beltrami equation
Quasiconformal mappings are related to the equation
f = f,
(2.8)
where : C is measurable and kk < 1. This equation is called the

Beltrami equation.
A function f : C is said to be an Lp -solution of (2.8) in if f has Lp derivatives and (2.8) holds a.e. in . It is shown that the Beltrami equation
fz = fz can be solved for given satisfying kk k < 1. First we prove
84
Miodrag Mateljevi
that the Beltrami equation (2.8) has always a homeomorphic solution. It is

easier to see the uniqueness of the solution.
Let f and g be quasiconformal mappings of a domain and write h =
f g 1 . Then a direct calculation yields
f (z) g (z) g(z) 2

h () =
.
(2.9)
1 f (z)g (z) |g(z)|
Theorem 2.5.
(i) A 1-qc map is conformal.

(ii) If f is a qc of a domain D and f = 0 a.e. on D. Then f is
conformal on D.
Theorem 2.6. Let f and g be quasiconformal mappings of a domain onto
itself whose complex dilatations agree a.e. in . Then f g 1 is a conformal

mapping.
Proof. By (2.9), the complex dilatation of h = f g 1 vanishes a.e. in .
Hence, it follows from Theorem 2.2 that h is 1-quasiconformal. Then by

Theorem 2.2 and Theorem 2.5(ii) it is conformal.
In the end of this section, our goal is to prove the following result. In
addtion, we consider the uniqueness of solutions.
Theorem 2.7 (Existence theorem). Let be a measurable function in

a domain with kk < 1. Then there is a quasiconformal mapping of
whose complex dilatation agrees with almost everywhere.
Let be a measurable function in a domain D with k = kk < 1. If
f : D D0 is a solution of of the - Beltrami equation (2.8) and g is is an
analytic function on D0 , then g f is also solution of the same equation.
Let be a measurable function on C with k = kk < 1. Then there is a
unique quasiconformal mapping f of C, normalized by f (i) = i, f (1) = 1 and
f (1) = 1, whose complex dilatation agrees with almost everywhere.
We let f be the solution f of the Beltrami equation (2.8) normalized
by f (i) = i, f (1) = 1 and f (1) = 1.
Integral Transforms
Let p > 2. For h Lp (C), the Cauchy transform is dened by
ZZ
1
1
1
h(z)
dx dy.
(P h)(w) =
zw z
C
(2.10)
85
For h C01 (C) we may write
ZZ
ZZ
1
1
1
1
(Ch)(w) =
h(z)
dx dy =
h( + w) d d.
zw
Then (P h)(w) = (Ch)(w) (Ch)(0). Note that (P h)(0) = 0.
(2.11)
Lemma 2.8. For h Lp (C), p > 2, the Cauchy transform (P h) is Hlder

continuous with exponent 1 2/p.
Proof. Busing the Holder inequality, where q is the conjugate exponent of p,

we obtain
Z Z
1
1
1
|P h(w)| =
h(z)
dx dy
zw z
Z Z
1/p Z Z
1/q
1
|w|
p
|h(z)| dxdy
dx dy
(|z w||z|)q
Because q is the conjugate exponent of p > 2, we have q (1, 2), and
therefore the last integral is nite. A change of variable shows that
ZZ
ZZ
1
1
22q
dx dy = |w|
dx dy
(|z(z w)|)q
|z(z 1)|q
where the value of the last integral is some constant A = Ap depending only
on p. Write Kp = A1/p . It follows that
|(P h)(w)| |w|12/p Kp khkp .

We note that (P h)(w1 ) (P h)(w2 ) = (P h1 )(w1 w2 ), where h1 (z) = h(z +
w2 ). Then we have
|(P h)(w1 ) (P h)(w2 )| Kp kh1 kp |w1 w2 |12/p ,
(2.12)
and kh1 kp = khkp .
Green's Formula
If f C 1 (), where is a domain having a nite number of boundary components, each being a regular Jordan curve , and the positively-oriented
boundary of G, then Green's formula states that
Z
ZZ
I = f dz =
d(f dz)
86
Miodrag Mateljevi
Because d(f dz) = (df dz), and df = Df (z)dz+Df (z)dz , we have d(f dz) =
(Df (z) dz + Df (z) dz) dz = Df (z) dz dz . Thus we may write
Z
ZZ
I = f dz =
Df (dz dz)
Note that dz dz = 2i dx dy , and the second integral is usual the Lebegue

integral because dx dy is the Lebegue measure in R2 . It follows that
Z
ZZ
Df dx dy
(2.13)
f dz = 2 i
If g C 1 (G), where G is a domain having a nite number of boundary components, each being a regular Jordan curve and is the positivelyoriented boundary of G, then Green's formula (2.13) yields
Z
ZZ
ZZ
g dz =
Dg (dz dz) = 2 i
Dg dx dy.
(2.14)
Let > 0 and B = {z : |z w| < }. Dene G to be the set G\{z :

|z w| < }. Suppose that a G. We apply Green's formulas (2.13) and
(2.14), respectively, with
f=
h
h
and g =
,
za
za
where h C 1 (G). Let = be the curve dened by
(t) = a + eit , where 0 t 2.

Because the function z 7 (z a)1 is holomorphic, we have
Df = fz =
(Dh)(z)
Dh(z)
h(z)
, gz = Dg(z) =
.
za
za
(z a)2
Verify
Z
lim
Z
0
Hence
g dz = 0.
f dz = 2ih(a), lim
1
h(a) =
2i
(2.15)
(2.16)
h(z)dz
1
za
2i
ZZ
G
(Dh)(z)
dz dz
za
(2.17)
h(z)dz
=
za
ZZ
Dh(z)
h(z)
za
(z a)2
87
dz dz.
(2.18)
The proof of the formula (2.18) shows the following: For each h C02
(space of twice dierentiable functions with compact support), the Hilbert
transform is dened by the Cauchy principal value:
ZZ
h(z)
1
(T h)(w) = lim
dx dy .
(2.19)
2
0
(z w)
|zw|>
For w BR , we prove
w=
ZZ
1
dx dy.
zw
(2.20)
BR
Example 2.0.3. First, one may apply (2.17) with h(z) = z and to use the indentity
zz = R2 for z KR , to obtain
Z
Z
z dz
dz
2
=R
= 0.
z
w
z(z
w)
KR
KR
Let h C02 and (z) = (T h)(z) h(z0 )z . Then we may show that has at z0
derivative 0 (z0 ) = (z0 ). By direct calculation
ZZ
1
h(z)
h(z
)
0
0 (z0 ) = (z0 ) = (T h)(z0 ) =
dx dy ,
(2.21)
(z z0 )2
B
where B = BR is an arbitrary disk containing the point z0 and the support of h.

Because has at z0 derivative 0 (z0 ) = (z0 ) which is independent of direction,
it follows that (z0 ) vanishes.
This example can also be used for obtaining a proof of the items (a) and
(b) of Lemma 2.9 (see [47, pp. 155157]).
Lemma 2.9. If h C02 , then (T h) is well-dened and (T h) C 1 .

(a) (P h)z = h,
(b) (P h)z = (T h),
(c) and
ZZ
ZZ
|h|2 dx dy.
|(T h)|2 dx dy =
C
88
Miodrag Mateljevi
Remark: Note that (a) solves the d-bar problem f = h.

Proof. Let
1
(Ch)(w) =
ZZ
h( + w)
1
d d.
(2.22)
Then, by formal dierentiation,
1
(Ch)(w) =
ZZ
h( + w)
1
d d.
(2.23)
By change variables, we have z = w + , and

ZZ
ZZ
hz
1
hz
1
(P h)w =
dx dy and (P h)w =
dx dy.
zw
zw
(2.24)
Now, (a) and (b) follow respectively from formulas (2.17) and (2.18). By
Green's formula, we have
ZZ
ZZ
hz
dh dz
1
1
dz dz =
2i
zw
2i
zw
Now dene to be C\{z : |z w| < }. Then
ZZ
Z
1
1
h
dh dz
(P h)w = lim
= lim
dz = h(w)
0 2i
0 2i
zw
zw
by Green's formula. Note that the change of sign comes from the orientation
of the path integral. Similary, we obtain (P h)w = (T h).
Finally, we prove (c). First observe that formula (2.24) can be written
in the following form. Recall that if h C02 , by Green's formulas (2.17) and
(2.18) for the terms in formula (2.24) hold
P (hz ) = h h(0), P (hz ) = (T h) (T h)(0)
(2.25)
Under the assumption h C02 , we can apply (2.24) to hz , and by use the second equation (2.25) we obtain (T h)z = P (hz )z = hz and (T h)z = P (hz )z =
T (hz ) = P (hzz ) + (T h)z (0). Thus (T h) C 1 and (P h) C 2 .
Because h has compact support it is immediate that P h = O(1) and
T h = O(|z|2 ). We have now sucient information to justify all steps in the
calculation. Let KR denote circle of radius R. Since (P h)(T h) = O(|z|2 ),
and
Z
P hT h d z
KR
89
approaches 0 when R tends , by integrating by parts and using parts (a)

and (b), we nd
ZZ
ZZ
ZZ
1
1
2
|(T h)| dx dy =
(P h)z ((P h))z dz dz =
(P h)((P h))zz dz dz.
2i
2i
Again, integrating by parts and using parts (a) and (b), we obtain
ZZ
ZZ
ZZ
1
1
=
h(P h)z dz dz =
|h|2 dx dy.
(P h)(h)z dz dz =
2i
2i
Exercise 2.0.4. Prove (i) and (ii) from directly (2.24).

Now (T h) is dened for h C02 , but since C02 is dense in L2 (C), using the
isometry the operator T can be extended to all h L2 (C). But we cannot
extend P in the same way.
Using the Caldern-Zygmund lemma, we can even dene T on Lp (C) for
any p > 1, but T will no longer be an isometry, although kT hkp is bounded.
Approximate h Lp (C) by hn C02 , such that hn h in the Lp -norm. The
Caldern-Zygmund lemma says that for p > 1, we have
k(T hn )kp Cp khn kp

for some constant Cp , and Cp 1 as p 2. It follows that (T hn ) is a Cauchy
sequence in Lp (C) and therefore it converges. We dene (T h) = lim (T hn ).
n
The Calderon-Zygmund lemma says that for p > 1,
kT hkp Cp khkp
for some constant Cp , and Cp 1 as p 2.
Absolutely Continuous Functions

Recall that if f L1 [a, b] and
Zx
F (x) =
f (t) dt,
a x b,
then F is absolutely continuous on the segment [a, b]. If F is absolutely

continuous on segment [a, b], then F 0 = f exist a.e. on [a, b], f L1 [a, b],
and
Zx
F (x) F (x0 ) = f (t)dt.
x0
90
Miodrag Mateljevi
Then we say F 0 = f in the distributional sense.

We make the following assumptions: the function F is continuous on
segment [a, b], F is dierentiable a.e on the segment [a, b], and F 0 L1 [a, b].
This does not imply that, in general, F is absolutely continuous on segment
[a, b]. The standard counterexample is the Cantor function.
Lemma 2.10. For h Lp (C), p > 2, then (P h)z = h, and (P h)z = (T h)

in the sense of distributions.
Proof. Let C01 be a test function. If h C02 , then by Lemma 2.9

ZZ
ZZ
ZZ
ZZ
(P h)z =
h, and
(P h)z =
(T h).
(2.26)
Approximate h Lp (C) by hn C02 , such that hn h in the Lp -norm.
Replace h with hn C02 . The right hand members have the right limits
since
kT h T hn kp Cp kh hn kp .
On the left hand side, we know by Lemma 2.8 that P (h hn ) converges
0 uniformly on compact subsets and since has compact support equation
(2.26) holds with h replaced by h.
Remarks: A solution of equation Df = h is given by f = (P h). If g is

holomorphic f = P h + g is also a solution. If f1 and f2 are two solutions,
then D(f1 f2 ) = 0 and by Weyel's lemma f1 f2 is holomorphic.
Let X be a Banach space and A : X X a linear operator such that
kAk < 1. Then the operator A : X X is surjective, the operator (I A)1
exists, and
X
1
Ak .
(I A) =
k=0
It follows that, for every y X , the equation x Ax = y has a unique

solution x X . The proof can be based on the following:
X
k=0
kAk k
kAkk < .
k=0
Solutions of the Beltrami Equation

Suppose that f has locally integrable derivatives in the complex plane C and
that f (z) 7 0 as z 7 . With the notation
ZZ
()
1
d d ,
(C)(z) =
C z
91
we then obtain from Green's formula

(2.27)
f = Cf.
For a smooth with compact support we dene the Hilbert transform H

of by
H = (C).
By dierentiation we obtain an expression for H as the principal value
ZZ
1
()
(H)(z) = lim
d d,
70+
(
z)2
A
where A = { : < || < 1 }. Instead of H we use also the notation T .
Fix 0 < k < 1, and let L (k, R) denote the measurable functions on C,
bounded by k , and supported in the disk BR . We let QC 1 (k, R) denote the
continuous dierentiable homeomorphisms f of C such that f = f , for
any L (k, R), normalized so that
1
f (z) = z + O( ), as z 7 .
z
Let f QC 1 (k, R). Then by (2.27), we have
f (z) z = C(f )(z).

Thus, if we set g = f 1 and use f = f , we obtain
g = H(f ) = H(f ) = H(g) + H().

In terms of the operator,
H (g) = H(g),
g Lp (C),
we obtain the equation
(I H )g = H().
(2.28)
If we x p = p(k) > 2 so that kH k < 1, then I H is invertible. Thus, we

can solve the equation (2.28) for g to obtain
g = (I H )1 H() Lp (C).
Now we are ready to give the main result of this section.
(2.29)
92
Miodrag Mateljevi
Theorem 2.8. Fix 0 < k < 1, R > 0 and p = p(k) > 2 as above. For
L (k, R), there is a function f on C, normalized so that f (z) = z + O( z1 ) at

, with distribution derivatives satisfying the Beltrami equation f = f .
Proof. (Outline) Dene g by (2.29)m and let

f (z) = z + C(g + ).
Because T is the convolution operator with kernel 1/z that is locally in L1 ,
the function f is continuous. Moreover, f is normalized at ,
f = g + ,
and
f = 1 + H(g + ) = 1 + g
in the distributional sense, so f satises the Beltrami equation.
Recall the Beltrami equation
fz = fz
(2.30)
where kk k < 1. We rst treat the case where has compact support,
so that f be analytic in a neighborhood . We shall use a xed p > 2 such
that kCp < 1, where Cp is from the Caldern-Zygmund inequality.
Theorem 2.9. Under the above assumptions, there exists a unique solution
of (2.30) such that f (0) = 0 and fz 1 Lp (C). By a solution, we mean f
has distributional derivative and is continuous.
3 NEW VERSION OF THE MAIN INEQUALITY
Analyzing the proof of the Grtzsch principle we discovered the following
lemma.
Let D be a vertically convex domain of nite area in the complex plane
C and let F be a mapping from the domain D onto the domain G.
Suppose that we have metric ds = (w)|dw| on G.
Let x be the interval which is the intersection of D by the straight line
Re z = x and let x be the curve which is the image of x under F . Let
p(x, y) = x be the projection and let (, ) = p(D).
93
Lemma 3.1. With the notation and hypothesis just stated, suppose (in
addition) that the mapping F is homeomorphism which has the rst generalized derivatives and that
Z
length(x ) (w)|dw| a.e. in (, ).
x
Then
ZZ
1/2 Z Z
area(D)
(w)dudv
G
1/2
T dd
where
= Belt[F ].
The proof of this lemma will be given in section C of this chapter. Note
that this lemma enables us to get a new version of the Main Inequality
(Theorem 3.2, section D) which is applicable to mappings which are not
quasiconformal. But rst, we are going to give a proof of the Reich-Strebel
inequality in the case of Riemann surfaces of nite analytic type using this
lemma.
A. The inequality of Reich and Strebel

It is convenient to use the notation
(z) 2
1 (z)
|(z)|
T (z) =
.
1 |(z)|2
Theorem 3.1 (RS - Reich and Strebel). Let R be a Riemann surface of
nite analytic type and let be integrable holomorphic quadratic dierential

on R.
Let f be a quasiconformal self mapping of R which is homotopic to the identity map and let be the Beltrami coecient of f . Then
ZZ
ZZ
(A1)
|(z)|dxdy
|(z)|T (z)dxdy.
R
94
Miodrag Mateljevi
Proof. Suppose that all noncritical trajectory of are closed. Up to a set
of Lebesgue 2-dimensional measure zero R = k , where k are disjoint

ring domains. Each k is swept out by a family of vertical trajectories of
the holomorphic quadratic dierential (z)dz 2R, and
p in each k there exists
a single valued univalent branch = k (z) of
(z)dz .
Each region k (k ) is a rectangle Rk = { : 0 < < ak , 0 < < bk }.
Let k = 1
k , Fk = f k , = = k ( ), where is vertical interval
which is the intersection of Rk with the straight line Re = , and let
= = f ( ).
Since the closed trajectories are shortest in their homotopy class (see [105,
Theorem 17.1]), we obtain
Z p
Z p
bk =
|(z)||dz|
|(w)||dw|.
If Gk = f (k ), = k = Belt[Fk ],
1/2
ZZ
|(w)|dudv
Ak =
1/2
ZZ
and Bk =
T dd
Dk
Gk
then by Lemma 3.1
ak bk Ak Bk .
Using the change of variables z = 1
k (), we get
ZZ
Bk 2 =
|(z)|T (z)dxdy.
k
Now, an application of Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, as in the proof of the

new version of the Main Inequality (see bellow), gives (A1).
Using the fact that quadratic dierentials with closed trajectories are
dense in Q (see [105, Theorem 25.2]), we can get the Main Inequality in
general.
B. The Problem of Grtzsch

