Does their exist an analytic function $f(z)$ such that $f(n + frac{1}{n}) = 0$ for all $n in mathbb{N}$?












2












$begingroup$


My approach:



Let $a_n = n + frac{1}{n}$. Define $f(z) = (z-a_1)cdots(z-a_n)cdots=prod_{ninmathbb{N}}(z-a_n)$. I think that $f(z)$ satisfies the above property. But I have some reservation in defining the infinite product. So is my approach correct and can someone write down the rigorous answer to it.






complex-analysis







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I guess you mean besides the function $f = 0$.
    $endgroup$
    – jjagmath
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:42










  • $begingroup$
    @jjagmath Yes $f neq 0$
    $endgroup$
    – henceproved
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:46
















2












$begingroup$


My approach:



Let $a_n = n + frac{1}{n}$. Define $f(z) = (z-a_1)cdots(z-a_n)cdots=prod_{ninmathbb{N}}(z-a_n)$. I think that $f(z)$ satisfies the above property. But I have some reservation in defining the infinite product. So is my approach correct and can someone write down the rigorous answer to it.






complex-analysis







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I guess you mean besides the function $f = 0$.
    $endgroup$
    – jjagmath
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:42










  • $begingroup$
    @jjagmath Yes $f neq 0$
    $endgroup$
    – henceproved
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:46














2












2








2





$begingroup$


My approach:



Let $a_n = n + frac{1}{n}$. Define $f(z) = (z-a_1)cdots(z-a_n)cdots=prod_{ninmathbb{N}}(z-a_n)$. I think that $f(z)$ satisfies the above property. But I have some reservation in defining the infinite product. So is my approach correct and can someone write down the rigorous answer to it.






complex-analysis







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




My approach:



Let $a_n = n + frac{1}{n}$. Define $f(z) = (z-a_1)cdots(z-a_n)cdots=prod_{ninmathbb{N}}(z-a_n)$. I think that $f(z)$ satisfies the above property. But I have some reservation in defining the infinite product. So is my approach correct and can someone write down the rigorous answer to it.






complex-analysis




complex-analysis






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 6 '18 at 0:04









Ethan Bolker

44.3k553119




44.3k553119










asked Dec 5 '18 at 23:29









henceprovedhenceproved

1628




1628








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I guess you mean besides the function $f = 0$.
    $endgroup$
    – jjagmath
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:42










  • $begingroup$
    @jjagmath Yes $f neq 0$
    $endgroup$
    – henceproved
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:46














  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I guess you mean besides the function $f = 0$.
    $endgroup$
    – jjagmath
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:42










  • $begingroup$
    @jjagmath Yes $f neq 0$
    $endgroup$
    – henceproved
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:46








1




1




$begingroup$
I guess you mean besides the function $f = 0$.
$endgroup$
– jjagmath
Dec 5 '18 at 23:42




$begingroup$
I guess you mean besides the function $f = 0$.
$endgroup$
– jjagmath
Dec 5 '18 at 23:42












$begingroup$
@jjagmath Yes $f neq 0$
$endgroup$
– henceproved
Dec 5 '18 at 23:46




$begingroup$
@jjagmath Yes $f neq 0$
$endgroup$
– henceproved
Dec 5 '18 at 23:46










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

This should follow immediately from the Weierstrass Factorization Theorem. There are some technical details you should attend to, but your idea is almost basically correct.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weierstrass_factorization_theorem






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thanks for the link, i was not aware of that theorem. Anyways in the theorem it mentions that $mid z - a_n mid to 0 $ as $n to infty$. Somehow I am not seeing that happening!
    $endgroup$
    – henceproved
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:48












  • $begingroup$
    @henceproved Where did you see $|z-a_n|rightarrow 0$? The first form of the theorem only requires that $a_nrightarrow infty$.
    $endgroup$
    – RandomMathGuy
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:50










