Scribd
Upload
60 views26 pages

Open Problems Conjectures Complex Analysis

Uploaded by

Prevalis
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
60 views26 pages

Open Problems Conjectures Complex Analysis

Uploaded by

Prevalis
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 26
Computotional Methode and Function Theory Proceedings, Velparaico 1969 St. Ruscheweyh, F:B. aff, L.C. Salina, RS. Varga (eds) Lecture Notes in Mathematics 1438, pp. 1-25, © Springer Berlin Heidelberg 1990 Open Problems and Conjectures in Complex Analysis Roger W. Barnard Department of Mathematics, Texas Tech University Lubbock, Texas 79409-1042, USA Introduction ‘This article surveys some of the open problems and conjectures in complex analysis that the author has been interested in and worked on over the last several years, They include problems on polynomials, geometric Function theory, and special functions with ‘frequent mixture of the three. The problems that will be discussed and the author's collaborators associated with each problem are as follows: 1. Polynomials with nonnegative cooficients (with W. Dayawansa, K. Pearce, and D. Weinberg) .. 2 2. The center divided difference of polynomials (with B. Evans and C. FitaGerald).......4 3. Digital filters and zoros of interpolating polynomials (with W. Ford and H. Wang).....5 4. Omitted values problems (with J. Lewis and K. Pearee).....sssscscssseesseeeseesseB 55. M@bius transformations of convex mappings (with G. Schober) 1 6, Robinson's 1/2 conjecture. costes Caeser al 7. Campbell's conjecture on a majorization - subordination result (with C. Kellogg).....14 8. Knyd conjecture for bounded nonvanishing functions (with §. Ruscheweyb) eves. 8 9. A conjecture for bounded stake fncions (ith J. Lewis and K. Peace) 6 10. A. Sel’ 2/3 conjecture with J, Lewis) ar 11, Brannan’s coeficient conjecture for certain power series . 19 12, Polynomial approximations using 2 differential equations model (with L. Reichel) ....20 2 RW, Barnard 1, Polynomials with nonnegative coefficients We first discuss a series of conjectures which have as one of their sources the work of Rigier, Trimble and Varga in (66). In [66] these authors considered two earlier papers bby Beauzamy and Enflo [23] and Beauzamy [22], which are connected with polynomials and the classical Jensen inequality. To describe their results, let He) = Yow! = Sart, where «= 0, 7>m, be a complex polynomial ( 0), let d be @ mimber in the interval (0,1), and let k be a nonnegative integer. Then (ef [22], [28]) p is said to have concentration d of degree at most k if o Ylal> aS" lash Beauramy and Enflo showed that there exists a constant C1, depending only on d and &, such that for any polynomial p satisfying (1), it is true that @ 3 [os ole 0 — oe ( si) > bus In the case of k = 0 in (2) the inequality is equivalent to the Jensen inequality (23), | A [oe ofea8 > log el Rigler, etc., in [66] considered the extension of this inequality from the class of polynomials to the class of H® (cf. Duren [36]) functions, For f ¢ H® the functional f= Ff wslite)|d0 — tog (& wi) can be well-defined and is finite, They let @) Can = int{I(f): f © H® and f(2) = 3 0;24(¢ 0) satisfies (1)} For a (Sxed) d € (0,1) and a (Sxed) nonnegative integer kit was shown that there exists an unique positive integer n (dependent on d and k) such that #2 (5)st 0 provided the coefficients are all nonnegative for t = 0. A special case of Conjecture 3 where the zeros on the upper semicircle are equally spaced would be of special interest. Although Conjecture 2 was verified in (10) the techniques do not appear applicable to Conjecture 3. 4 RW. Barnard 2. The center divided difference of polynomials Another series of polynomial problems was generated in classical mumber theory by the work of Evans and Stolarsky in [37]. Given a polynomial p and e real number 1 define 6:(p), the center divided difference of p, by we+))- ne 50) = a Plz), We did » study of the bebavior of the &(p) as a function of A in [11]. A number of classical results of Walsh and Obrechkoff and of Kuipers [50] give some information about the zer0s of 5x(p) as a function of A. Let Wp] equal the width of the smallest vertical strip containing the zeros of p. It follows from the classical work that WIélp)] < Wp} ‘and that the diameter of the zero set of &3(p) approaches oo as |A| approaches oo. The Gauss-Lucas theorem shows that Wil s Wo). It was shown in [11] that ® WI6s(0)] s WIP) and the conditions on p when equality holds in (5) are given. We were also able to prove that W[Es(p)] = O(1/2) as |A| + 00. ‘The numerical work done by the number theorists had suggested, Conjecture 4. W(5;(p)] monotonically decreases to zero as || — oo. In that direction it was shown in [11] that (6) Wi6.a(p)) < WLdx(P)) for all positive A and conditions for equality in (6) were found. In addition, if the zero set of p is symmetric about a vertical line then @ WI6x(P)] However, an example was given of a ‘polynomial p., that contradicts Conjecture 4 at least for some . The polynomial p, has its 2ero set symmetric about the imaginary axis and hes the property that for small ¢, W/é\(p:)] = 0 and W[6(P.)] = 0 for A> VIF% = W\pl] while W15\(p,)] > 0 for 1 Wip'). y Open Problems and Conjectures in Complex Analysis 5 Thus conjecture 4 needs to be modified to read Conjecture 5. W[éx(p)] monotonically decreases to zero for > Wi ‘The original question thet motivated the number theorist’s interest in this problem was the determination of the zeros of 6,(py) where x me) = TL G-) Also occuring in their work were the iterates, 6 of 6 defined inductively by (pw) = HL (Pw)] with DP bpw) = dxlew). ‘The numerical work had suggested Conjecture 6. Al! nonreal zeros of 6" (py) are purely imaginary for all \ and all Conjecture 6 has been verified in [11] for n= 1. Indeed, an interesting problem, with other ramifications in number theory, see Stolarsky [71], would be to characterize those polynomials for which &@ has only real and pore imaginary roots 3. Digital filters and zeros of interpolating polynomials Some interesting problems arise when classical complex analysis techniques are ap- plied to digital filter theory. Polynomials to be used in interpolation of digital signals are called interpolating polynomials. These polynomisls may require modification to assure convergence of their reciprocals on the unit circle. Such modifications provide the opportunity to apply classical analysis theory as was done by the author, Ford, and Wang in [12] ‘A teal function, g, defined for all values of the real independent variable time, ¢, is called a signal. A digital signal, 7, is @ real sequence, {7m : co 1. If this digital signal is to be compared with digital signals based on the smaller sample interval, At, the given digital signal must be interpolated to the smaller sample interval, At. For example, insertion of N ~ 1 zeros between every be and bg4u, followed by multiplication of the Z-transform of the result by the interpolating series, Py, defined by (20) Pas) 1+ Le +2") sine reads to ay AG)= SS a= ( s ve") ey Since the coefficient of 2#,axy7, in A comes from products of 6; and sine(mm/N) such that kN’ = jN em, it follows that m =0 (mod), sine(m=/N)=0 for nonzero m, and ay = by. Thus, A is an intespolation of the given B with coefficients, b. Open Problems and Conjectures in Complex Analysis 7 'A major goal is to study possible alternatives to the interpolation used in (20) in terms of truncation of the interpolating series in (11). In practice one truncstes P to obtain the interpolating polynomial, Py. defined by . i (a2) Prals) ==" (+ Fler 427") sine 7) : where N > 1 “To asoure stability and accuracy of evaluation it i important that alternative P's have no zeros on the unit circle, It is shown in [12] that all of the zeros of Pyrs, are of unit modulus when L < NV and examples are given showing that when L > N +1 rer tee neers eter number of classical results are then combined to give sharp conditions on real sequences: {en m < 00} 20 that the function Pj. defined by m mr a3) Py(s) = 2" fh + Lee ten sine has no zero of unit modulus. In particular, in order to define a useful test to determine ‘if 8 specific sequence of numbers will work for the ¢n’s in (13) the following theorem was proved in (1 "Theorem 1. Ifa real sequence, {by :0 < m < Zyby = 1} is such that lh ba bei beat 20 bes hol & be bao hou for 0 < k < Ly let i 2log L)" m= ba(t “8 ) define the coefficients in (13). Then Pj, has no zero of unit modulus. A number of the standard “windows” that occur in the engineering literature are then shown to be just special cases of those defined in Theorem 1, including the very generalized Hamming window and the Hanning window, (see Rabniner and Gold’s book, Theory and Application of Digital Signal Processing.) ‘The distribution of zeros and the orthogonality property of the sine functions deter- mine the interpolating properties in (11) and enables the classical results to be applied. Thus one can ask, can the sine functions be replaced by more general orthogonal fun- ctions, e.g., Jacobi polynomials, to ereate a more general setting in which many more applications can be found? Discussions with several engineers have suggested this. Omitted values problems We now discuss a number of open problems in geometric function theory. Let A,= (ei el —1/2} and F, maps A onto the sector (erbaleral ce} whose vertex, v = —x/4a, is located inside the disk, then AY) = AFyasr) for 1/2 r 0 and f < F (F € Uy) then f' < FF for |2| 1 An = suplanl ie That Ar = 2/e dates back to 1932 (see Levin {61}) and appears explicitly in Hummel, ete, (46) and Horowitz [45]. That z = 2/e appears in [46] and As = 2/e in (65). For a fairly complete history of this problem see (46) or Brown [31], These results suggest what has become known as the Kray Conjecture, Conjecture 12. 4, =2/e, for all n > 1, , with equality only for the functions E42) = en [ and its rotations eK, (e2). ‘An is to equal the apocryphal Pondiczery constant, named by Boas in [25]. A sharp ‘uniform bound less than one is expected. However, the bound 2/e © 7357+, is so- mewhat surprising in view of the fact that the best uniform estimate known to date is : foal s1— 2 + Asin (5) = 0.008772. 12, given by D. Horovitz in 1978 in [45]. ‘The open problem of Krzyé’s Conjecture is stated in A. Goodman's book “Univalent Functions” (40, page 83]. De Branges’ recent solution to the Bieberbach Conjecture gave hope to solving many of these type problems. However, not withstanding the amount of effort by several function theorists to solve the corresponding coefficient problem, Conjecture 12 still remains open. ‘A related conjecture made by Ruscheweyh upon verification would give a much improved uniform estimate for A,. Consider (2) = exp{—Ap(z)] for A > 0 and p € P where P= {p: plz) = 1+ m2 t+ Repl2) > 0, 21 < 1) ‘Then consider the following: For 0 0,4] =1,k = 1,2) nand we) = Sas (82) i-Ge, Conjecture 13. ape bo (24) Herre Re{p(re'*)}dy < Flr"), with F defined in (28). ‘We have shown by using the Legendre polynomial expansion for Bessel functions 1 that ow 2f nef tee) ay Equation (25) shows that the estimate (24) would be sharp for fixed r for defined mae 1 (a 2). 