 Research
 Open access
 Published:
Some normality criteria for families of meromorphic functions
Journal of Inequalities and Applications volume 2013, Article number: 459 (2013)
Abstract
In the note, we study the normality of families of meromorphic functions. We consider whether a family of meromorphic functions ℱ is normal in D if, for a normal family \mathcal{G} and for each function f\in \mathcal{F}, there exists g\in \mathcal{G} such that {f}^{n}{f}^{\prime}={a}_{i} implies {g}^{n}{g}^{\prime}={a}_{i} for two distinct nonzero points {a}_{i}, i=1,2 and an integer n. An example shows that the condition in our results is best possible.
MSC:30D45, 30D35.
1 Introduction and main results
Let f(z) and g(z) be two nonconstant meromorphic functions in a domain D\subseteq \mathbb{C}, and let a be a finite complex value. We say that f and g share a CM (or IM) in D provided that fa and ga have the same zeros counting (or ignoring) multiplicity in D. If g=a whenever f=a, we denote it by f=a\u27f9g=a. When a=\mathrm{\infty}, the zeros of fa means the poles of f (see [1]). It is assumed that the reader is familiar with the standard notations and the basic results of Nevanlinna’s valuedistribution theory (see [2–4] or [1]).
Bloch’s principle [5] states that every condition which reduces a meromorphic function in the plane ℂ to be a constant forces a family of meromorphic functions in a domain D to be normal. Although the principle is false in general (see [6]), many authors proved normality criterion for families of meromorphic functions corresponding to a LiouvillePicard type theorem (see [4]).
It is also more interesting to find normality criteria from the point of view of shared values. In this area, Schwick [7] first proved an interesting result which states that a family of meromorphic functions in a domain is normal if every function shares three distinct finite complex numbers with its first derivative therein. Later, more results about normality criteria concerning shared values have emerged; for instance, see [8–10]. In recent years, this subject has attracted the attention of many researchers worldwide. Studying normal families of functions is of considerable interest. For example, they are used in operator theory on spaces of analytic functions (see, for example, [11], [[12], Lemma 2.5], [[13], Lemma 2.2]).
We now first introduce a normality criterion related to a Hayman normal conjecture [14].
Theorem 1.1 Let ℱ be a family of meromorphic functions on D and n\in \mathbb{N}. If each function f(z) of family ℱ satisfies {f}^{n}(z){f}^{\prime}(z)\ne 1, then ℱ is normal in D.
The proof of Theorem 1.1 is due to Gu [15] for n\ge 3, Pang [16] for n=2, Chen and Fang [17] for n=1. In 2004, by the ideas of shared values, Fang and Zalcman [18] obtained the following.
Theorem 1.2 Let ℱ be a family of meromorphic functions on D and n\in \mathbb{N}. If for each pair of functions f and g in ℱ, f and g share the value 0 and {f}^{n}{f}^{\prime} and {g}^{n}{g}^{\prime} share a nonzero value a in D, then ℱ is normal in D.
In 2008, Zhang [10] obtained some criteria for normality of ℱ in terms of the multiplicities of the zeros and poles of the functions in ℱ and used them to improve Theorem 1.2 as follows.
Theorem 1.3 Let ℱ be a family of meromorphic functions in D satisfying that all of zeros and poles of f\in \mathcal{F} have multiplicities at least 3. If for each pair of functions f and g in ℱ, {f}^{\prime} and {g}^{\prime} share a nonzero value a in D, then ℱ is normal in D.
Theorem 1.4 Let ℱ be a family of meromorphic functions on D and n\in \mathbb{N}. If n\ge 2 and for each pair of functions f and g in ℱ, {f}^{n}{f}^{\prime} and {g}^{n}{g}^{\prime} share a nonzero value a in D, then ℱ is normal in D.
Zhang [10] gave the following example to show that Theorem 1.4 is not true when n=1, and therefore the condition n\ge 2 is best possible.
Example 1.1 The family of holomorphic functions \mathcal{F}=\{{f}_{j}(z)=\sqrt{j}(z+\frac{1}{j}):j=1,2,\dots \} is not normal in D=\{z:z<1\}. This is deduced by {f}_{j}^{\mathrm{\#}}(0)=\frac{j\sqrt{j}}{j+1}\to \mathrm{\infty} as j\to \mathrm{\infty} and Marty’s criterion [2], although for any {f}_{j}(z)\in \mathcal{F}, {f}_{j}{f}_{j}^{\prime}=jz+1. So, for each pair m, j, {f}_{m}{f}_{m}^{\prime} and {f}_{j}{f}_{j}^{\prime} share the value 1.