B1. In order to motivate the statement and proof of our version of the Main
Inequality we will emphasize the main points in the proof of Grtzsch's

principle.
We will follow [54], where we announced the results of this section.
95
If Q is a square and R is a rectangle, not a square, there is no conformal

mapping of Q on R which maps vertices on vertices. Instead, Grtzsch asked
for the most nearly conformal mapping of this kind and took the rst step
toward the creation of a theory of quasiconformal mappings.
Let w = f (z) be a mapping from one region to another. Recall that we
use notation
where p = f
df = pdz + qdz,
and q = f.
The complex (Beltrami) dilatatation is:
q
f = Belt[f ] = .
p
The dilatation of f is:
Df =
|p| + |q|
.
|p| |q|
We pass to the Grtzsch problem and give it a precise meaning by saying

that f is most nearly conformal if sup Df is as small as possible.
Let R, R0 be two rectangles with sides a, b and a0 , b0 . We may assume
that K =
b0 b
: 1. The mapping f is supposed to be C 1 -homeomorphism
a0 a
from R onto R0 , which takes a-sides into a-sides and b-sides into b-sides.
Next, let x be the vertical segment which is the intersection of the line
Re z = x with R and x the curve which is image of x under f .
The starting point of Grtzsch's approach is the geometric obvious inequality
Zb
(B1)
b length(x ) =
|p q|dy.
0
Using
ZZ
Jf dxdy = a0 b0 ,
(B2)
R
where Jf denotes the Jacobian of f , and the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality one

get
(B3)
K sup Df .
The minimum is attained for the ane mapping. We note the following
connections to with Grtzsch's problem. The restriction to C 1 -mapping is
96
Miodrag Mateljevi
not essential. The inequality (B3) holds for quasiconformal mapping (see,
for example, [5]).
In order to give a version of Grtzsch principle concerning mappings with
L1 -derivatives, we need the following denition.
B2. Denition of Lp derivatives

Let D be a domain in C . We say that a function f : D 7 C has Lp
derivatives, p 1, if it statises the following two conditions:
(a) f is absolutely continuous on lines in D.
(b) The partial derivatives fx and fy belong to Lp in every compact
subset of D.
When we say that f has rst generalized derivatives in D this means
that f has L1 -derivatives in D. For various characterizations of functions
with Lp -derivatives and their important role in the theory of quasiconformal
mappings we refer to Chapters III to VI of the book by Lehto, Virtanen,
[47].
B3. A version of Grtzsch's principle

Before, we give further extension of Grtzsch's principle, it is useful to
consider the following example when (B1) and (B3) does not hold.
Example 3.0.4. Let : I 7 I , where I = [0, 1], be Cantor function and let
f (z) = x + i(y + (y)).
Note that this function does not satisfy ACL property and that the known
formula for the length of curve by means of rst partial derivatives does not
hold.
Suppose that:
(a) f is a homeomorphism of closed rectangle R onto the closed rectangle
0
R which maps a-sides onto a0 -sides and b-sides onto b0 -sides.
(b) f has the rst generalized derivatives on R.
In order to get some conclusion we can follow the outline of the proof of
Grtzsch principle from the part B1 of this section.
We need the following denition below.
At the point z where (z) is dened and |(z)| 6= 1, we dene T (z) by
T (z) =
|1 (z)|2
.
1 |(z)|2
Also, at point z where |p(z)| = |q(z)| we dene T (z) to be zero if p(z) =

q(z) and + if p(z) =
6 q(z).
97
Now, we can give the precise meaning of T by means of T , where
= /||.
Since f satises the ACL-property, inequality (B1) holds for a.a. x
[0, a].
In order to prove inequality (B4) (see below), we can suppose that T is
dened and nite a.e. on R, because otherwise the right-hand side of (B4)
is innite.
Next, we can integrate with respect to dx over [0, a] and use the fact that
the Jacobian
Jf = |p|2 (1 ||2 ) a.e. on R.
Instead of (B2), we have
Z
Jf dxdy area(R0 ) = a0 b0 .
R
Now, an application of Cauchy-Schwarz inequality gives

ZZ
1/2
b0
0 1/2
(B4)
area(R) [area(R )]
T
.
b
R
Further development of the ideas outlined above leads us to Lemma 3.2

(see below), which will be used in the proof of the new version of the Main
Inequality.
C. Proofs of Lemma 3.2 and Lemma 3.3

For the sake of the reader recall the statement of the Lemma 3.2.
Let D be a vertically convex domain of nite area in the complex plane
C and let F be a mapping from the domain D onto the domain G.
Suppose that we have metric ds = (w)|dw| on G.
Let x be the interval which is the intersection of D by the straight line
Rez = x and let x be the curve which is the image of x under F . Let
p(x, y) = x be the projection and let (, ) = p(D).
Lemma 3.2. With the notation and hypothesis just stated, suppose (in
addition) that the mapping F is homeomorphism which has rst generalized
derivatives and that
Z
(C1)
length(x ) (w)|dw| a.e. in (, ).
x
98
Miodrag Mateljevi
Then
(C2)
ZZ
1/2 Z Z
area(D)
(w)dudv
1/2
T dd
where
= Belt[F ].
Proof. We will use the notation dF = P d + Qd , where P = F and

Q = F .
We can suppose that T is dened and nite a.e. on D, because otherwise
the right-hand side of (C2) is innite. With denition of T in mind, this
means that P = Q a.e. on A, where A is the set on which Jacobian JF
equals zero.
Since F is absolutely continuous on x for a.a. x (, ), we nd
Z
length (x ) = ( F )()|P ||1 |d.
x
By Fubini's theorem and assumption (C1),

ZZ
area(D)
( F )()|P ||1 |dd.
D
Since
JF = |P |2 (1 ||2 ) a.e. on D,
the term on the right can be written in the form

ZZ
1/2
=
( F )()JF T1/2 dd.
D
Next, using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality we conclude that
A1/2 B 1/2 ,
where
ZZ
ZZ
2
A=
( F )(z)JF (z)dxdy
and B =
T dd .
D
Let
ZZ
2 (w)dudv.
C=
G
We need the following lemma to nish the proof.
99
Lemma 3.3. A C .
Proof. Let the measure be dened by
Z
(E) =
JF (z)dxdy
E
and
F (E) = m(F (E)),

for every Lebesgue measurable set E .
Since F is a homeomorphism which possesses nite partial derivatives
a.e. in D, by ([47, Lemma 3.3, p.131])
(E) F (E)
and therefore we have the desired result.
D. Proof of new version of the Main Inequality

There are several papers of Reich and Strebel which concern various
forms of the Main Inequality. Our proof is based on their ideas.
Here, we will give a complete proof of the Theorem 3.2, because we need
to be careful when we work with mappings whose dilatation is not bounded.
For convenience of the reader let us recall the statement of Theorem 3.2.
Theorem 3.2. Suppose that

(a) f is a homeomorphism of D onto itself,
(b) f has rst generalized derivatives on D,
(c) f is the identity on D.
Then the inequality

ZZ
ZZ
|(z)|dxdy
|(z)|T (z)dxdy
D
holds for every analytic integrable function on D.
D1. First, we observe that Theorem 3.2 can be reduced to the case when
is also analytic on D. Namely, let r , 0 < r < 1, be the function dened

by r (z) = (rz), z D. If Theorem 3.2 holds for every r , 0 < r < 1,
then, when r approaches 1 we conclude that the theorem holds for , by
Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem.
100
Miodrag Mateljevi
Suppose that is an analytic function in D.

The following decomposition is possible (see [106] and [103]). Up to
a set of Lebesgue 2-dimensional measure zero, D = nk=1 k , where {k }
are disjoint simple connected strip domains. Each k is swept out by
a family of vertical trajectories of the holomorphic quadratic dierential
2
(z)dz
R p and in each k there exists a single valued schlicht branch = k (z)
of
(z)dz . Each region Dk = k (k ) is vertically convex.
In [S] it is merely assumed that is analytic on D, instead of D, so that
countably many, instead of merely nitely many k , can occur. Actually, in
our use of the strip domains, the advantage of limiting ourselves to nitely
many is purely didactic.
For the local and global behavior of the trajectories of holomorphic
quadratic dierentials we refer reader to Strebel's book ([105]).
The following fact is important in the proof of Theorem 3.2.
D2. The vertical trajectories of holomorphic quadratic dierential are

globally geodesics in Teichmller's metric
ds2 = |(z)||dz|2 .
R
Note that = k (z) is a single-valued branch of
dz in k and that
k
Dk = k (k ) and x = x is the interval which is intersection of Dk by
straight line Rez = x.
Let x = 1
k (x ) and Gk = f (k ). Thus x is trajectory of holomorphic
quadratic dierential (z)dz 2 . Let x = f (x ).
Since x is a global geodesic in Teichmller metric
ds2 = |(z)||dz|2 ,
Z
Z
length(x ) = |(z)|1/2 |dz| |(w)|1/2 |dw|.
x
Thus we can apply Lemma 3.2 to the function Fk = f 1

k and
1/2
(w) = |(w)| . Hence, by Lemma 3.2,
ZZ
(D1)
|(z)|dxdy = area(Dk ) Ak Bk ,
k
where
ZZ
Ak =
1/2
|(w)|dudv
Gk
and
ZZ
101
1/2
Bk =
T dd
= k = Belt(Fk ).
Dk
Using the change of variables z = 1

k (), we get
ZZ
Bk 2 =
|(z)|T (z)dxdy.
k
Further application of the Cauchy-Schwarz lemma and (D1) give

n
n
X
X
area (k )
Ak Bk A B,
k=1
where
A=
k=1
X
n
A2k
1/2
and B =
X
n
k=1
Bk2
1/2
k=1
Now, Theorem 3.2 follows from the fact that
ZZ
A=
1/2
|(z)|dxdy
Z
and B =
1/2
||T dxdy
where = Belt[f ].
4 EXTREMAL QC
A. Introduction
This part is an expanded version of the lecture given by the author at
The VIII Romanian-Finish Seminar, Iassy, August '99.
Recently, in [73], [15] and [14], characterizations of unique extremality
and example of unique extremal dilatation of nonconstant modulus have
been obtained.
Our primary purpose is to give a short exposition of some of the main
result of the authors' joint papers, mentioned above, and sketch further
progress in the study of a more general concept.
In order to simplify exposition it is convenient to restrict mainly considerations in this chapter to the disc D.
102
Miodrag Mateljevi
In order to introduce and discuss a more general concept of unique extremality we need a few denitions.
For a given f QC we denote the equivalence class of f by Qf = [f ] or
[], where = f . Recall some denitions from the introduction.
We also use the notation,
k0 ([f ]) = inf{||g || : g Qf }.
equation
(F1)
f = f

We let f be the solution f of (F1) normalized by f (i) = i, f (1) = 1 and
f (1) = 1.
We say two elements 0 and 1 in M are equivalent if f 0 and f 1
coincide on D and write 0 1 .
The universal Teichmller space T = T (D) is the space of equivalence
classes of Beltrami coecient in the unit ball M of the space L = L (D)
of all essentially bounded functions on D.
The equivalence class of the zero dilatation is the basepoint in T .
For dilatation the extremal set E = E() is the set where |(z)| =
|||| .
We say that is uniquely extremal on its extremal set E if the hypothesis
that is equivalent to , in its Teichmller class together with the condition
|||| |||| , imply that = a.e. on E .
One veries easily that if is uniquely extremal on its extremal set E
and if the measure of E is positive, then is an extremal dilatation.
In order to prove that f QC is extremal (or uniquely extremal) we need
estimates which allow us to compare Beltrami dilatation f of f , with g ,
for the other g Qf .
It appears that the main inequality of Reich and Strebel is a major tool
in theory of extremal quasiconformal mappings.
Using the main inequality in [14] we have derived an inequality, which
we called Delta inequality, and we have shown that the Delta inequality is
suitable for studying unique extremality.
103
In order to give a characterization of a given dilatation , which is

uniquely extremal on its extremal set E = E(), we make a variation r of
on a compact set K E . It turns out that [r ] is a Strebel point.
Using Strebel Frame Mapping Criterion and the main inequality, we show
that for r (0, r0 ), where r0 is a positive number small enough, there is a
unit vector = r such that
Z
Z
() = () = |||| dxdy 2r ||.
D
Here Q is the subspace of L1 = L1 (D) consisting of holomorphic function in

D.
R
Now, if = is the linear functional dened by () = Re dxdy ,
D
we can elementary show that

(1) has a unique norm-preserving extension from Q to Q .
Here
is dened by
= on E ,
= 0 on D \ E and Q is the smallest
subspace of L1 which contains Q {}
.
Proof that (1) implies that is uniquely extremal on E is based on the
Delta inequality.
Analysis of the proof of Hahn-Banach Theorem shows that (1) is equivalent to
(2) There exists sequence {un } in Q such that
(un ) = ()
+ |||| ||
un || + o(1),
where o(1) 0, when n .
Hence, using the classical result that L1 convergence of a sequence of
functions {fn } implies that there exists subsequence {fnk }, which converges
a.e. on the corresponding set, and the Delta inequality, we can prove the
following result.
Theorem 4.1. is uniquely extremal on its extremal set E if and only if

(3) satises Reich condition on E ,
that is, there exists sequence {n } in Q, such that

R
(a)
(n ) = kn kkk Re n 0,
(b)
lim inf |n (z)| > 0, for almost all z in E().

n
This criterion has many applications concerning precise characterizations

(Theorem 4.18 and Corollary 4.3) and removable properties (Theorem 4.19
104
Miodrag Mateljevi
and Theorem 4.20) of unique extremal dilatation of Teichmller type. Also,

this criterion can be used to construct unique extremal dilatation of nonconstant modulus; see the part G below.
B. Extremal dilatation
In this section we give a short report concerning extremal mappings.
The interested reader can learn more about extremal mappings from
Strebel's survey article [102], Reich's papers [84, 85] and Earle-Li Zhong's
[23], all of which we highly recommend.
Extremal mappings have been one of the main topics in the theory of
quasiconformal mappings, since its earliest days, when Grtzsch solved the
extremal problem for two rectangles. In order to discuss them we need to
review some familiar denitions.
A homeomorphism f from a domain G onto another is called quasiconformal if f is ACL (absolutely continuous on lines) in G and |fz| k|fz | a.e.
in G, for some real number k , with 0 k < 1.
It is well known that if f is a quasiconformal mapping dened on the
region G then the function fz is nonzero a.e. in G. The function
f =
fz
fz
is therefore a well dened bounded measurable function on G, called the

complex dilatation or Beltrami coecient of f .
The positive number
K(f ) =
1 + ||f ||
1 ||f ||
is called the maximal dilatation of f . We say that f is Kquasiconformal

if f is a quasiconformal mapping and K(f ) K .
For a given f QC we denote the equivalence class of f QC by Qf = [f ]
or [], where = f . Also we use notation,
k0 ([f ]) = inf{||g || : g Qf }
and
K0 ([f ]) =
1 + k0
.
1 k0
105

equation
f = f
(1)

We let f be the solution f of (1) normalized by f (i) = i, f (1) = 1 and
f (1) = 1.
Two elements 0 and 1 in M are equivalent if f 0 and f 1 coincide on
D.
For given M the equivalence class [] contains at least one element
0 such that
||0 || = inf{|||| : []}.
Such a 0 is referred to as an extremal complex dilatation and f0 = f 0 as
an extremal quasiconformal mapping (abbreviated EQC mapping).
As we mentioned, we restrict mainly considerations in this review to the
disc and only consider a few examples concerning the other Jordan domains.
For discussion concerning subregions of the plane, which are not necessarily simply-connected, we refer the interested reader to the paper [23],
which we follow in this section.
Let zi , 1 i 4, be four distinct points on the unit circle S 1 , and let
wi , 1 i 4, be their images under some sense-preserving homeomorphism
h of the closed unit disc D onto itself. Let S be the set of all quasiconformal
mappings g of the open unit disc D onto itself which maps zi to wi , 1 i 4.
Let and be conformal mappings of the two discs onto horizontal rectangles, R and R0 , which map the distinguished points (verticies) on verticies
of rectangles. Let AK be the horizontal stretching of R onto R0 dened by
AK () = K + i,
where = + i . Then f = 1 AK is the unique extremal mapping.
It is easy to compute the Beltrami dilatation of f , that we have just
described. One nds that
(2)
f = k
|0 |2
0
=
k
= k||/,
0
(0 )2
where (z) = [0 (z)]2 . Note that the holomorphic function (0 )2 belongs to

Q(D) since its L1 norm equals the area of rectangle R. If z varies on the
106
Miodrag Mateljevi
arcs of T between vertices, we have either 0 (z)dz real or purely imaginary

if the arcs goes to a horizontal or vertical edge of R. Hence (z)dz 2 = real
on these arcs. More precisely, dene (t) = (eit ); then 0 (t) = 0 (eit )ieit is

real or purely imaginary number and 0 (t)2 is real.