1-7 by lee Ble) = a") ‘Upon verification of Conjecture 13 it can be shown that (28) jel <2 FO) ger ct ‘Choosing +? = (nm — 1)/(n +1) in (26) it would follow that en) {a| < Jim ig rl =F Q = 869 by numerical calculations, 9. A conjecture for bounded starlike functions A conjecture that. was made by this author in (6] in 1975 was recently disproved with computer methods by Pearce leaving the problem now as one that probably can only Open Problems and Conjectures in Complex Analysis Ww be done numerically. The conjecture involved coefficient estimates for bounded starlike functions in S. Define, for a fixed M > 1, Su = {fF 8: flz) = 2+ a2 +0327 ++ |f(D] 5 Mz € A} ‘The fact that [ay| is maximized in Sy by the function mapping onto Pick’s domain of the disk Ay minus o single radial slit has been known since 1917 [sce Goodman, vol. I, .38], In the early sixties Tarami [73] used Schiffer’s variational methods to determine the explicit extremal domains for maximizing the first few coefficients in Sy. In particular he proved that the extremal domains for maximizing |as| in Sy are as shown in Figure 3 for the different values of M. 1 3 are no longer starlike suggested the need for ‘2 local variational technique that preserved these properties. This was developed by combining the Julia Variational formula with the Loewner Theory in (6] and in (17). Let Siy = UF € Su: f(A) is starlike with respect to the origin} Ik was shown in (6] that the extremal domain maximizing |ag| in Sjy is the dise Ay ‘minus at most two symmetric radial slits. Define Diy as Ayy minus two eymmetrie radial slits where 20 is the angle between the 2 slits, Let As(IM, 8) be the thied coefficient for the function in Sf, mapping A onto the domain Diy From the properties of the extremal domains in the class Sy, along with initial computations and the observation that :4y(3,0) = As(3,x/2) = 8/9 led this author to the following Conjecture 14. For all f € Sip (28) las} < As(M,x/2}, 1 0, max [As(M,8), As(M,x/2)] < As(M, 6(M1)) for 2.83 < M < My <5. 10. A. Schild’s 2/3 conjecture Another long standing conjecture that was proved false was the 2/3 conjecture. Let ry = ni(f) be the radius of convexity of f, ie. ni(f) = supfr + f(A.) is a convex domain). Put d* = min{| (2)| :|2| =} and d= inf |3| for which f(+) # 9. In 1983 in (60), A. Schild conjectured that d°/d > 2/3 for all functions f € S*. Here equality holds for the Koebe function K(2) = 2(1 + 2)? Schild noted that dt/d > r, > 2— V3 and proved the conjecture for p symmetric functions, p > 7. He also showed for a certain class of circularly symmetric functions that d*/d > 49. Lewandowski in [52], proved the conjecture true for certain subclass of S$". In [58], McCarty and Tepper obtained the best known lower bound of .38 for all starlike functions. The conjecture was shown false by the author and Lewis in [15] by giving two explicit counter examples. ‘The first example is given simply by the two alit map defined by z)e(1 + 2) where ois sufficiently near 0. It was noted that if d is computed as a function of a, then @/(d) + +90 as @ —+ 0 50 that a minimal value of .656 for d*/d was obtained for this function at a = .08. The second example is a more complicsted function that maps A onto the circularly symmetric domain shown in Figure 4. Open Problems anid Conjectures in Complex Analysis 19 Figure 4 ‘An explicit formula for this function g,, determined by Sufftidge in [72], is given by (2) L42ar+27)"? tee] 1 tog 22 = dined (4243) + He] a} i 2 spite’ where a= 268 1 and d = [(1-+ 0942 — 99] with ¥ = x(1 = 8). A close appro- imation to the minimum of d"/d for this function is 0.644 given by a * 0.89. Also 5.08 for this minimum value. The enthor’s work suggest: Conjecture 15. jing €' [d= min (d*/d for gq) © 644 Jaf. Jd = min (@°/d for gn} \ 11. Brannan’s coefficient conjecture for certain power series An innocent looking, but not so trivial, conjecture was made by Brannan in 1973 in [26] on the coefficients of a specific power series. The problem originated in the Brannan, Clunie, Kirwan paper (28] (later completed by e Aharanov and Friedland in [1]) solving the cocfficient problem for functions of bounded boundary rotation, Consider the coefficients in the expansion Ge ue = Sages, lel 1,a>0,8>0. Brannan posed the problem as to when (0) I: N(a)| < Alea), 20 R.W. Barnard He gave a short elegant proof that (30) held if 6 = 1 and a > 1. However, he showed that for 8 = 1,0 < a <1, (30) did not hold for the even coefficients and that for z =e, (30) held for odd coefficients in a sufficiently small neighborhood of @ = 0. He also noted. that for 0 1 and |AG-*(2)| < Al(1) for |2| = 1,2 # Land n= 1,230 (a) ARD(2)| < AGIA). n = 1,2,3,--- for 0 1, > 1. Mileotich, in [59}, has recently shown that (80) holds for n = 5,8 = 1 and 2 < a 3. The basic Conjecture 16. |AGH(z)| < AG() is still open, 12, Polynomial approximations using a differential equation model Another conjecture on special functions arose out of the author's and L. Reichel’s ‘work on polynomial approximations using a differential equation model. Given equidi- stant data (1;,ys) with x; = 1— (2 1)/Mf, the problem is to best it a polynomial of given degree IV — 1 to Mf data points. A comparison is used between the discrete norm lll, defined by 1 Wllb = 3p Lise@P and the continuous norm, ||» Je, defined by q Wil Grom polynomials (y;} are used where they are orthonormal in the discrete norm with an expansion for p given by mal f(2)| Plz) = Daves), so that [ip = Ca}. These are defined recursively by Open Problems and Conjectures in Complex Analysis a1 (31) en(t) = 2ean-ven-1 — (an-1/on-2)¢Nn-2(2), v=! (8 = ua)" where MEN ‘The asymptotics as M and N —+ oo are studied by letting r = N/VMI and 2 = 1 ¢/M. Then the recurrence relation in (31) can be used to obtain px ~ Beara + nea = [7*— (1/4r*) — 24] ew/M + 0f1). ‘This in turn can be used to obtain the differential equation model: (32) et) (P - (2/4?) - 2¢] (0), where t 7 ~1/V3K7 and the initial condition as t — 0 is defined by pw ll —¢/M] = y2vMVi + 0(1/M), ives v(t) & vilt + 0). A normalization is made by g(t) & %o/V2VM where ¢ is an odd positive integer if and only if is a grid point. The solution to (82) is given by v(t) where 1) is Kummer’s confluent hypergeometric function (see Gradshteyn and Ryzhik (41). ‘To find error estimates for least square approximates by these polynomials an ap- plication of Brass's result in [20] can be used that gives error estimates for least square norms in terms of the uniform sup norm. But in order to apply this result all the ‘en(1 — C/MY’s must have their sup norms occur at the right end point of the interval [1,1], An extensive computer analysis suggested that this does oceur. What is needed then is to verify Conjecture 17. For all ¢ > 0 and real t we have 6 (Sue) Oand 2 > 0 ‘We have verified Conjecture 17 for the regions dotted in Figure 5. 2 Figure 5 References [1] D. Aharonov, S. Friedland, On an ineguality connected with the coefficient conjec- ture for functions of bounded boundary rotation, Ann. Acad, Sci. Fenn. Ser. A. 524 (1972), (2] HS. Al-Amicl, On the radius of univalence of certain analytic functions, Colloq, iy ‘Math, 28 (1973) 133-139, [3] RM, Ali, Properties of Conner Mappings, PhD. Thess, "Texas Tech University [Al Ait, Le Calrei, Brstence and regularity for © minimum problem vith fe boundary, J. Reine Angew, Math. 325 (1981) 105-144. [5] J.M. Anderson, K.E. Barth, D.A. Brannan, Research problems in complex analysis, Bull. London Math Soc. 9 (1977) 129-162. [6} R.W. Barnard, A variational technique for bounded starlike functions, Canadian Math. J. 27 (1975) 387-347. (3) RW. Barns On the radian of stnitenes of (=f for J wnivalent Pro, AMS ‘83 (1075) 385-390. [8] R.W. Barnard, On Robinson's 4/2 conjecture, Proc. AMS. 72 (1978) 195-198. [9] R.W. Barnard, The omitted area problem for univalent functions, Contemporary Math. (1985) 58-60. [10] RW. Barnard, W. Dayawansa, K. Pearce, D. Weinberg, Polynomials with nonne- gative coefficients, (preprint). Open Problems