1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

ArXiv:1301.7652 and Euler homogeneous function theorem

  1. Dec 30, 2014 #1

    strangerep

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Let ##F : R^n \to R## be a degree-1 positive-homogeneous function. I.e., ##F(\lambda y) = \lambda F(y),## for all real ##\lambda>0## and any nonzero ##y\in R^n##.

    In this paper, near the middle of p2 at eq(4), the authors introduce
    $$\ell_a ~=~ \frac{\partial F}{\partial y^a} ~,$$and then they claim that because ##F## is 1-homogeneous, it follows that ##\ell_a## is necessarily of the form:
    ##\ell_a ~=~ y^a/F ~.##

    ISTM that one can only claim that ##\ell_a## is 0-homogeneous (by the Euler homogeneous function theorem), and there are other 0-homogeneous functions besides their ##y^a/F## .

    Am I missing something, or are the authors wrong?

    Edit: Maybe they meant ##F/y^a## ? But that still seems wrong if ##n > 1##.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2014
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 1, 2015 #2

    micromass

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor
    2016 Award

    The authors are most definitely wrong, even if it's a typo and they actually mean your edit. Almost any homogeneous function would give a solid counterexample. Not to say that the indices are wrong.

    What I think they did is saying that ##y^a \ell_a = F##, which is indeed the Euler homogeneous function theorem. Then they somehow forget that this is a sum and divide to obtain ##\ell_a = F/y^a## (which I think they meant). From a rigorous point of view, this is nonsense. But perhaps the rest of the paper goes through by only using the relation ##y^a \ell_a = F##?
     
  4. Jan 1, 2015 #3

    strangerep

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Oh, what a relief! Micromass returns unexpectedly from the wilderness! After 50+ views and no replies, I was becoming depressed.

    Yes.

    OK, good -- in the sense that this is indeed what I thought.

    I suppose I should email the authors, though I suspect they won't appreciate it.

    I'll have to check that.

    Thank you indeed.
     
  5. Jan 1, 2015 #4

    micromass

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor
    2016 Award

    It's a bit interesting though that the indices in ##\ell_a = F/y^a## are correct. Clearly the equation is nonsense, but perhaps we can give a rigorous meaning to it nevertheless. I need to think of this.
     
  6. Jan 1, 2015 #5

    strangerep

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Consider the example function ##F(x,y) := x_\alpha y^\alpha##, where ##F## is 1-homogeneous in the vector ##y##. We have
    $$\ell_\lambda ~:=~ \frac{\partial F}{\partial y^\lambda} ~=~ x_\lambda ~,$$and indeed
    $$\ell_\mu y^\mu ~=~ F(x,y) ~.$$However,
    $$\ell_\lambda ~\ne~ \frac{F}{y^\lambda} ~=~ \frac{x_\alpha y^\alpha}{y^\lambda} ~.$$
     
  7. Jan 1, 2015 #6

    micromass

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor
    2016 Award

    Yes, I know that it's nonsense. But I was thinking of changing the meaning of /, to make things work out nice. But this is obviously not what the paper does. Your counterexample is indeed a good one to the relation in the paper.
     
  8. Jan 2, 2015 #7

    strangerep

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Argh! I think I see what they probably intended...

    From their definition of ##h_{ab}## in eq(4), it follows that ##y^b h_{ab} = 0##. Then, contracting both sides of their eq(5) with ##y^b##, we get
    $$0 ~=~ g_{ab} y^b - \ell_a \ell_b y^b ~=~ y_a - \ell_a F ~.$$ Hence
    $$y_a ~=~ \ell_a F$$and so, (for ##F\ne 0##),
    $$\ell_a ~=~ y_a/F ~.$$
    But their sequence of statements is totally messed up (sigh).
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: ArXiv:1301.7652 and Euler homogeneous function theorem
Loading...