Teichmller discovered that many extremal quasiconformal mappings
have Beltrami dilatation whose form resembles (2).
In recognition of the importance of that discovery, a Beltrami coecient
in a plane region G is called a Teichmller dilatation if there are number
k [0, 1) and a holomorphic function Q(G), not identically zero, such
that
||
= k , a.e. in G.
If we do not require that is integrable we will say that is Teichmller

dilatation in general sense (or has Teichmller type).
Here, for a given domain G C, by Q(G) we denote the space of all holomorphic function in L1 (G). A quasiconformal mapping f whose Beltrami
coecient is a Teichmller dilatation is called a Teichmller mapping.
Let Q be the Banach space consisting of holomorphic functions , belonging to L1 = L1 (D), with norm
ZZ
|||| =
|(z)|dxdy < , Q.
D
For L we consider the linear functional
() = (, ), Q,
where
ZZ
(, ) =
(z)(z)dxdy,
D
and denote by
|||| = || ||
the norm of as an element of the dual space of Q.
For L we say that it satises the Hamilton-Krushkal condition if
|||| = |||| .
We are now ready to state the main result about extremal complex dilatations.
107
Theorem 4.2 (HKRS - Hamilton-Krushkal and Reich-Strebel). Let
M . A necessary and sucient condition that f is an EQC mapping is

that.
(3)
|||| = |||| .
We are going to prove the necessity of Hamilton-Krushkal condition for a

quasiconformal mapping to be extremal in its Teichmller class (see Theorem
4.3 bellow). For the proof we need two lemmas.
Let N denote the subspace of L (D) which is ortogonal to Q. Dierentiials which belong to N are called innitesimaly trivial.
For the proof of the next Lemma see Lehto [46].
1
4
Lemma 4.1. Let N and |||| < 2. Then, for 0 t , there is a

t [t] such that ||t || 12t2 .
Lemma 4.2. Let f be extremal. If and represent the same innitesimal

equivalence class, then
|||| |||| .
Proof. Set k0 = |||| , k = |||| . We assume that k < k0 and prove that
f = f cannot be extremal. Writing = , we rst prove that for
f = f (f t )1
has a smaller maximal dilatation than f . Since () =
= p/p, p = f t , direct calculation gives
t 1
, where
1 t
|()| = |(z)| At + O(t2 ),

where = f t (z),
A = A, (z) =
1 |(z)|2
Re (z)(z)
|(z)|
and the remainder term O(t2 ) is uniformly bounded in z .

n
o
k + k0
Write E1 = z D : |(z)| <
, E2 = D \ E1 . In E2 ,
2
Re
k + k0
k0 k
= || Re
k =
||
||
2
2
108
Miodrag Mateljevi
and therefore
1
A (1 k02 )(k0 k).
2
Hence, |()| < k0 m0 t. But, if t is as in Lemma 4.1, then f = f f t

and f belong to the same Teichmller class. We have
|| ||
|||| + ||t ||
k0 m0 t + 12t2
<
.
1 ||t ||
1 12t2
Let is equivalent to , = , t as in Lemma B1 and f = f f t .
| f | = |(z)| At + O(t2 ),
A = A, (z) =
1 |(z)|2
Re(||2 (z)(z))
|(z)|
and the remainder term O(t2 ) is uniformly bounded in z .

If f be extremal and E = E(), then Re(||2 (z)(z)) 0 a.e. on
E . Hence, = a.e. on E .
Using this and the steps as in [14], prove The Equivalence Theorem.
Theorem 4.3. If f is extremal in its equivalence class, then

(4)
|||| = |||| .
Proof. By the Hahn-Banach theorem and Riesz representation theorem
there exists M such that and represent the same innitesimal class
and |||| = || || = |||| .
Since |||| = |||| |||| , the equality (4) follows from Lemma 4.2.
The necessary condition (4) for to be extremal is also sucient.
Reich and Strebel proved this using their Main Inequality.
We nd it is convenient to formulate Hamilton-Krushkal's condition in
terms of Hamilton sequences.
Denition 4.1. Let f be the Beltrami coecient of some quasiconformal
mapping f of the unit disc D onto itself. A Hamilton sequence for f , is a

sequence in Q, such that ||n || = 1, for all n, and
lim (, n ) = |||| .
Now we can state theorem of Hamilton-Krushkal and Reich-Strebel in

the form
109
Theorem 4.4. Let f be a quasiconformal mapping of the unit disc D onto
itself, and let f be its Beltrami coecient. Then f is extremal in its class
[f ] if and only if f has a Hamilton sequence.
Corollary 4.1. Every Teichmller mapping is extremal in its equivalence

class.
Proof. If f is a Teichmller mapping then its Beltrami coecient f can

be written in the form f = k
||
, with 0 < k < 1, Q and |||| = 1. The
sequence {n }, with n = , for all n, is obviously a Hamilton sequence for

f .
Not all extremal quasiconformal mappings are Teichmller mappings.
The rst counterexample occurs in the famous paper [13].
Example 4.0.5. Let H be the upper half plane and K > 1. In [13, Section 5] it is
shown that the quasiconformal mapping f (z) = z|z|K1 of H onto itself is extremal
in its class.
A simple calculation shows that
f (z) = k
|(z)|
, z H,
(z)
where k = (K 1)/(K + 1) and (z) = z 2 .
This has the same form as Teichmller mapping, but is not Teichmller
mapping, because is not an integrable function on the upper half plane.
The question whether f is uniquely extremal mapping in its class was
not considered in [13].
One method for studying extremal mappings that are not Teichmller
mappings is to use degenerating Hamilton sequences.
Let f be the Beltrami coecient of the quasiconformal mapping f .
The Hamilton sequence {n } for is degenerating if n converges zero
uniformly on compact subsets on D as n .
The connection between degenerating Hamilton sequences and Teichmller mappings is given by the following
For a proof of the next lemma see for example Earle-Li Zhong [23] (see
also Lehto [46]).
Lemma 4.3 (Reich and Strebel). If f has a Hamilton sequence that

does not degenerate, then f is a Teichmller mapping.
110
Miodrag Mateljevi
Lemma 4.3 shows that it is desirable to nd geometric condition on an

extremal mapping that will prevent its Beltrami coecient from having a
degenerating Hamilton sequences. Strebel's Frame Mapping Criterion provides such conditions in terms of the boundary dilatation, which we shall
now dene.
The boundary dilatation H([]) of the Teichmller class of is the inmum over all elements in the equivalence class of in T of the quantity
1 + h ()
.
1 h ()
Here h () is the inmum over all compact subsets K contained in D of the
essential supremum of Beltrami coecient (z) as z varies over D \ K . As
usual, we let
1 + h ()
H () =
.
1 h ()
For f QC, also, we dene
H (f ) = H (f ) and H([f ]) = H([f ]).
Theorem 4.5 (Strebel Frame Mapping Criterion). Let f QC and let

f be extremal in its class Qf . If H([f ]) < K(f ) then
(a) f has no degenerating Hamilton sequences
(b) f is a Teichmller mapping.
Proof can be based on the following lemmas:
Lemma 4.4. Suppose that n is a sequence for which ||n || = 1 and

Z
n k,
(4.1)
as n , where k = |||| . Then

Z
n
k
dxdy
1 ||2
1 k2
(4.2)
and
Z
|n |T n dxdy
D
1
1k
=
.
K
1+k
(4.3)
111
Lemma 4.5. Assume f is is an extremal mapping and that f has a degenerating Hamilton sequence n . If S is an arbitrary compact of D and
f1 equivalent to f , then K0 H1 , where K0 is dilatation of f and H1 is
dilatation of f1 o compact set S .
Proof. Let K1 be dilatation of f1 on the whole D. Then a version of the

main inequality yields
1 K1 K0 Jn + H1 In ,
where
Z
Jn =
(4.4)
Z
n dxdy, In =
T dxdy.
(4.5)
D\S
Lemma 4.4 shows that In approaches to K01 . Hence K0 H1 .
Lemma 4.6. Assume f is is an extremal mapping and that f has no a
degenerating Hamilton sequence. If n is a Hamilton sequence that converges

uniformly on compact subsets of D to a holomorphic function . Then |||| =
1 and
lim ||n || = 0.
(4.6)
n
By Lebesgue's dominated convergence theorem
lim ||n || = 1 ||||.
(4.7)
If 0 < |||| < 1, show that sequence n = (n )/||n || is a degenerating

Hamilton sequence for f .
Note that for a proof of Strebel Frame Mapping Criterion, we can use
also Lemma 4.3 instead of Lemma 4.6.
Question: Describe dierence between Lemma 4.3 and Lemma 4.6.
Example 4.0.6 (Strebel's chimney). In [106], Strebel made another break-
through by constructing the rst example of a nonuniquely extremal Beltrami

coecient. Strebel considered the plane region
V = {z = x + iy : |x| < 1} {z = x + iy : y < 0},

now known as Strebel's chimney. For every real number K > 1, the quasiconformal
homeomorphism fK (z) = x + iKy of V is extremal in its class K T (V ). On the
other hand, K contains innitely many distinct extremal mappings. For instance,
hL (z) = fK (z), for y 0, and hL (z) = fL (z), for y < 0, is extremal in K for every
h1
i
L
,K .
K
112
Miodrag Mateljevi
4.1 Compact surfaces

We only give a short exposition. See Lehto [46] for more details.
If a Riemann surface S = D/G, where G is of the second kind we denote
by B the complement of the limit set L of G with respect to the unit circle.
Then S = D/G B/G is a bordered Riemann surface. A qc mapping f of
S onto S 0 = D/G0 can be extended to a homeomorphism of S onto (S 0 ) . It
seems convenient to use the term "homotopic" to mean "homotopic modulo
the boundary" in the case of bordered surfaces.
Let G be a Fuchsian group which acts on H, that is G is a group and
G Aut(H).
Fix a point z0 H and denote G(z0 ) the orbit of z0 . Dene N = {z H :
(z, z0 ) < (z, w) for all w G(z0 ) \ {z0 }}. N is called the Dirichlet region
of G with center at z0 . N is a non-euclidean polygon with nitly many sides
a1 b1 a01 b01 ap bp a0p b0p , where the sides ak and bk are equivalent to a0k and b0k ,
respectively. The number p (which is at least 2) is called the genus of S .
A sphere has the genus p = 0 and a torus has the genus p = 1. Every
compact Riemann surface whose universal covering is the upper half-plane
has the genus p > 1. Therefore every compact Riemann surface which is not
a sphere or a torus has the genus p > 1.
Suppose that S = H/G is a Riemann surface.
(i1) Then S is compact if and only if the Dirichlet regions of G are
bounded in the hyperbolic metric of H.
(i2) The covering group of the upper half-plane over a compact Riemann
surface is nitely generated and of the rst kind.
(i3) Two orientable compact surfaces are homeomorphic if and only if
they have the same genus.
(i4) A compact orientable surface of genus p is topological sphere with p
handles.
(i5) On a compact Riemann surface of genus p, the dimension of the
space of holomorphic Abelian dierentials is equal to p.
Lemma 4.7. Let C be a quasicircle and f a homeomorphism of the plane

which is K -qc in the complement of C . Then f is K -qc mapping of the
plane.
Theorem 4.6. Thmext0 Let S and S 0 be compact, topologicaly eqivalent
Riemann surfaces. Then every homotopy class of sense-preserving homeomorphisms of S onto S 0 contains a quasiconformal mappinng.
Proof. Let g : S S 0 be a sense-preserving homeomorphism of S onto S 0 .
Since S is compact, it has a nite covering by domains U1 , U2 , , Un such
113
that Uk is conformally equivalent to the unit disk and Uk is an analytic

curve. Set f0 = g and dene inductively a sequence of mappings fk : fk =
fk1 in S \ Uk and the mapping fk is the Buerling-Ahlfors extension of the
boundary values fk1 |Uk . fk |Uk is a dieomorphism and hence locally qc.
Since Uk is a removable singularity and S is compact it follows that f = fn
is a qc mapping of S . The mapping (p, t) 7 tfk (p) + (1 t)fk1 (p) is a
homotopy between fk1 and fk . Hence f is homotopic to g .
Suppose that p1 , p2 , , pm are punctures on S and g(pk ) = p0k then
we can modify the above proof to show that there is a qc f of S onto S 0
homotopic to g such that f (pk ) = p0k . There is a unique harmonic f with
the above properties cf [121, 123].
Theorem 4.7. Let M and N be two Riemann surfaces and f : M N a

qc mapping and F the class of all qc mappings of M onto N homotopic to
f . Then F contains a extremal mapping.
Proof. We leave to the reader to consider the cases when the the universal
covering surface is C or C. Thus we have only to consider the case when H
is the universal covering. We can lift each g F to a mapping g : H H
such that all mappings agree on R. The class W = {
g : g F contains its
qc limits. More precisely let 0 = inf{|h | : h W }. Then there is a
sequence hn in W such that |hn | 0 and therefore a subsequence hnk
such that hnk uniformly on compact subset of H converges to a qc h0 and
|h0 | = 0 . Thus h0 is with smallest maximal dilatation in W . The
projection f0 of h0 is the required extremal mapping.
Exercise 4.1.1. Let G be the covering group of M . If G is not of the rst kind
whether we need to modify the above proof.

Recall if S is bordered we use the term "homotopic" to mean with "homotopic
modulo the boundary".
Theorem 4.8. In each homotopy class of sense-preserving homeomorphisms
between tori there is a mapping whose lifts are ane and which is extremal.
Let T = C/G and T 0 = C/G0 . Let F denote the class of normalized
lifts. Fix a normalized base (1 , 2 ) of G. There exists a normalized base
(10 , 20 ) of G0 such that F is the class of self-homeomorphisms of C satisfying
f (0) = 0 and
f (z + m1 + n2 ) = f (z) + m10 + n20
(4.8)
for all z C and m, n Z, there is a unique ane mapping A in F. Let
f F be K -qc, and dene fk = f (kz)/k , k = 1, 2, . . . It follows, that
114
Miodrag Mateljevi
mappinng fk converges to A, uniformly in euclidean metric. By Theorem

XX, the maximal dilatation of A is at most K . Hence the projection of A is
extremal in the given homotopy class.
Show that A is uniquely extremal.
Theorem 4.9. On a compact Riemann surface M , a extremal qc mapping

f is a Teichmller mapping.
Hint. If n is a Hamilton sequence for f , then there is a subsequence of
it which locally uniformly converges to a holomorphic quadric dierential

. Since M is compact the subsequence uniformly converges on M . Hence
|| = 1, and every Hamilton sequence for f does not degenerate. Then, by
Lemma 4.3, f isR a Teichmller
mapping.
R
Using that = || ||, one can prove = || ||.
M
Theorem 4.10. Let M be a compact Rieman surfaces of genus grether then

1. In every homotopy class of sense-preserving homeomorphisms of M onto
another Riemann surface N , there is exactly one Teichmuller mapping. This
mapping is uniquely extremal.
Proof. By Theorem 4.7 in every homotopy class of sense-preserving homeomorphisms of M onto another Riemann surface N there is a extremal f0 ,
which is a Teichmller mapping by Theorem 4.9. Using a corollary of the
main inequality it is easy to prove that every Teichmller mapping is the
unique extremal; see Theorem 4.14 below. Note that Teichmller Uniqueness Theorem is also an immediate corollary of the Delta inequality (see
below).
Exercise 4.1.2. In Lehto [46],p.237-239, is given another proof of Teichmller's

Uniqueness Theorem. It seems useful to study it and to try to repeat the details.
C. Unique extremality
In this section we shortly discuss results of authors' joint paper [14] (see
also [73] and [15]).
For studying unique extremality it is convenient to use the following
result.
Proposition 4.1. Let be conformal mapping of the domain D onto V .
Then is uniquely extremal on V if and only if (z) = ((z))0 (z)/0 (z)

is uniquely extremal on D.
115
Strebel has proved in [101]

stretching A(w) = AK (w) =
n that thehorizontal
o
Ku + iv , K > 1, in V = w : |v| <
is the unique extremal in its equiva4
lence class.
The proof of Strebel's result has also been given in [23], using Reich's
method (see also Reich [85]).
1
Using conformal mapping w = (z) = ln z of H onto V one can

2
4
show that the Beurling-Ahlfors mapping f is the uniquely extremal mapping
in its class.
Ahlfors and Bers showed that T has a complex structure with tangent
space at the basepoint isomorphic to Banach space Q . Two tangent vectors
and in the tangent space to M determine the same tangent vector in T
if and only if
Z
Z
=
D
for all
Q.
If and have this property, we say that they represent the same Teichmller innitesimal equivalence class or, more briey, that they are innitesimally equivalent. The space of equivalence classes is denoted by B .
A given is said to be extremal in its innitesimal Teichmller class if
|||| |||| , for any innitesimally equivalent to .
Recall that Hamilton, Krushkal, Reich and Strebel showed that a Beltrami coecient in M is extremal in its class in T if and only if is
extremal in its class in B . It was natural to consider whether the analogous
statement holds for the unique extremality. In several articles Reich showed
that in many special situations the two notions of unique extremality coincide and conjectured that the notions may coincide in general. In [14] (see
also [73] and [15]) we have recently proved the answer to this conjecture is
armative.
Theorem 4.11 (The Equivalence Theorem I). is uniquely extremal in

its Teichmller class if and only if is uniquely extremal in its innitesimally
class.
Proof of this theorem is based on estimates which allow us to compare
two Beltrami coecients and in the same global equivalence class and
two Beltrami dierentials in the same innitesimal equivalence class. These
estimates generalize Reich's Delta inequality for Beltrami dierentials in
the same equivalence class (see [84]). Unlike Reich's forms of the Delta
inequalities, our forms do not require either one of the Beltrami coecients
to have constant absolute value.
116
Miodrag Mateljevi
The generalized Delta inequality is our rst step towards obtaining the
criterion for the unique extremality of Beltrami dierentials. The next important step is the analysis of the proof of Hahn-Banach theorem and its
applications to our setting. In particular, we obtain the following necessary
and sucient criterion for the unique extremality of given Beltrami coecient .
Theorem 4.12 (Characterization Theorem I). Beltrami coecient
is uniquely extremal if and only if for every admissible variation of there

exist a sequence n in A(R) such that
(a)
(b)
(n ) = kn kkk Re
n 0
lim inf |n (z)| > 0, for almost all z E().

n
Here, an admissible variation of is any Beltrami dierential that does

not increase the L norm of , and which is allowed to dier from only
on the set where |(z)| s < kk , where s is a constant, and the extremal
set E() is the set where (z) = kk . This criterion is analogous to the
Hamilton-Krushkal, Reich-Strebel necessary and sucient criterion for the
extremality. Namely, is extremal if and only if there is a sequence n of
holomorphic quadratic dierential of norm 1 such that
Z
kk Re n 0.
R
This criterion is among listed in the theorem in [14, Section 11], which
we called the Characterization Theorem. The Characterization Theorem
applies to many interesting situations. For instance, we can say precisely
when a Beltrami dierential of the form k|(z)|/(z), with a holomorphic
quadratic dierential with |||| = , is uniquely extremal.
There are many examples of extremal Beltrami dierentials with nonconstant modulus, but all examples of uniquely extremal Beltrami dierentials
known up to our papers [14] and [15] were of the general Teichmller type.
Moreover, many results obtained studying the extremal problems speak in
favour of the conjecture that all uniquely extremal Beltrami dierentials
satisfy |(z)| = |||| , for almost all z . Surprisingly, we disprove this conjecture and show that there are uniquely extremal Beltrami dierentials with
nonconstant modulus.
D. The main inequalities
117
Let D denote the unit disc,
(z)
S = 1 (z)
|(z)|
and
T (z) =
S
=
1 |(z)|2
(z) 2
1 (z)
|(z)|
1 |(z)|2
We will refer to the following result as the Reich-Strebel inequality or

the Main Inequality.
Theorem 4.13 (Reich and Strebel). Suppose that f is a quasiconformal
homeomorphism of D onto itself which is the identity on D. Then, with

= f
ZZ
ZZ
|(z)|dxdy
|(z)|T (z)dxdy,
D
for every analytic integrable function on D.

