06/14/2011, 05:07 PM
(06/14/2011, 03:00 PM)sheldonison Wrote: Its definitely a uniqueness criterion. Another way to think about it is from the point of view that \( \theta(z) \) is connected to Kneser's unique Riemann mapping, since \( \rho^{-1}(z)=\theta(z)+z \). But yes, any sexp(z) solution would either be the unique solution, with \( \theta(z) \) exponentially decaying to a constant as \( z\to+i\infty \), or else if it is any other solution, than \( \theta(z) \) grows exponentially as \( z\to+i\infty \).
That screams for a proof, does it?