  • $begingroup$
    sorry typo it should be $mid z - a_n mid to 1$ and I saw this condition in the motivation section.
    $endgroup$
    – henceproved
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:52










  • $begingroup$
    @henceproved Ah, that condition is certainly required, and your proposed product certainly does not satisfy it. That is why I said you had some technical details to attend to. Notice that in the theorem the elementary factors are rather strange looking.
    $endgroup$
    – RandomMathGuy
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:53






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    If $$sum frac{1}{a^2_n}$$ is absolutely convergent (which it is in this case), then $$f(z) = prod_{n=1}^{infty} left(1 - frac{z}{a_n}right) e^{z/a_n}$$ is a holomorphic function with zeroes exactly at $a_n$. If you don't mind extra zeroes, then you could consider $F(z) = f(z)f(-z)$, which has zeroes at $a_n$ and $-a_n$ but the slightly nicer form: $$ prod_{n=1}^{infty} left(1 - frac{z^2}{a^2_n} right).$$
    $endgroup$
    – Lorem Ipsum
    Dec 6 '18 at 1:39



















0












$begingroup$

The function you have is actually nowhere analytic and not even well defined.



Suppose that $f:mathbb{C}rightarrow mathbb{C}$ where $f(x) = lim_{nrightarrowinfty}prod_{i=1}^{n}(x-a_n)$ is well defined, i.e $f(x)in mathbb{C}$ for each $xin mathbb{C}$.



Pick any $xinmathbb{C},nin mathbb{N}$.



begin{align}
|a_n-a_m|&=|n+frac{1}{n}-m-frac{1}{m}|\
&geq |n-m| - |frac{1}{n}-frac{1}{m}|\
&geq |n-m| - 2
end{align}



So that $|a_n - a_m|rightarrowinfty$ as $mrightarrow infty$. We also have that begin{align}
|x-a_m|&= |(x-a_n)-(a_n-a_m)|\
&geq |a_n -a_m| - |x-a_n|
end{align}



Now, as $|a_n-a_m|rightarrowinfty$, choose $M = 2+|x-a_n|$ so that there exists $Nin mathbb{N}$ such that $m> N$ implies $|a_n-a_m| geq M$ which implies $|x-a_m| geq 2$.



Note $|x-a_i|$ is nonzero for all $1leq ileq N$. Thus $prod_{1leq ileq N}{|x-a_i|}$ is equal to some $varepsilon>0$. Now there exists $kinmathbb{N}$ such that $frac{1}{2^k} leq varepsilon$. Now $prod_{i=1}^{N+m+k}|x-a_i| geq varepsilon2^{m+k}geq2^{m}$. Thus $f(x)$ must be unbounded so that $f(x)notin mathbb{C}$. Hence $f$ is not well defined.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    This addresses "is my approach correct" but not "can someone write down the rigorous answer to it".
    $endgroup$
    – Did
    Dec 7 '18 at 20:07











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3027823%2fdoes-their-exist-an-analytic-function-fz-such-that-fn-frac1n-0%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









2












$begingroup$

This should follow immediately from the Weierstrass Factorization Theorem. There are some technical details you should attend to, but your idea is almost basically correct.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weierstrass_factorization_theorem






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thanks for the link, i was not aware of that theorem. Anyways in the theorem it mentions that $mid z - a_n mid to 0 $ as $n to infty$. Somehow I am not seeing that happening!
    $endgroup$
    – henceproved
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:48












  • $begingroup$
    @henceproved Where did you see $|z-a_n|rightarrow 0$? The first form of the theorem only requires that $a_nrightarrow infty$.
    $endgroup$
    – RandomMathGuy
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:50










  • $begingroup$
    sorry typo it should be $mid z - a_n mid to 1$ and I saw this condition in the motivation section.
    $endgroup$
    – henceproved
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:52










