Let $K$ be the field of fractions of $\mathbb{C}[[z]]\otimes_{\mathbb{C}}\mathbb{C}[[w]]\subset \mathbb{C}[[z, w]].$ Given a formal power series in $t, f\in \mathbb{C}[[t]],$ is there any simple criterion which will conclude that $f(zw)$ does not belong to $K?$ I suspect that $f(zw)\in K$ if and only if $f(t)$ is a rational function, i.e. belongs to $\mathbb{C}(t).$ I am especially interested in proving that $e^{zw}\notin K.$

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ For the particular case you're interested in, wouldn't it suffice to let $z = w$ and show that $e^{2z}$ can't be written as a rational function of $z$? $\endgroup$ – Michael Lugo Apr 17 '11 at 18:53
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Zamanjan search to prove that $e^{zw} \neq Q(f_1(z),...,f_k(z),g_1(w),...,g_n(w))$ for all rational function $Q$ and all series $f_1(z),...,f_k(z),g_1(w),...,g_n(w)$. $\endgroup$ – user12806 Apr 17 '11 at 19:03
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Presumably the vote to close is because the question in the title is easy as Michael showed. (Homework level for a first course in complex variables.) So the title should be changed! $\endgroup$ – Gerald Edgar Apr 17 '11 at 19:24
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @Gerald: I've tried to make the title more related to the question $\endgroup$ – Fedor Petrov Apr 17 '11 at 19:33
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ 1+, very interesting question. I've also worked on that to find explicit examples that the functor from complex manifolds to complex locally ringed spaces does not preserve products. $\endgroup$ – Martin Brandenburg Apr 17 '11 at 20:10

Theorem 1. Let $f\in\mathbb{C}[[t]]$. Then $f(zw)\in \mathbb{C}[[z]]\otimes_{\mathbb{C}}\mathbb{C}[[w]]$ if and only if $f\in\mathbb{C}[t].$

Proof. The "if" part is obvious. For the "only if" part assume that $f\notin\mathbb{C}[t]$ but $$f(zw) = \sum_{i=1}^n g_i(z)h_i(w),$$ where $g_i\in\mathbb{C}[[z]]$ and $h_i\in\mathbb{C}[[w]]$. We can assume that $n>0$ is minimal. If $g_i(0)=h_i(0)=0$ for all $i$, then $f(0)=0$ and we can divide both sides by $zw$ in the obvious way. Therefore $g_i(0)\neq 0$ or $h_i(0)\neq 0$ for some $i$. Without loss of generality, $g_1(0)=1$, then $$h_1(w)=f(0)-\sum_{i=2}^n g_i(0)h_i(w),$$ so that $$f(zw)=g_1(z)f(0)+\sum_{i=2}^n\bigl(g_i(z)-g_i(0)g_1(z)\bigr)h_i(w).$$ Taking derivative with respect to $w$ and then dividing by $z$ yields $$f'(zw)=\sum_{i=2}^n\frac{g_i(z)-g_i(0)g_1(z)}{z}h_i'(w).$$ Here $f'\notin\mathbb{C}[t]$, but the fractions are elements of $\mathbb{C}[[z]]$, contradicting the minimality of $n$.

Theorem 2. $e^{zw}\notin K$.

