arxiv: v1 [math.cv] 31 Jan 2016

Transcription

1 ALGEBRAIC DEPENDENCES AND UNIQUENESS PROBLEM OF MEROMORPHIC MAPPINGS SHARING MOVING HYPERPLANES WITHOUT COUNTING MULTIPLICITIES arxiv: v1 [math.cv] 31 Jan 2016 LE NGOC QUYNH Abstract. This article deals with the multiple values and algebraic dependences problem of meromorphic mappings sharing moving hyperplanes in projective space. We give some algebraic dependences theorems for meromorphic mappings sharing moving hyperplanes without counting multiplicity, where all zeros with multiplicities more than a certain number are omitted. Basing on these results, some unicity theorems regardless of multiplicity for meromorphic mappings in several complex variables are given. These results are extensions and strong improvements of some recent results. 1. Introduction The theory on algebraic dependences of meromorphic mappings in several complex variables into the complex projective spaces for fixed targets was first studied by W. Stoll [7]. Later, M. Ru [6] generalized W. Stoll s result to the case of holomorphic curves into the complex projective spaces sharing moving hyperplanes. Recently, by using the new second main theorem given by Thai-Quang [11], P. D. Thoan, P. V. Duc and S. D. Quang [3, 10, 8] gave some improvements of the results of W. Stoll and M. Ru. In order to state some of their result, we first recall the following. We call a meromorphic mapping of C n into P N (C) a moving hyperplane in P N (C). Let a 1,...,a ( N + 1) be moving hyperplanes with reduced representations a j = (a j0 : : a jn ) (1 j ). We say that a 1,...,a are in general position if det(a jk l) 0 for any 1 j 0 < j 1 <... < j N. Let f i : C n P N (C) (1 i λ) be meromorphic mappings with reduced representations f i := (f i0 : : f in ). Let g j : C n P N (C) (0 j 1) be meromorphic mappings in general position with reduced representations g j := (g j0 : : g jn ). Put (f i,g j ) := N s=0 f isg js 0 for each 1 i λ, 0 j 1 and assume that min{1,ν(f 0 1,g j ), } = = min{1,ν(f 0 λ,g j ), }. Put A j = Supp(ν(f 0 1,g j ), ). Assume that each A j has an irreducible decomposition as follows A j = t j s=1a js. Set A = A js A j s {A js A j s } with 1 s t j,1 s t j,0 j,j 1. Denote by T[N+1,] the set of all injective maps from {1,,N+1} to {0,,}. For each z C n \ { β T[N+1,] {z g β(1)(z) g β(n+1) (z) = 0} A λ I(f i)}, we define ρ(z) = {j z A j }. Then ρ(z) N. For any positive number r > 0, define ρ(r) = 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification: Primary 32H30, 32A22; Secondary 30D35. Key words and phrases: algebraic dependence, unicity problem, meromorphic mapping, truncated multiplicity. 1

2 2 LE NGOC QUYNH sup{ρ(z) z r}, where the supremum is taken over all z C n \{ β T[N+1,] {z g β(1)(z) g β(n+1) (z) = 0} A λ I(f i)}. Then ρ(r) is a decreasing function. Let d := lim r + ρ(r). Then d N. If for each i j, dim{a i A j } n 2, then d = 1. When all k j = +, in [3], P. V. Duc and P. D. Thoan proved the following. Theorem A (see [3, Theorem 1]). Let f 1,,f λ : C n P N (C) be non-constant meromorphic mappings. Let g i : C n P N (C) (0 i 1) be moving targets located in general position and T(r,g i ) = o(max 1 j λ T(r,f j )) (0 i 1). Assume that (f i,g j ) 0 for 1 i λ, 0 j and A j := (f 1,g j ) 1 {0} = = (f λ,g j ) 1 {0} for each 0 j. Denote A = A j. Let l, 2 l λ, be an integer such that for any increasing seuence 1 j 1 < < j l λ, f j1 (z) f jl (z) = 0 for every point z A. dn(2n +1)λ If >, then f 1,,f λ are algebraically over C, i.e. f 1 f λ 0. λ l+1 Furthermore, in the case of d = 1, P. D. Thoan, P. V. Duc and S. D. Quang [10] proved an better algebraic dependences theorem as follows. Theorem B (see [10, Theorem 1]). Let f 1,,f λ : C n P N (C) be non-constant meromorphic mappings. Let g i : C n P N (C) (0 i ) be moving hyperplanes in general position such that T(r,g i ) = o(max 1 j λ T(r,f j )) (0 i 1) and (f i,g j ) 0 for 1 i λ, 0 j 1. Assume that the following conditions are satisfied. (a) min{1,ν (f1,g j )} = = min{1,ν (fλ,g j )} for each 0 j 1, (b) dim{z (f 1,g i )(z) = (f 1,g j )(z) = 0} n 2 for each 0 i < j 1, (c) there exists an integer number l, 2 l λ, such that for any increasing seuence 1 j 1 < < j l λ, f j1 (z) f jl (z) = 0 for every point z i=0 (f 1,g i ) 1 {0}. If > N(2N+1)λ (N 1)(λ 1) λ l+1, then f 1 f λ 0. The above results are the best results on the algebraic dependences of meromorphic mappings sharing moving hyperplanes available at the present. However, in our opinion, they are still weak. Also in the above results, all intersecting points of the mappings and the moving hyperplanes are considered. Actually, there are many authors consider the multiple values for meromorphic mappings sharing hyperplanes, i.e., consider only the intersecting points of the mappings f i and the hyperplanes g j with the multiplicity not exceed a certain number k j < +. For example, in 2010, T. B. Cao and H. X. Yi gave some uniueness theorems for meromorphic mappings sharing fixed hyperplanes where all intersecting points more than a certain number are omitted (see [1, Theorems 1.4 and 1.5]). Recently, H. H. Giang consider the multiple values and uniueness problems for the mappings sharing moving hyperplanes (see [4, Theorems 1.1 and 1.3]). Our first purpose in this paper is to generalize and improve Theorems A and B by considering the multiple values problem and reducing the number of hyperplanes. Namely, we will prove the following.

3 ALGEBRAIC DEPENDENCES OF MEROMORPHIC MAPPINGS 3 Theorem 1.1. Let f 1,,f λ : C n P N (C) be non-constant meromorphic mappings. Let {g j } be moving hyperplanes of PN (C) in general position satisfying T(r,g j ) = o(max 1 i λ T(r,f i )) (0 j 1). Let k j (0 j 1) be positive integers or +. Assume that (f i,g j ) 0 for 1 i λ, 0 j 1 and A j := Suppν(f 0 1,g j ), = = Suppν(f 0 λ,g j ), for each 0 j 1. Denote A = A j. Let l, 2 l λ, be an integer such that for any increasing seuence 1 i 1 < < i l λ, f i1 (z) f il (z) = 0 for every point z A. If then f 1 f λ 0. 1 k j < N(N +2) dλ λ l+1, In the above result, letting k j = + (0 j ), we get the conclusion of Theorem A with > dλn(n+2). Also, letting d = 1, we obtain the conclusion of Theorem B with (λ l+1) > λn(n+2) λ l+1. Hence our result is improvement of Theorems A and B. Let λ = l = 2 and k j = + (0 j 1), the above theorem implies the following unicity theorem. Corollary 1.2. Let f 1,f 2 : C n P N (C) be two non-constant meromorphic mappings. Let {g j } be moving hyperplanes of PN (C) in general position satisfying T(r,g j ) = o(max 1 i 2 T(r,f i )) (0 j 1). Assume that the following conditions are satisfied. (a) min{1,ν(f 0 1,g j ) } = min{1,ν0 (f 2,g j )} for each 0 j 1, (b) f 1 (z) = f 2 (z) for each z Suppν0 (f 1,g j ), (c) > 2dN(N +2). Then f 1 f 2. If d = 1, then from the above corollary, we get a uniueness theorem for meromorphic mappings, which are not assumed to be nondegenerate, sharing > 2N 2 + 4N moving hyperplanes in general position. Now, if we assume further that the linearly closures of the images of the mappings f i in Theorem 1.1 have the same dimension then we will get a better result as follows. Theorem 1.3. Let f 1,,f λ : C n P N (C) be non-constant meromorphic mappings. Let {g j } be meromorphic mappings g j : C n P N (C) (0 j 1) in general position satisfying T(r,g j ) = o(max 1 i λ T(r,f i )) (0 j 1). Let k j (0 j 1) be positive integers or +. Assume that (f i,g j ) 0 for 1 i λ, 0 j 1, and the following conditions are satisfied. (a) min{1,ν 0 (f 1,g j ) } = = min{1,ν 0 (f λ,g j ) } for each 0 j 1, (b) dimf 1 1 (g j1 ) f 1 1 (g j2 ) n 2 for each 0 j 1 < j 2, (c) there exists an integer number l, 2 l λ, such that for any increasing seuence 1 i 1 < < i l λ, f i1 (z) f il (z) = 0 for every point z f 1 1 (g j ).

