Hyperbolic convexity of holomorphic level sets

Maximum principle, Schwarz's lemma, Lindelöf principle, analogues and generalizations; subordination (30C80) Conformal metrics (hyperbolic, Poincaré, distance functions) (30F45) Dynamics induced by flows and semiflows (37C10) Fixed points and periodic points of dynamical systems; fixed-point index theory; local dynamics (37C25) Spherical and hyperbolic convexity (52A55)

Review text

A set \(\Omega\) of the unit disk \(\mathbb{D}\) is said to be hyperbolically convex if for every two distinct points \(z_1,z_2\in \Omega\), the hyperbolic geodesic segment joining \(z_1\) to \(z_2\) lies entirely in \(\Omega\). If, in addition, every hyperbolic geodesic intersects \(\partial \Omega\) in at most two points, then \(\Omega\) is said to be strictly hyperbolically convex.\N\NLet \(f\) be a holomorphic self-map of \(\mathbb{D}\) and let \(k_{\mathbb{D}}\) denote the Poincaré distance in \(\mathbb{D}\). If \(z_0,w_0\in \mathbb{D}\), we consider the sets\N\[\N\mathcal{D}_{\mu}(f)=\{z\in\mathbb{D}:k_{\mathbb{D}}(z,z_0)-k_{\mathbb{D}}(f(z),w_0)<\mu\},\quad\mu \in \mathbb{R},\N\]\Nand\N\[\N\Omega_{\lambda}(f)=\left\{z\in\mathbb{D}:\frac{1-|f(z)|^2}{1-|z|^2}<\lambda\right\},\quad\lambda>0.\N\]\N\textit{A. Yu. Solynin} [Zap. Nauchn. Semin. POMI 337, 238--252 (2006); translation in J. Math. Sci., New York 143, No. 3, 3153--3160 (2007; Zbl 1122.30018)] proved that the set \(\mathcal{D}_{0}(f)\) is either empty or hyperbolically convex. In the paper under review, the authors extend this result to the families \(\mathcal{D}_{\mu}(f)\) and \(\Omega_{\lambda}(f)\) for \(\mu<0\) and \(\lambda>1\). In particular, they prove that if \(\mu \le 0\) then the set \(\mathcal{D}_{\mu}(f)\) is either empty or strictly hyperbolically convex. Moreover, they show that if \(\lambda> 1\) then the set \(\Omega_{\lambda}(f)\) is a strictly hyperbolically convex domain containing the origin. In the case \(\lambda=1\) the same conclusion holds under the additional assumptions that \(f(0)\neq 0\) and that \(f\) is not an automorphism of \(\mathbb{D}\). The results are sharp and also resolve a question posed by \textit{J. Arango} et al. [Monatsh. Math. 190, No. 3, 413--423 (2019; Zbl 1432.31001)]. The paper concludes with several interesting questions for further research in more general settings.

Cites work

Cited in

(1)

Hyperbolic curvature of holomorphic level curves

This page was built for publication: Hyperbolic convexity of holomorphic level sets

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q6850293)