On Nevanlinna - Cartan theory for holomorphic curves with Tsuji characteristics
Nguyen Van Thin (Thai Nguyen University of Education)

TL;DR
This paper extends Nevanlinna-Cartan theory to holomorphic curves on angular domains, establishing fundamental theorems and addressing the uniqueness problem via inverse images of hypersurfaces, with new results in this specific setting.
Contribution
It introduces the first known results on the uniqueness of holomorphic curves by inverse images of hypersurfaces on angular domains, expanding classical value distribution theory.
Findings
Proves fundamental theorems for holomorphic curves intersecting hypersurfaces on angular domains.
Establishes a new uniqueness theorem for holomorphic curves in an angle.
Improves existing results on uniqueness of holomorphic curves on the complex plane.
Abstract
In this paper, we prove some fundamental theorems for holomorphic curves on angular domain intersecting a hypersurface, finite set of fixed hyperplanes in general position and finite set of fixed hypersurfaces in general position on complex projective variety with the level of truncation. As applications of the second main theorems for an angle, we will discuss the uniqueness problem of holomorphic curves in an angle instead of the whole complex plane. Detail, we establish a result for uniqueness problem of holomorphic curve by inverse image of a hypersurface. In my knowledge, this is the first result for uniqueness problem of holomorphic curve by inverse image of hypersurface on angular domain. On complex plane, we obtain a uniqueness result for holomorphic curves, it is improvement of some results before [5, 10] in this trend.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsMeromorphic and Entire Functions · Holomorphic and Operator Theory · Algebraic Geometry and Number Theory
On Nevanlinna - Cartan theory for holomorphic curves with Tsuji characteristics
Nguyen Van Thin
Department of Mathematics, Thai Nguyen University of Education, Luong Ngoc Quyen street, Thai Nguyen city, Viet Nam.
Abstract.
In this paper, we prove some fundamental theorems for holomorphic curves on intersecting a hypersurface, finite set of fixed hyperplanes in general position and finite set of fixed hypersurfaces in general position on complex projective variety with the level of truncation. As applications of the second main theorems for an angle, we will discuss the uniqueness problem of holomorphic curves in an angle instead of the whole complex plane. Detail, we establish a result for uniqueness problem of holomorphic curve by inverse image of a hypersurface. In my knowledge, this is the first result for uniqueness problem of holomorphic curve by inverse image of hypersurface on angular domain. When we obtain a uniqueness result for holomorphic curves, it is improvement of some results before [5, 10] in this trend.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 32H30.
Key words: Algebraic variety, General position, Hypersurface, Nevanlinna theory, Tsuji characteristics.
1. Introduction and main results
We denote by the angle on complex plane, where Then, is called an angular domain on complex plane. The Nevanlinna second main theorem for an angle was used in [17, 4, 6, 7, 22, 20], and [19] to investigate the growth of meromorphic functions with some radially distributed values. The usage of the second main theorem produces a basic and elementary method in the topic [20]. In [19], in view of the Tsuji second main theorem, we established a five-value uniqueness theorem and four-value uniqueness theorem for meromorphic functions in an angle. In 2015, J. Zheng [21] established the value distribution of holomorphic curves on an angular domain from the point of view of potential theory and established the first and second fundamental theorems corresponding to those theorems of Ahlfors-Shimizu, Nevanlinna, and Tsuji on meromorphic functions in an angular domain. We refer readers to [21] for comments on the results of the value distribution of holomorphic curves on an angular domain. These results motivate us to consider the case of holomorphic curves on intersecting hypersurfaces. In this paper, we prove the fundamental theorems for holomorphic mappings from , to intersecting a hypersurface, finite set of fixed hyperplanes in general position and finite set of fixed hypersurfaces in general position on complex projective variety with the level of truncation and the Nevanlinna functions have the form of Tsuji characteristics.