  • $begingroup$
    @henceproved Ah, that condition is certainly required, and your proposed product certainly does not satisfy it. That is why I said you had some technical details to attend to. Notice that in the theorem the elementary factors are rather strange looking.
    $endgroup$
    – RandomMathGuy
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:53






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    If $$sum frac{1}{a^2_n}$$ is absolutely convergent (which it is in this case), then $$f(z) = prod_{n=1}^{infty} left(1 - frac{z}{a_n}right) e^{z/a_n}$$ is a holomorphic function with zeroes exactly at $a_n$. If you don't mind extra zeroes, then you could consider $F(z) = f(z)f(-z)$, which has zeroes at $a_n$ and $-a_n$ but the slightly nicer form: $$ prod_{n=1}^{infty} left(1 - frac{z^2}{a^2_n} right).$$
    $endgroup$
    – Lorem Ipsum
    Dec 6 '18 at 1:39
















2












$begingroup$

This should follow immediately from the Weierstrass Factorization Theorem. There are some technical details you should attend to, but your idea is almost basically correct.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weierstrass_factorization_theorem






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thanks for the link, i was not aware of that theorem. Anyways in the theorem it mentions that $mid z - a_n mid to 0 $ as $n to infty$. Somehow I am not seeing that happening!
    $endgroup$
    – henceproved
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:48












  • $begingroup$
    @henceproved Where did you see $|z-a_n|rightarrow 0$? The first form of the theorem only requires that $a_nrightarrow infty$.
    $endgroup$
    – RandomMathGuy
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:50










  • $begingroup$
    sorry typo it should be $mid z - a_n mid to 1$ and I saw this condition in the motivation section.
    $endgroup$
    – henceproved
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:52










  • $begingroup$
    @henceproved Ah, that condition is certainly required, and your proposed product certainly does not satisfy it. That is why I said you had some technical details to attend to. Notice that in the theorem the elementary factors are rather strange looking.
    $endgroup$
    – RandomMathGuy
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:53






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    If $$sum frac{1}{a^2_n}$$ is absolutely convergent (which it is in this case), then $$f(z) = prod_{n=1}^{infty} left(1 - frac{z}{a_n}right) e^{z/a_n}$$ is a holomorphic function with zeroes exactly at $a_n$. If you don't mind extra zeroes, then you could consider $F(z) = f(z)f(-z)$, which has zeroes at $a_n$ and $-a_n$ but the slightly nicer form: $$ prod_{n=1}^{infty} left(1 - frac{z^2}{a^2_n} right).$$
    $endgroup$
    – Lorem Ipsum
    Dec 6 '18 at 1:39














2












2








2





$begingroup$

This should follow immediately from the Weierstrass Factorization Theorem. There are some technical details you should attend to, but your idea is almost basically correct.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weierstrass_factorization_theorem






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



This should follow immediately from the Weierstrass Factorization Theorem. There are some technical details you should attend to, but your idea is almost basically correct.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weierstrass_factorization_theorem







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Dec 5 '18 at 23:39









RandomMathGuyRandomMathGuy

641




641












  • $begingroup$
    Thanks for the link, i was not aware of that theorem. Anyways in the theorem it mentions that $mid z - a_n mid to 0 $ as $n to infty$. Somehow I am not seeing that happening!
    $endgroup$
    – henceproved
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:48












  • $begingroup$
    @henceproved Where did you see $|z-a_n|rightarrow 0$? The first form of the theorem only requires that $a_nrightarrow infty$.
    $endgroup$
    – RandomMathGuy
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:50










  • $begingroup$
    sorry typo it should be $mid z - a_n mid to 1$ and I saw this condition in the motivation section.
    $endgroup$
    – henceproved
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:52










  • $begingroup$
    @henceproved Ah, that condition is certainly required, and your proposed product certainly does not satisfy it. That is why I said you had some technical details to attend to. Notice that in the theorem the elementary factors are rather strange looking.
    $endgroup$
    – RandomMathGuy
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:53