Here {f}^{\mathrm{\#}}(\xi ) denotes the spherical derivative
Recently, Yuan et al. [19] improved Theorem 1.3 and used it to consider Theorem 1.4 when n=1. They proved the following theorems.
Theorem 1.5 Let ℱ be a family of meromorphic functions on D such that all of zeroes of each f\in \mathcal{F} have multiplicities at least 4 and all of poles of f\in \mathcal{F} are multiple. If for each pair of functions f and g in ℱ, {f}^{\prime} and {g}^{\prime} share a nonzero value a in D, then ℱ is normal in D.
Theorem 1.6 Let ℱ be a family of meromorphic functions on D such that all of zeroes of each f\in \mathcal{F} are multiple. If for each pair of functions f and g in ℱ, f{f}^{\prime} and g{g}^{\prime} share a nonzero value a in D, then ℱ is normal in D.
Remark 1.7 Example 1.1 shows that the condition that all of zeros of f\in \mathcal{F} are multiple in Theorem 1.6 is best possible.
In this paper, we will consider the related problems concerning two families. Our main results are as follows.
Theorem 1.8 Let ℱ and \mathcal{G} be two families of meromorphic functions in D\subseteq \mathbb{C}, k be a positive integer and {a}_{i} (i=1,2) be two distinct nonzero constants. Suppose that for each function f\in \mathcal{F}, all its zeros are of multiplicity at least k+1 and all its poles are multiple.
If \mathcal{G} is normal and for each function f\in \mathcal{F}, there exists g\in \mathcal{G} such that {f}^{(k)}={a}_{i}\u27f9{g}^{(k)}={a}_{i} for i=1,2, then ℱ is normal in D.
Theorem 1.9 Let ℱ and \mathcal{G} be two families of meromorphic functions on D and {a}_{i} (i=1,2) be two distinct nonzero constants. If all of zeroes of f\in \mathcal{F} have multiplicities at least 3, \mathcal{G} is normal and for each function f\in \mathcal{F}, there exists g\in \mathcal{G} such that {f}^{\prime}={a}_{i}\u27f9{g}^{\prime}={a}_{i} for i=1,2, then ℱ is normal in D.
Example 1.2 The family of meromorphic functions \mathcal{F}=\{{f}_{j}(z)=\frac{1}{jz}:j=1,2,\dots \} is not normal in D=\{z:z<1\}. This is deduced by {f}_{j}^{\mathrm{\#}}(0)=j\to \mathrm{\infty} as j\to \mathrm{\infty} and Marty’s criterion [2]. The family of holomorphic functions \mathcal{G}=\{{g}_{j}(z):j=1,2,\dots \} is normal in D, where
However, for any {f}_{j}(z)\in \mathcal{F} and {g}_{j}(z)\in \mathcal{G}, {f}_{j}(z)\ne 0 and {g}_{j}(z)\ne 0 and {f}_{j}^{(k)}(z)=1 if and only if {g}_{j}^{(k)}(z)=1 in D.
Noting that normality of families of ℱ and {\mathcal{F}}^{\ast}=\{\frac{1}{f}f\in \mathcal{F}\} is the same by famous Marty’s criterion, we obtain the following criteria.
Theorem 1.10 Let ℱ and \mathcal{G} be two families of meromorphic functions on D and {a}_{i} (i=1,2) be two distinct nonzero constants. Suppose that n (n\ne 0, −1 and −2) is an integer number. If \mathcal{G} is normal and for each function f\in \mathcal{F}, there exists g\in \mathcal{G} such that {f}^{n}{f}^{\prime}={a}_{i}\u27f9{g}^{n}{g}^{\prime}={a}_{i} for i=1,2, then ℱ is normal in D.
Theorem 1.11 Let ℱ and \mathcal{G} be two families of meromorphic functions on D and {a}_{i} (i=1,2) be two distinct nonzero constants. If all of poles of f\in \mathcal{F} have multiplicities at least 3, \mathcal{G} is normal and for each function f\in \mathcal{F}, there exists g\in \mathcal{G} such that {f}^{2}{f}^{\prime}={a}_{i}\u27f9{g}^{2}{g}^{\prime}={a}_{i} for i=1,2, then ℱ is normal in D.
Remark 1.12 Example 1.2 shows that the condition in Theorem 1.8 and Theorem 1.9 that for each f\in \mathcal{F}, there exists g\in \mathcal{G} such that {f}^{(k)}={a}_{i}\u27f9{g}^{(k)}={a}_{i} for {a}_{i}\ne 0, i=1,2, is best possible.