We denote by and for any pair of real numbers and in with
[TABLE]
Let be a holomorphic curve. Let be a reduced representation of where are holomorphic functions and without common zeros in Set Let be a hypersurface in of degree . Let be the homogeneous polynomial of degree defining . Under the assumption that the counting function of with respect to is defined as
[TABLE]
where the are the number zeros of in the set counting with multiplicity and are zeros of in the set
The proximity function of on with respect to is defined as following:
[TABLE]
Now let be a positive integer, the truncated counting function of is defined by
[TABLE]
where the are the number zeros of any zero of multiplicity greater than of in is “truncated” and counted as if it only had multiplicity
Let be a holomorphic map. Let be a reduced representation of where are holomorphic functions and without common zeros in . The counting function of with respect to is defined as
[TABLE]
where the are the zeros of in counting with multiplicity. For each zero of in with multiple , then term is counted times in
Now let be a positive integer, the truncated counting function of is defined by
[TABLE]
where any zero of multiplicity greater than of in is “truncated” and counted as if it only had multiplicity This means that for each zero of in with multiple , the terms is counted times in
The angular proximity Nevanlinna of with respect to is defined as following:
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where
Let be a smooth complex projective variety of dimension Let be hypersurfaces in where The hypersurfaces are said to be in general position on V if for every subset we have
[TABLE]
where means the support of the divisor A map is said to be algebraically nondegenerate if the image of is not contained in any proper subvarieties of
In this paper, a notation in the inequality is mean that the inequality holds for outside a set with measure finite.
Our main results are
Theorem 1**.**
Let be a hypersurface in and be a holomorphic curve whose image is not contained . Then we have for any ,
[TABLE]
Theorem 2**.**
Let be a hypersurface in and be a holomorphic curve whose image is not contained . Then we have for any ,
[TABLE]
Taking we get the following results:
Corollary 1**.**
Let be a hyperplane in and be a holomorphic curve whose image is not contained . Then we have for any ,
[TABLE]
Corollary 2**.**
Let be a hyperplane in and be a holomorphic curve whose image is not contained . Then we have for any ,
[TABLE]
Theorem 3**.**
Let be a linearly non-degenerate holomorphic curve and be hyperplanes in in general position. Then we have
[TABLE]
Theorem 4**.**
Let be a linearly non-degenerate holomorphic curve and be hyperplanes in in general position. Then we have
[TABLE]
Theorem 5**.**
Let be an algebraically nondegenerate holomorphic curve. Let and be two integers with Let be hyperplanes in Let be hypersurfaces of degree such that the hypersurfaces are in general position in Let Then
[TABLE]
We give a hypersurfaces satisfying Theorem 5.
Example 6**.**
Let be hypersurfaces of degree Let We see that the hypersurfaces are in general position in Then
[TABLE]
satisfies the Theorem 5 with
As an application of Theorem 5, we prove the uniqueness theorem for holomorphic curves on angular domain by inverse image of a hypersurface.
Theorem 7**.**
Let be two algebraically nondegenerate holomorphic curves, and be a integer with Let be a hypersurface as the same Theorem 5. Suppose that on then
In my knowledge, up to now, Theorem 7 is a first result for uniqueness problem of holomorphic curve by inverse image of a hypersurface on angular domain.
When this means we obtain some uniqueness results for holomorphic curves on complex plane as following:
Corollary 3**.**
Let be two algebraically nondegenerate holomorphic curves, and be a integer with Let be a hypersurface as the same Theorem 5. Suppose that on then
By using method of Ru [14] and Ru et. al. [2], we are easy to get some results as follows:
Theorem 8**.**
Let be a complex projective variety of dimension Let be hypersurfaces in of degree located in general position on Let be the least common multiple of the Let be an algebraically non-degenerate holomorphic map. Let and
[TABLE]
where for a positive real number Then
[TABLE]
holds for all outside a set of finite measure.
Theorem 9**.**
Let be a complex projective variety of dimension Let be hypersurfaces in of degree located in general position on Let be the least common multiple of the Let be an algebraically non-degenerate holomorphic map. Let and
[TABLE]
where for a positive real number Then
[TABLE]
holds for all outside a set of finite measure.
2. Some preliminaries in angular Nevanlinna theory for meromorphic functions
First, we remind some definitions which is contained the book of A. A. Goldberg and I. V. Ostrovskii. We consider the set
[TABLE]
Let be a meromorphic function on the angle , , We recall that
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
and are poles of counted according with multiplicity. We denote by the angular Nevanlinna characteristics on and defined as following:
[TABLE]
In order to prove theorems, we need the following lemmas.