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    If $$sum frac{1}{a^2_n}$$ is absolutely convergent (which it is in this case), then $$f(z) = prod_{n=1}^{infty} left(1 - frac{z}{a_n}right) e^{z/a_n}$$ is a holomorphic function with zeroes exactly at $a_n$. If you don't mind extra zeroes, then you could consider $F(z) = f(z)f(-z)$, which has zeroes at $a_n$ and $-a_n$ but the slightly nicer form: $$ prod_{n=1}^{infty} left(1 - frac{z^2}{a^2_n} right).$$
    $endgroup$
    – Lorem Ipsum
    Dec 6 '18 at 1:39


















  • $begingroup$
    Thanks for the link, i was not aware of that theorem. Anyways in the theorem it mentions that $mid z - a_n mid to 0 $ as $n to infty$. Somehow I am not seeing that happening!
    $endgroup$
    – henceproved
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:48












  • $begingroup$
    @henceproved Where did you see $|z-a_n|rightarrow 0$? The first form of the theorem only requires that $a_nrightarrow infty$.
    $endgroup$
    – RandomMathGuy
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:50










  • $begingroup$
    sorry typo it should be $mid z - a_n mid to 1$ and I saw this condition in the motivation section.
    $endgroup$
    – henceproved
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:52










  • $begingroup$
    @henceproved Ah, that condition is certainly required, and your proposed product certainly does not satisfy it. That is why I said you had some technical details to attend to. Notice that in the theorem the elementary factors are rather strange looking.
    $endgroup$
    – RandomMathGuy
    Dec 5 '18 at 23:53






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    If $$sum frac{1}{a^2_n}$$ is absolutely convergent (which it is in this case), then $$f(z) = prod_{n=1}^{infty} left(1 - frac{z}{a_n}right) e^{z/a_n}$$ is a holomorphic function with zeroes exactly at $a_n$. If you don't mind extra zeroes, then you could consider $F(z) = f(z)f(-z)$, which has zeroes at $a_n$ and $-a_n$ but the slightly nicer form: $$ prod_{n=1}^{infty} left(1 - frac{z^2}{a^2_n} right).$$
    $endgroup$
    – Lorem Ipsum
    Dec 6 '18 at 1:39
















$begingroup$
Thanks for the link, i was not aware of that theorem. Anyways in the theorem it mentions that $mid z - a_n mid to 0 $ as $n to infty$. Somehow I am not seeing that happening!
$endgroup$
– henceproved
Dec 5 '18 at 23:48






$begingroup$
Thanks for the link, i was not aware of that theorem. Anyways in the theorem it mentions that $mid z - a_n mid to 0 $ as $n to infty$. Somehow I am not seeing that happening!
$endgroup$
– henceproved
Dec 5 '18 at 23:48














$begingroup$
@henceproved Where did you see $|z-a_n|rightarrow 0$? The first form of the theorem only requires that $a_nrightarrow infty$.
$endgroup$
– RandomMathGuy
Dec 5 '18 at 23:50




$begingroup$
@henceproved Where did you see $|z-a_n|rightarrow 0$? The first form of the theorem only requires that $a_nrightarrow infty$.
$endgroup$
– RandomMathGuy
Dec 5 '18 at 23:50












$begingroup$
sorry typo it should be $mid z - a_n mid to 1$ and I saw this condition in the motivation section.
$endgroup$
– henceproved
Dec 5 '18 at 23:52




$begingroup$
sorry typo it should be $mid z - a_n mid to 1$ and I saw this condition in the motivation section.
$endgroup$
– henceproved
Dec 5 '18 at 23:52












$begingroup$
@henceproved Ah, that condition is certainly required, and your proposed product certainly does not satisfy it. That is why I said you had some technical details to attend to. Notice that in the theorem the elementary factors are rather strange looking.
$endgroup$
– RandomMathGuy
Dec 5 '18 at 23:53