4 4 LE NGOC QUYNH We assume further that rank R{gj }f 1 = = rank R{gj }f λ = m+1, where m is a positive integer. If (*) then f 1 f λ 0. 1 k j +1 m < m(2n m+2) λ (λ l +1)+λ(m 1) Remark 1: i) When k 0 = = k = +, the condition (*) becomes > λ(2nm m2 +m+1). (λ l +1) We see that this ineuality is satisfied with > λ(n2 +N+1) (λ l+1), since its right hand side attains maximum at m = N. Hence in this case (d = 1 and k 0 = = k = + ), the conclusion of Theorem 1.3 is better than that of Theorem 1.1. ii) Let λ = l = 2 and k 0 = = k = +. We may show that if f 1 and f 2 satisfy the conditions (i)-(iii) of Theorem 1.3 and > N(N +2) then rank R{gj }f 1 = rank R{gj }f 2. Indeed, supposethattherearea 0,...,a N R{g j },notallzeros, satisfying 0 i N a if 1i 0. Set P = 0 i N a if 2i. Then P = 0 on 1 j (f 1,g j ) 1 (0). If P 0, then by using Remark 2 below, we have T f2 (r) N(r,νP 0 )+o(t f 2 (r)) N [1] (r,ν(f 0 1,g j ) )+o(t f 2 (r)) = N [1] (r,ν(f 0 2,g j ) )+o(t f 2 (r)) N(N +2) T f 2 (r)+o(t f2 (r)). Letting r +, we get N(N + 2). This is a contradiction. Then we must have P 0. This implies that rank R{gj }f 1 rank R{gj }f 2. Similarly, we have rank R{gj }f 1 rank R{gj }f 2. Hence rank R{gj }f 1 = rank R{gj }f 2 Then from Theorem 1.3 and the above remarks, we get a uniueness theorem as follows. Corollary 1.4. Let f 1,f 2 : C n P N (C) be non - constant meromorphic mappings. Let {g j } be moving hyperplanes of PN (C) in general position satisfying T(r,g j ) = o(max 1 i 2 T(r,f i )) (0 j ). Assume that (f i,g j ) 0 for 1 i 2, 0 j, and the following conditions are satisfied. (a) min{1,ν(f 0 1,g j ) } = min{1,ν0 (f 2,g j )} for each 0 j 1, (b) dimf 1 1 (g j1 ) f 1 1 (g j2 ) n 2 for each 0 j 1 < j 2, (c) f 1 = f 2 on Suppν(f 0 1,g j ). If > 2N 2 +2N +2, then f 1 f 2. We would like to note that there are several results on the uniueness problem of meromorphic mappings sharing moving hyperplanes regardless of multiplicity. For example, in 2007, with the same assumption of Corollary 1.4 (and plus N 2), Z. Chen, Y. Li and

5 ALGEBRAIC DEPENDENCES OF MEROMORPHIC MAPPINGS 5 Q. Yan [2] get the uniueness theorem with 4N 2 +2N. In 2013, P. D. Thoan, P. V. Duc and S. D. Quang improved the result of these authors to the case of 4N (for any N). Therefore, our above uniueness theorem is much stronger improvements of many previous results. Acknowledgements: This paper was supported in part by a NAFOSTED grant of Vietnam. 2. Basic notions and auxiliary results from Nevanlinna theory 2.1. We set z = ( z z n 2) 1/2 for z = (z1,...,z n ) C n and define Define B(r) := {z C n : z < r}, S(r) := {z C n : z = r} (0 < r < ). v n 1 (z) := ( dd c z 2) n 1 and σ n (z) := d c log z 2 ( dd c log z 2) n 1 on C n \{0} For a divisor ν on C n, we denote by N(r,ν) the counting function of the divisor ν as usual in Nevanlinna theory (see [5]). For a positive integer M or M =, we define the truncated divisors of ν by { ν [M] (z) = min {M,ν(z)}, ν [M] k (z) := ν [M] (z) if ν [M] (z) k, 0 if ν [M] (z) > k. Similarly, we define ν [M] >k. We will write N[M] (r,ν), N [M] k (r,ν), N[M] >k (r,ν) for N(r,ν[M] ), N(r,ν [M] k ), N(r,ν[M] >k ) as respectively. We will omit the character [M] if