Lemma 1**.**
[6](Carleman formula)* Let be a nonconstant meromorphic function in Then*
[TABLE]
For any pair of real numbers and in with
[TABLE]
Let be a nonconstant meromorphic function on . We define
[TABLE]
where the are the number poles of in the set counting with multiplicity and are poles of in the set
The proximity function of on is given by
[TABLE]
The characteristic function of on is defined by
[TABLE]
Lemma 2**.**
[19]** Let be a nonconstant meromorphic function in Then
[TABLE]
Lemma 3**.**
[6]** Let be a natural number and be nonconstant meromorphic function on Then we have the estimate
[TABLE]
holds for outside a set of finite measure.
Lemma 4**.**
[19]** Let be a natural number and be nonconstant meromorphic function on Then we have the estimate
[TABLE]
holds for outside a set of finite measure.
3. Proofs of Theorems
Proof of Theorem 1 and Theorem 2.
First, we prove the Theorem 1. Note that By the definitions of , , and apply to Lemma 1 for , we have
[TABLE]
Hence, we get
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
This is conclusion of Theorem 1.
The end, we prove Theorem 2. We have By the definitions of , , and apply to Lemma 2 for , we have
[TABLE]
Thus, we obtain
[TABLE]
We have completed the proof of Theorem 2.
∎
In order to prove the Theorem 3, and Theorem 4, we need some lemmas. First we recall the property of Wronskian.
Let be meromorphic functions on complex plane then Wronskian of is defined by
[TABLE]
Lemma 5**.**
[9]** Let be meromorphic functions on then
[TABLE]
Let be holomorophic curve, then Wronskian of is defined by
[TABLE]
We denote by the counting function in zeros of in this means
[TABLE]
We use the notation talking the counting function in zeros of in namely
[TABLE]
We call the counting function in zeros of in namely
[TABLE]
Let are linearly independent forms of . For , set
[TABLE]
By the property of Wronskian there exists a constant such that
[TABLE]
Lemma 6**.**
Let be a linearly non-degenerate holomorphic curve and be hyperplanes in in general position. Then we have
[TABLE]
Here the maximum is taken over all subsets of such that , , are linearly independent.
Proof.
First, we prove
[TABLE]
Let such that are linearly independent. Without loss of generality, we may assume that and Let is the set of all injective maps . Then we have
[TABLE]
Thus, we obtain
[TABLE]
By the property of Wronskian, we see that
[TABLE]
where is constant.
Thus, we get
[TABLE]
Take
[TABLE]
Apply to Lemma 5, we have
[TABLE]
For each and using Lemma 3, we have the inequality as following
[TABLE]
Futhermore Then from (3.8), we have
[TABLE]
Hence for any and from (3), we have
[TABLE]
This implies that
[TABLE]
Combining (3) and (3.9), we get the inequality (3). Similarly, we obtain
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
We may obtain the conclusion of Lemma 6 by adding (3), (3) and (3) and note that
[TABLE]
We have completed the proof of this lemma. ∎
Lemma 7**.**
Let be a linearly non-degenerate holomorphic curve and be hyperplanes in in general position. Let be the vector associated with for . Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let be the associated vector of , and let be the set of all injective maps . By hypothesis, are in general position for any , then the vectors are linearly independent.
Let , we have
[TABLE]
Solve the system of linear equations (3.12), we get
[TABLE]
where\biggl{(}b_{j}^{\mu(t)}\biggl{)}_{t,j=0}^{n} is the inverse matrix of \biggl{(}a_{j}^{\mu(t)}\biggl{)}_{t,j=0}^{n}. So there is a constant satisfying
[TABLE]
Set . Then for any , we have
[TABLE]
For any , there exists the mapping such that
[TABLE]
for . Hence
[TABLE]
We have
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Thus
[TABLE]
Therefore, we conclude that
[TABLE]
This is conclusion of Lemma 7. ∎
By argument as Lemma 6 and Lemma 7, we are easy to get results as following:
Lemma 8**.**
Let be a linearly non-degenerate holomorphic curve and be hyperplanes in in general position. Then we have
[TABLE]
Here the maximum is taken over all subsets of such that , , are linearly independent.
