Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T14:16:35.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Euclidean linear invariance and uniform local convexity

Part of: Entire and meromorphic functions, and related topics Geometric function theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 April 2009

Wancang Ma  and
David Minda
Wancang Ma
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematical SciencesUniversity of CincinnatiCincinnati, Ohio 45221-0025, U.S.A.
David Minda
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematical SciencesUniversity of CincinnatiCincinnati, Ohio 45221-0025, U.S.A.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Let S(p) be the family of holomorphic functions f defined on the unit disk D, normalized by f(0) = f1(0) – 1 = 0 and univalent in every hyperbolic disk of radius p. Let C(p) be the subfamily consisting of those functions which are convex univalent in every hyperbolic disk of radius p. For p = ∞ these become the classical families S and C of normalized univalent and convex functions, respectively. These families are linearly invariant in the sense of Pommerenke; a natural problem is to calculate the order of these linearly invariant families. More precisely, we give a geometrie proof that C(p) is the universal linearly invariant family of all normalized locally schlicht functions of order at most coth(2p). This gives a purely geometric interpretation for the order of a linearly invariant family. In a related matter, we characterize those locally schlicht functions which map each hyperbolically k-convex subset of D onto a euclidean convex set. Finally, we give upper and lower bounds on the order of the linearly invariant family S(p) and prove that this class is not equal to the universal linearly invariant family of any order.

MSC classification

Secondary: 30C99: None of the above, but in this section 30C45: Special classes of univalent and multivalent functions (starlike, convex, bounded rotation, etc.) 30C50: Coefficient problems for univalent and multivalent functions 30D45: Bloch functions, normal functions, normal families
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Australian Mathematical Society , Volume 52 , Issue 3 , June 1992 , pp. 401 - 418
Copyright
Copyright © Australian Mathematical Society 1992

References

[1]Beesack, P. R. and Schwarz, B., ‘On the zeros of solutions of second-order linear differential equations’, Canad. J. Math. 8 (1956), 504–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Flinn, B. and Osgood, B., ‘Hyperbolic curvature and conformal mapping’, Bull. London Math. Soc. 18 (1986), 272–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Harmelin, R., ‘Locally convex functions and the Schwarzian derivative’, Israel J. Math. 67 (1989), 367–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Heins, M., ‘On a theorem of Study concerning conformal maps with convex images’, Mathematical essays dedicated to A. J. Macintyre, Ohio University Press, Athens, Ohio, 1970, pp. 171–176.Google Scholar
[5]Jørgensen, V., ‘On an inequality for the hyperbolic measure and its applications to the theory of functions’, Math. Scand. 4 (1956), 113–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Kra, I., ‘Deformations of Fuchsian groups II’, Duke Math. J. 38 (1971), 499–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Ma, W. and Minda, D., ‘Linear invariance and uniform local univalence’, Complex Variables Theory Appl. 16 (1991), 9–19.Google Scholar
[8]Mejia, D., The hyperbolic metric in K-convex regions, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Cincinnati, 1986.Google Scholar
[9]Minda, D., ‘The Schwarzian derivative and univalence criteria’, Contemporary Math. 38 (1985), 43–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10]Minda, D., ‘Hyperbolic curvature on Riemann surfaces’, Complex Variables Theory Appl. 12 (1989), 1–8.Google Scholar
[11]Nehari, Z., ‘Some inequalities in the theory of functions’, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 75 (1953), 256–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12]Overholt, M., ‘Linear problems for the Schwarzian derivative, Ph. D. dissertation, The University of Michigan, 1987.Google Scholar
[13]Pick, G., ‘Über die konforme Abbildung eines Kreises auf ein schlichtes und zugleich beschränktes Gebiet’, S.-B. Kaiserl. Akad. Wiss. Wien, Math.-Naturwiss. K1. 126 (1917), 247–263.Google Scholar
[14]Pommerenke, Ch., ‘Linear-invariante Familien analytischer Funktionen I’, Math. Ann. 155 (1964), 108–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15]Pommerenke, Ch., ‘Linear-invariante Familien analytischer Funktionen II’, Math. Ann. 156 (1964), 226–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[16]Pommerenke, Ch., ‘Images of convex domains under convex conformal mappings’, Michigan Math. J. 9 (1962), 257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[17]Pommerenke, Ch., Univalent Functions, Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht: Göttingen, 1975.Google Scholar
[18]Schwarz, B., ‘Complex nonoscillation theorems and criteria of univalence’, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 80 (1955), 159–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[19]Study, E., Vorlesungen über ausgewählte Gegenstände der Geometrie, 2. Heft, Leipzig and Berlin, 1913.Google Scholar
[20]Yamashita, S., ‘Inequalities for the Schwarzian derivative’, Indian Univ. Math. J. 28 (1979), 131–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar