4

In his presentation of Abel's theorem, Ahlfors mentions that for a fixed positive number $K$, the region defined by \begin{equation} \frac{|1-z|}{1-|z|}\le K \end{equation} corresponds to the region inside the unit circle and in a certain angle with vertex $1$, symmetric around the x-axis.

This should not be too difficult, but I cannot actually see how that inequality is related to that geometric picture.

Can someone give a hint?

Thanks!

Hui Yu
  • 15,029

1 Answers1

6

It's not an equality. The Stolz angle with opening $\alpha > 0$ and radius $r$ is

$$S(\alpha,r) = \{1 - \rho e^{i\varphi} : 0 < \rho < r,\; \lvert\varphi\rvert < \alpha\},$$

a circular sector that for $\alpha < \pi/2$ and small enough $r$ (depending on $\alpha$) is contained in the unit disk. Its boundary consists of two straight line segments, and one circular arc.

For $0 < K < \infty$, the region

$$R(K) = \left\lbrace z \in \mathbb{D} : \frac{\lvert 1-z\rvert}{1-\lvert z\rvert} < K \right\rbrace$$

is bounded by a curve that contains no straight line segment. But as $z$ approaches $1$ on the boundary of $R(K)$, the angle between between the real axis and $1-z$ approaches a limit $< \pi/2$ (namely $\arccos K^{-1}$).

The equivalence of the two conditions is to be understood in the sense that if we consider $R(K,r) = \{z \in R(K) : \lvert 1-z\rvert < r\}$, then for every $K \in (0,\infty)$, there is an $\alpha < \pi/2$ with $R(K,r) \subset S(\alpha,r)$, and for every angle $\alpha \in (0,\pi/2)$, there is a $K < \infty$ with $S(\alpha,r) \subset R(K,r)$ (where $r$ is always supposed small enough that $\overline{S(\alpha,r)}\setminus \{1\}$ is contained in the unit disk). Demonstrations at wolfram.

Daniel Fischer
  • 206,697
  • How do you come to the conclusion that "as $z$ approaches $1$ on the boundary of $R(K),$ the angle between $1 - z$ and the real line approaches a limit which is $\arccos K^{-1}\ $"? – Akiro Kurosawa Dec 16 '23 at 16:44
  • How do even you come to the conclusion of the equivalence that you mentioned at the end? Diagrams are only there to build some intuition but it cannot be considered as a proof. So the visual demonstration you mentioned is not a valid proof. – Akiro Kurosawa Dec 17 '23 at 05:49