Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generated
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

A maximum principle for the Smirnov class: N+∩Lp=Hp

Statement

Let 0<p≤∞ and let f∈N+(D) with boundary function f∗ (as in Boundary values and log-integrability of Nevanlinna-class functions). If f∗∈Lp(T,m) then f∈Hp(D) and ∥f∥Hp=∥f∗∥p(0<p<∞),∥f∥∞=∥f∗∥∞. Consequently a function of N+(D) lies in Hp(D) exactly when its boundary function lies in Lp, with equality of norms; this is written N+∩Lp=Hp. (The statement is false with N in place of N+: the reciprocal 1/Sμ of a nonconstant singular inner function lies in N with unimodular boundary values, but is not bounded on D and hence not in H∞.)

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Countable choice, 0<p≤∞ and f∈N+(D) whose boundary function satisfies f∗∈Lp(T,m).

[L1]

For nonzero f, N+ membership means f∈N(D), log⁡∣f∗∣∈L1 and log⁡∣f(z)∣≤P[log⁡∣f∗∣](z) for all z; and fr→f∗ m-almost everywhere (The Smirnov class on the disc, Boundary values and log-integrability of Nevanlinna-class functions).

[L2]

Convex Jensen for the probability density P(z,ζ)dm(ζ): for the convex function t↦ept and an integrable real u with epu∈L1(P dm), ep∫P(z,ζ)u(ζ)dm(ζ)≤∫P(z,ζ)epu(ζ)dm(ζ); in particular with u=log⁡∣f∗∣ one has ∣f(z)∣p≤P[∣f∗∣p](z) whenever log⁡∣f∗∣∈L1 and ∣f∗∣p∈L1 (Jensen's inequality for expectation, The Poisson integral of a finite complex boundary measure, The Smirnov class on the disc).

[L3]

Fubini-Tonelli on the product of the probability space (T,m) with itself, and ∫TP(rζ,η)dm(ζ)=1 for every fixed η; ∥⋅∥Hp is the supremum of the radial Lp means, nondecreasing in the radius (Fubini's theorem for L^1 functions on a sigma-finite product, Tonelli's theorem for nonnegative measurable functions on a sigma-finite product, Radial p-means of a holomorphic function are nondecreasing, Analytic Hardy spaces on the unit disc).

[L4]

Fatou's lemma: ∫lim inf⁡rgr dm≤lim inf⁡r∫gr dm for nonnegative measurable gr (Fatou's lemma).

[L5]

For a nonzero finite positive singular measure μ, Sμ is zero-free, ∣Sμ∣≤1, Sμ(0)=e−μ(T)<1, and ∣Sμ∗∣=1 almost everywhere under CC. Its reciprocal is holomorphic with log⁡∣1/Sμ∣=P[μ]≥0, hence belongs to N. If the reciprocal were bounded, its boundary modulus one and the CC bounded-holomorphic norm identity would force ∣1/Sμ∣≤1, contradicting 1/Sμ(0)>1. Thus it is not bounded; no divergence claim at every support point is required. (Properties of the singular functions Sμ, Bounded holomorphic disc functions have Poisson boundary data and Fatou limits under countable choice, Inner, singular inner and outer functions, Boundary values and log-integrability of Nevanlinna-class functions)

Proof

technique · direct
1.1givenL1L2L3algebra

If f≡0, its boundary function and every asserted norm are zero, so all conclusions hold. Assume henceforth f≢0. The case p<∞: Hp membership and the bound ∥f∥Hp≤∥f∗∥p. Assume p<∞ and f∗∈Lp. By [L1], log⁡∣f∗∣∈L1 and log⁡∣f(z)∣≤P[log⁡∣f∗∣](z), so [L2] (applied with u=log⁡∣f∗∣, for which epu=∣f∗∣p∈L1) gives ∣f(z)∣p≤P[∣f∗∣p](z) for every z∈D. Integrating over the circle ∣z∣=r and using Tonelli's theorem and the unit mass of the kernel [L3] gives ∫T∣f(rζ)∣p dm(ζ)≤∫T∣f∗∣p dm for every r<1; hence f is holomorphic with bounded radial means, that is f∈Hp(D), and ∥f∥Hp≤∥f∗∥p.

2.1step 1.1L1L3L4algebra

The reverse inequality by Fatou. By [L1], f(rζ)→f∗(ζ) m-almost everywhere; Fatou's lemma [L4] applied to the nonnegative functions ∣fr∣p gives ∥f∗∥pp=∫∣f∗∣p dm≤lim inf⁡r∫∣fr∣p dm≤sup⁡r∫∣fr∣p dm=∥f∥Hpp, using the definition of the Hp norm as a supremum [L3]. Together with step 1.1 this gives ∥f∥Hp=∥f∗∥p.

2.2step 1.1L1algebra

The case p=∞. If f∗∈L∞, then log⁡∣f∗∣≤log⁡∥f∗∥∞ a.e., so P[log⁡∣f∗∣]≤log⁡∥f∗∥∞ and the defining inequality of [L1] gives ∣f(z)∣≤∥f∗∥∞ for every z, that is f∈H∞ with ∥f∥∞≤∥f∗∥∞. Conversely, f∗ is an a.e. limit of the radial functions fr, so ∣f∗∣≤sup⁡z∈D∣f(z)∣=∥f∥∞ a.e. and ∥f∗∥∞≤∥f∥∞; hence ∥f∥∞=∥f∗∥∞.

3.1step 1.1step 2.1step 2.2L5∎

Assembly and sharpness for N. Steps 1.1, 2.1 and 2.2 prove N+∩Lp=Hp with equality of norms for every 0<p≤∞: if f∈N+ and f∗∈Lp then f∈Hp with the stated norm identity, and the reverse inclusion Hp⊆N+ is in the definition of N+. The sharpness assertion is [L5]: the reciprocal of a nonconstant singular inner function lies in N with unimodular boundary values, so N∩L∞≠H∞, showing that the maximum principle fails for N.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

88 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources