MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Can anybody point me to a statement and proof of Vitali's (convergence) Theorem, which states (I think) that nets of holomorphic functions converge under certain conditions?

I understand that there are different formulations of this theorem. I'm looking for a reference, which treats the theorem comprehensively.

share|cite|improve this question

The comprehensive treatment can be found in section 2.4 of: Schiff, Joel L. Normal families. Universitext. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1993. xii+236 pp. ISBN: 0-387-97967-0

Here is what he calls Vitali-Porter theorem: Let $\{f_n\}$ be a locally bounded sequence of analytic functions in a domain $\Omega$ such that the limit $\lim_{n\to \infty}f_n(z)$ exists for all $z$ belonging to a subset $E \subset \Omega$ which has an accumulation point in $\Omega$. Then $f_n$ converges uniformly on compact subsets of $\Omega$ to an analytic function.

In this text it is explicitly shown that this theorem is equivalent to Montel's theorem on bounded families of analytic functions. Other texts (e.g. Goluzin) usually only deduce Vitali's theorem from Montel's theorem, if they treat it at all. Also, several generalizations are mentioned at the end of the section. All seem to concern sequences rather than general nets, but since in Montel's theorem the family is not required to be countable, perhaps you can somehow get what you want from these results.

share|cite|improve this answer
You can assume wlog that $E$ is countable. If $\{f_\alpha\}_{\alpha \in A}$ is a net of functions that does not converge uniformly on a set $K$, but does converge pointwise on $E$, it is easy to extract a subsequence that does not converge uniformly on $K$ but does converge pointwise on $E$. So the sequence version does imply the net version. – Robert Israel Dec 6 '11 at 20:41
@Robert: Thanks for supplying the argument. – Margaret Friedland Dec 7 '11 at 16:24

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.