$begingroup$
@henceproved Ah, that condition is certainly required, and your proposed product certainly does not satisfy it. That is why I said you had some technical details to attend to. Notice that in the theorem the elementary factors are rather strange looking.
$endgroup$
– RandomMathGuy
Dec 5 '18 at 23:53




2




2




$begingroup$
If $$sum frac{1}{a^2_n}$$ is absolutely convergent (which it is in this case), then $$f(z) = prod_{n=1}^{infty} left(1 - frac{z}{a_n}right) e^{z/a_n}$$ is a holomorphic function with zeroes exactly at $a_n$. If you don't mind extra zeroes, then you could consider $F(z) = f(z)f(-z)$, which has zeroes at $a_n$ and $-a_n$ but the slightly nicer form: $$ prod_{n=1}^{infty} left(1 - frac{z^2}{a^2_n} right).$$
$endgroup$
– Lorem Ipsum
Dec 6 '18 at 1:39




$begingroup$
If $$sum frac{1}{a^2_n}$$ is absolutely convergent (which it is in this case), then $$f(z) = prod_{n=1}^{infty} left(1 - frac{z}{a_n}right) e^{z/a_n}$$ is a holomorphic function with zeroes exactly at $a_n$. If you don't mind extra zeroes, then you could consider $F(z) = f(z)f(-z)$, which has zeroes at $a_n$ and $-a_n$ but the slightly nicer form: $$ prod_{n=1}^{infty} left(1 - frac{z^2}{a^2_n} right).$$
$endgroup$
– Lorem Ipsum
Dec 6 '18 at 1:39











0












$begingroup$

The function you have is actually nowhere analytic and not even well defined.



Suppose that $f:mathbb{C}rightarrow mathbb{C}$ where $f(x) = lim_{nrightarrowinfty}prod_{i=1}^{n}(x-a_n)$ is well defined, i.e $f(x)in mathbb{C}$ for each $xin mathbb{C}$.



Pick any $xinmathbb{C},nin mathbb{N}$.



begin{align}
|a_n-a_m|&=|n+frac{1}{n}-m-frac{1}{m}|\
&geq |n-m| - |frac{1}{n}-frac{1}{m}|\
&geq |n-m| - 2
end{align}



So that $|a_n - a_m|rightarrowinfty$ as $mrightarrow infty$. We also have that begin{align}
|x-a_m|&= |(x-a_n)-(a_n-a_m)|\
&geq |a_n -a_m| - |x-a_n|
end{align}



Now, as $|a_n-a_m|rightarrowinfty$, choose $M = 2+|x-a_n|$ so that there exists $Nin mathbb{N}$ such that $m> N$ implies $|a_n-a_m| geq M$ which implies $|x-a_m| geq 2$.



Note $|x-a_i|$ is nonzero for all $1leq ileq N$. Thus $prod_{1leq ileq N}{|x-a_i|}$ is equal to some $varepsilon>0$. Now there exists $kinmathbb{N}$ such that $frac{1}{2^k} leq varepsilon$. Now $prod_{i=1}^{N+m+k}|x-a_i| geq varepsilon2^{m+k}geq2^{m}$. Thus $f(x)$ must be unbounded so that $f(x)notin mathbb{C}$. Hence $f$ is not well defined.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    This addresses "is my approach correct" but not "can someone write down the rigorous answer to it".
    $endgroup$
    – Did
    Dec 7 '18 at 20:07
















0












$begingroup$

The function you have is actually nowhere analytic and not even well defined.



Suppose that $f:mathbb{C}rightarrow mathbb{C}$ where $f(x) = lim_{nrightarrowinfty}prod_{i=1}^{n}(x-a_n)$ is well defined, i.e $f(x)in mathbb{C}$ for each $xin mathbb{C}$.