and Conjectures in Complex Analysis 23 [11] RW. Barnard, R. Evans, C. FitzGerald, The center divided difference of polyno- rials (preprint) [12] RW. Barnard, WT. Ford, H. Wang, On the eras of interpolating polynomials, SIAM J. of Math, Anal, 17 (1986) 734-744. [13] RW. Barnard, C. Kellogg, Applications of convolution operators to problems in univalent function theory, Mich. Math. J. 27 (1980) 81-94, [14] RW. Barnard, C. Kellogg, On Campbell's conjecture on the radius of majorization of functions subordinate to conver functions, Rocky Mountain J. 14 (1984) 331- 339. [15] RW, Barnard, ILL. Lewis, A counteresample to the two-thirds conjecture, Proc AMS 41 (1973) 525-529. [16] RW. Barnard, J-L. Lewis, Coefficient bounds for some classes of starlike func- tions. Pacific J. Math, 56 (1975) 325-331 [17] RW. Barnard, J.L. Lewis, Subordination theorems for some classes of starlike functions, Pacific J. Math. 86 (1975) 333-366. [18] RW, Barnard, Lewis, J.L. On the omitted erea problem, Mich. Math. J. 34 (1987) 13-22. [19] R.W, Barnard, K. Pearce, Rounding corners of gearlike domains and the omitted area problem, J. Comput. Appl. Math. 14 (1986) 217-226, [20] RW, Barnard, G, Schober, Mébius transformations for convex: mappings, Com- plex Variables, Theory and Applications 3 (1984) 45-54. [21] RW. Barnard, G. Schober, Mabius transformations for convex mappings II, Com- plex Variables, Theory and Applications 7 (1986) 205-214. [22] B. Beauzamy, Jensen's inequality for polynomials with concentration at low de- ‘grees, Numer. Math, 49 (1986) 221-225, [23] B, Beauzamy, P. Enflo, Bstimations de produits de polyndmes, J. Number Theory (1985) 21 390-412. [24] S.D. Bemardi, A survey of the development of the theory of schlickt functions, Duke Math. J. 19 (1952) 263-287. (25) RLP. Boas, Entire Functions Academic Press, New York, (1954) [26] D.A. Brannan, On coefficient problems for certain power series, Symposium on Complex Analysis, Canterbury, (1973) (ed. Cltnie, Haymen). London Math, Soe. Lecture Note Series 12. (27] D.A. Brannan, J.G. Clunic, J.G. (eds.). Aspects of contemporary compler analysis, (Durham, 1979), Academie Press, London (1980) Bn RW, Barnard [28] D.A. Brannan, J.G. Chunie, W.B. Kirwan, On the coefficient problem for functions of bounded boundary rotation, Ann. Acad. Sei. Fenn. Ser. A.I. Math. 3, (1973). [29] H. Brass, Error estimates for least squares approzimation by polynoméals, 3. Ap- prox. Theory. 41, (1984) 345-849. [30] J. Brown, A coefficient problem for nonvanishing HP functions, Rocky Mountain J. of Math. 18 (1988) 707-718. [81] J. Brown, A proof of the Krzyi conjecture for n = 4, (preprint). [82] D. Campbell, Majorization-Subordination theorems for locally univalent functions, Bull. AMS 78, (1972) 535-538. [33] D. Campbell, Mojorization-Subordination theorems for locally wnivalent functions Hi, Can. J. Math. 25, (1978) 420-425. [84] D. Campbell, Majerization-Subordination theorems for locelly wnivalent functions II, Trans. Amer. Math, Soe. 198 (1974) 297-306. [35] S. Chandra, P. Singh, Certain subclasses of the class of functions regular and wnivalent in the unit disc, Arch. Math. 26 (1975) 60-63. [36] P. Duren, Univatent Functions. Springer-Verlag, 259, New York, (1980). [37] R.J. Bvans, K.B. Stolarsky, A fomily of polynomais with concyclic zeros, IT, Proc. AMS. 92, (1984) 393-396. [38] A.W. Goodman, Note on regions omitted by wnivalent functions, Bull. Amer. Math. Soe. 55 (1949) 363-369. (89] A.W. Goodman, B. Reich, On the regions omitted by univalent functions IT, Canad, J. Math. 7 (1955) 88-88, [40] A.W. Goodman, Univelent Functions, Mariner (1982). 