M = Let f : C n P N (C) be a meromorphic mapping. For arbitrarily fixed homogeneous coordinates (w 0 : : w N ) on P N (C), we take a reduced representation f = (f 0 : : f N ), which means that each f i is a holomorphic function on C n and f(z) = ( f 0 (z) : : f N (z) ) outside the analytic set {f 0 = = f N = 0} of codimension 2. Let a be a meromorphic mapping of C n into P N (C) with reduced representation a = (a 0 : : a N ). We denote by T(r,f) the characteristic function of f and by m f,a (r) the proximity function of f with respect to a (see [9]). If (f,a) 0, then the first main theorem for moving targets in value distribution theory states T(r,f)+T(r,a) = m f,a (r)+n (f,a) (r). Theorem 2.1 (The First Main Theorem for general position [7, p. 326]). Let f j : C n P N (C), 1 j k be meromorphic mappings located in general position. Assume that 1 k N. Then N(r,µ f1 f λ )+m(r,f 1 f λ ) T(r,f i )+O(1). 1 i λ Here, by µ f1 f λ we denote the divisor associated with f 1 f λ. We also denote by N f1 f λ (r) the counting function associated with the divisor µ f1 f λ. Let V be a complex vector space of dimension N 1. The vectors {v 1,,v k } are said to be in general position if for each selection of integers 1 i 1 < < i p k with p N,

6 6 LE NGOC QUYNH then v i1 v ip 0. The vectors {v 1,,v k } are said to be in special position if they are not in general position. Take 1 p k. Then {v 1,,v k } are said to be in p-special position if for each selection of integers 1 i 1 < < i p k, the vectors v i1,,v ip are in special position. Theorem 2.2 (The Second Main Theorem for general position [7, p. 320]). Let M be a connected complex manifold of dimension m. Let A be a pure (m 1)-dimensional analytic subset of M. Let V be a complex vector space of dimension n + 1 > 1. Let p and k be integers with 1 p k n + 1. Let f j : M P(V),1 j k, be meromorphic mappings. Assume that f 1,...,f k are in general position. Also assume that f 1,...,f k are in p-special position on A. Then we have µ f1 f k (k p+1)ν A. Here by ν A we denote the reduced divisor whose support is the set A. The following is a new second main theorem given by S. D. Quang [9], which is an improvement the second main theorem of Thai-Quang in [11]. Theorem 2.3 (The Second Main Theorem for moving target [9]). Let f : C n P N (C) be a meromorphic mapping. Let {a i } ( 2N m+2) be meromorphic mappings of C n into P N (C) in general position such that (f,a i ) 0 (1 i ), where m + 1 = rank R{ai }(f). Then we have 2N m+2 T f(r) N [m] (f,a i ) (r)+o(t f(r))+o(max 1 i T a i (r)). As usual, by the notation P we mean the assertion P holds for all r [0, ) excluding a Borel subset E of the interval [0, ) with dr <. E Remark 2: With the assumption of Theorem 2.3, we see that m(2n m+2) T f (r) N [1] (f,a i ) (r)+o(t f(r))+o(max T a i (r)) 1 i N(N +2) (2.4) N [1] (f,a i ) (r)+o(t f(r))+o(max T a i (r)). 1 i 3. Proofs of Main Theorems 3.1. Proof of Theorem 1.1. It suffices to prove Theorem 1.1 in the case of λ N +1. Suppose that f 1 f λ 0. We now prove the following. Claim 3.1. For every 1 i λ, 0 j 1 and 1 m N, we have N [m] (r,ν(f 0 i,g j ) ) k j +1 k j +1 m N[m] (r,ν(f 0 i,g j ) ) m k j +1 m T(r,f i).