2 Preliminary lemmas
In order to prove our result, we need the following lemmas. The first one is an extension of a result by Zalcman in [20] concerning normal families.
Lemma 2.1 [21]
Let ℱ be a family of meromorphic functions on the unit disc such that all zeros of functions in ℱ have multiplicity greater than p and all poles of functions in ℱ have multiplicity greater than q. Let α be a real number satisfying q<\alpha <p. Then ℱ is not normal at 0 if and only if there exist

(a)
a number 0<r<1;

(b)
points {z}_{n} with {z}_{n}<r;

(c)
functions {f}_{n}\in \mathcal{F};

(d)
positive numbers {\rho}_{n}\to 0
such that {g}_{n}(\zeta ):={\rho}^{\alpha}{f}_{n}({z}_{n}+{\rho}_{n}\zeta ) converges spherically uniformly on each compact subset of ℂ to a nonconstant meromorphic function g(\zeta ), its all zeros are of multiplicity greater than p and its all poles are of multiplicity greater than q and its order is at most 2.
Remark 2.2 If ℱ is a family of holomorphic functions on the unit disc in Lemma 2.1, then g(\zeta ) is a nonconstant entire function whose order is at most 1.
The order of g is defined by using the Nevanlinna’s characteristic function T(r,g):
Let f(z) be a meromorphic function of finite order in the plane, k be a positive integer and a\in \mathbb{C}\mathrm{\setminus}\{0\}. Suppose that all its zeros are of multiplicity at least k+1 and all its poles are multiple. If {f}^{(k)}(z)\ne a, then f(z) is constant.
Lemma 2.4 [24]
Let f be a meromorphic function of finite order in the plane and a\in \mathbb{C}\mathrm{\setminus}\{0\}. If all its zeros are of multiplicity at least 3 and {f}^{\prime}(z)\ne a, then f(z) is a constant.
3 Proofs of the results
Proof of Theorem 1.8 Suppose that ℱ is not normal in D. Then there exists at least one point {z}_{0} such that ℱ is not normal at the point {z}_{0}. Without loss of generality, we assume that {z}_{0}=0. By Lemma 2.1, there exist points {z}_{j}\to 0, positive numbers {\rho}_{j}\to 0 and functions {f}_{j}\in \mathcal{F} such that
locally uniformly with respect to the spherical metric, where F is a nonconstant meromorphic function in ℂ satisfying all of whose zeros are of multiplicity at least k+1 and all of whose poles are multiple. Moreover, the order of F is less than two.
From (3.1) we know
also locally uniformly with respect to the spherical metric.
Combining with Lemma 2.3, we know that {F}^{(k)}(\xi ) takes two distinct nonzero finite values \{{a}_{1},{a}_{2}\}. Set {\xi}_{0} and {\xi}_{0}^{\ast} to be two zeros of {F}^{(k)}{a}_{1} and {F}^{(k)}{a}_{2}, respectively. Obviously, {\xi}_{0}\ne {\xi}_{0}^{\ast}, and then choose δ (>0) small enough such that D({\xi}_{0},\delta )\cap D({\xi}_{0}^{\ast},\delta )=\varphi, where D({\xi}_{0},\delta )=\{\xi :\xi {\xi}_{0}<\delta \} and D({\xi}_{0}^{\ast},\delta )=\{\xi :\xi {\xi}_{0}^{\ast}<\delta \}. From (3.2), by Hurwitz’s theorem, there exist points {\xi}_{j}\in D({\xi}_{0},\delta ), {\xi}_{j}^{\ast}\in D({\xi}_{0}^{\ast},\delta ) such that for sufficiently large j,
It follows from (3.3) and the hypothesis of Theorem 1.8 that
Since \mathcal{G} is normal, without loss of generality, we assume that
locally uniformly with respect to the spherical metric.
By (3.4), (3.5) and taking j\to \mathrm{\infty}, we have
It is a contradiction.
The proof of Theorem 1.8 is complete. □
Proof of Theorem 1.9 By Lemma 2.4, similar to the proof of Theorem 1.8, we can give the proof of Theorem 1.9. We omit the details.
The proof of Theorem 1.9 is complete. □
Proof of Theorem 1.10 and Theorem 1.11 Set {\mathcal{F}}^{\ast}=\{\frac{{f}^{n+1}}{n+1}f\in \mathcal{F}\}, {\mathcal{G}}^{\ast}=\{\frac{{g}^{n+1}}{n+1}g\in \mathcal{G}\}.