Various forms of this result play a major role in the theory of quasiconformal mappings and have many applications.
For application to extremal and uniquely extremal quasiconformal mappings, we refer the interested reader to the book by Gardiner [28], and for
some recent results to [73], [15], [14], [89], [85] and [124].
Let f and g be two equivalent quasiconformal mappings on D and let
= f = Belt[f ], = f 1 f, = g1 f and = .
Then g 1 f is the identity on D, and, if we apply the Reich-Strebel

inequality to F = g 1 f , we get
ZZ
(1)
1
|(z)|T T dxdy,
D
where = (1 /||)(1 /||)1 and Q, |||| = 1.

Note that = p/p, = p/p and
T =
S
.
1 ||2
We are going to state two consequences of the Main Inequality, known as

the fundamental Reich-Strebel inequalities (inequalities (2) and (3) below).
118
Miodrag Mateljevi
If K0 = K0 ([]) and g Qf is an extremal quasiconformal mapping, then

inequality (1) yields
(2)
K0
ZZ
||T dxdy.
D
Suppose now that is a Teichmller dierential, i.e., = k0 |0 |/0

for some 0 Q, with ||0 || = 1 and 0 < k0 < 1. Then = 1 and
T 0 = K01 , where K0 =
1 + k0
. Suppose that equivalent to k0 |0 |/0 ,
1 k0
where ||0 || = 1.
It means that there exists g = f , which is is equivalent to f = f .
Therefore, the inequality (1) becomes
ZZ
(3)
K0
|0 |T 0 dxdy.
D
Since || || = |||| = |||| , it follows from (3) that K0
1 + ||||
,
1 ||||
which implies k0 |||| and, therefore, k0 |0 |/0 has minimal norm among
all equivalent Beltrami dilatations . Moreover, if k0 = |||| , then the
inequality (3) yields
ZZ
(4)
K0
|0 | T 0 dxdy K0 ,
D
and so (4) is an equality and this obviously implies rst that = , i.e.
f 1 = g 1 . Hence f = g and therefore = k0 |0 |/0 almost everywhere.
We have proved the following theorem.
Theorem 4.14 (Teichmller Uniqueness Theorem). Suppose that =

k||/, where 0 < k < 1 and is an element of norm 1 in Q. Then
= k||/ is uniquely extremal in its Teichmller class on D.
thmt ?In section XX, we prove Teichmller Uniqueness Theorem using

the Delta inequality.
E. Delta inequality
Since
119
(z)
=
S = 1 (z)
|(z)|
1 2 Re (z)
(z)
+ |(z)|2 ,
|(z)|
we nd
T (z) =
S
=
1 |(z)|2
(1 2 Re (z)
(z) 2
1 (z)
|(z)|
1 |(z)|2
(z)
+ |(z)|2 )(1 |(z)|2 ),
|(z)|
and therefore
||2
||(T 1) = 2[ 1||
2 || Re 1||2 ]. Hence Theorem 4.13, which we
call the main inequality of Reich and Strebel, can be stated in the following
form.
Theorem 4.15 (Reich and Strebel). Suppose that f is a quasiconfomal
homeomorphism of D onto itself which is the identity on D.Then, with

= f
ZZ
ZZ
||2
Re
dxdy
|| dxdy, for all Q.

1 ||2
1 ||2
D
A simple calculation shows that this inequality is equivalent to the inequality (1) (see below), which is a starting point in the proof of the Delta
inequality. Sometimes it is convenient to denote the left and the right side
2 , ) = R(||2 , ||) and write
of this inequality by R [] and R+ [] = R(||

it in the form R [] R+ [], Q.
Example 4.1.1 (The Delta inequality in T -Version 1). Let and belong
to the same class in T , f = f , gR = f , = Belt[f 1 ] f , = Belt[g 1 ] f ,

= |(z) (z)|2 and I = I() = ||. If |||| k = |||| , then
D
I() C (), Q,
where C is a constant which depends only on k = |||| .
An equivalent version of this result is given in Theorem 4.16 below. Working on the subject the authors of paper [14] rst proved the version of this
result under additional hypothesis that || is bounded from below.
120
Miodrag Mateljevi
Proof. We will prove this result under additional hypothesis that || is
bounded from below by a positive constant s, for almost every z in D. Let

h = g 1 f and = Belt[h].
Let P = ( )(1 )1 and Q = (1 ||2 )(1 ||2 ). A straightforward computations yields (1 ||2 ) = Q|1
|2 , ||2 (1 ||2 )1 = /Q
2
and = P |1
| . Then for any Q we have as an easy consequence
of the Main Inequality (Theorem 4.15)
Z
Z
P
(1)
Re

||.
Q
Q
D
Note that || = ||. In order to get an estimate involving {} add to both

sides ` =
||
Re P
||. We get
Q
|| Re P
|| Re
Q
P
(|||| ).
Q
Furthermore, Re P = ||2 [ + (1 ||2 )(Re ||2 )]. Hence, using

2 Re = ||2 + ||2 , we nd
(4.9)
|| Re P = A + B(|| ||),
where A = 21 ||1 (1 ||)2 and B = 21 ||1 (|| + ||)(1 ||2 ) (see

Example 4.1.3 below).
Hence, the inequality (1) can be rewritten in the form
Z
A
(2)
|| J() + s(),
Q
D
where J() = Re
R P
D
(|||| ) and s() =
R B
D
(|| ||)||.
Since is bounded from below by a positive constant s > 0 in D, A and

B are bounded, using (2) and the estimate || || k ||, one can show
that there is a constant c, which depends only on k = |||| and s, such
that
(3)
where I1 =
I c(I1 + {}),
R
|| and = {} = {, } = (k ||)||.
D
121
Now we estimate I1 from above by means I . Using and the identity
||w| w|2 = 2|w|(|w| Re w),
and applying the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality to the functions ||1/2 and
R
|| ||1/2 , we obtain I 2 I ||1 || 2 2kI and
1
D
therefore I1
where c1 = 2k .
Using this, (3) and the inequality , we get
1 1
c1 I 2 2 ,
I c2 (I 2 2 + ).
If we set x = I 1/2 1/2 , this inequality becomes x c2 (1 + 1/x), which
implies x is bounded from above by a constant c3 = c3 (k, s) and therefore
I C(k, s).
Exercise 4.1.3. (i1)Let P1 = ( )(1 ). Then Re P = ||2 Re P1 and

C = Re P1 = (||2
)(1 ) = ||2 + ||2 ||2 (1 + ||2 ) Re . Hence, using
2
2
2 Re = || + || , we nd C = ||2 + ||2 ||2 (1 + ||2 )( ||2 ||2 )/2 =

E1 + F1 (||2 ||2 ), where E1 = (1 + ||2 )/2 and F1 = (1 ||2 )/2. Hence
|| Re P = E + F (||2 ||2 ), where E = ||1 E1 and F = ||1 F1 . In order to
extract expression || Re P , note that F > 1 and set A = F 1. Hence we get
(4.9).
(i2)check

=
.
1
Dene
=
.
1
Then = /
and 1 = ||/
= |1 |2 ||P .
The Delta inequality found many applications in subject related to unique

extremality (see Sections XX).
Exercise 4.1.4. Let and be Beltrami coecient of f and g , = Belt[f 1 ] f ,

= Belt[g 1 ] f , h = g 1 f and = Belt[h]. Then
=

.
1
Set X = p/
p, Y = X 1 = p/p. Then = XT () and therefore =
/
+Y
T (Y ) = 1Y . Hence since = Y , we get = 1
|Y
|2 and then

.
1
122
Miodrag Mateljevi
Exercise 4.1.5. Let and belong to the same class in T , f = f , g = f ,
= Belt[f 1 ] f , = Belt[g 1 ] f , h = g 1 f and = Belt[h].

Set X = p/
p, Y = X 1 = p/p. Then = XT () and therefore =
/
+Y
T (Y ) = 1Y . Hence since = Y , we get = 1
|Y
|2 and then
=

.
1
Dene 1 = ||/. By a version of Reich and Strebel inequality (Theorem

4.15), R [] R+ [] and therefore R1 [||] R+ [] J[] = R1 [||] R [].
It is easy to check
i1) Re(1 || ) = Re( ||

|| ) = Re[ (|||| ]),
2
i2) |1 |2 (1 ||2 ) = (1 ||2 )((1
R || ).
2
2
2
Dene I(|| , ) = I[| , ] = || |(1 ||2 |)1 || and
S[] = S[, ; ] =
(1 ||2 )1 Re[ (|||| ]).
In the proof of the next result we will also use (see below for the values of
A = A() and B1 = B1 (, ))
A||2 = Re 1 ||2 + B1 (|| ||) .

This yields
I [A] = R1 [||] R+ [] + K(, , ),

(4.10)
R
2 1
where K(, , ) = B1 (|| ||)(1 || ) ||. Hence, using a version of the
main inequality (Theorem 4.15), we obtain
I(||2 , A) S[] + K(, , ) .
(4.11)
i3) We can prove directly if n is a weak Hamilton sequence (in particular, a

Re-sequence) for R, then J[n ] converges
0.
Use an = Im n tends 0 and |w| w |w| Re w + Im w, prove that S[n ]

tends 0.
i4) Check K(, , ) c [] c1 [].
i5) If n is a weak Hamilton sequence (in particular, a Re-sequence) for , then
S[n ] and K(, , n ) converge 0.
Theorem 4.16 (The Delta inequality in T -Version 2). Let and
belong to the same class in T , f = f , g = f , = Belt[f 1 ] f , =

1
1
Belt[g
R 2 ] f , h = g f , = Belt[h] and I = I() = I(, ) = I [] =
|| ||. If |||| k = |||| , then
D
I() C (),
Q,
where C is a constant which depends only on k = |||| .
123
Proof. Step 1. || is bounded from below by a positive constant s, for

almost every z in D.
Let h = g 1 f and = Belt[h]. Then

.
1
Dene 1 = ||/. One can verify that
Re 1 ||2 = A||2 B1 (|| ||),

where A = 21 ||1 (1||)2 and B1 = 21 ||1 (||+||)(1||2 )|1|2 .
Dene
ZZ
(1 || )
J[] =
Re
dxdy
1 ||2
and
ZZ
+
J [] =
||
||||| |dxdy.
||(1 ||2 )
Let Q. An easy consequence of the Main inequality yields

ZZ
Re1 ||2
|| J[] J + [].
1 ||2
RR
(4.12)
Recall I = I[] = I [] =
||2 ||. Using Cauchy-Schwarz inequality
(can we avoid this procedure ?)and the identity
||w| w|2 = 2|w|(|w| Re w),

we obtain
J[] J + [] cI 2 2 .
Let = {} = (, ) = [] =
(k ||)|| and = .
Using this and the inequality , we get

1 1
I c I22 + ,
and therefore
I C(k, s).
Step 2. Variation of .
Let
= Belt[f 1 ], = Belt[g 1 ], s = k/2 and
E = Es = {|
()| < s}.
124
Miodrag Mateljevi
Take E . If
() 6= (), let () be the point on the hyperbolic circle
S = S(
()) = {w : (w,
()) = (0, k/2)}
with minimal hyperbolic distance from () ( is the hyperbolic distance in
the unit disc).
If
() = () 6= 0, let () = a
(), where a is a positive number so that
() S . Finally, if
() = () = 0, let () = k/2. Extend by setting
() = 0 for all in D\E . Let h0 be a qc mapping with Beltrami coecient
. Beltrami coecients
and
of h0 fand h0 g are
equivalent.Note
that | (z)| = (f z),
(f z) , | (z)| = (gz), (gz) . For E , the
denition of yields
(a) | (z)| = (),

() = k/2 and
((), ()) (k, k/2) (0, k/2) = (k, 0)

and therefore
(b) ((), ()) k .
If we use notation = f z , we can rewrite (a) in the form:
(a1)
| (z)| = k/2 for almost all z f 1 (E ).
Next, we have
(c) | (z)| = 0,
(f z) = |
(f z)| for almost all z such that f z
/ E , and
(d) | (z)| = 0, (gz) = |

(gz)| for almost all z such that gz
/ E.
Hence | | k/2 and | | k .
Dene h = g1 f , and = Belt[h ]. Since
h = (h0 g)1 (h0 f ) = g 1 f = h,

we have = and therefore
I [] = I [] C(k, k/2) [].
We left to the reader to check that [] 3 [] and therefore I []
3C(k, k/2) [].
Recall that the hyperbolic distance in the unit disc is dened by =
ln
where is the hyperbolic pseudo-distance in the unit disc.
1+
1 ,
Lemma 4.8. Let and belong to the same class in T , |||| k = |||| .
There is a qc mapping h0 such that | | k/2 and | | k , where and

are the Beltrami coecients of h0 f and h0 g .
Proof. Dene
125
E = Es = {|
()| < s},
E = Ek/2
and S() = S(; k/2) = {w : (w, ) = k/2}, where is the
hyperbolic pseudo-distance in the unit disc. Take E . If
() 6= (), let
L be the geodesic arc joining the points
() and () and () intersection
of L and S = S(
()). If
() = () 6= 0, let () = a
(), where a is a
positive number so that () S ; and if
() = () = 0, let () = k/2.
Finally, extend by setting () = 0 for all in D \ E . Let h0 be a qc
mapping with Beltrami coecient . Beltrami coecients
and of h0 f
and
h
g
are
equivalent.
Note
that
|
(z)|
=
(f
z),
(f z) , | (z)| =
0
(gz), (gz) . The denition of yields ((), ()) (k, k/2)

(0, k/2) = (k, 0) and | (z)| = k/2 for almost all z f 1 (E ). Hence
| | k/2 and | | k .
Exercise 4.1.6. If we suppose the above notation, check the following:
(i) Let S , E . Then (, 0) (,

() + (
(), 0) (0, k/2) +
(0, k/2). Hence, since (0, k/2) (k, k/2), we nd (, 0) (0, k) and therefore || k . Thus S Dk .
(ii) In [14] the set S is dened
1
S = w : (w,
()) = (0, k/2) .
2
It implies that (f z),

(f z) < k/2 if f z E . Whether we need to remove 1/2
in the previous denition of S in order to conclude |1 | k/2?
Lemma 4.9. Let be Beltrami coecient with || = k. For 0 < s < k,

dene
G = G
s = {|(z)| < s} .
(A1)Suppose that is uniquely extremal in B . If is any Beltrami

dierential supported in G with || k and dened by = on G and
= on D \ G, then is uniquely extremal in B .
(A2)Suppose that is uniquely extremal in T . Then there is a positive
number r such that Beltrami dierential (r) = r is uniquely extremal in
T.
(A3) Suppose that is equivalent to in B and || k . If z is outside
G, let (z) = 0 and let (z) is the intersection of the half line which begin
at (z) throughout (z) with euclidean circle {w : |w (z)| = k}. Then
126
Miodrag Mateljevi
r() is equivalent to r( ) in B , |r( )| rk , |r((z)(z))| = rk

for all z G and r( ) is uniquely extremal in T for some r.
Proof. Suppose that is equivalent to . Then C and C + belong

to the same class in B and |C + | max{Cs + 2k, Ck} for C > 0. If
we choose C such that Cs + 2k < Ck , that is C > 2k/(k s), by the unique
extremality of in B , we conclude that C = C + | and therefore
= .
Hint (A2). Choose r such that (0, rk) + (0, s) (k, rk). Let 1 and (r)
belong to the same class in T and |1 | rk . Let g , g1 and f be normalized
qc with Beltrami coecient (r), 1 and and j = f g 1 . j g and j g1
belong to the same class; since K(j g) K(), we nd (r) = 1 .
(A3) is straightforward.
Lemma 4.10. Let and belong to T , |||| k = |||| . For 0 < s < k,
dene
E = Es = {|
()| < s}, G = G
s = {|(z)| < s} .
(A1) There is a qc mapping h0 such that | | = k on G and = on D \ G

| | k , where and are the Beltrami coecients of h0 f and h0 g .
(A2) If is uniquely extremal in B , then is uniquely extremal in B .
(A3)Let and belong to the same class in T , |||| k = |||| . Then
and belong to the same class in T .
Proof. Dene
E = Es = {|
()| < s},
E = Ek and S() = S(; k) = {w : (w, ) = k}, where is the hyperbolic

pseudo-distance in the unit disc. Take E . If
() 6= (), let L be the
geodesic arc joining the points
() and () and () intersection of L and
S = S(
()). If
() = () 6= 0, let () = a
(), where a is a positive
number so that () S ; and if
() = () = 0, let () = k/2. Finally,
extend by setting () = 0 for all in D\E . Let h0 be a qc mapping with
Beltrami coecient . Beltrami coecients
and
of h0 f and h0 g are
equivalent. Note that | (z)| = (f z),

(f z) , | (z)| = (gz), (gz) .
The denition of yields ((), ()) (k, k) (0, k) = (k, 0) and
| (z)| = k for almost all z f 1 (E ). Hence | | k .XX
XX Can we prove more directly than in the proof of Theorem 4.16 if n
is a weak Hamilton sequence (in particular, a Re-sequence) for , then J[n ]
converges 0? The answer is yes.
127
Proposition 4.2. Suppose the hypothesis of Theorem 4.16 and Example
4.1.1 and the above notation. If n is a weak Hamilton sequence (in particular, a Re-sequence) for , then J[n ] and I[n ] converge 0.
R
Hint. Use an = Im n tends 0 and |w| w |w| Re w + Im w,
prove that S[n ] tends 0.
F. More general concept of unique extremality

We say that M is uniquely extremal on its extremal set E if the
hypothesis that is equivalent to , in its Teichmller class together with
the condition |||| |||| , imply that = a.e. on E .
We say that L satises unique extension property on its extremal
set E (or we say that is unique extremal on E in its innitesimal Teichmller class B ), if the hypothesis that is equivalent to , in its innitesimal
Teichmller class B together with the condition kk kk , imply that
= a.e. on E .
Theorem 4.17 (The Equivalence Theorem II). Let M and E be

its extremal set. Then the following conditions are equivalent
(a) is uniquely extremal on E
(b) satises unique extension property on E .
Note that an immediate consequence of this result is the Equivalence
Theorem when dilatation has constant absolute value.
First, we give a few denitions and lemmas, on which the proof is based.
Now, we will introduce the variation property and prove Lemma 4.11,
Lemma 4.12 and two other lemmas (we develop them in T and B ) which
utilize variational property.
Denition 4.2. Let L , k = |||| < 1 and E be its extremal set. We
say that satises variational property on E in T if for each compact subset

K E and for each r > 0
(1 + r)k0 ([r ]) > k0 ([]),
where r =
in K c and r = in K .
1+r
In a parallel manner, we dene the variational property in B .
128
Miodrag Mateljevi
Denition 4.3. Let L , k = |||| and E be its extremal set. We say

that satises variational property on E in B if for each compact subset
K E and for each r > 0
||r || > |||| ,
where r = in K c and r = (1 + r) in K .
Lemma 4.11. If is uniquely extremal on its extremal set E , then satises
variational property on E in T .
Proof. Let K E be a set of positive measure and let r be the variation
of to K .
Assume that H(r ) = K0 (r ). Then, there exists in Teichmller class
of r such that |||| s0 .
Let g = f gr , where gr = (f r )1 f . As in [14] the reader can verify
that K(g) K(f ).
Using that gr converges uniformly to the identity on K , when r 0+,
one can show that the set A = K gr (K) has positive measure if r (0, r0 )
for some positive r0 . This means that f and g are distinct on the set B =
gr1 (A). Since B E has positive measure and f is uniquely extremal on E
this yields a contradiction.
Lemma 4.12. (i1)Let be extremal and satisfy variational property on E in
T and let K E be compact set of positive measure on which || = |||| <

1. Then for each r > 0 there is a unit vector Q such that
Z
(1)
() 2r ||.
K
(i2) In particular if is uniquely extremal on E , we have (1).