7 Indeed, we have Thus ALGEBRAIC DEPENDENCES OF MEROMORPHIC MAPPINGS 7 N [m] (r,ν 0 (f i,g j ) ) = N[m] (r,ν 0 (f i,g j ) ) N[m] >k j (r,ν 0 (f i,g j ) ) N [m] (r,ν 0 (f i,g j ) ) m k j +1 N >k j (r,ν 0 (f i,g j ) ) = N [m] (r,ν 0 (f i,g j ) ) m k j +1 N(r,ν0 (f i,g j ) )+ m k j +1 N (r,ν 0 (f i,g j ) ) N [m] (r,ν 0 (f i,g j ) ) m k j +1 T(r,f i)+ m k j +1 N[N] (r,ν 0 (f i,g j ) ). N [m] (r,ν(f 0 i,g j )) k j +1 k j +1 m N[m] (r,ν(f 0 m i,g j )) k j +1 m T(r,f i). Then the claim is proved. Claim 3.2. For every 1 i λ, we have min{1,ν 0 d (f i,g j ), } λ l+1 µ f 1 f λ (z)+. β µ gβ(1) g β(n+1) (z) for each z A λ I(f i), where the sum is over all injective maps β : {1,2,,N+1} {1,2,,} Indeed, for each regular point z 0 A\(A λ I(f i) β T[N+1,] {z g β(1)(z) g β(n+1) (z) = 0}) and for each increasing seuence 1 i 1 < < i l λ, we have f i1 (z 0 ) f il (z 0 ) = 0. By the Second Main Theorem for general position [7, p. 320], we have Hence µ f1 f λ (z 0 ) λ (l 1). min{1,ν(f 0 i,g j ), (z 0 )} min{1,ν(f 0 i,g j )(z 0 )} d If z 0 β T[N+1,] {z g β(1)(z) g β(n+1) (z) = 0}, then we have min{1,ν(f 0 i,g j ), (z 0 )} min{1,ν(f 0 i,g j ) (z 0)} Thus, for each z A λ I(f i), we have min{1,ν(f 0 i,g j ), (z)} The Claim 3.2 is proved. d λ l+1 µ f 1 f λ (z)+ d λ l +1 µ f 1 f λ (z 0 ). β T[N+1,] β T[N+1,] µ gβ(1) g β(n+1) (z 0 ). µ gβ(1) g β(n+1) (z).

8 8 LE NGOC QUYNH The above Claim yields that N [1] (r,ν 0 (f i,g j ) ) = d λ l+1 N f 1 f λ (r)+ d λ l+1 λ T(r,f i )+ β T[N+1,] β T[N+1,] d λ l +1 T(r)+o(max 1 i λ T(r,f i)). N gβ(1) g β(n+1) (r) N+1 T(r,g β(i) ) where T(r) = λ T(r,f i). Then, by Claim 3.1 and the ineuality (2.4) we have dλ λ λ l +1 T(r) Letting r +, we get N [1] (r,ν 0 (f i,g j ) )+o(t(r)) λ ( kj +1 N [1] (r,ν(f 0 k i,g j ) ) 1 ) T(r,f i ) j k j λ λ N [1] (r,ν(f 0 i,g j ) ) 1 k j T(r)+o(T(r)) N(N +2) T(r,f 1 i) T(r)+o(T(r)) k j ( = N(N +2) 1 1 k j k j N(N +2) ) T(r)+o(T(r)). dλ λ l +1. This is a contradiction. Thus, f 1 f λ = 0. The theorem is proved. +o(t(r)) 3.2. Proof of Theorem 1.3. It suffices to prove Theorem 1.3 in the case of λ N+1. We set m = rank R{gj }(f i ) 1. Similar as [3, Claim 3.1], we have the following claim. Claim 3.3. Let h i : C n P N (C) (1 i p N + 1) be meromorphic mappings with reduced representations h i := (h i0 : : h in ). Let a i : C n P N (C) (1 i N + 1) be moving hyperplanes with reduced representations a i := (a i0 : : a in ). Put h i := ((h i,a 1 ) : : (h i,a N+1 )) Assume that a 1,,a N+1 are located in general position such that (h i,a j ) 0 (1 i p, 1 j N +1). Let S be a pure (n 1)-dimensional analytic subset of C n such that S (a 1 a N+1 ) 1 {0}. Then h 1 h p = 0 on S if and only if h 1 h p = 0 on S. We now prove Claim 3.3.

9 ALGEBRAIC DEPENDENCES OF MEROMORPHIC MAPPINGS 9 ( ) Suppose that { h 1 h p } 0 on S. Then there exists z 0 S such that h 1 (z 0 ) h p (z 0 ) 0. This means that the family { h 1 (z 0 ),, h p (z 0 )} is linearly independent on C, i.e., the following matrix is of rank p (h 1,a 1 )(z 0 ) (h p,a 1 )(z 0 ) A = (h 1,a N+1 )(z 0 ) (h p,a N+1 )(z 0 ) Hence the matrix a 10 (z 0 ) a 1N (z 0 ) = a N+10 (z 0 ) a N+1N (z 0 ) h 10 (z 0 ) h p0 (z 0 ) h 1N (z 0 ) h pn (z 0 ) h 10 (z 0 ) h p0 (z 0 ). h 1N (z 0 ) h pn (z 0 ) is of rank p, i.e., h 1 (z 0 ) h p (z 0 ) 0. This yields that h 1 h p 0 on S. This is a contradiction. ( ) We see that the following matrix is of rank p 1 for each z S (h 1,a 1 )(z) (h p,a 1 )(z) A =. (h 1,a N+1 )(z) (h p,a N+1 )(z) On the other hand, we have a 10 (z) a 1N (z) A = a N+10 (z) a N+1N (z) h 10 (z) h p0 (z). h 1N (z) h pn (z) Since the family {a i } is located in general position and S (a 1 a N+1 ) 1 {0}, this implies that the matrix h 10 (z) h p0 (z) h 1N (z) h pn (z) is of rank p 1 for each z S, i.e., h 1 h p 0 on S. The Claim 3.3 is proved. We now continue to prove the theorem. Suppose that f 1 f λ 0. For λ indices 0 = j 0 < j 1 < < j λ 1 N such that is nondegenerate. (f 1,g j0 ) (f λ,g j0 ) (f 1,g j1 ) (f λ,g j1 ) (f 1,g jλ 1 ) (f λ,g jλ 1 )

10 10 LE NGOC QUYNH PutJ = {j 0,,j λ 1 },J c = {0,...,}\J andb J = We now prove the following claim. Claim 3.4. If B J is nondegenerate, i.e., detb J 0 then (min 1 i λ {ν0 (f i,g j ), } min{1,ν(f 0 1,g j ), }) j J (f 1,g j0 ) (f λ,g j0 ) (f 1,g j1 ) (f λ,g j1 ) (f 1,g jλ 1 ) (f λ,g jλ 1 ) + (λ l+1)min{1,ν(f 0 1,g j ), } µ f1 f λ on the setc n \(A λ I(f i) (g j0 g jλ 1 ) 1 (0)), where f i := ((f i,g j0 ) : : (f i,g jλ 1 )) and A = 0 i<j Z (f 1,g i ) Z (f1,g j ). Indeed, put A := j J Z (f 1,g j ),A c := j J c Z (f1,g j ). We consider the following two cases. Case 1. Let z 0 A\(A λ I(f i) (g j0 g jλ 1 ) 1 (0)) be a regular point of A. Then z 0 is a zero of one of the meromorphic functions {(f 1,g j )} j J. Without loss of generality we may assume that z 0 is a zero of (f 1,g j0 ). Let S be an irreducible component of A containing z 0. Suppose that U is an open neighborhood of z 0 in C n such that U {A \ S} =. Choose a holomorphic function h on an open neighborhood U U of z 0 such that ν h (z) = min 1 i λ {ν(f 0 i,g j0 ),0 (z)} if z S and ν h (z) = 0 if z S. Then (f i,g j0 ) = a i h (1 i λ), where a i are holomorphic functions. Therefore, the matrix (f 1,g j1 ) (f λ,g j1 ) is of rank λ 1. Hence, there exist λ holomorphic (f 1,g jλ 1 ) (f λ,g jλ 1 ) functions b 1,,b λ, not all zeros, such that λ b i (f i,g jk ) = 0 (1 k λ 1). Without loss of generality, we may assume that the set of common zeros of {b i } λ is an analytic subset of codimension 2. Then there exists an index i 1,1 i 1 λ, such that S b 1 i 1 {0}. We may assume that i 1 = λ. Then for each z (U S)\b 1 λ {0}, we have ( f 1 (z) f λ (z) = f 1 (z) f λ 1 ) b i λ 1 (z) f λ (z)+ fi (z) b λ where V(z) := (a λ + λ 1 = f 1 (z) f λ 1 (z) (V(z)h(z)) = h(z) ( f 1 (z) f λ 1 (z) V(z)), b i b λ a i,0,,0). By the assumption and by Claim 3.3, for any increasing seuence 1 i 1 < < i l λ 1, we have f i1 f il = 0 on S. This implies that the family { f 1, f λ 1,V} is in.

11 ALGEBRAIC DEPENDENCES OF MEROMORPHIC MAPPINGS 11 (l+1)-special position on S. By using The Second Main Theorem for general position [7, p. 320], we have µ f1 f λ 1 V (z) λ l, z S. Hence µ f1 f λ (z) ν h (z)+λ l = min 1 i λ {ν0 (f i,g j0 ),0 (z)}+λ l, for all z (U S)\b 1 i 1 {0}. This implies that j J (min 1 i λ {ν0 (f i,g j ), (z 0 )} min{1,ν 0 (f 1,g j ), (z 0 )}) + (λ l+1)min{1,ν(f 0 1,g j ), (z 0 )} = min 1 i λ {ν0 (f i,g j0 ),0 (z 0 )}+λ l µ f1 f λ (z 0 ). Case 2. Let z 0 A c \(A λ I(f i) (g j0 g jλ 1 ) 1 (0)) be a regular point of A c. Then z 0 is a zero of (f 1,g j ),j J c. By the assumption and by Claim 3.3, the family { f 1,, f λ } is in l-special position on each irreducible component of A c containing z 0. By using The Second Main Theorem for general position [7, p. 320], we have Hence µ f1 f λ (z 0 ) λ l+1. (min 1 i λ {ν0 (f i,g j ), (z 0 )} min{1,ν(f 0 1,g j ), (z 0 )}) j J + (λ l+1)min{1,ν(f 0 1,g j ), (z 0 )} = λ l+1 µ f1 f λ (z 0 ). From the above two cases we get the desired ineuality of the claim. We now continue to prove the theorem. For each j,0 j 1, we set λ N j (r) = N [m] (r,ν(f 0 i,g j ) ) ((λ 1)m+1)N[1] (r,ν(f 0 1,g j ), ). For each permutation I = (j 0,...,j ) of (0,..., 1), we set T I = {r [1,+ );N j0 (r) N j (r)}. It is clear that I T I = [1,+ ). Therefore, there exists a permutation, for instance it is I 0 = (0,..., 1), such that T I0 dr = +. Then we have N 0 (r) N 1 (r) N (r) for all r T I0. By the assumption for f 1 f λ 0, there exist indices J = {j 0,,j λ 1 } with 0 = j 0 < j 1 < < j λ 1 N such that detb J 0. We note that N 0 (r) = N j0 (r) N j1 (r) N jλ 1 (r) N N (r), for each r T I0.

