Difference Nevanlinna theories with vanishing and infinite periods (Q2408337)

A difference Nevanlinna theory for meromorphic functions with steps tending to zero (vanishing period) and a difference Nevanlinna theory for finite-order meromorphic functions with steps tending to infinity (infinite period) is established, by extending the idea of a difference operator with a fixed step to a varying-step difference operator. Let \(f\) be a meromorphic function in \(\mathbb{C}\), and \(r = |z|\) be fixed. Then, for vanishing period, \[ \lim\limits_{\nu\to0}m\left(r,\frac{f(z+\nu)}{f(z)}\right)+ \lim\limits_{\nu\to0}m\left(r,\frac{f(z)}{f(z+\nu)}\right)=0, \] where \(m\) denotes the Nevanlinna proximity function. If \(f(z)\) is a meromorphic function of finite order \(\sigma\), \(0<\beta<1\), and \(0<|\omega|< r^\beta\), then, given \(0<\varepsilon< (1-\beta)/(2-\beta)\), \[ m\left(r,\frac{f(z+\omega)}{f(z)}\right)+ m\left(r,\frac{f(z)}{f(z+\omega)}\right)=O(r^{\sigma-(1-\beta)(1-\varepsilon)+\varepsilon}). \] By additional finite-order growth restriction for meromorphic functions from the infinite period theory, the classical little Picard theorem from the vanishing period theory is recovered: Let \(f\) be a meromorphic function having three Picard exceptional values for a varying-step difference operator with vanishing period. Then \(f\) is a constant. Then some applications of these theories to exhibit connections between discrete equations and their continuous analogues are given.