0
,
1+r
0
1 + s0
r =
in K c and r = 0 in K . Since H([r ]) H (r )
1+r
1 s0
1 + s0
and by the denition K0 ([r ]) >
, we conclude that the extremal
1 s0
Proof. Let k0 = k0 ([]), 0 extremal in [], s0 = k0 /(1 + r), 1 =
dilatation K0 is strictly greater then the boundary dilatation H . Thus [r ]

is a Strebel point in T and by Strebel's frame mapping theorem there exists
sr = k0 ([r ]) > s0 and a unit vector Q such that r and sr

equivalent in T .
||
are
129
Therefore, by Reich-Strebel's second fundamental inequality (see the inequality (3) in Section C and also [28],
2
Z
Z
Z
|1 + r ||
|
1 + s0
1 + sr
A =: ||
=
Tr || +
T0 ||.
1 s0
1 sr
1 |r |2
Kc
K
D
R
R
Since |1 | R= s0 , using K c Tr || = K c T1 ||
R , A = D TR1 || + B ,
where B = K (T0 T1 )|| and B C1 (k0 )r K ||, C = T1 ||
1+s20
1s20
Re(1 ,)
,
1s20
+
a simple calculation as in [14] gives (1). (i2) follows from
Lemma 4.11 and (i1).
Now, we are going to prove that condition (a) implies the condition (b)
in Theorem 4.17.
Proof. Let be uniquely extremal on its extremal set E in its Teichmller
class and k0 = k0 ([]). Suppose that does not satisfy the condition (b).
Hence, there exists , distinct from on E , such that and belong to
the same class in B and |||| k0 . Therefore, there exist (0, k0 ) and a
compact set K E of positive measure such that
|(z) (z)| 2, a. e. on K.
Since
Z
() = k0 |||| Re
+
, Q
2
and
2 d, a. e. on K,
p
where d =
k02 2 , we conclude that (k0 d)||||K (), where
R
||||K = ||dxdy . Hence, using Lemma 4.11 and Lemma 4.12 one can
K
get a contradiction.
Lemma 4.13. If satises unique extension property on its extremal set

E , then satises variational property on E in B .
Proof. Contrary, suppose that ||r || k = |||| for some r > 0 and some
compact set K E , where r = in K c and r = (1 + r) in K . Then

there is a non-zero annihilator N such that ||r + || k .
Let 1 = + , where = (1+r)1 . By using similarity of the triangles,
one can check that ||1 || k . Since 1 [], we conclude that 1 = , i.e.,
= 0. Thus we have a contradiction.
130
Miodrag Mateljevi
Lemma 4.14. Let satisfy the variational property on E in B and let

K E be a compact set of positive measure on which || = |||| = k .
Then for each r > 0 there is a unit vector Q such that
Z
() kr ||.
K
Proof. Let r = in K c , r = (1+r) in K and let r be a linear functional
dened by r () = Re(r , ), Q. Since satises variational property

in B , there exists a unit vector Q such that r () k . Therefore,
() = k () r () ().
Since
Z
r () () = Re(r , ) = Re
r,
K
one can nd that
Z
() |r () ()| rk
||.
Now, we can complete the proof of Theorem 4.17.

One can easily verify, by using Lemma 4.13, Lemma 4.14 and the Delta
inequality, that condition (b) implies condition (a).
G. Uniquely extremal dierentials of Teichmller type

In this section we will give some applications of the Characterization
Theorem using Reich sequences. Using new tools available in innitesimal
cotangent space Q (such as compactness of certain families of holomorphic
functions and mean value theorem) we can prove some properties of uniquely
extremal dilatation of Teichmller type.
Let X be a normed linear space and let M be a subspace of X and let
be a real bounded linear functional on M .
We dene the functional = on M by
() = kkkk (), M.
We say that a sequence {n } from M is weak Hamilton sequence for
if n = (n ) converges to zero.
131
Suppose now that X = L1 (D) and M = Q. Recall that we denote by

Q = Q(D) the space of L1 integrable analytic functions on D. We say
that L (D) is uniquely extremal in innitesimal class (abbreviated by
HBU ) if the linear function Q induced by , () = (, ), has
a unique norm-preserving extension from Q to a bounded linear functional
on L1 (D).
We say that L (D) satises Reich condition on a set S D (or, we
say that n is Reich sequence for on S ) if
(1) there is a weak Hamilton sequence n for
(2) lim inf|n (z)| > 0 a.e. in S .
If satises Reich condition on D we will simply say that satises
Reich condition and, also, that n is Reich sequence. Now, we can state an
immediate corollary of Characterization Theorem.
Corollary 4.2. If is uniquely extremal then satises Reich condition on

its extremal set.
Corollary 4.3. If || is constant then is uniquely extremal if and only if

satises Reich condition.
Example 4.1.2. If f (z) = Kx + iy , K > 1, is the ane stretch, dened on a plane
domain D, then the Beltrami coecient of f has the form (z) = k
0 = 1 and k =
K 1
.
K +1
|0 |
, with
0
In [81], Reich has shown that if there exist a sequence n in Q(D) such
that
(a) n (z) 0 (z) for allR z D
(b) (n ) = ||n || Re n 0,
D
then f (z) is uniquely extremal.

z
Also, in [81], Reich showed that a sequence (z) = e n in Q(D) satises
conditions (a) and (b) for D = D = {z : y > |x| }, with > 3, and asked
interesting question.
Question: Whether the conditions (a) and (b) are not only sucient but
also necessary for unique extremality.
Theorem 4.18 and Corollary 4.4 (see below) provide an armative answer
to this question in more general situation.
Concerning the Reich sequences, the next example is interesting.
Example 4.1.3. Let (z) = (1 z)2 , = k ||

, 0 < k < 1. Then is uniquely
extremal on D.
132
Miodrag Mateljevi
It is interesting to note that if tn 1 and n (z) = (1 tn z)2 , then (n )

(1 ln 2), when n . Thus, n is not Reich sequence.
Recall that we say that is Teichmller dierential in general sense on

||
D if = k , where is an analytic function on D, which is not identically
zero.
||
is normalized at a point
We say that Reich sequence n for = k
z0 G if n (z0 ) (z0 ) 6= 0.
The outline of the proof of the next lemma shows how one can use the
presence of analytic function in denition of Teichmller dierential to show
that each normalized Reich sequence forms a normal family.
Lemma 4.15. Let be a Teichmller dierential in general sense dened by

=k
||
, where k is number in [0, 1) and is an analytic function on D and
let n be normalized Reich sequence for at a point z0 and let D = D(z0 , r)

be the disc such that has no zeros on D. Then n converges uniformly to
on D.
Proof. There exist disc D1 with center at z0 and of radius r1 > r, such that
D D1 and that has no zeros on D1 , and positive numbers m and M
such that m |(z)| M for each z D1 .
Let n =
n
and
Z
(1)
n = n (D1 ) = k
|n | Re
D1
Hence
n ||
.
D1
Z
n km
(|n | Re n ).
D1
This inequality, with the mean value theorem, shows that n , and therefore n , form a normal family on D1 . Therefore, there is a subsequence nk
which converges uniformly to 0 on D. By letting n to innity in (1) (by
D instead of D1 ) and using normalization that 0 = at z0 , we conclude
that 0 = on D. This actually shows that n converges uniformly to
on D.
The proof of the next result is based on Lemma 4.15.
133
Theorem 4.18. Let be uniquey extremal on D and let be Teichmller

dierential (in general sense) dened by an analytic function . Then every
normalized Reich sequence n converges uniformly on compact subsets of D
to .
Corollary 4.4. [14] Let be Teichmller dilatation in general sense dened
by some analytic function in D. Then is uniquely extremal if and only if

there exists Reich sequence n in Q, which uniformly converges on compact
subsets of D.
Further developments of the ideas outlined in the proof of Lemma 4.15

leads to the following results.
Theorem 4.19 (The rst removable singularity Theorem). Let K be
a compact subset of D, G = D \ K and an analytic function on G. Suppose

that
(a) is an extremal dilatation on D
(b) = s||/ on G,
where s is non-negative measurable function on G. If there exist two positive
constants m and M , such that m |(z) M , for all z G, then
(a) has an analytic extension from G to D
(b) = k
||
a.e. in D.
Theorem 4.20 (The second removable singularity Theorem-Version

1). Let be uniquely extremal on D and let be multiple of nonnegative
measurable function and Teichmller dierential dened by analytic function
on the complement of a compact set K D. Then
(a) has an analytic extension from G to D
(b)
=k
||
a.e. in D.
During my work with Boin, Laki and Markovi, on the subject concerning unique extremality, we wrote several drafts, in which the proofs of
some versions of Theorem 4.19 and Theorem 4.20 have been given.
Thanks to the Characterization Theorem we can study uniquely extremal
dilatations using an innitesimal cotangent space A = L1a , which is the
space of holomorphic integrable functions. Using new tools, some properties
of uniquely extremal dilatations of general Teichmller type have been described. In particular, we use compactness of certain families of holomorphic
functions and the mean value theorem to prove the following results [69] (see
also [70]).
We can generalize Theorem 4.20.
134
Miodrag Mateljevi
Theorem 4.21 ([59] - The second removable singularity Theorem-Version

2). Let be a bounded domain (multiply connected in general), the un-
bounded component of c and 0 = ( )c . Let be a uniquely extremal

complex dilatation of general Teichmller type (s, ) on . Then
(a) = k||/ a.e. in , where k is a constant.
If, in addition, has uniquely extremal extension to 0 , then
(b) has an analytic extension from to 0 .
(c) = k||/
a.e. in 0 .
If D is a simply-connected domain and K a compact set such that K D,
we say that (K, D) is a pair.
Theorem 4.22 ([59]). Let (K, D) be a pair and V = D \ K . Then
(A) The following condition

(a) || is a constant a.e. on D and is HBUa on D
implies
(b) there is a Re -sequence consisting of polynomials for on D (and,
in particular, on V ).
(B) Suppose
(b1 ) there is a Re -sequence consisting of polynomials for on V .
(c) is a complex dilatation of general Teichmller type (s, ) on V .
Then (b1 ) and (c) imply that there is a unique complex dilatation 0 , which
is uniquely extremal extension of to D (and consequently which is of Teichmller type).
Note that there is the dierence between the hypothesis in part (B) of this
theorem and Theorem 4.21 (The second removable singularity Theorem).
Namely, the assumption in Theorem 4.21 that is uniquely extremal in
D = 0 , is replaced by the assumption in Theorem 4.22 that holds: (b)
there is a Re -sequence consisting of polynomials for on V .
H. Unique extremality and approximation sequences

In this section we briey discuss some results from [14] and only announce
new results (see below Lemma 4.18, Propositions 4.5 and 4.6 and Theorems
4.23 and 4.24).
Let M be a subspace of a normed linear space X and let be a linear
functional on M and be its real part.
Put
(x0 ) = inf{(y) + ||||||y x0 || : y M }
135
and
(x0 ) = sup{(x) |||| ||x x0 || : x M }.

Analysis of the proof of the Hahn-Banach Theorem leads to the following.
Proposition 4.3. Linear functional has a unique Hahn-Banach normpreserving extension from M to X if and only if (x0 ) = (x0 ), for each
x0 X \ M .
The details of the proof are left to the reader.
Lemma 4.16. Let have unique Hahn-Banach norm-preserving extension

from M to X . Then for each x0 X \ M there exist sequences un , vn M
such that
(1) (un ) = (x0 ) + kkkun x0 k + o(1)
(2) (vn ) = (x0 ) kkkvn x0 k + o(1)
(3) (wn ) = kk(kx0 un k + kx0 vn k) + o(1), where wn = un vn
(4) wn is weak Hamilton sequence for .
We say that satises unique approximation property at x0 X \ M

if there exist sequences {un } and {vn }, in M , such that the condition (3) is
satised.
The following result follows from Lemma 4.16 and Proposition 4.3.
Proposition 4.4. Let be a bounded linear functional on M and be its
real part. Then has unique Hahn-Banach norm-preserving extension from

M to X if and only if satises unique approximation property at each
x0 X \ M .
We say that 0 L1 (D) is an extremal vector for linear function = ,

if (0 ) = kk0 k, where k = kk .
For a given L (D), it is convenient to mark the extremal vector
dened by
= , on E and
= 0, on D \ E .
The further discussion will show that
has an important role in characterizations of uniquely extremal dilatation .
Lemma 4.17. If HBU then satises Reich condition on its extremal

set E .
Proof. Applying the part (1) of Lemma 4.16 to the function , dened by
=
, we nd that there exist a sequence un A such that
(5)
() + k un k + o(1) = (un ),
where denotes .
136
Miodrag Mateljevi
Since () = kk and (un ) kun k k|| + kun k, we obtain, using

(5), that
(6)
kk + kun k + o(1) = kun k.
Hence, (un ) = kun k + o(1). Thus un is weak Hamilton sequence for .

Using (6) we conclude that kn k 0, n , where
n = || + | un | |un |.
Hence, there exist subsequence nk which converges to zero a.e. on D. Since,
|un | || n , it follows that
lim inf|unk (z)| |(z)|, a. e on D.
k+
Recall that E = {z D : |(z)| = k}.
Lemma 4.18. Let 0 be an extremal vector for and A = {z D :
0 (z) 6= 0}. Then
(z) = k
|0 (z)|
, z A E.
0 (z)
Proposition 4.5. If ()
= ()
, then is uniquely extremal on its extremal set E .
Let Q be the smallest subset of L1 which contains Q {}

. For a given
L , it is convenient to consider = as a linear functional on L1 ,
dened by
(f ) = Re(, f ), f L1 .
Proposition 4.6. If is a extremal dilatation on D and 0 L1 an extremal

vector, then
(0 ) = (0 ),
where = .
Theorem 4.23 (The Characterization Theorem II). Let L . The

following conditions are equivalent
(7) is uniquely extremal on its extremal set
(8) has a unique norm-preserving extension from Q to Q
(9) There exists sequence {n }, with n Q for all n, such that
(n ) = ()
+ |||| ||n ||
+ o(1)
(10) satises Reich condition on its extremal set E .
137
Theorem 4.24. Let L (D) and k = kk . If there exist Reich sequence n for , on its extremal set E , then
(11) k
|n |
converges to a.e. on its extremal set E
n
(12) If two-dimensional Lebesgue measure of E is positive then

Z
|n |
= k.
lim
n
n
E
I. Construction
Recall is uniquely extremal in its innitesimally class if and only if
has unique Hahn-Banach norm-preserving extension from L1a to L1 (abbreviated by HBU ).
If HBU then
ess sup|(z)| = k for each open set G, G D,

as has been observed by Reich [87]. Therefore, the following question (see
[87] and [102]) is natural.
Question: Does HBU actually imply that
|(z)| = k a.e.?
The next theorem shows that the answer to corresponding question, concerning a more general concept of unique extremality, is negative.
Theorem 4.25. Let K D be a compact set of positive measure, whose

complement is connected. Then there exist L (D) such that is zero
on K , is uniquely extremal on and |(z)| = k > 0 a.e. on , where
= D \ K.
Proof. Inductively, we will nd a sequence of polinomials {Pn } and increasing sequence of compact sets such that
(1) Kn and K are disjunct
(2) complement of Fn = K Kn is connected
(3) |
n=1 Kn | = ||
(4) |Pn (z)| <
1
for each z K and |Pn (z)| > 2 for each z Kn
2
(5) n |1 |Pn+1 (z)|/Pn+1 (z)| 2n , for each z Kn+1 , where
n = P1 P2 . . . Pn , n = max{|n (z)| : z Kn+1 }

(6)
R
D
|n |
R
Fn+1
|n |
1
, where Fn = K Kn .
n
138
Miodrag Mateljevi
Before we state next result we introduce a class of sets which is important

in our investigation.
Let K be a compact subset of C whose complement is connected in C
and interior is empty. We say that K is Mergelyan's set. Motivation for this
denition is famous Mergelyan's Theorem.
Theorem 4.26 (Mergelyan's Theorem). If K is a compact set in the
plane whose complement is connected, if f is a continuous complex function

on K which is holomorphic in the interior of K , and if > 0, then there
exist a polinomial P such that |f (z) P (z)| < for all z K .
Note that K need not be connected.