Noting that for each function {f}^{\ast}\in {\mathcal{F}}^{\ast}, all of whose zeros and poles are multiple if n\notin \{2,1,0\}, and all of whose zeros have multiplicities at least 3 if n=2. For each {f}^{\ast}\in {\mathcal{F}}^{\ast}, there exists g in \mathcal{G} such that {({f}^{\ast})}^{\prime}={a}_{i}\u27f9{({g}^{\ast})}^{\prime}={a}_{i} for i=1,2 in D, we know that {\mathcal{F}}^{\ast} is normal in D by Theorem 1.8 and Theorem 1.9. Therefore, ℱ is normal in D.
The proof of Theorem 1.10 and Theorem 1.11 is complete. □
References
Yang CC, Yi HX Mathematics and Its Applications 557. In Uniqueness Theory of Meromorphic Functions. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht; 2003.
Gu YX, Pang XC, Fang ML: Theory of Normal Family and Its Applications. Science Press, Beijing; 2007.
Hayman WK Oxford Mathematical Monographs. In Meromorphic Functions. Clarendon, Oxford; 1964.
Yang L: Value Distribution Theory. Springer, Berlin; 1993.
Bergweiler W: Bloch’s principle. Comput. Methods Funct. Theory 2006, 6(1):77–108. 10.1007/BF03321119
Rubel LA: Four counterexamples to Bloch’s principle. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1986, 98(2):257–260.
Schwick W: Normality criteria for families of meromorphic function. J. Anal. Math. 1989, 52: 241–289.
Pang XC, Zalcman L: Normal families and shared values. Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. 2000, 32(3):325–331. 10.1112/S002460939900644X
Pang XC, Zalcman L: Normality and shared values. Ark. Mat. 2000, 38(1):171–182. 10.1007/BF02384496
Zhang QC: Some normality criteria of meromorphic functions. Complex Var. Elliptic Equ. 2008, 53(8):791–795. 10.1080/17476930802124666
Schwartz, HJ: Composition operators on Hp. Thesis, University of Toledo (1969)
Li S, Stević S: Weighted composition operators from Bergmantype spaces into Bloch spaces. Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. Math. Sci. 2007, 117(3):371–385. 10.1007/s120440070032y
Stević S: Essential norms of weighted composition operators from the α Bloch space to a weightedtype space on the unit ball. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2008., 2008: Article ID 279691
Hayman WK: Research Problems of Function Theory. Athlone Press, London; 1967.
Gu YX: Normal Families of Meromorphic Functions. Sichuan Edu. Press, Chengdou; 1988. (in Chinese)
Pang XC: On normal criterion of meromorphic functions. Sci. China Ser. A 1990, 33: 521–527.
Chen HH, Fang ML:On the value distribution of {f}^{n}{f}^{\prime}. Sci. China Ser. A 1995, 38: 789–798.
Fang ML, Zalcman L: A note on normality and shared value. J. Aust. Math. Soc. 2004, 76: 141–150. 10.1017/S1446788700008752
Yuan WJ, Zhu B, Lin JM: Some normality criteria of meromorphic functions related a Hayman conjecture. J. Inequal. Appl. 2011, 97: 1–10. 10.1186/1029242X201197
Zalcman L: A heuristic principle in complex function theory. Am. Math. Mon. 1975, 82(8):813–817. 10.2307/2319796
Zalcman L: Normal families: new perspectives. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 1998, 35(3):215–230. 10.1090/S0273097998007551
Bergweiler W, Pang XC: On the derivative of meromorphic functions with multiple zeros. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2003, 278: 285–292. 10.1016/S0022247X(02)003499
Wang YF, Fang ML: Picard values and normal families of meromorphic functions with multiple zeros. Acta Math. Sin. 1998, 14(1):17–26. 10.1007/BF02563879
Fang ML, Yuan WJ: On the normality for families of meromorphic functions. Indian J. Math. 2001, 43(3):341–351.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express their hearty thanks to Professors Fang Mingliang, Liao Liangwen and Yang Degui for their helpful discussions and suggestions. This work was completed with the support of the NSF of China (No. 11271090), the NSF of Guangdong Province (S2012010010121) and the Visiting Scholar Program of Chern Institute of Mathematics at Nankai University. The first author would like to express his hearty thanks to Chern Institute of Mathematics for providing him with very comfortable research environment. The authors wish to thank the referees and editors for their very helpful comments and useful suggestions.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Authors’ contributions
WY and JL carried out the design of the study and performed the analysis. WX participated in its design and coordination. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
About this article
Cite this article
Yuan, W., Xiong, W. & Lin, J. Some normality criteria for families of meromorphic functions. J Inequal Appl 2013, 459 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/1029242X2013459
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1029242X2013459