Mean Value Theorem and Analytic Functions
Mean Value Theorem and Analytic Functions
by ELGIN H. JOHNSTON
(Received 20th January 1982)
It is well known that the mean value theorem (MVT) does not, in general, hold for
analytic functions. The most familiar example to this effect is f(z) = ez since
2ni zo
e -e°j=2nie for any z o eC. On the other hand, it is easy to show that the MVT
holds in C if /(z) is a polynomial of degree at most 2. Thus it is natural to ask what
conditions on a function /(z) analytic in a domain D are necessary and sufficient for
/(z) to satisfy the MVT in D. This is one of the questions answered in this paper.
Many authors have devised "substitutes" for the MVT that do apply to all analytic
functions. For example Samuelsson [5] (see also Robertson [3] and Novinger [2]) has
proved the following local version of the mean value theorem.
f(zi)-f(z0)=f'(z)(z1-z0).
Notice that the point z does not necessarily lie on the segment [zo^^. McLeod [1]
has proved a version of the MVT that involves a convex combination of derivatives on
[zo>zil-
In this paper we look in a direction different from those in Theorems A and B and
instead ask for what analytic functions does the classical MVT hold. We actually ask for
more ... in particular when does a pair of analytic functions satisfy the generalised
MVT? This is made more precise in the following definition.
Definition 1. Let f(z) and g(z) be functions analytic in a domain D £ C, and suppose
that g(z) is one-to-one in D. Then /(z) and g(z) satisfy the generalised mean value
property (GMVP) on D if, whenever the line segment [zi,z 2 ]s/> (zY^z^), there is a
289
f(z2)-f(zi) J'(c)
In the above definition, the classical MVP arises if we take g(z) to be linear. Since the
GMVP is clearly satisfied if /(z) = constant, we eliminate this case from our
considerations.
Theorem 2. Let f{z) (^ constant) be analytic in a domain D and let g(z) be analytic
and one-to-one in D. Then the following are equivalent.
(i) f(z) and g(z) satisfy the GMVP on D.
u and
(1
° f\z) ~ g'(z) md f'{z) - g\z)
cis meromorphic functions in D.
(iii) One of the following statements holds; in (a) and (c) it is assumed that g is univalent
in D:
(a) /(z) and g(z) are nonconstant polynomials of degree at most 2,
(b) f(z) = Ag(z) + Bfor some complex constants A and B (A^O),
(c) f(z) = A cos ccz + B sin az + C and g(z) = D cos az + E sin a.z+ F where A, B, C, D, E, F
are complex constants and (|/l| + |B|)(|£>| + |£|)a=/=0.
Proof. (iii)=>(i). This is easily checked.
(i)=>(ii). Select aeD with /'(a)^0. Since neither the addition of constants to /(z) and g(z)
nor the translation of the variable affects the GMVP, we may assume a = 0=/(0)=g(0).
Since g'(0)^0, g~1(w) is analytic in a neighbourhood of w = 0, with g~1(0) = 0. Thus
f°g~l(w) is analytic in a neighbourhood of 0 and we can write
for |w|<£, where e is a suitable positive number. Letting w=g(z), we find that
N — {0}. If n ^ 3 , then we can find distinct points zuz2,z3eN — {0} with F(z1) = F(z2)
= F(z3). By the GMVP, each of the segments {zuz2), (zuz3), {z2,z3) must contain a zero
of F'(z). However these segments are all contained in A(0, rf) and 0 is the only zero of
F'(z) in A(0,r\). Thus 0e(zl,z2)r\(z2,z3)n(zl,z3). This is impossible for distinct points
z1;z2,z3. It follows that n = 2. Thus F(z) is a two-to-one mapping on N and, if zuz2 are
distinct points of AT —{0}, then
Let / be any line through 0 and let Hx, H2 be the two open half planes determined by
/. Let Ni = HtnN (i=l,2). It follows from (2) that F(z) is univalent on each of NUN2.