It is interesting that the following surprisingly simple lemma plays a role
in construction unique extremal dilatation with nonconstant modulus.
Lemma 4.19 (Re). If K is Mergelyan's set and annihilator of Q in L

such that supp K , then = 0.
This lemma was proved by Reich in [87] (see also [73] and [14]). The
following result is an immediate corollary of Theorem 4.25 and Lemma 4.19.
Theorem 4.27. Let K D be Mergelyan's set of positive measure. Then

there exist HBU such that (z) = 0 in K and |(z)| = k > 0 a.e. in
Kc = D \ K.
4.2 New constructions

In this subsection we follow [70].
Thanks to characterization of unique extremality by Re-polynomials and
Runge and Mergelyan's theorems, we can make interesting constructions of
uniquely extremal dilatations.
Before we state the next results we introduce a class of sets which is
important in our investigation. We nd that it is convenient to call the sets
with empty interior special sets.
Let K be a compact subset of C whose complement is connected in C
(Mergelyan's set, M -set) and whose interior is empty. We say that K is a
special Mergelyan's set (a special M -set). The motivation for this denition
is the famous Mergelyan's Theorem.
Theorem 4.28 (Mergelyan's Theorem). If K is a compact set in the

plane whose complement is connected, f is a continuous complex function
on K which is holomorphic in the interior of K , and if > 0, then there
exist a polynomial P such that |f (z) P (z)| < for all z K .
139
Note that, in particular, the theorem holds if K is connected.

Let K be a compact subset of a Jordan domain D, containing at least
two points, such that D \ K is doubly connected. We call (K, D) a doublyconnected pair (shortly a pair). This notion is convenient for application of
the Runge theorem.
In particular, this means that K is a connected M -set. In connection with
Mergelyan's theorem, note that the hypothesis of that result requires only
that K does not separate the plane. The theorem is applicable even if K is
not connected.
Suppose M(D) and || s a.e. on K D, where s < |||| . Then
if there is not trivilal annihilator with support on K , is not uniquely
extremal on D. For small , we have that dilatations + and are
equivalent and || + || | = ||| .
If K D is compact set with positive Lebegue measure.
Question: Whether there is not trivial annihilator with support on K . It
is interesting that answer in general is no.
If this were true in general, then the above argument would show that
every uniquely extremal dilatation is with constant modulus. It is interesting
that a few members of our seminar at Belgrade university considered at that
time that it is clear that the answer is yes and use it to prove that every
uniquely extremal dilatation is with constant modulus.
Let f be a qc mapping on G and let = f and k = |||| . Suppose
that there is a ball B G such that esssup{|(z)| : z B} < k . Let
f (B) = B and let and be conformal mappings from B and B onto
+ , respectively. Dene f = 1
AK , where K > 1. Then f = f on
B and if K is close to 1 then esssup{|f (z)| : z B} < k . This means f
is not uniquely extremal.
Thus, we have proved the following result, which has been observed by Reich
[87]:
Proposition 4.7. If HBUa (G) and k = |||| , then ess sup |(z)| = k
over each open set G0 G.
Therefore, the following question arises naturally (see [87] and [102]).
Question: Does HBUa actually imply that |(z)| = k a.e.?
The next theorem shows that the answer to the corresponding question,
concerning a more general concept of uniquely extremal complex dilatation,
is negative.
140
Miodrag Mateljevi
Proposition 4.8. Let (K, D) be a doubly connected pair and let V = D r K .
Then there exists L (D) such that is zero on K , V is its extremal set,
that is V = {z D : |(z)| = |||| = k > 0}; and is uniquely extremal
on its extremal set V relative to D.
Note that only the cases in which the set K is of positive measure are of
interest.
Although this result can be considered as a corollary of a very special case
of Theorem 4.30 (see below) and The Delta inequality, we state it separately
because of the following:
(a) this result has a signicant corollary (see Propositon 4.10 and the
item 4., which is after the statement of Theorem 4.30). Namely, if K is a
set with empty interior (i.e. in this setting a special M -set with connected
complement) and with positive Lebesgue two-dimensional measure, then we
can use the result to construct an example of an uniquely extremal complex
dilatation with nonconstant modulus.
(b) it explains the dierence between two concepts of unique extremality:
more precisely, in the setting described by the proposition, is uniquely
extremal on D i K is a set with empty interior.
(c) it has some interest by itself.
Note that, using the Mergelan theorem instead of the Runge theorem,
one can prove that the proposition is true if we suppose only that D \ K is
connected (thus, without assumption that K is connected).
Note that the part (a) of the following proposition is a very special case
of Theorem 4.30:
Proposition 4.9. Let (K, D) be a doubly connected pair and let V = D r K .
(a) Then there exists a sequence of polynomials n and L (D) such

that
is zero on K , |||| = k > 0,
V is its extremal set (that is, V = E() = {z D : |(z)| = |||| = k >
0}),
and n is a Re-sequence for on V relative to D.
(b) in addition, described in a) is uniquely extremal on its extremal set
V with respect to D.
Proof. Part (b) of the proposition is an immediate corollary of the part (a)
of Theorem 4.30 (The characterization theorem II for pairs).
Proposition 4.8 follows from Proposition 4.9.
141
Remark 4.1. One can also verify that dened by the proposition is uniquely
extremal on its extremal set V with respect to D in its Teichmller class, using
the method of the proof of Theorem V. 3.1 [85], which is a special case of the
Characterization theorem. It follows because the proof of Theorem V. 3.1 [85] is
more elementary then the proof of the generalized Delta Inequality in T eichm
uller
class.
The situation described in the proposition (in particular, in which K

is a special set; that is a set with empty interior and with positive twodimensional measure) is one that we will often encounter. Hence it is convenient to introduce new terminology.
Denition 4.4 (special sequence of polynomials). Suppose that (K, D)
is a pair and K has positive Lebesgue two-dimensional measure. If a sequence

of polynomials n uniformly converges to 0 on K and satises the Re- condition on V = D \ K , we call n a special sequence of polynomials for the
pair (K, D).
We are mainly concerned in this paper with the case when (K, D) is a
doubly-connected pair.
Special sequences of polynomials play an important role in the constructions
of uniquely extremal dilatations.
Namely, the following special case of proposition is important: if (K, D) is a
special doubly-connected pair, then there is a special sequence of polynomials
for it.
It is interesting that the following surprisingly simple lemma ( concerning
special sets) plays a role in the construction of uniquely extremal dilatations
with nonconstant modulus.
Lemma 4.20 (R - annihilators on special sets). If K G is a special

Mergelyan's set and is an annihilator of A(G) in L such that supp K ,
then = 0.
In the case when G is the unit disk, this lemma was proved by Reich in
[87] (see also [73] and Lemma 6 [14]).
For the reader who likes to have some pictures of special connected
Mergelyan's sets the following example may be useful.
Example 4.2.1. Let C0 be a Cantor set on the segment l = [0, 1] with positive
one-dimensional Lebesgue measure and K0 = {(x, y) : x C0 , |y| 1}. Then
K = K0 l is a special connected Mergelyan's set.
The following result is an immediate corollary of Proposition 4.8 and

Lemma 4.20.
142
Miodrag Mateljevi
Proposition 4.10. [14] Let K be a compact set of positive measure, (K, D)
a special double connected pair and let V = D r K . Then there exists

HBUa such that (z) = 0 in K and |(z)| = k > 0 a.e. in V = K c = DrK .
Proof. By Proposition 4.8, there exists L (D) such that is zero on
K , V is its extremal set, that is V = {z D : |(z)| = |||| = k > 0}; and

is uniquely extremal on its extremal set V relative to D. Hence, if is
equivalent to , in its Teichmller innitesimal class in D and the condition
|||| |||| holds, it follows that = a.e. on V ; and therefore =
is an annihilator of A in L and it has support on K . So, by Lemma 4.20,
= 0 a.e. on D. Thus, is uniquely extremal.
In [14] we show, using Mergelyan's theorem, that the result holds if K

D is a special Mergelyan's set of positive Lebesgue 2-dimensional measure.
We refer to the proof of this result as the construction of a uniquely
extremal complex dilatation with nonconstant modulus (shortly the construction).
Simplications of the construction have been given by the author during
his lectures at Scoala Normala Superioara Buchurest (SNSB), 2003-2004 (to
appear in [65]).
Theorem 4.29 (Runge theorem). Suppose K is a compact set in the

plane, C \ K is connected, and f is a holomorphic function on (i.e.
f H()), where is some open set containing K . Then there is a sequence
{Pn } of polynomials such that Pn f uniformly on K .
Outline of new construction.
Let (K, D) be a doubly-connected pair. We will show that there exists a

sequence of Jordan-domains Jn such that
Jn IntJn+1 ,
1 Jk = D \ K.
(4.13)
In this setting, we say that sequence of Jordan-domains Jn exhausts D \ K .

Namely, since D \ K is doubly connected and K contains at least two point,
then there is the closed disk B of radius r and a conformal mapping
of D \ B onto D \ K , where D denotes the unit disk. Let rn = r + 1/n,
Jn0 = {ei : rn < < 1, 0 < < 2 1/n} and Jn = (Jn0 ). It is clear that
the sequence of Jordan-domains Jn satises condition (4.13).
Denition 4.5 (simply-connected triple). Let Ir = (r, 1) be an interval,

= (Ir ), V = D \ K, and V 0 = V \ . We call (K, D, V 0 ) a simplyconnected triple (a doubly-connected pair (K, D) with cut ). If, in addition,
143
K has empty interior we say that (K, D, V 0 ) is a special simply-connected

triple and that (K, D) is a special doubly-connected pair.
Suppose that (K, D) is a pair and is of a general Teichmuller type
(s, ) on V = D \ K . In this setting, we conclude:
a) The proof of Theorem 4.22 (see also Theorem 4.21) tells us that if 6= 0
a.e. on V, and has a Re- sequence consisting of polynomials on V , then the
corresponding normalized sequence of polynomials Pn c-uniformly converges
on D and gives the analytic continuation of to D. Since is not
||
identically zero on D, we can dene

= k . It is not dicult to verify
that Pn is a Re- sequence for

on D and therefore that
HBUa (D) (see
Theorem 4.22).
In particular, if is uniquely extremal on D and = 0 on K, then = 0
on D a.e. or K is a nite set.
b) If, in addition, the normalized sequence of polynomials Pn is a special
for and pair (K, D), then rst we conclude that is zero on K . Therefore
cannot be of Teichmuller type on V unless if K is a nite set or s = 0 a.e.
on V .
The two next lemmas are an immediate corollaries of the Runge and
Mergelyan theorem respectively.
Lemma 4.21. Let K be a M -set and G be a Jordan domain such that
G K = . Suppose that 0 is a holomorphic function on K , and 0 is a

holomorphic function on G. Then, for every > 0, there exists a polynomial
P such that
(1) |P 0 | < on K
(2) |P 0 | < on G
Lemma 4.22. Let K be a special M -compact set and G be a Jordan domain

such that G K = , f is a continuous function on K and 0 a holomorphic
function on G. For every > 0, there exists polynomial P such that
(1) |P f | < on K
(2) |P 0 | < on G
Concerning Lemma 4.21, we note that we can consider it as a germ of

new construction. If is a holomorphic function on K , we can modify the
constructions (the original construction from [14], see also proof of Theorem
4.30 and mentioned Reich survey [85]) to prove that there is a sequence of
polynomials n which uniformly converge to on K and satisfy the Recondition on V = D \ K for some complex dilatation ).
144
Miodrag Mateljevi
Theorem 4.30 (Construction Theorem). Let (K, D, V 0 ) be a simply-
connected triple and 0 a holomorphic function on K .

(a) There is a sequence of polynomials n , which uniformly converge to
0 on K and which c-uniformly converges to a holomorphic nonzero function
o on V 0 , and which is a Re-sequence on V .
(b) If, in addition, 0 is dierent than 0 a.e. in K , and if is dened
on D by =
|0 |
| |
on K and = 0 on V 0 , then the sequence n is a
0
o
Re-sequence for on D, and therefore is HBUa on D.
The situation described in the theorem is one that we will often encounter. Hence it is convenient to introduce new terminology.
Denition 4.6 ((o , 0 )- special sequence of polynomials). We call the
sequence n described in theorem, (o , 0 )- special sequence of polynomials

for a simply-connected triple (K, D, V 0 ).
Before we prove this theorem, we state some remarks and corollaries
which partially explain the signicance of the result.
Remarks and corollaries of Theorem 4.30

1. The theorem holds if we only suppose that 0 is a continuous function
on K and a holomorphic function in the interior of K .
2. the assumption that n is a Re-sequence of polynomials on V 0 , which
c-uniformly converges to a holomorphic not identically zero function o on
V 0 , implies o is dierent than 0 on V 0 .
3. (holomorphic function as germ of uniquely extremal complex dilatation) If the holomorphic function 0 is dierent than 0 a.e. in K , and if is
dened on K by =
|0 |
, then it follows from part b) of the theorem that
0
has an extension which is uniquely extremal on D.

Namely, if we extend to D by =
|0 |
on V 0 , where the function
o
0 is dened by the sequence n on V 0 , then n is a Re-sequence for

on D. Therefore, by a very special case of The Characterization Theorem
(Proposion 4.11, see Section 4.2), is HBUa on D; that is is uniquely
extremal.
In this way, we can roughly state that every 0 is a germ of a uniquely
extremal complex dilatation on D.
Continuous function as germ of uniquely extremal complex dilatation.
In particular, if K is a special set, f is a continuous function on K , which
is dierent than 0 a.e. in K, and if 0 = |ff | on K , then, using the method
145
of the proof of Theorem 4.30 and the Mergelyan theorem instead of Runge,
one can show that 0 has a uniquely extremal extension to D (see Corollary
4.6).
4. (construction of uniquely extremal complex dilatation with nonconstant
modulus) If o 0, and if is dened on D by =
|0 |
on V 0 and = 0
o
on K , using the Delta inequality in the tangent space B (as in [14]), one can
show that is uniquely extremal on V relative to D (see Proposition 4.9).
If, in addition, the set K has empty interior and positive two-dimensional
measure, then using Lemma R, which roughly states that annihilators with
support on special sets vanish, one can show that is uniquely extremal
(HBUa ) on D (see Proposition 4.10).
This gives an example of uniquely extremal complex dilatation with nonconstant modulus.
Note that one can verify that dened in this item is uniquely extremal
by means of Theorem V. 3.1 [85], which is a special case of the Characterization theorem. That has sense because the proof of the theorem is much
simpler than the proof of the Characterization theorem.
5. If 0 has no analytic continuation to D, then, by Theorem 4.21, the
complex dilatation is not of Teichmuller type on V (i.e. the function o has
no analytic continuation to V ). Thus we can construct a uniquely extremal
complex dilatation on D, which is of Teichmuller type on both V 0 and K ,
but not on K V 0 .
2
The next statement is an immediate corollary of Theorem 4.30 .
Corollary 4.5 (The HBUa continuation of holomorphic function).

Let (K, D) be a doubly-connected pair, 0 a holomorphic function on K ,
which is dierent than 0 a.e. in K , and 0 =
a HBUa on D such that = 0 on K .
|0 |
on K . Then there exists
0
Corollary 4.6 (The HBUa continuation of continuous function). Let
(K, D) be a special doubly-connected pair, and let f be a continuous function
on K , which is dierent than 0 a.e. in K ; If 0 =

HBUa on D such that = 0 on K .
|f |
on K , then there is
f
Using Mergelyan's theorem as in [14], one can show that this corollary
holds if (K, D) is a pair and K a special M -set.
Outline of proof of Corollary 4.6. Proceeding in a similar way as in the
proof of Theorem 4.30 below one can prove Corollary 4.6. The dierence
is only in the application of the Mergelyan theorem (instead of the Runge
146
Miodrag Mateljevi
theorem) which gives

(2) n f = 0(1) on K .
The proof of the part b) of Theorem 4.30 is based on an important corollary of the Characterization Theorem:
Proposition 4.11. If || is a constant on G, then is uniquely extremal if

and only if satises the Re- condition on G.
Proof of Theorem 4.30. Inductively, we can nd a sequence of polynomials {n }, n 1, and a sub-sequence Vn , n 1, of sequence Jn such
that
RR
(1)
|n | = 0(1), where n = V \ Vn+1 ,
n
(2) n 0 = 0(1) on K ,
1
(3) |n+1 n | < n on Vn+1 .

