Critical points of maps f:R^n->R^m , m>1

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Bacle
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Critical points Points
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the critical points of maps from R^n to R^m where m>1. Participants explore the conditions for differentiability and the implications of the Jacobian matrix's properties in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about identifying critical points for maps from R^n to R^m, noting knowledge of sufficient but not necessary conditions for differentiability.
  • Another participant challenges the assertion that the Jacobian must be invertible for differentiability, citing the null function as an example of a differentiable function with a non-invertible Jacobian.
  • A participant clarifies that the Jacobian's invertibility is sufficient but not necessary for differentiability, emphasizing the role of continuous partial derivatives.
  • There is a suggestion that the rank of the derivative matrix does not determine the differentiability of the function, prompting a request for a more precise formulation of the original question.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit disagreement regarding the relationship between the invertibility of the Jacobian and differentiability, with no consensus reached on the necessary conditions for critical points in the context of maps from R^n to R^m.

Contextual Notes

Participants discuss the implications of differentiability and the properties of the Jacobian matrix, but there are unresolved assumptions regarding the definitions and conditions applied to critical points.

Bacle
Messages
656
Reaction score
1
Critical points of maps f:R^n-->R^m , m>1

Hi, Everyone:

I am having trouble figuring out what the critical points would be for any such map

f:R^n -->R^m , m>1.

Problem is that I know sufficient conditions for differentiability (partials exist and

are continuous.) but not necessary ones. So our differential is given by an

mxn matrix. In the case of n=m, we just want the Jacobian matrix to be invertible,

but I am not clear on how to deal with this issue when n=/m.

Any Hints, Please.?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


In the case m=n, why do you say that the jacobian must be invertible for the function to be differentiable? Consider the null function from R^n to itself. This is differentiable, but the jacobian is not invertible. I think you confuse the concepts of differentiable functions and diffeomorphisms (invertible differentiable functions). Or maybe I misunderstood your question.
 


Thanks, Mugver:

What do you mean by the null function.?

Actually, the condition of the Jacobian being invertible is, I think, sufficient,

but not necessary: I think we assume when we have a Jacobian, that

the partials Delf/Delx_i are continuous. Then we have that the partials

exist and they are continuous. Then f is differentiable.
 


Bacle said:
What do you mean by the null function.?

I mean the function from R^m to R^n defined by f(x) = 0.

Bacle said:
Actually, the condition of the Jacobian being invertible is, I think, sufficient,

but not necessary: I think we assume when we have a Jacobian, that

the partials Delf/Delx_i are continuous. Then we have that the partials

exist and they are continuous. Then f is differentiable.

The rank of the matrix formed by the derivatives of the function has nothing to do with the differentiability of the function. Maybe you should state more precisely your question... :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
9K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K