On meromorphic extendibility (Q2518295): Difference between revisions

Let \(D\subset\mathbb C\) be a bounded domain whose boundary \(\partial D\) consists of finitely many pairwise disjoint real-analytic simple closed curves. Let \(f\) be an integrable function on \(\partial D\). Let \(A(D)\) be the algebra of all continuous functions on \(\overline D\) which are holomorphic on \(D\). A function \(f\in L^1(\partial D)\) extends holomorphically through \(D\) iff \(\int_{\partial D}f(\zeta)\omega(\zeta)\,d\zeta=0\) for each \(\omega\in A(D)\), which, since rational functions with poles outside \(\overline D\) are dense in \(A(D)\), is equivalent to \( \int_{\partial D}\frac{f(\zeta)\,d\zeta}{\zeta-z}\equiv0\), \(z\in\mathbb C\setminus\overline D\). There is no such simple test for meromorphic extendibility. If we happen to know the potential poles and their multiplicities, that is, if we know a nonzero polynomial \(Q\), then to check the meromorphic extendibility is easy as we simply check whether \(Qf\) extends holomorphically through \(D\). The problem becomes more difficult if we do not know in advance where the poles are. The author shows that for continuous functions on \(\partial D\) the meromorphic extendibility can be expressed in terms of the argument principle. Given a continuous function \(\varphi : \partial D\to\mathbb C \backslash\{0\}\) denote by \(\mathcal W(\varphi)\) the winding number of \(\varphi\) (around the origin). So \(2\pi\mathcal W(\varphi)\) equals the change of argument of \(\varphi(z)\) as \(z\) runs along \(\partial D\) following the standard orientation. It is proved that a continuous function \(f\) on \(\partial D\) extends meromorphically through \(D\) iff there is an \(N\in\mathbb N\cup \{0\}\) such that \(\mathcal W(Pf + Q)\geqslant-N\) for all \(P, Q\in A(D)\) such that \(Pf + Q\neq 0\) on \(\partial D\). If this is the case then the meromorphic extension of \(f\) has at most \(N\) poles in \(D\), counting multiplicity.