Abstract
For α ≥0 let Fα denote the class of functions defined for |z| < 1 by
integrating 1/(1 −xz)α if α > 0, and log(1/(1 −xz)) if α = 0, against a complex measure
on |x|=1. We study families of starlike functions where zf′(z)/f(z) ranges over a parabola
with given focus and vertex. We prove a number of properties of these functions, among
others that they are bounded and that they belong to F0. In general, it is only known
that bounded starlike functions belong to Fα for α > 0.
Results & Lemmas (9)
Each result is auto-extracted from the paper via OCR - the math is shown verbatim and may carry occasional transcription artifacts. Click to expand the full statement.
Theorem 2.1.
Theorem 2.1. Let Ωα = w: |w −α| ≤Re w + α. Define Pα(z) to be the analytic and univalent function with the properties Pα(0) = 1, P ′ α(0) >…
Theorem 2.1. Let Ωα = {w : |w −α| ≤Re w + α}. Define Pα(z) to be the analytic and univalent function with the properties Pα(0) = 1, P ′ α(0) > 0 and Pα(U) = Ωα. Then (2.1) Pα(z) = α 1 + 4 π2 log 1 + p wα(z) 1 − p
Theorem 2.2.
Theorem 2.2. Let Pα(z) be as in (2.1). Then for 0 < α < ∞, Pα ∈H2. P r o o f. Let Qα(z) be the function in (2.2) and define Ak such that…
Theorem 2.2. Let Pα(z) be as in (2.1). Then for 0 < α < ∞, Pα ∈H2. P r o o f. Let Qα(z) be the function in (2.2) and define Ak such that Qα(z) = α + 4α π2 ∞ X k=1 Akzk. Then, from [10], we know that Ak = 4 k k X m=1 1
Theorem 3.1.
Theorem 3.1. If f ∈SP(α) then there is a constant K(α) such that |f(z)| < |z|K(α), |z| < 1. P r o o f. If α1 < α2 then SP(α1) ⊂SP(α2), so…
Theorem 3.1. If f ∈SP(α) then there is a constant K(α) such that |f(z)| < |z|K(α), |z| < 1. P r o o f. If α1 < α2 then SP(α1) ⊂SP(α2), so it is enough to prove the theorem for α > 1. Let kα be the function in SP(α) with the property
Theorem 3.2.
Theorem 3.2. Let f ∈SP(α), 0 < α < ∞. Then f ′ ∈H2. P r o o f. It is enough to prove that zf ′ ∈H2, and from Theorem 3.1 it follows that…
Theorem 3.2. Let f ∈SP(α), 0 < α < ∞. Then f ′ ∈H2. P r o o f. It is enough to prove that zf ′ ∈H2, and from Theorem 3.1 it follows that |zf ′(z)|2 < K(α)2
Corollary 3.3.
Corollary 3.3. Every function in SP(α) belongs to F0. R e m a r k. It is natural to compare the classes SP(α) to the classes of strongly…
Corollary 3.3. Every function in SP(α) belongs to F0. R e m a r k. It is natural to compare the classes SP(α) to the classes of strongly starlike functions, SS(α), studied e.g. in [1]. A function f ∈ SS(α) if and only if |arg(zf ′(z)/f(z))| < πα/2, so in this case we have an angular domain instead of a parabola. According to results in [1] the functions in SS(α) share many properties of the functions in SP(α), e.g. that they are bounded and that f ′ ∈H1. However, we do not get f ′ ∈H2 as in SP(α
Corollary 3.4.
Corollary 3.4. Every function in SP(α) maps |z| = 1 onto a rectifiable Jordan curve. If f(z) = z + P∞ k=2 akzk is a function in SP(α) then…
Corollary 3.4. Every function in SP(α) maps |z| = 1 onto a rectifiable Jordan curve. If f(z) = z + P∞ k=2 akzk is a function in SP(α) then there is a µ ∈ M such that f(z) = R Γ log(1/(1 −xz)) dµ(x), which means that an = (1/n) R Γ xn dµ(x) and therefore we have
Corollary 3.5.
Corollary 3.5. The order of growth of the coefficients in SP(α) is O(1/n). R e m a r k. Ma and Minda [8] proved that the order of growth of…
Corollary 3.5. The order of growth of the coefficients in SP(α) is O(1/n). R e m a r k. Ma and Minda [8] proved that the order of growth of the coefficients for functions in SP 1 2, 1 2 is O(1/n). Note that by Corollary 3.5 this order of growth holds in all the classes SP(α, β). 4. Some special cases. We now go back to the more general classes SP(α, β). Because of the inclusion SP(α, β) ⊂SP(α, 0), 0<β < 1, the re- sults about boundedness and membership in F0 will also hold for SP(α, β). As menti
Theorem 4.1.
Theorem 4.1. Let f ∈SP 1−γ 2, 1+γ 2 and let Kγ be as in (4.1), −1 ≤ γ < 1. Then f(z) maps |z| = 1 onto a rectifiable curve of length at…
Theorem 4.1. Let f ∈SP 1−γ 2 , 1+γ 2 and let Kγ be as in (4.1), −1 ≤ γ < 1. Then f(z) maps |z| = 1 onto a rectifiable curve of length at most 2πKγIγ where Iγ = ∞R 0 p (1 + γ)2 + 2(3 −4γ + γ2)v2 + (1 −γ)2v4eπv/2 1 + eπv dv.
Theorem 4.2.
Theorem 4.2. Let f ∈SP 1−γ 2, 1+γ 2 . Then M2(r, f ′) ≤Kγ p 3 −4γ + 2γ2, where Kγ is as in (4.1). P r o o f. As in the proof of Theorem…
Theorem 4.2. Let f ∈SP 1−γ 2 , 1+γ 2 . Then M2(r, f ′) ≤Kγ p 3 −4γ + 2γ2, where Kγ is as in (4.1). P r o o f. As in the proof of Theorem 4.1 we have 2πR 0 |f ′(eiθ)|2 dθ ≤K2 γ
Related Papers