Furthermore, for i = 1,2, F(AT;) = F(iV) — y where y = F{lnN) is a simple analytic arc with
one endpoint 0. We can then define analytic functions hi-.F(N) — y-*Ni (i = l,2) with
(hj°F)(z) = z (zeNi). Since O^JV; (i=l,2), neither hy nor h2 takes the values 0. Thus
hY{w)lh2(w) is analytic on F(N) — y and by (2), hl(w)/h2(w)<0 on F(N) — y. Thus
h1(w)/h2(w) = k (k some negative constant). Now let Fbe a line through 0 and assume the
acute angle formed by / and T is less than n/10. Let Ht and H2 be the half planes
determined by T, and labeled so that Hx n H t is a sector of angle measure greater than
97i/10. Analagous to the previous development, define JV; = J?,-nN (i=l,2), y = F(Nnl)
and /j;:F(JV)-y->JV,. (i = 1,2) with (£,.<>F)(z) = z (zeJVf). Then
(i = l,2), and it follows that fi1(w)/fi2(w) = k on F(N)-y. Now let zoeN1nN2. Then there
is a point z'oeN2nNl with F(z0) = F(z'o). We then have
k = Z° = /
Hence /c= — 1.
From the above argument we may conclude that if zuz2 are distinct points in N with
F(z1) = F(z2), then zl = —z2. Conversely, if Zj = —z2, we must have F(z1) = F{ — z2) = F(z2),
showing that F(z) is an even function. Thus
and
Since A, =f'{0)/g'(0) and a = 0 was chosen without loss of generality, we see that (ii)
holds for all zeD at which f'(z)^0. Since g'(z) is never 0 on D, it follows that
f"\z)lf\z) and/ (5) (z)//'(z) have only removable singularities on D. Thus (ii) holds in D.
(ii)=>(iii). We consider three cases
Similarly,
v
/'(z) """ ' f'(z)
f'{z) g'(z)
and so,
As an immediate corollary we can characterise those analytic functions that satisfy the
MVT on D.
Corollary 3. Let f(z) be analytic on a domain D. Then f(z) satisfies the MVT on D
(i.e. the GMVP with g(z) = z) if and only if f(z) is a polynomial of degree at most 2.
Remark 4. Since the arguments in the proof of Theorem 2 were all local, it is clear
that the univalence hypothesis on g can be dropped. If we instead require only that g(z)
is not constant on D. then the proof of Theorem 2 shows that (ii) holds at all points
where f'{z)g'(z) £ 0. It follows that the equalities in (ii) actually hold in all of D as
equalities between meromorphic functions. The equation
when g(z1)=g{z2) {zl±z2) can then be interpreted as saying that there is a point
ce(zl,z2) such that the order of the pole of {f(zx)—f{z))/(g{z1)—g(z)) at z2 is the same as
the order of the pole of f'(z)/g'(z) at c. Indeed this is easily checked for those functions
f(z) and g(z) listed in (iii).
Remark 5. Although the condition / ' 5)(z)//'(z) = g(5\z)/g'(z) was used in only one case of
the proof of (ii)=>(iii), the condition cannot be dropped. For example, it is easy to check that if
/(z) = z4 and g(z) = z~1 are analytic on a domain D, then /'"(z)//'(z) =
g'"(z)lg'(z). However f(z) and g{z) will not satisfy the GMVP on D. (Note that
on D).
A somewhat longer argument can be used to prove the following more informative
result.
Proof. Suppose /(z) takes the value a with multiplicity at least 3. Then three cases
might arise:
Case 2. There are distinct points zo,zy&D with f(zo)=f(zl) = a and f'(zo) = O.
Since A^ and N2 are open, we may assume, by a subsequence argument that the
segments {[£4,>7J} are pairwise disjoint. By (ii) and RP, there is a point pke(Zk,r]k) with
f'(Pk) — ® (fe = 1,2,...). Since the segments {[^, T/J} are disjoint, the pk's
produced are distinct. By another subsequence argument we may assume \imk^oopk = p
exists where petz^z^zD. But then the Identity Theorem [4,p. 209] implies /'(z) = 0
on D, contradicting the assumption that / is not identically constant. Thus Case 2
cannot occur.
The argument that Case 3 cannot occur is similar and is left to the reader.
I wish to thank the referee for many useful suggestions.
REFERENCES
1. R. M. MCLEOD, Mean value theorems for vector valued functions, Proc. Edinburgh Math.
Soc. (2) 14 (1965), 197-209.
2. W. P. NOVINGER, A local mean value theorem for analytic functions with smooth boundary
values, Glasgow Math. J. 15 (1974), 27-29.
3. J. M. ROBERTSON, A local mean value theorem for the complex plane, Proc. Edinburgh Math.
Soc. (2)16(1968/69), 329-331.
4. WALTER RUDIN, Real and Complex Analysis, (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1966).
5. AKE SAMUELSON, A local mean value theorem for analytic functions, American Math. Monthly
80 (1973), 45^46.