Pick any $xinmathbb{C},nin mathbb{N}$.



begin{align}
|a_n-a_m|&=|n+frac{1}{n}-m-frac{1}{m}|\
&geq |n-m| - |frac{1}{n}-frac{1}{m}|\
&geq |n-m| - 2
end{align}



So that $|a_n - a_m|rightarrowinfty$ as $mrightarrow infty$. We also have that begin{align}
|x-a_m|&= |(x-a_n)-(a_n-a_m)|\
&geq |a_n -a_m| - |x-a_n|
end{align}



Now, as $|a_n-a_m|rightarrowinfty$, choose $M = 2+|x-a_n|$ so that there exists $Nin mathbb{N}$ such that $m> N$ implies $|a_n-a_m| geq M$ which implies $|x-a_m| geq 2$.



Note $|x-a_i|$ is nonzero for all $1leq ileq N$. Thus $prod_{1leq ileq N}{|x-a_i|}$ is equal to some $varepsilon>0$. Now there exists $kinmathbb{N}$ such that $frac{1}{2^k} leq varepsilon$. Now $prod_{i=1}^{N+m+k}|x-a_i| geq varepsilon2^{m+k}geq2^{m}$. Thus $f(x)$ must be unbounded so that $f(x)notin mathbb{C}$. Hence $f$ is not well defined.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    This addresses "is my approach correct" but not "can someone write down the rigorous answer to it".
    $endgroup$
    – Did
    Dec 7 '18 at 20:07














0












0








0





$begingroup$

The function you have is actually nowhere analytic and not even well defined.



Suppose that $f:mathbb{C}rightarrow mathbb{C}$ where $f(x) = lim_{nrightarrowinfty}prod_{i=1}^{n}(x-a_n)$ is well defined, i.e $f(x)in mathbb{C}$ for each $xin mathbb{C}$.



Pick any $xinmathbb{C},nin mathbb{N}$.



begin{align}
|a_n-a_m|&=|n+frac{1}{n}-m-frac{1}{m}|\
&geq |n-m| - |frac{1}{n}-frac{1}{m}|\
&geq |n-m| - 2
end{align}



So that $|a_n - a_m|rightarrowinfty$ as $mrightarrow infty$. We also have that begin{align}
|x-a_m|&= |(x-a_n)-(a_n-a_m)|\
&geq |a_n -a_m| - |x-a_n|
end{align}



Now, as $|a_n-a_m|rightarrowinfty$, choose $M = 2+|x-a_n|$ so that there exists $Nin mathbb{N}$ such that $m> N$ implies $|a_n-a_m| geq M$ which implies $|x-a_m| geq 2$.



Note $|x-a_i|$ is nonzero for all $1leq ileq N$. Thus $prod_{1leq ileq N}{|x-a_i|}$ is equal to some $varepsilon>0$. Now there exists $kinmathbb{N}$ such that $frac{1}{2^k} leq varepsilon$. Now $prod_{i=1}^{N+m+k}|x-a_i| geq varepsilon2^{m+k}geq2^{m}$. Thus $f(x)$ must be unbounded so that $f(x)notin mathbb{C}$. Hence $f$ is not well defined.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



The function you have is actually nowhere analytic and not even well defined.



Suppose that $f:mathbb{C}rightarrow mathbb{C}$ where $f(x) = lim_{nrightarrowinfty}prod_{i=1}^{n}(x-a_n)$ is well defined, i.e $f(x)in mathbb{C}$ for each $xin mathbb{C}$.



Pick any $xinmathbb{C},nin mathbb{N}$.



begin{align}
|a_n-a_m|&=|n+frac{1}{n}-m-frac{1}{m}|\
&geq |n-m| - |frac{1}{n}-frac{1}{m}|\
&geq |n-m| - 2
end{align}



So that $|a_n - a_m|rightarrowinfty$ as $mrightarrow infty$. We also have that begin{align}
|x-a_m|&= |(x-a_n)-(a_n-a_m)|\
&geq |a_n -a_m| - |x-a_n|
end{align}



Now, as $|a_n-a_m|rightarrowinfty$, choose $M = 2+|x-a_n|$ so that there exists $Nin mathbb{N}$ such that $m> N$ implies $|a_n-a_m| geq M$ which implies $|x-a_m| geq 2$.