2
Note that we have used Lemma 4.21 in the inductive procedure. After
application of Lemma 4.21 on the pair K and Vn we construct function n .
It seems that we have diculties because we do not control
R n on thencanal
n1 = V \ Vn . Since Jk = V 0 , there is m such that
|n | = 1/2 . Set
V \Jm
Vn+1 = Jm .
Remark that we do not yet have control of n on the set 0n = Vn+1 \ Vn .
It is interesting that another application of Lema 4.21 enables to overcome this diculty. Namely, for given n , there is a polynomial n+1 such
1
that |n+1 n | < n on Vn+1 and n+1 0 = 0(1) on K . Thus, we

2
modify n by n+1 on Vn+1 .
By the triangle inequality and (3), it follows that
|m n | <
1
1
1
+ n+1 + = n1
n
2
2
2
on Vn+1 ( m n 1) and therefore n forms a Cauchy sequence, which

c-uniformly converges to a holomorphic function o on V 0 . In particular,
|n o | = 1/2n1 on Vn+1 and hence
(30 )
n o = 0(1) on Vn+1 , and |n | |o | = 0(1) on Vn+1 .
One can choose 1 such that 1 2 on C (for example, it is enough to

choose 1 such that |1 (z)| 2 for all z V2 ).
Since |1 (z) 0 (z)| 1 for all z V2 , it follows that 0 has no zero in
V2 , and therefore 0 can only have isolated zeros in V 0 . Suppose that 0 is
dierent than 0 a.e. in K .
Dene on D in the following way: =
147
| |
|0 |
on K and = 0 on V 0 .
0
o
By (2), it follows rst |n | = |0 | + 0(1) on K and then
|0 |
|0 |
n =
(0 + 0(1)) = |0 | + 0(1) on K
0
0
and therefore
(20 )
n (K) = (n ; K) tends to 0.
In a similar way, if we substitute n = o + 0(1) and |n | = |0 | + 0(1) in
n (Vn+1 ) = [n ] = (n ; Vn+1 ),
since
|0 |
|0 |
n =
(0 + 0(1)) = |0 | + 0(1) on Vn+1 ,
0
0
we get
(300 )
n tends 0.
Since n (V ) = n (Vn+1 ) + n (n ), using (1) and (300 ), it follows that
(4)
n (V ) tends 0.
Since n (D) = n (K) + n (V ), using (2') and (4) it follows that n (D) tends
to 0. Therefore n is a Re-sequence for on D and hence, by Proposition
4.11, HBUa on D and the part b) of theorem is proved.
In particular, n is a Re-sequence for on V and the part a) of theorem
is also proved if 0 is dierent than 0 a.e. in K .
Combining (2) and that n (V ) tends 0, we obtain that the part a) of theorem
also holds if o 0 on K .
Note, by using Runge's theorem instead of Mergelyan's theorem and
Jordan-domains Gn which exhaust D \ K, the new construction is more
visual (and it also seems that it is more acceptable from pedagogue point of
view).
Question: If is smooth (only continuous) and uniquely extremal is of
Teichmller type?
Remark 4.2. If G is a ring domain and K belongs to a bounded component of Gc
we can not apply the Runge theorem on the pair K and G in general situation, so
canals n = D \ Jn+1 have an important role in the construction.
148
Miodrag Mateljevi
Also one can modify our construction [14] such that the corresponding sequence
n (z) is a Cauchy sequence on the whole D; that is (z) = lim n (z) exists for
0(1)
every z D. In addition, we can choose a polynomial Pk such that Pk = 1 + 2
k
uniformly on Vk , where Vk is the corresponding exhaustion of V . We can verify that
Y
||
on
Pk converges c-uniformly to a holomorphic function on V 0 . Hence =
0
V .
Using the Runge theorem, we can prove the following result.
Lemma 4.23. Let K be a M -set and G be a Jordan domain such that

G K = and let B = BR be a disk which contains F = K G. For given
positive numbers p, q and , there exists a polynomial P which has no zeros
in B such that
(a1 ) |P | < p on K
(a2 ) q < |P | on G
(a3 ) |1 |P |/P | < on F = K G
Remark 4.3. By Runge's theorem there is a polynomial Q such that |Q| < ln p
on K , ln q < |Q| on G and which is close to ln p , ln q respectively on K and G.
For suitable Q close to constant functions on K and G the entire function = eQ
satises the above conditions. Hence, there is an entire function which satises the
above conditions and in addition has no zeros in C. Let = min{|(z)| : z BR }
and choose 0 < < /2. Let P = Pn be a partial sum of the Taylor series of
such that |P (z) (z)| < for every z BR . In addition, we can choose small
enough such that P satises the condition of the theorem.
Using only (a1) and (a2) of Lemma 4.23, we can show the following
proposition.
Proposition 4.12. Let K be a M -set. There is a sequence of polynomial Pn
which uniformly tends to 0 on K such that Pn (z) for every z C \ K .
J. Beltrami equation
Suppose that f has L1 derivatives in the complex plane C and that
f (z) 7 0 as z 7 . With the notation
ZZ
()
1
T (z) =
dd
z
C
we then obtain from Green's formula
(1)
f = T f.
149
For smooth with compact support we dene the Hilbert transform H of

by
H = (T ).
By dierentiation we obtain an expression for H as principle value
ZZ
1
()
dd,
(H)(z) = lim
70+
( z)2
A
where A = { : < || < 1 }.

Fix 0 < k < 1, and let L (k, R) denote the measurable functions on C,
bounded by k , and supported in the disc BR . We let QC 1 (k, R) denote the
continuous dierentiable homeomorphisms f of C such that f = f , for
some L (k, R), normalized so that
f (z) = z + O
1
z
, as z 7 .
Let f QC 1 (k, R). Then by (1),
f (z) z = T (f )(z).
Thus, if we set g = f 1 and use f = f , we obtain
g = H(f ) = H(f ) = H(g) + H().

In terms of the operator
H (g) = H(g), g Lp ,
we obtain the equation
(2)
(I H )g = H().
If we x p = p(k) > 2 so that ||H || < 1, then I H is invertible. Thus,

we can solve the equation (2) for g to obtain
(3)
g = (I H )1 H() Lp .
Theorem 4.31. Fix 0 < k < 1, R > 0 and p = p(k) > 2 as above. For
L (k, R), there is a function f on C, normalized so that f (z) = z + O( z1 ) at
, with distribution derivatives satisfying the Beltrami equation f = f .
150
Miodrag Mateljevi
Outline of the proof: Dene g by (3) and dene

f (z) = z + T (g + ).
Since T is the convolution operator with kernel
ous. Moreover, f is normalized at , and
1
z
locally in L1 , f is continu-
f = g + ,
f = 1 + H(g + ) = 1 + g
in the sense of distributions, so f satises the Beltrami equation.
Main Inequality
Let and be Beltrami coecient of f and g , = Belt[f 1 ] f , =
Belt[g 1 ] f , h = g 1 f and = Belt[h].
Let = h , where h = g 1 f and p = p/p. Then
=
1 ||2 =
+ p
,
1 + p
(1 ||2 )(1 ||2 )

|1 + p |2
and
T =
|A|2
,
(1 ||2 )(1 ||2 )
where A = A = (1 + p )(1 ) and = /||. It is also convenient

to introduce B = 1 . Direct calculation yields A = B + p ( ).
Since = B , we nd A = B(1p B/B). Hence T = T T.
Recall that we use notations = p , = B/B and = . This gives
the main inequality.
Suppose that f and g are quasiconfomal homeomorphism of D onto itself,
which are equal on D. Then
ZZ
|(z)|T T dxdy, Q .
(1)
||||
D
Check that

.
1
151
Dene Q = (1 ||2 )(1 ||2 )

Theorem 4.15 states if h is a quasiconfomal homeomorphism of D onto
itself which is the identity on D, then, with = h ,
ZZ
ZZ
||2
Re
dxdy
|| dxdy, for all Q.

1 ||2
1 ||2
D
Since
ZZ
Re
|1|2
1
Q
= ( )(1 ) = P , hence
( )(1 ) dxdy
ZZ
| |2
|| dxdy, for all Q.
Q
5 NOTATION
K0 = K0 [h] = inf{K(f ) : f Q[h]}
LITERATURA
[1] M. Abate, G. Patrizio, Holomorphic curvature of Finsler metrics and complex geodesics , Preprint, Max Planck Institut fur Matematik, Bonn (1992).
[Ka-Ad] D. Adnaevi, Z. Kadelburg, Matematika analiza II, Beograd, 1991.
[Ah] L. Ahlfors, Complex Analysis, McGraw-Hill Book Co, 1966.
[4] L. Ahlfors, Conformal invariants, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1973.
[5] L. Ahlfors, Lectures on Quasiconformal Mappings, Van Nostrand, 1966.
[6] L. Ahlfors: Lectures on Quasiconformal mappings (with additional chapters
by Earle and Kra, Shishikura, Hubbard), Univ. Lectures Series (Providence,
R.I.), 2006.
[Al] S. Aljani, Uvod u realnu i funkcionalnu analizu, Graevinska knjiga, Beograd, 1968.
[8] I. Ani, V. Markovi, M. Mateljevi, Uniformly Bounded Maximal -disks,
Bers Spaces and Harmonic Maps, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 128 (2000),
29472956.
[9] I. Ani, M. Mateljevi, D. ari, Extremal metrics and modulus, Czech.
Math. J. (2000), 52(127), No 2, pp. 225235.
[10] K. Astala, Area distortion of quasiconformal mappings, Acta Math. 173
(1994), 3760.
[11] K. Astala, T. Iwaniec, G. Martin, J. Onninen, Extremal Mappings of Finite
Distortion, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 91 (2005), no. 3, 655702.
[Be-G] A. Berenstein, R. Gay, Complex variables, Springer-Verlag, 1991.
[13] A. Beurling, L. Ahlfors: The boundary correspondence under quasiconformal mappings, Acta Math. 96 (1956), 125142.
[14] V. Boin, N. Laki, V. Markovi, M. Mateljevi, The unique extremality,
J. d'Analyse Math. 75 (1998), 299338.
[15] V. Boin, V. Markovi, M. Mateljevi, The unique extremality in the tangent space of Teichmller space , Proceedings of the International Conference Generalized Functions-Linear and Nonlinear Problems, Novi Sad,
Aug. 31- Sep. 04, 1996; Integral Transforms and Special Functions 6 (1997),
223227.
[16] M. do Carmo, Dierential Geometry of Curves and Surfaces. Prentice Hall,
1976.
[17] S. Y. Cheng, S. T. Yau, Dierential equations on Riemannian manifolds
and their geometric applications, Comm.Pure and Appl. Math. 28 (1975)
333-354
[Ch-Br] R. Churchill, J. Brown, Complex variables and applications, McGraw-Hill
Book Co, 1984.
References
153
[Co] J. Conway, Functions of One Complex Variable, Springer-Verlag, 1978.

[20] J. M. Coron, F. Helein, Harmonic dieomorphisms, minimizing harmonic
maps and rotational symetry , Composito Mathematico 69 (1989), 175228.
[21] R. Courant, Dirichlet's principle, conformal mappings and minimal surfaces, New York: Interscience Publishers, inc. (1950).
[22] C. J. Earle, J. Eells, A Fibre bundle description of Teichmler theory, J.
Di. Geom. 3, (1969) 1943
[23] C. J. Earle, Li Zhong, Extremal quasiconformal mappings in plane domains,
Quasiconformal Mappings and Analysis, A Collection of Papers Honoring
F. W. Gehring, Peter Duren, Et Al. Eds., Springer, (1998), 141157.
[24] J. Eells, L. Lemaire, A report of harmonic maps, Bull. London Math. Soc.
10 (1978), 109160.
[25] J. Eells, L. Lemaire, Selected topics in harmonic maps, 85 pg. AMS Conference Board 50 (1980).
[26] A. E. Eremenko, D. H. Hamilton, On the area distortion by quasiconformal
mappings, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 123 (1995), no.9, 27932797.
[27] A. Fletcher, V. Markovic, Quasiconformal maps and Teichmuller theory.
Oxford Graduate Texts in Mathematics, 11. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2007. viii+189 pp. ISBN: 978-0-19-856926-8; 0-19-856926-2.
[28] F. P. Gardiner, Teichmller Theory and Quadratic Dierentials, New York:
Wiley-Interscience Publication, 1987.
[29] F. W. Gehring, Quasiconformal mappings in space, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc.
69 (1963).
[30] F. W. Gehring, Rings and quasiconformal mappings in space, Trans. Amer.
Math. Soc. 103 (1962), 383393.
[31] G. Gentili, B. Visintin, Finsler Complex Geodesics and Holomorphic Curvature, Rendinconti Accad. XL Memorie di Matematica bf 111 (1993) 153170.
[32] M. Gerstenhaber, H. E. Rauch, On extremal quasi-conformal mappings, I.
Proc. Nat. Acad. U.S.A. 40 (1954), 802-812, 991-994
[GM] I. Gutman, M. Mateljevi, Note on the Coulson Integral Formula, J. Math.
Chem., File No. A2081
[34] P. Hartman, On homotopic harmonic maps , Can. J. Math. 19 (1967), 673
687.
[35] Z-C. Han, Remarks on the geometric behavior of harmonic maps between
surfaces, Elliptic and parabolic methods in geometry. Proceedings of a
workshop, Minneapolis, May 23-27, 1994., Wellesley
[36] Z-C. Han, L-F. Tam, A. Treibergs, T. Wan, Harmonic maps from the complex plane into surfaces with nonpositive curvature, Commun. Anal. Geom.
154
References
3 (1995) 85-114
[37] S. Hencl, P. Koskela, J. Onninen, A Note on Extremal Mappings of Finite
Distortion, Math Res Lett 12, 231-237, 2005
[38] S. Hencl, P. Koskela, Regularity of the inverse of a planar homeomorphism,Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 180, 2006, 75-95.
[39] T. Iwaniec, L. V. Kovalev, J. Onninen, The Nitsche conjecture, J. Amer.
Math. Soc. 24 (2011), no. 2, 345-373.
[Je-Ma] M. Jevti, M. Mateljevi, Analitike funkcije, Beograd, 1986.
[41] J. Jost, Two-dimensional Geometric Variational Problems, John Wiley &
Sons, 1991.
[42] D. Kalaj, M. Mateljevi, On conformal, harmonic mappings and Dirichlet's
integral, Filomat, Vol 25, No 2, 2011, pp 91-108.
[43] M. Kneevi, M. Mateljevi: On the quasi-isometries of harmonic quasiconformal mappings, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 334(1) (2007), 404413.
[44] R. Khnau, Verzerrungsstze und Koezientenbedingungen vom Grunskyschen Typfr quasikonforme Abbildungen., Math. Nachr. 48(1971), 77
105.
[45] O. Lehto, Schlicht functions with a quasiconformal extension, Ann. Acad.
Sci. Fenn. AI Math. 500 (1971), 110.
[46] O. Lehto, Univalent Functions and Teichmler Spaces , Springer-Verlag,
New York, 1987.
[47] O. Lehto, K. I. Virtanen: Quasiconformal Mappings in the Plane, SpringerVerlag, 1973.
[48] P. Li, L. F. Tam, The heat equation and harmonic maps of complete manifolds , Inv. Math. 105 (1991), 146.
[49] P. Li, L. F. Tam, Uniqueness and regularity of proper harmonic maps II ,
Indiana U. Math. J. 42 (1993), 593635.
[50] P. Li, L. Tam, J. Wang, Harmonic dieomorphisms between hyperbolic
Hadamard manifolds, to appear Jour. Geom. Anal.
[51] C. Loewner, On the conformal capacity in space, J. Math. Mech. 8 (1959),
411414.
[52] V. Markovi, Uniquely extremal quasiconformal mappings and stationary
points of the energy integral, Ph.D. Thesis (Doctoral disertation), University of Belgrade (1998)
[53] V. Markovi, Extremal problems for quasiconformal maps of puncured plane
domains Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 354, 4, (2001), 1631-1650.
[54] V. Markovi, M. Mateljevi, New version of Grtzsch principle and ReichStrebel inequality , Mat. Vesnik 49 (1997), 235239.
[55] V. Markovi, M. Mateljevi, New version of the main inequality and unique-
References
155
ness of harmonic maps, J. d'Analyse Math. 79 (1999).

[56] M. Markovi, M. Mateljevi, New versions of Reich-Strebel inequality and
uniqueness of harmonic mappings, to appear
[57] M. Mateljevi, Ahlfors-Schwarz lemma and curvature, Kragujevac Journal
of Mathematics (Zbornik radova PMF), 25, 2003, 155164.
[57] M. Mateljevi, An area theorem of Lehto-Khnau type for harmonic mappings, (to appear).
[58] M. Mateljevi, An extension of the Area Theorem, Complex Variables 15,
(1990), 155157.
[59] M. Mateljevi, Communications at Analysis Seminar, University of Belgrade.
[60] M. Mateljevi, Dirichlet's principle, uniqueness of harmonic maps and extremal qc mappings, Zbornik radova 10(18), Two topics in mathematics,
editor B. Stankovi, 2004, 4191; ISBN 86-80593-36-2
[61] M. Mateljevi, Dirichlet's principle, uniqueness of harmonic maps and related problems, Proceedings of Symposium Contemporary Mathematics,
Univ. of Belgrade (1998), 251267.
[Ma 2] M. Mateljevi, Kompleksna analiza, Banja Luka, 2004.
[63] M. Mateljevi, Kompleksna analiza 2, rukopis
[64] M. Mateljevi, Kompleksne Funkcije 1 & 2, 2006, Drutvo Matematiara
Srbije.
[65] M. Mateljevi, Lectures on quasiconformal mappings, Scoala Normala Superioara Buchurest, (SNSB), 2003-2004.
[66] M. Mateljevi, Note on Schwarz lemma, curvature and distance, Zbornik
radova PMF 13 (1992) 25-29.
[Ma] M. Mateljevi, O Kompleksnim brojevima i osnovnom stavu Algebre, Nastava matematike, XLVII, 3-4, Beograd, 2002.
[Ma 1] M. Mateljevi, Promena argumenta du puta i Jordanove teoreme, Nastava
matematike, XLIX, 1-2, Beograd, 2004.
[68] M. Mateljevi, Some geometric questions related to harmonic map , Abstract, Symposium Contemporary Mathematics, Univ. of Belgrade, 18-20
Dec. (1998).
[69] M. Mateljevi, Unique extremality III, Warwick Preprint: 08/2005.
[70] M. Mateljevi, Unique extremality of quasiconformal mappings, J Anal
Math 107, 39-63, 2009
[71] M. Mateljevi, V. Markovi, Reich-Strebel inequality, harmonic mappings
and uniquely extremal q.c. mapping, Abstract, Nevanlinna Colloquium,
Lausanne (1997).
[72] M. Mateljevi, Topics in Conformal, Quasiconformal and Harmonic maps,
156
References
Zavod za udbenike, Beograd 2012
[73] M. Mateljevi, V. Markovi, The unique extremal QC mapping and uniqueness of Hahn-Banach extensions , Mat. Vesnik 48 (1996), 107112.
[74] J. Milnor, Dynamics in One Complex Variable, Ann. Math. Studies 160,
Princenton U. Press, Princenton, 2006
[75] Y. Minsky, Harmonic maps, lenght and energy in Teichmller space,
J.Di.Geom. 35 (1992), 151-217
[Mi] D. S. Mitrinovi, Kompleksna analiza, Beograd, 1973.
[Ni] M. Niki, Osnovi kompleksne analize, Nauna knjiga, Beograd, 1992.
[Pi] D. Perii, S. Pilipovi, M. Stojanovi, Funkcije vie promenljivih; diferencijalni i integralni raun, Novi Sad, 1997.
[79] C. Pommerenke, On the Bloch functions, J. London Math. Soc. (2),2
(1970), 689-695
[80] C. Pommerenke, Univalent functions, Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, Gttingen (1975).
[81] E. Reich, A criterion for unique extremality of Teichmller mappings, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 30 (1981), 441447.
[82] E. Reich, A generalized Dirichlet integral , J. d'Analyse Math. 30 (1976),
456463.
[83] E. Reich, An extremum problem for analytic functions with area norm, Ann.
Fenn., A.I. vol. 2 (1976), 429445.
[84] E. Reich, Extremal extensions from the circle to the disc, Quasiconformal
Mappings And Analysis, A Collection Of Papers Honoring F. W. Gehring,
Peter Duren Et Al. Eds., Springer, (1998), 321335.
[85] E. Reich, Extremal Quasiconformal Mapping of the Disk , Chapter 3 in Geometric function theory ,Volume 1, Edited by R. Khnau, Elsevier Science
B. V., 2002.
[86] E. Reich, On criteria for unique extremality for Teichmller mappings,
Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn 6 (1981), 289301.
[87] E. Reich, On the uniqueness question for Hahn-Banach extensions from
the space of L1 analytic functions, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 88 (1983),
305310.
[88] E. Reich, On the variational principle of Gestenhaber and Rauch , Ann.
Acad. Sci. Fenn. 10 (1985), 469475.
[89] E. Reich, The unique extremality counterexample, J. d'Analyse Math. 75
(1998), 339347.
[90] E. Reich, Uniqueness of Hahn-Banach extensions from certain spaces of
analytic functions, Math. Z. 167 (1979), 8189.
[91] E. Reich, H. S. Shapiro, Teichmller type annihilators of L1 -analytic func-
References
157
tios, Proc. AMS (around 1989)

