Commutativity of differentiation in a special case

  • Thread starter Thread starter HotMintea
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Differentiation
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on proving the commutativity of differentiation for a function f(x(t), y(t), t) by showing that the total derivative can be expressed as a sum of partial derivatives. The user attempts to establish the equality of mixed partials, referencing a proof for f(x, y) and considering how it applies to their specific function. They suggest that the theorem extends to functions of multiple variables and inquire about the arbitrary nature of a specific inequality in a referenced note. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the need for clarity in applying differentiation rules and understanding the implications of mixed partial derivatives.
HotMintea
Messages
42
Reaction score
0
Problem

I'd like to prove \frac{d}{dt}[\frac{\partial}{\partial{x}}f(x(t),y(t),t)]=\frac{\partial}{\partial{x}}[\frac{d}{dt}f(x(t),y(t),t)].

Attempt
\begin{equation*}\begin{split}<br /> \frac{d}{dt}[\frac{\partial}{\partial x}f(x(t),y(t),t)]=\frac{d}{dt}\lim_{\epsilon\to 0}\frac{f(x(t)+\epsilon,y(t),t)-f(x(t),y(t),t)}{\epsilon}\\<br /> =\lim_{\delta\to 0}\lim_{\epsilon\to 0} \frac{[f(x(t+\delta)+\epsilon,y(t+\delta),t+\delta)-f(x(t)+\epsilon,y(t),t)]-[f(x(t+\delta),y(t+\delta),t+\delta)-f(x(t),y(t),t)]}{\epsilon\delta}\end{split}\end{equation*}

So if my previous steps are correct, I need to show that the 2 limits are commutative, which I have no idea...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Did you know you can express the total derivative as a sum of partial derivatives?
 
Are you required to go all the way back to the definition of derivative? If not, use the chain rule as hunt mat suggests.
 
Thanks for the hints!

\frac{d}{dt}\partial_{x}f(x(t), y(t), t)=(\sum\dot{x}_k \partial_{x_k}+\partial_t)\partial_{x}f=\sum\dot x_k\partial_{x_k}\partial_{x}f+\partial_t\partial_{x}f.

At this point, I need to show the "equality of mixed partials". I found the proof of f_{xy}=f_{yx} for f(x, y) here: http://www.sju.edu/~pklingsb/clairaut.pdf

My function is f(x(t), y(t), t) so a bit different.

For proving f_{x(t)\hspace{1mm}t} = f_{t\hspace{1 mm}x(t)} for f(x(t), t), I think the proof in the note works if I substitute c=x(a) and d=x(b).

I also think the theorem can be extended to f(x_1(t), x_2(t), ..., x_n(t), t) if I imagine slicing the n dimensional space by a plane parallel to x_i x_j plane (or x_i\hspace{1 mm}t plane).

So I have f_{x_i x_j}=f_{x_j x_i} and f_{x_i\hspace{1 mm}t}=f_{t\hspace{1 mm}x_i} for f(x_1(t), ..., x_n(t), t). Is that okay?

By the way, I don't understand why the author of the note wrote f_{xy}(x,y)-f_{yx}(x,y)\ge \frac{h}{2}. Is that arbitrary? Can I use h/3 instead for example?
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K