2005
DOI: 10.1007/bf02884720
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Normal families of meromorphic mappings of several complex variables into PN (C) for moving targets

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
27
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
27
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example (see, e.g., [18, p. 40]), f (z 1 , z 2 ) := (1, e z ) (from C to C 2 ) omits three moving hyperplanes Z 0 = 0, Z 1 = 0, e z Z 0 +Z 1 = 0 (z ∈ C, (Z 0 , Z 1 ) ∈ C 2 ), where these three moving hyperplanes are located in pointwise general position on C. However, f (z) := ρ( f (z)) (from C to P 1 (C)) is not a constant. Although a holomorphic mapping from C into P N (C) omitting 2N + 1 moving hyperplanes in pointwise general position may not be a constant, Tu and Li [17] extended Theorem 2.2 to the case of moving hyperplanes in pointwise general position and proved the following results. Theorem 2.3 (see [17]) Let F be a family of holomorphic mappings of a domain D in C n into P N (C), and H 1 (z), · · · , H 2N +1 (z) (z ∈ D) be 2N + 1 moving hyperplanes in P N (C) located in pointwise general position on D. If each f in F omits H j (z) (j = 1, · · · , 2N + 1) on D, then F is a normal family on D.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 96%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…For example (see, e.g., [18, p. 40]), f (z 1 , z 2 ) := (1, e z ) (from C to C 2 ) omits three moving hyperplanes Z 0 = 0, Z 1 = 0, e z Z 0 +Z 1 = 0 (z ∈ C, (Z 0 , Z 1 ) ∈ C 2 ), where these three moving hyperplanes are located in pointwise general position on C. However, f (z) := ρ( f (z)) (from C to P 1 (C)) is not a constant. Although a holomorphic mapping from C into P N (C) omitting 2N + 1 moving hyperplanes in pointwise general position may not be a constant, Tu and Li [17] extended Theorem 2.2 to the case of moving hyperplanes in pointwise general position and proved the following results. Theorem 2.3 (see [17]) Let F be a family of holomorphic mappings of a domain D in C n into P N (C), and H 1 (z), · · · , H 2N +1 (z) (z ∈ D) be 2N + 1 moving hyperplanes in P N (C) located in pointwise general position on D. If each f in F omits H j (z) (j = 1, · · · , 2N + 1) on D, then F is a normal family on D.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Although a holomorphic mapping from C into P N (C) omitting 2N + 1 moving hyperplanes in pointwise general position may not be a constant, Tu and Li [17] extended Theorem 2.2 to the case of moving hyperplanes in pointwise general position and proved the following results. Theorem 2.3 (see [17]) Let F be a family of holomorphic mappings of a domain D in C n into P N (C), and H 1 (z), · · · , H 2N +1 (z) (z ∈ D) be 2N + 1 moving hyperplanes in P N (C) located in pointwise general position on D. If each f in F omits H j (z) (j = 1, · · · , 2N + 1) on D, then F is a normal family on D.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 96%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In 2005, Tu and Li [13] extended the above theorem to the case of moving hyperplanes as follows: Theorem 1.2. Let F be a family of holomorphic mappings of a domain D ⊂ C m into CP n and let {H j } q j=1 be q (≥ 2n + 1) moving hyperplanes in CP n in pointwise general position on D such that each f in F intersects H j on D with multiplicity at least m j (j = 1, .…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%