$f$ has a pole at $z=a$ implies $1/f$ has a removable singularity at $z=a$












2












$begingroup$


In Section V.1 of Conway's Functions of One Complex variable, he says that if $f$ has a pole at $z=a$ implies $[f(z)]^{-1}$ has a removable singularity at $z=a$. I am confused why $[f(z)]^{-1}$ should have an isolated singularity at $z=a$ in the first place.



For example, take $f(z) = 1/z $. Then, $[f(z)]^{-1} = z$. Here, $f$ has a pole at $z=0$ whereas $[f(z)]^{-1}$ is entire and has no singularities.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$

















    2












    $begingroup$


    In Section V.1 of Conway's Functions of One Complex variable, he says that if $f$ has a pole at $z=a$ implies $[f(z)]^{-1}$ has a removable singularity at $z=a$. I am confused why $[f(z)]^{-1}$ should have an isolated singularity at $z=a$ in the first place.



    For example, take $f(z) = 1/z $. Then, $[f(z)]^{-1} = z$. Here, $f$ has a pole at $z=0$ whereas $[f(z)]^{-1}$ is entire and has no singularities.










    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$















      2












      2








      2





      $begingroup$


      In Section V.1 of Conway's Functions of One Complex variable, he says that if $f$ has a pole at $z=a$ implies $[f(z)]^{-1}$ has a removable singularity at $z=a$. I am confused why $[f(z)]^{-1}$ should have an isolated singularity at $z=a$ in the first place.



      For example, take $f(z) = 1/z $. Then, $[f(z)]^{-1} = z$. Here, $f$ has a pole at $z=0$ whereas $[f(z)]^{-1}$ is entire and has no singularities.










      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      In Section V.1 of Conway's Functions of One Complex variable, he says that if $f$ has a pole at $z=a$ implies $[f(z)]^{-1}$ has a removable singularity at $z=a$. I am confused why $[f(z)]^{-1}$ should have an isolated singularity at $z=a$ in the first place.



      For example, take $f(z) = 1/z $. Then, $[f(z)]^{-1} = z$. Here, $f$ has a pole at $z=0$ whereas $[f(z)]^{-1}$ is entire and has no singularities.







      complex-analysis analytic-functions singularity






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Jan 6 at 10:01









      Ajay Kumar NairAjay Kumar Nair

      1109




      1109






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2












          $begingroup$

          Watch the domain. In your example, $f(z)=frac1z$ for all $zneq 0$. The reciprocal $g(z)=frac1{f(z)}$ is then equal to $z$ for all $zneq 0$. At zero? It's not defined. That's a classic removable singularity.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













            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%2f3063670%2ff-has-a-pole-at-z-a-implies-1-f-has-a-removable-singularity-at-z-a%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            2












            $begingroup$

            Watch the domain. In your example, $f(z)=frac1z$ for all $zneq 0$. The reciprocal $g(z)=frac1{f(z)}$ is then equal to $z$ for all $zneq 0$. At zero? It's not defined. That's a classic removable singularity.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$


















              2












              $begingroup$

              Watch the domain. In your example, $f(z)=frac1z$ for all $zneq 0$. The reciprocal $g(z)=frac1{f(z)}$ is then equal to $z$ for all $zneq 0$. At zero? It's not defined. That's a classic removable singularity.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$
















                2












                2








                2





                $begingroup$

                Watch the domain. In your example, $f(z)=frac1z$ for all $zneq 0$. The reciprocal $g(z)=frac1{f(z)}$ is then equal to $z$ for all $zneq 0$. At zero? It's not defined. That's a classic removable singularity.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$



                Watch the domain. In your example, $f(z)=frac1z$ for all $zneq 0$. The reciprocal $g(z)=frac1{f(z)}$ is then equal to $z$ for all $zneq 0$. At zero? It's not defined. That's a classic removable singularity.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered Jan 6 at 10:04









                jmerryjmerry

                12.8k1628




                12.8k1628






























                    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%2f3063670%2ff-has-a-pole-at-z-a-implies-1-f-has-a-removable-singularity-at-z-a%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

                    Quarter-circle Tiles

                    build a pushdown automaton that recognizes the reverse language of a given pushdown automaton?

                    Mont Emei