The differential equation of an inner function

Henry Helson

Displaying similar documents to “The differential equation of an inner function”

Theory of non-analytic Functions of a complex Variable

E. R. Hedrick, Louis Inglold (1923)

Journal de Mathématiques Pures et Appliquées

Similarity:

A characterisation of dilation-analytic operators

E. Balslev, A. Grossmann, T. Paul (1986)

Annales de l'I.H.P. Physique théorique

Similarity:

On vector-valued analytic functions with constant norm

J. Globevnik (1975)

Studia Mathematica

Similarity:

Extension of separately analytic functions and applications to range characterization of the exponential Radon transform

Ozan Öktem (1998)

Annales Polonici Mathematici

Similarity:

We consider the problem of characterizing the range of the exponential Radon transform. The proof uses extension properties of separately analytic functions, and we prove a new theorem about extending such functions.

Semi-classical analysis for Harper's equation. III : Cantor structure of the spectrum

B. Helffer, J. Sjöstrand (1989)

Mémoires de la Société Mathématique de France

Similarity:

On the inner parts of certain analytic functions

Balmohan V. Limaye (1972)

Annales Polonici Mathematici

Similarity:

Analytic functions in general analysis

Angus E. Taylor (1937)

Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa - Classe di Scienze

Similarity:

A fixed point theorem for analytic functions.

Matache, Valentin (2005)

Fixed Point Theory and Applications [electronic only]

Similarity:

Failure of analytic hypoellipticity in a class of differential operators

Ovidiu Costin, Rodica D. Costin (2003)

Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa - Classe di Scienze

Similarity:

For the hypoelliptic differential operators $P = \partial_{x}^{2} + {(x^{k} \partial_{y} - x^{l} \partial_{t})}^{2}$ introduced by T. Hoshiro, generalizing a class of M. Christ, in the cases of $k$ and $l$ left open in the analysis, the operators $P$ also fail to be analytic hypoelliptic (except for $(k, l) = (0, 1)$ ), in accordance with Treves’ conjecture. The proof is constructive, suitable for generalization, and relies on evaluating a family of eigenvalues of a non-self-adjoint operator.