Note $|x-a_i|$ is nonzero for all $1leq ileq N$. Thus $prod_{1leq ileq N}{|x-a_i|}$ is equal to some $varepsilon>0$. Now there exists $kinmathbb{N}$ such that $frac{1}{2^k} leq varepsilon$. Now $prod_{i=1}^{N+m+k}|x-a_i| geq varepsilon2^{m+k}geq2^{m}$. Thus $f(x)$ must be unbounded so that $f(x)notin mathbb{C}$. Hence $f$ is not well defined.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited Dec 6 '18 at 1:31

























answered Dec 6 '18 at 1:20









TomTom

736




736












  • $begingroup$
    This addresses "is my approach correct" but not "can someone write down the rigorous answer to it".
    $endgroup$
    – Did
    Dec 7 '18 at 20:07


















  • $begingroup$
    This addresses "is my approach correct" but not "can someone write down the rigorous answer to it".
    $endgroup$
    – Did
    Dec 7 '18 at 20:07
















$begingroup$
This addresses "is my approach correct" but not "can someone write down the rigorous answer to it".
$endgroup$
– Did
Dec 7 '18 at 20:07




$begingroup$
This addresses "is my approach correct" but not "can someone write down the rigorous answer to it".
$endgroup$
– Did
Dec 7 '18 at 20:07


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3027823%2fdoes-their-exist-an-analytic-function-fz-such-that-fn-frac1n-0%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







-

Popular posts from this blog

How to change which sound is reproduced for terminal bell?

Image
3 Recently upgrade to 18.10 from 18.04, and using the terminal is becoming annoying: the new alert sound is a drip ( /usr/share/sounds/gnome/default/alerts/drip.ogg ), and the previous one is still located at ( /usr/share/sounds/ubuntu/stereo/bell.ogg ). My issue is that at the gnome-terminal, when autocompleting or pressing left BOTH sounds are reproduced, at the same time. I want to just have ubuntu/stereo/bell.ogg active, not both . At the moment I have been only able to reduce the volume of the alerts (but still both are played), or turn the alerts down (but I dislike both "solutions"). gnome-terminal 18.10 teminal-bell share | improve this question
Read more

Can I use Tabulator js library in my java Spring + Thymeleaf project?

Image
0 I want to add Tabulator js to my java project. I added tabulator.min.js, tabulator.min.css to resources folder. After that added to my html page these dependencies as recommending in readme.md. <link rel="stylesheet" th:href="@{/css/tabulator.min.css}"> <script type="text/javascript" th:src="@{/js/tabulator.min.js}"></script> Now my tables view all elements, that I have in the html page, but not correct. In the documentation of Tabulator is example how to create header and table, var table = new Tabulator("#example-table", { columns:[ {title:"Name", field:"name", sorter:"string", width:200, editor:true}, {title:"Age", field:"age", sorter:"
Read more

Title Spacing in Bjornstrup Chapter, Removing Chapter Number From Contents

Image
up vote 5 down vote favorite 2 I would like to make it so that the vertical space below the title of each chapter is the same when using the Bjornstrup package (i.e. so that the descenders do not affect the spacing - as shown by the red arrow in the picture below). I think I'm fairly happy with the spacing around "A chapter", so I'd really like titles without descenders (e.g. "Contents") to have the same vertical spacing as "A chapter" below the title. I would also like to remove the large "0" in the contents title. Any help appreciated, as always. documentclass[11pt,a4paper]{book} % Packages[![enter image description here][1]][1] usepackage[left=3.5cm, right=3.5cm, top=4.3cm, bottom=4.25cm]{geometry} usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} usepackage{libertine} usepackage[libertine]{newtx
Read more