41] Gradshteyn, Ryzhik. Table of integral, series and products, Academic Press, 1980, {42] R.R. Hall, On a conjecture of Olunie ond Sheil-Smail, Bull, London Math. Soc. 12 (1980) 25-28, [43] E. Gray, A. Schild, A new proof of « conjecture of Schild, Proc. AMS 16 (1965) 76-77, MR30 #2136. [44] W.K. Hayman, Multivalent functions, Cambtidge Tracts in Math, and Math, Phys., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1958. [45] C. Horowitz, Coefficients of nonvanishing functions in H™, Inracl J. Math. 30, (2978) 285-291. [46] J.A. Hummel, $. Scheinberg, L. Zaleman, A coefficient problem for bounded non- vanishing functions, J. Analyse Math. 81 (1977) 169-190, Open Problems and Conjectures in Complex Analysis 5 {47] J. Jenkins, On vatues omitted by univalent functions, Amer. J. Math. 2 (1953) 406-408. {48] J. Jenkins, On circularly symmetric functions, Proc. AMS. 6 (1955) 620-624, [49] J. Krayé, Coefficient problem for Bounded nonvanishing functions, Ann, Polon, Math. 70 (1968) 314. [50] L. Kuipers, Note on the location of zeros of polynomials III, Simon Stevin. 31 (1987) 61-72. [51] V. Levin, Anjgate 168, Jber. Dt. Math. Verein. 43 (1933) p. 113, Lésung, ibid, 44 (1934) 80-83 (solutions by W. Fenchel, E, Reissner). [52] Z. Lewandowski, Nouvelles remargues sur les théorémes de Schild relatifs a une classe de fonctions univalentes (Démonstration d'une hypothése de Schild), Ann. Univ. Marine Curie-Sklodowska Sect. A. 10 (1956), [53] Z. Lewandowski, On circular symmetrization of starshaped domains, Ann. Univ. Mariae Curie-Sklodowska, Sect A. 17 (1963) 35-38 [54] J.L. Lewis, On the minimum area problem, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 34 (1985) 631-661. [55] RJ. Libera, AE. Livingston, On the univalence of some classes of reguler func- tions, Proc. AMS 30 (1971) 327-336. [66] A.B. Livingston, On the radius of univelence of certain analytic functions, Proc. AMS 17 (1966) 352-357. [517] TH. MacGregor, Geometric problems in comples enalysis, Amer. Math. Monthly. 79 (1972) 447-468, (58] C. McCarty, D. Tepper, A note on the 2/9 conjecture for starlike functions, Proc. AMS 34 (1972) 417-421. (59] J.G, Milcetich, On 6 coefficient conjecture of Brannan, (preprint). (60] S. Miller, (ed.), Comples analysis, (Brockport, NY, 1976), Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math. 36, Dekker, New York, (1978). [61] D. Moak, An application of hypergeometric function to « problem in function ‘theory, International J. of Math and Math Sei. 7 (1984). [62] Z. Nehasi, Conformal Mapping McGraw Hill, (1952). [63] K.S. Padmanabhan, On the radius of univalence of certain classes of analytic functions, J. London Math. Soc. (2) 1 (1969) 225-231. [G4] K. Pearce, A note on a problem of Robinson, Proc. AMS. 89 (1983) 623-627. [65] D.V. Prokhorov, J. Szynal, Coefficient estimates for bounded nonvanishing func- tions, Bull. Aca. Polon. Sci. Ser. 29 (1981) 223-280, 26 RW. Barnard [60] A.K. Rigler, S.Y. Trimble, RS. Varga, Sharp lower bounds for a generalized Jensen Inequality, Rocky Mountain J. of Math. 19 (1989). (67] R. Robinson, Univalent majorants, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 61 (1947) 1-36. [68] St. Ruscheweyh, A subordination theorem for i-like functions, J. London Math. Soe. (2) 13 (1978) 275-280. [69] A. Schild, On « problem in conformal mapping of schlicht functions, Proc. AMS 4 (1953) 43-51 MR 14 #861. [70] J. Stankiewiex, On « fomily of starlike functions, Ann. Univ. Marine Curie- Sklodowslm, Sect A. 22-24 (1968-70) 175-181. {7l] K.B. Stolarsky, Zeros of exponential polynomials and reductions, Topics in Clas- sical Number Theory. Collog. Math. Sec., Jénos Bolyai, 34, Elsevier, (1985). [72] . Sutfidge, A coefficient problem for o class of univalent functions, Mich. Math. J. 16 (1960) 33-42. [73] ©. Tammi, On the mazimalization of the coefficient ag of bounded schlicht func. tions, Ann, Acad. Sei. Fenn. Ser. Al. 9 (1953). [74] J. Waniurski, On values omitted by conves univalent moppings, Complex Variables, ‘Theory and Appl. 8 (1987) 173-180. Received: August 30, 1989

You might also like