Proof. Assume there are $u_i,f_j\in\mathbb{C}[[z]]$ and $v_i,g_j\in\mathbb{C}[[w]]$ such that $$e^{zw}\sum_{i=1}^m u_i(z)v_i(w)=\sum_{j=1}^n f_j(z)g_j(w),$$ where the sums are nonzero. We can assume that $n>0$ is minimal, and also that $m>0$ is minimal for this $n$. In particular, the $u_i$'s are independent over $\mathbb{C}$. We can assume that some $v_i(0)$ or $g_j(0)$ is nonzero, for otherwise we can divide both sides by $w$ in the obvious way. Then $$ \sum_{i=1}^m u_i(z)v_i(0)=\sum_{j=1}^n f_j(z)g_j(0) $$ is a nonzero element of $\mathbb{C}[[z]]$, call it $h(z)$. In particular, $g_j(0)\neq 0$ for some $j$. Without loss of generality $g_1(0)=1$, then with the notation $$\tilde u_i(z):=u_i(z)/h(z)\in\mathbb{C}((z))$$ $$\tilde f_j(z):=f_j(z)/h(z)\in\mathbb{C}((z))$$ $$e^{zw}\sum_{i=1}^m \tilde u_i(z)v_i(w)=g_1(w)+\sum_{j=2}^n \tilde f_j(z)\bigl(g_j(w)-g_j(0)g_1(w)\bigr).$$ The sum on the right hand side is independent of $z$ for otherwise we could contradict the minimality of $n$ by taking the $z$-derivative on both sides and then multiplying by a large power of $z$ to turn elements of $\mathbb{C}((z))$ into elements of $\mathbb{C}[[z]]$. At any rate, the right hand side is a nonzero element $k\in\mathbb{C}[[w]]$, because $k(0)=g_1(0)=1$. With the notation $$ \tilde v_i(w):=v_i(w)/k(w)\in\mathbb{C}((w))$$ we conclude $$e^{-zw}=\sum_{i=1}^m \tilde u_i(z)\tilde v_i(w).$$ In particular, there is some integer $r>0$ such that $$(zw)^r e^{-zw}\in \mathbb{C}[[z]]\otimes_{\mathbb{C}}\mathbb{C}[[w]],$$ which contradicts Theorem 1. The proof of Theorem 2 is complete.


If $e^{zw}=\frac{\sum_{i=1}^{a} f_i(z)g_i(w)}{\sum_{j=1}^b u_j(z)v_j(w)}$,

$e^{zw}(\sum u_j(z)v_j(w))=\sum f_i(z)g_i(w)$

$\frac{\partial^{n}}{\partial w^n}e^{zw}(\sum u_j(z)v_j(w))=\frac{\partial^{n}}{\partial w^n}\sum f_i(z)g_i(w)$

$\sum_{k=0}^n C^k_n z^k e^{zw}(\sum u_j(z)v^{(n-k)}_j(w))=\sum f_i(z)g_i^{(n)}(w)$

If $w=0$, $\sum_{k=0}^n C^k_n z^k(\sum u_j(z)v^{(n-k)}_j(0))=\sum f_i(z)g_i^{(n)}(0)$

For $(f_i(z))$ a finite family. $N \in \mathbb{N}$ exists such that, for all $(\lambda_i)$,if $\sum \lambda_i f_i(z) \neq 0$, $valuation( \sum \lambda_i f_i(z)) \leq N$.

Let $h_{k}(z)=\sum_{j=1}^b u_j(z)v_j^{(k)}(0)$. The infinite family $(h_0,...,h_k,...)$ has rank less or equal than $b$.

We have:

$$h_0 \in Vect(f_i)$$ $$zh_0+h_1 \in Vect(f_i)$$ $$z^2h_0+2zh_1 +h_2\in Vect(f_i)$$ $$z^3h_0+3z^2h_1+3zh_2+h_3 \in Vect(f_i)$$

If $h_0=0$, a diagonal is empty.

If $h_1= \lambda h_0$, we can substract $\lambda \times$ the first line to the second line. We can substract $2\lambda \times$ the second line to the third. And substract $k\lambda \times $ the line $k$ to the line $k+1$, etc... A diagonal vanishes.

We can suppose that the family $(h_1,...,h_c)$ generates the infinite family $(h_0,...,h_k,...)$

If $h_d=\lambda_0 h_0 + ... \lambda_c h_c$, we substract to the $(d+i+1)$-th line, $C^i_{d+i}/C^i_i \times \lambda_0 \times$ line $1$-th, ...,$C^i_{d+i}/C^i_{j+i} \times \lambda_j \times$ line $(j+1)$-th...,$C^i_{d+i}/C^i_{c+i}\times \lambda_c \times$ line $(c+1)$-th.

The diagonal $d+1$ vanishes.

So, if $c \neq 0$, the valuation is not bounded in $Vect(f_i)$. Contradiction.

My answer is not complete.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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