12 12 LE NGOC QUYNH We see that min 1 i λ a i λ min{m,a i} (λ 1)m for every λ non-negative integers a 1,...,a λ. Then Claim 3.4 implies that ( λ ) min{m,ν(f 0 i,g j ), } ((λ 1)m+1)min{1,ν(f 0 1,g j ), } j J + (λ l+1)min{1,ν(f 0 1,g j ), } µ f1 f λ. on the set C n \ (A λ I(f i) (g j0 g jλ 1 ) 1 (0)). Integrating both sides of this ineuality, we have (3.5) ( λ ) N [m] (r,ν(f 0 i,g j ) ) ((λ 1)m+1)N[1] (r,ν(f 0 1,g j ) ) j J + (λ l+1)n [1] (r,ν(f 0 1,g j )) N f1 f λ (r) = N detbj (r). Also, by Jensen s formula, we have (3.6) N detbj (r) S(r) log detb J σ n +O(1) λ T(r,f i )+o(max 1 i λ T(r,f i)). Set T(r) = λ T(r,f i). Combining (3.5) and (3.6), then for all r I 0, we have λ 1 T(r) N ji (r)+ (λ l+1)n [1] (r,ν(f 0 1,g j ))+o(t(r)) i=0 λ N j (r)+ (λ l+1)n [1] k j (r,ν(f 0 1,g j ))+o(t(r)) ( λ((λ 1)m+1) ) [1] = λ l +1 N k j (r,ν(f 0 1,g j )) + λ λ λ N [m] (r,ν 0 (f i,g j ))+o(t(r)) (λ + λ l+1 λm (λ 1)m+1 ) [m] N k m j (r,ν(f 0 i,g j ) )+o(t(r))

13 ALGEBRAIC DEPENDENCES OF MEROMORPHIC MAPPINGS 13 λ (λ l +1)+λ(m 1) ( N [m] (r,ν(f 0 λm i,g j ) ) m k j +1 m T(r,f i) ) +o(t(r)) (λ l +1)+λ(m 1) λm ( λ (λ l +1)+λ(m 1) ( λm Letting r +, we have Thus 1 N [m] (r,ν(f 0 i,g j ) ) 2N m+2 (λ l +1)+λ(m 1) λm 1 k j +1 m ( m(2n m+2) This is a contradiction. Thus, we have f 1 f λ 0. m k j +1 m T(r)) +o(t(r)) m ) T(r)+o(T(r)). k j +1 m 2N m+2 ) m. k j +1 m References λ (λ l+1)+λ(m 1). [1] T. B. Cao and H. X. Yi, Uniueness theorems for meromorphic mappings sharing hyperplanes in general position, arxiv: v4 [math.cv]. [2] Z. Chen and Y. Li and Q. Yan, Uniueness problem with truncated multiplicities of meromorphic mappings for moving targets, Acta Math. Sci. Ser. B Engl. Ed. 27 (2007), [3] P. V. Duc and P. D. Thoan, Algebraic dependences of meromorphic mappings in several complex variables, Ukrain. Math. J. 62 (2010), [4] H. H. Giang, Multiple values and finiteness problem of meromorphic mappings sharing different families of moving hyperplanes, arxiv: v1 [math.cv], to appear in Bull. Math. Soc. Sci. Math. Roumanie. [5] J. Noguchi and T. Ochiai, Introduction to Geometric Function Theory in Several Complex Variables, Trans. Math. Monogr. 80, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, Rhode Island, [6] M. Ru, A uniueness theorem with moving targets without counting multiplicity, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 129 (2001), [7] W. Stoll, On the propagation of dependences, Pacific J. Math., 139 (1989), [8] S. D. Quang, Algebraic dependences of meromorphic mappings sharing few moving hyperplanes, Ann. Polon. Math. 108 (2013), [9] S. D. Quang, Second main theorem for meromorphic mappings intersecting moving hyperplanes with truncated counting functions and unicity problem, Preprint, arxiv: [math. CV]. [10] P. D. Thoan and P. V. Duc and S. D. Quang, Algebraic dependence and unicity problem with a truncation level to 1 of meromorphic mappings sharing moving targets, Bull. Math. Soc. Sci. Math. Roumanie 56(104) (2013), [11] D. D. Thai and S. D. Quang, Second main theorem with truncated counting function in several complex variables for moving targets, Forum Math. 20 (2008) Faculty of Education, An Giang University, 18 Ung Van Khiem, Dong Xuyen, Long Xuyen, An Giang, Vietnam address: nuynh1511@gmail.com