Jump to content

Talk:Open mapping theorem (complex analysis)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk | contribs) at 01:55, 2 February 2024 (Implementing WP:PIQA (Task 26)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This write-up is 10000000 times more clear than what's in my book! Thank you!


This proof needs modification to deal with the case in which is not a simple zero.


uhm, i don't think so. However it seems that the connection hypothesis is unnecessary and, indeed, unused. 151.45.69.228 (talk) 15:43, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is, indeed, total bogus. For non connected U, even you can easily construct a counterexample by choosing f to be the zero-function on a connection component of U, while f(z) = 1 for all other z in U. This is, indeed, holomorphic and nonconstant, but the image of f, {0,1}, is clearly not open. ~ batman