[92] E. Reich, K. Strebel, On quasiconformal mapping which keep the boundary
points xed , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 136 (1969), 211222.
[93] E. Reich, K. Strebel, On the Gerstenhaber-Rauch principle, Israel J. Math.
57, No. 1 (1987), 89100.
[94] W. Rudin, Real and complex analysis, McGraw-Hill 1966.
[95] J. K. Sampson, Some properties and application of harmonic mappings,
Ann. cole Norm. Sup. 11 (1978), 211228.
[96] R. Schoen, The role of harmonic mappings in rigidity and deformation
problems , Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math. 143 (1993), 179200.
[97] R. Schoen, S. T. Yau, Lectures on Harmonic Maps, Conf. Proc. and Lect.
Not. in Geometry and Topology, Vol.II, Inter. Press, 1997.
[98] R. Schoen, S. T. Yau, On univalent harmonic maps between surfaces, Invent.Math. 44 (1978), 265278
[99] Y. L. Shen, Extremal Problems for Quasiconformal Mappings, J. Math.
Anal. Appl. 247, (2000), 27-44
[100] D. Stegenga, K. Stephenson, A geometric characterization of analytic functions with bounded mean oscillation, J. London Math. Soc. (2), 24 (1981),
243254
[101] K. Strebel, Eine Abschtzung der Lnge gewisser Kurven bei quasikonformer Abbildung, Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. 243 (1957), 119.
[102] K. Strebel, Extremal quasiconformal mappings, Resultate der Mathematik
10 (1986), 168210.
[103] K. Strebel, On quasiconformal mappings of open Riemann surfaces Comment. Math. Helv. 53 (1978), 301321.
[104] K. Strebel, On the existence of extremal Teichmller mappings, J. Analyse
Math. 30 (1976), 464480.
[105] K. Strebel, Quadratic Dierential, Springer Verlag (1984).
[106] K. Strebel, Zur Frage der Eidentigkeit extremaler quasikonformer Abbildungen des Einheitskreiss II, Coment. Math. Helv. 39 (1964), 7789.
[107] L. Tam, T. Wan, Harmonic dieomorphisms into Cartan-Hadamard surfaces with prescribed Hopf dierentials, Comm.Anal.Geom. 4 (1994) 593625
[108] L. Tam, T. Wan, Quasiconformal harmonic dieomorphism and universal
Teichmler space, J. Di. Geom. 42 (1995) 368-410
[To] D. . Toi, Zbirka reenih ispitnih zadataka iz matematike III, Akademska
misao, Beograd, 2002.
[110] J. Visl: Lectures on n-Dimensional Quasiconformal Mappings, SpringerVerlag, 1971.
158
References
[111] T. Wan, Constant mean curvature surface, harmonic maps, and univrsal
Teichmller space, J. Di. Geom. 35 (1992), 643657.
[112] H. B. Wei, On the uniqueness problem of harmonic mappings , Proc. Amer.
Math. Soc., 124 (1996), 23372341
[113] M. Wolf, High-energy degeneration of harmonic maps between surfaces and
rays in Teichmler space, Topology 30 (1991), 517-540
[114] M. Wolf, The Teichmller theory of harmonic maps, J. Di. Geom. 29
(1989) 449-479
[115] G. Yao, Convergence of harmonic maps on the Poincar disk, Proc. Amer.
Math. Soc. 132 (2004), 2483-2493
[116] G. Yao, -Energy Integral and Harmonic Mappings, Proc Amer Math Soc
131 (7) 2002, 2271-2277
[117] S. T. Yau, Harmonic functions on complete Riemannian manifolds,
Comm.Pure and Appl. Math. 28 (1975) 201-228.
[Zo] V. Zori, Analiza II, 1984.
[a] B. V. abat, Uvod u kompleksnu analizu, 1976.
[a-La] B. V. abat, M. A. Lavrentijev, Metodi teorije funkcija kompleksne promenljive, Fizmatgiz, Moskva, 1973.
[121] V. Markovic: Harmonic dieomorphisms of noncompact surfaces and

Teichmller spaces. J. London Math. Soc. (2) 65 (2002), no. 1, 103
114.
[122] V. Markovic: Quasisymmetric groups. Journal of American Mathematical Society 19 (2006), no. 3, 673-715
[123] V. Markovic: Harmonic dieomorphisms and conformal distortion
of Riemann surfaces. Communications in Analysis and Geometry 10
(2002), no. 4, 847- 876.
[124] F. Gardiner, N. Lakic: Quasiconformal Teichmuller theory, AMS,
Math Surveys and Monographes series, Vol. 76, Amer. Math. Soc.,
Providence, RI ,2000, xix + 372 pp., ISBN 0-8218-1983-6.
LITERATURA
[Ka-Ad] D. Adnaevi, Z. Kadelburg, Matematika analiza II, Beograd, 1991.
[Ah] L. Ahlfors, Complex Analysis, McGraw-Hill Book Co, 1966.
[Al] S. Aljani, Uvod u realnu i funkcionalnu analizu, Graevinska knjiga,
Beograd, 1968.
[Be-G] A. Berenstein, R. Gay, Complex variables, Springer-Verlag, 1991.
[Co] J. Conway, Functions of One Complex Variable, Springer-Verlag, 1978.
[Ch-Br] R.Churchill, J.Brown, Complex variables and applications, McGraw-Hill
Book Co, 1984.
[GM] Gutman, I., Mateljevic, M., Note on the Coulson Integral Formula, J.
Math. Chem., File No. A2081
[Je-Ma] M. Jevti, M. Mateljevi, Analitike funkcije, Beograd, 1986.
[LV] Lehto, O., Virtanen, K., I., Quasiconformal Mappings in the Plane,
Springer-Verlag (1973).
[Ma] M. Mateljevi, O Kompleksnim brojevima i osnovnom stavu Algebre, Nastava matematike, XLVII, 3-4, Beograd, 2002.
[Ma 1] M. Mateljevi, Promena argumenta du puta i Jordanove teoreme, Nastava matematike, XLIX, 1-2, Beograd, 2004.
[Ma 2] M. Mateljevi, Kompleksna analiza, Banja Luka, 2004.
[1] M. Mateljevi: Kompleksne Funkcije 1 & 2, Drutvo matematiara Srbije,
2006.
[Mi] D. Mitrinovi, Kompleksna analiza, Beograd, 1973.
[Ni] M. Niki, Osnovi kompleksne analize, Nauna knjiga, Beograd, 1992.
[Pi] D. Perii, S. Pilipovi, M. Stojanovi, Funkcije vie promenljivih; diferencijalni i integralni raun, Novi Sad, 1997.
[Ru] W.Rudin, Real and Complex Analysis, McGraw-Hill Book Co, 1966.
[To] D. . Toi, Zbirka reenih ispitnih zadataka iz matematike III, Akademska misao, Beograd, 2002.
[Zo] V. Zori, Analiza II, 1984.
[a] abat, Uvod u kompleksnu analizu, 1976.
[a-La] abat, Lavrentijev, Metodi teorije funkcija kompleksne promenljive, Fizmatgiz, Moskva, 1973.
[Ku71] D. Kurepa, On the left factorial function !n, Math. Balkan. 1

(1971), 147-153
INDEKS
analitika
funkcija, 25
kriva, 47
automorzam
konformni, 36, 58
cikl, 99
funkcija
analitika, 47
bilinearna, 37
jednolisna, 43
meromorfna, 14
promena argumenta funkcije du
puta, 65
funkcional, 39
neprekidan, 39
grana
argumenta
neprekidna du puta, 25
regularna du puta, 66
vieznane funkcije, 58, 64
homotopija, 76
indeks puta, 22
integral
du puta, 80
logaritamskog izvoda, 18
izomorzam
konformni, 36, 57
jedno-parametarska familija
puteva, 76
kompaktna pripadnost, 48
krunica
pozitivno orijentisana, 90
lema
varcova, 33, 45
integral logaritamskog izvoda,
18
m-list lok, 26
Mihajlova, 59
neprekidnog produenja, 49
o Indeksu, 99
Postoji primitivan lanac, 79
princip simetrije, 52
Produenje primitivne f-je, 79
Subordinacije, Lem Sub, 34
topoloka, L Top 2, 100, 114
logaritamski rezidum, 1314, 21
lokalna jednolisnost, 27, 29
holomorfne funkcije, 28
lokalni kvadrat, 70
lokalni pravougaonik, 70, 114
nejednakost
Koijeva, 39
nula reda n, 14
oblast
ordanova, 48
deo po deo regularna, 72
O-tipa, 64
prosto povezana, 41, 103
regularna, 20, 99
specijalnog O-tipa, 24
pol, 14
princip
argumenta, 18, 48, 67
indeksa, 23
Indeks
put
red
kompaktnosti, 38
korespondencije granica, 4, 47
korespondencije oblasti, 48, 113
maksimuma modula, 4, 30, 56
minimuma modula, 30
ouvanja oblasti, 25, 26
simetrije, 49
polarna reprezentacija, 4, 66
zatvoren, 66, 67
Tejlorov, 61
taka
ataka, 23
singularna
izolovana, 13
teorema
varcova, 47
princip, 51
ordanova, 4, 64, 69
Grinova formula, 117
Heine-Borela, 47
Hurvicova, 40
Hurvitz-a, 44
Indeks ordanove konture, 73
jedinosti, 30, 40, 52
Jedinstvenost produenja du
puta, 75
jednolisno konformno, 28
Karateodorijeva, 47, 110, 112
KIFKont, 100
KIT homoloka verzija, 97
KIT homotopija, 80
KIT za prosto povezane oblasti,
107
KITKont, 99
Koi-Gursa, 100
Koijeva
161
o rezidumima, 102
Koijeva Formula za cikl, 94
Koijeva integralna 2, 53
Koijeva integralna ntougao,
54
Koijeva teorema za konveksne
skupove, 87
Koijeva Teorema za trouglove,
86
Lok ponaanje holo, 28
Lokalna Jednolisnost, Lok 1-1,
27, 29
Montela, 39
Nezavisnost produenja od puta,
77
o indeksu, 67, 73, 88, 90
o monodromiji, 44, 78
o srednjoj vrednosti integrala,
35
osnovni stav algebre, 17
PKOb, 48
Postojanje neprekidnog logaritma, 109
Postoji primitivna funkcija du
puta, 79
Princip Argumenta, PArg, 21
Princip Indeksa, PInd, 23
Princip Korespondencije Oblasti, PKOb, 113
Princip ouvanja oblasti, P O
Ob, 26
Produenje kroz analitiki luk,
52
Rimanova, 4, 36, 42
Rueova, 15, 23, 26, 41, 60, 67
Rungeova, 32
Tejlorova, 92
Vajertrasova, 40
Varavski krug, 49
162
ordanova
analitika kriva, 47
domen, 113
Indeks
MIODRAG MATELJEVI
KOMPLEKSNA ANALIZA 2
Izdava
ZAVOD ZA UDBENIKE
Beograd, Obiliev venac 5, Beograd
www.zavod.co.rs
Likovni urednik
TIJANA RANI
Korice
TIJANA RANI
Graki urednik
MILAN BJELANOVI
Kompjuterska priprema
SRAN RADOVANOVI
Korektor
DOBRILO TOI
Obim: xxx tamparskih tabaka

Format: 16, 5 23, 5 cm
Rukopis predat u tampu decembra 2011. godine.

tampanje zavreno januara 2012. godine.
tampa xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Beograd

Kompl Analiza 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kompl Analiza 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See

Available from: Miodrag Mateljevi

Kompleksna integracija, Analiticke funkcije, Konformna

Ovo delo se ne sme umnoavati, fotokopirati i na bilo koji nain reprodukovati,

Godine 2006. izala je iz tampe moja knjiga Kompleksne funkcije

1 FUNDAMENTALS OF GEOMETRIC THEORY

cis t = cos t + i sin t = eit

f dz kompleksni integral du konture

kontura deo po deo gladak put

A() klasa regularno-analitikih funkcija na

TK Go1 Teorema Koi-Goursa

K z ili Ind z = Ind (z) Indeks zatvorenog puta u odnosu na z

Ako funkcija f ima pol reda n u taki a, koristimo oznake

dx = ctg() Ojlerov integral druge vrste (u smislu glavne

B = B(p, q) Beta funkcija

FUNDAMENTALS OF GEOMETRIC THEORY

Denicija 1.1. Logarithmic residue of a function f in the point a C is

of function f in the point a.

Log Res(f, a) = Log Resa f = Resa

Function f may have a logarithmic residue that is dierent from zero

f (z) = (z a)n (z),

f 0 (z) = n(z a)n1 (z) + (z a)n 0 (z),

From this expression, we conclude the following: in a zero of order n the

f (z) = (z a)m (z),

Lema 1.1 (Log Res). If a function f has a zero of order n Z in point

Log Resa f = Resa

From now on we will count each zero or pole of a function is as many

Fundamentals of Geometric Theory

in domain , is called a meromorphic function on .

Teorema 1.1 (Logarithmic

where is the positively oriented boundary of the domain G.

Dokaz. Since f in G has only nite number of zeros, a1 , . . . , an and nite

number of poles, b1 , . . . , bm , and G contains neither zeros nor poles, funcf0

Considering the Lemma 1.1,

kj is the total number of zeros (in general sense).

when the integral exists. If h is meromorphic function in a domain G, by

Nh = N (h, G) and Ph = P (h, G)

|h(z)| |f (z)| |g(z)|,

holds, From (b)it follows

Fundamentals of Geometric Theory

and, therefore, maps G to B = B(1; 1) + . Since on + there exists a

Primer 1. Determine the number of zeros of the function

Note. The Rouch's theorem is also applied on multiply connected domains;

Rezultat. The answer is NO in general sense. More precisely, b. holds i is

The Fundamental theorem of algebra

Uputstvo. If p1 (z) = an1 z n1 + + a1 z + a0 , then P (z) = z n + p1 (z)

The Argument Principle

that following conditions hold:

holds, where a = (0), b = (1) and ln = logarithm branch in O.

and ln such that arg = Im ln.

Fundamentals of Geometric Theory

holds, we further obtain

J = ln |f (b)| ln |f (a)| + i Arg f,

Propozicija 1.1 (The Integral of logarithmic derivative and argument's

Dokaz. Let us divide contour by points z0 = a, z1 , . . . , zn = b into nite

number of contours 1 , . . . , n such that each contour k = f k lies in

As a result of summing these equations, and bearing in mind that

holds, we get (1.9).

Denicija 1.3. In the case when f = E is the identity mapping, instead of

technique. Let f be holomorphic on a closed contour and dierent from

Since is closed, a = (0) = (1) = b holds, and therefore,

Primer 2. Let K1 be a positive oriented disc boundary, = K1 and f (z) = z . We

Teorema 1.3 (Log Res with respect to a cycle and a change of

Denicija 1.1. Logarithmic residue of a function f in the point a C is

Function f may have a logarithmic residue that is dierent from zero

Dokaz. Since f in G has only nite number of zeros, a1 , . . . , an and nite

Rezultat. The answer is NO in general sense. More precisely, b. holds i is

Dokaz. Let us divide contour by points z0 = a, z1 , . . . , zn = b into nite

Denicija 1.3. In the case when f = E is the identity mapping, instead of

technique. Let f be holomorphic on a closed contour and dierent from

By summing these equalities and introducing the natural denition

we can give a formal denition:

enough to replace function f with fa (dened as fa (z) = f (z) a). If G

Uputstvo. (For 1 ): Let us divide into nite number of contours 1 , . . . , n ,

The domain of special O-type, Denition 5.4. We say that domain

Dokaz. Let us rst prove that there exists a disc B 1 = {|z z0 | r1 }

Veba 1.1.5. If f (z) = x + iy 3 , prove that f R is innitely dierentiable function