Lemma 9**.**
Let be a linearly non-degenerate holomorphic curve and be hyperplanes in in general position. Let be the vector associated with for . Then
[TABLE]
Proof of Theorem 3 and Theorem 4.
First, we prove the Theorem 3. Using Lemma 6 and Lemma 7, we have
[TABLE]
By Corollary 1, we get that
[TABLE]
for any . So from (3), we have
[TABLE]
For , we may assume that vanishes at for , does not vanish at for . Hence, there exists a integer and nowhere vanishing holomorphic function in neighborhood of such that
[TABLE]
here for . We may assume that for , and for By property of the Wronskian, we have
[TABLE]
where is holomorphic function on . Then is vanishes at with order at least
[TABLE]
By the definition of and , we have
[TABLE]
So from (3.14), we have
[TABLE]
The proof of Theorem 3 is completed.
Next, we prove the Theorem 4. By Lemma 8 and Lemma 9, we have
[TABLE]
Corollary 2 gives that
[TABLE]
for any . Hence from (3.15), we obtain
[TABLE]
For we may suppose that vanishes at for , does not vanish at for . Hence, there exists a integer and nowhere vanishing holomorphic function in neighborhood of such that
[TABLE]
here for . We may assume that for , and for By property of the Wronskian, we have
[TABLE]
where is holomorphic function on . Then is vanishes at with order at least
[TABLE]
By the definition of and , we have
[TABLE]
Thus from (3.17), we get the inequality
[TABLE]
This is statement of Theorem 4. ∎
Proof of Theorem 5.
Let be a reduced representation of where are entire functions on and have no common zeros. We consider the function Let Since the hypersurfaces are located in general position in then is a holomorphic curve. Let be the hypersurface defined by From the hypothesis are in general position, i.e.
[TABLE]
Thus by Hilbert’s Nullstellensatz [15], for any integer k, there is an integer such that
[TABLE]
where are homogeneous forms with coefficients in of degree This implies
[TABLE]
where is a positive constant depending only on the coefficients of thus depending only on the coefficients of Therefore,
[TABLE]
From (3.18) and the First Main Theorem, we have
[TABLE]
On the other hand, by applying Theorem 4 to , and the hyperplanes
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
yields
[TABLE]
We have
[TABLE]
for all where is counting function with level of truncation of Hence
[TABLE]
for all Also note By combining (3) to (3), we obtain
[TABLE]
∎
Proof of Theorem 7.
We suppose that then there are two numbers such that Assume that is a zero of where is a homogeneous defining From condition when we get This implies is a zero of Therefore, we have
[TABLE]
Apply to Theorem 5, we obtain
[TABLE]
Similarly, we have
[TABLE]
Combining (3.22) and (3.23), we get
[TABLE]
This is a contradiction with Hence ∎
**Acknowledgements
**The author thanks to the Proffesor Jian-Hua Zheng for very helpful comments and useful suggestions in this paper.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] H. Cartan, Sur les zeros des combinaisions linearires de p 𝑝 p fonctions holomorpes donnees, Mathematica (Cluj). 7, 80-103, 1933.
- 2[2] Z. Chen, M. Ru and Q. Yan , The truncated Second main theorem and uniqueness theorems , Sci. China. Math. 53(3), 605-616, 2010.
- 3[3] W. Cherry and Z. Ye, Nevanlinna’s Theory of Value Distribution: The Second Main Theorem and its Error Terms, Springer Monographs in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag, 2001.
- 4[4] D. Drasin and W. Hayman, Value distribution of functions meromorphic in an angle, Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. 48(3), 319-340, 1984.
- 5[5] M. Dulock and M. Ru , A uniqueness theorem for holomorphic curves into encountering hypersurfaces in projective space, Complex Variables and Elliptic Equations. 53, 797-802, 2008.
- 6[6] A. A. Goldberg and V. Ostroskii , Value Distribution of Meromorphic Functions, Translations of Mathematical Monographs, vol. 236, 2008.
- 7[7] E. V. Gleizer, Meromorphic functions with zeros and poles in small angles, Sib. Mat. Zh. 26 (1985), no. 4, 22-37, II, Sib. Mat. Zh. 31 (1990), no. 2, 9-20.
- 8[8] W. K. Hayman, Meromorphic Functions, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1964.
