MHB Determining the Maximum and Minimum of a Discontinuous Function $f(x,y)$

  • Thread starter Thread starter mathmari
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Maximum Minimum
mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! :o

We have the function $f: (\mathbb{R}^2,\|\cdot\|_2)\rightarrow (\mathbb{R},|\cdot |)$ with \begin{equation*}f(x,y)=\begin{cases}y-x & y\geq x^2 \\ 0 & y<x^2\end{cases}\end{equation*}

I have shown that $f(x,y)$ is discontinuous at the points $(x,x^2)$ with $x\neq 0,1$ and continuous at the other points, i.e. at the points $(x,y)$ with $y<x^2$ and $y>x^2$, and also at the points $(0,0)$ and $(1,1)$.

Now I want to determine the maximum and minimum of $f$, if they exist. When $y\geq x^2$ we have that $f(x,y)=y-x\geq x^2-x\geq -\frac{1}{4}$.
($-\frac{1}{4}$ is the minimum of $x^2-x$ at $x=\frac{1}{2}$)
Since $-\frac{1}{4}$ is smaller than $0$ (the value of the function when $y<x^2$) it follows that the function $f(x,y)$ has a minimum at $(x,y)=(x,x^2)=\left (\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{4}\right )$ which is equal to $-\frac{1}{4}$.

Is this correct? If yes, could we improve the justification? (Wondering) About the maximum: In the first case, $y$ is greater than $x^2$, so I think that the value of the function can grow infinitely, i.e. it has no maximum. Is this correct? But how could we justify that formally? (Wondering)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mathmari said:
Hey! :o

We have the function $f: (\mathbb{R}^2,\|\cdot\|_2)\rightarrow (\mathbb{R},|\cdot |)$ with \begin{equation*}f(x,y)=\begin{cases}y-x & y\geq x^2 \\ 0 & y<x^2\end{cases}\end{equation*}

I have shown that $f(x,y)$ is discontinuous at the points $(x,x^2)$ with $x\neq 0,1$ and continuous at the other points, i.e. at the points $(x,y)$ with $y<x^2$ and $y>x^2$, and also at the points $(0,0)$ and $(1,1)$.

Now I want to determine the maximum and minimum of $f$, if they exist. When $y\geq x^2$ we have that $f(x,y)=y-x\geq x^2-x\geq -\frac{1}{4}$.
($-\frac{1}{4}$ is the minimum of $x^2-x$ at $x=\frac{1}{2}$)
Since $-\frac{1}{4}$ is smaller than $0$ (the value of the function when $y<x^2$) it follows that the function $f(x,y)$ has a minimum at $(x,y)=(x,x^2)=\left (\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{4}\right )$ which is equal to $-\frac{1}{4}$.

Is this correct? If yes, could we improve the justification? (Wondering) About the maximum: In the first case, $y$ is greater than $x^2$, so I think that the value of the function can grow infinitely, i.e. it has no maximum. Is this correct? But how could we justify that formally? (Wondering)
Your answers are correct. The minimum is $-\frac14$, at the point $\left (\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{4}\right )$. To show that there is no maximum, notice that $f(0,y) = y$ for all $y\geqslant0$.
 
Opalg said:
Your answers are correct. The minimum is $-\frac14$, at the point $\left (\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{4}\right )$. To show that there is no maximum, notice that $f(0,y) = y$ for all $y\geqslant0$.

Ah ok! Thank you very much! (Yes)
 
We all know the definition of n-dimensional topological manifold uses open sets and homeomorphisms onto the image as open set in ##\mathbb R^n##. It should be possible to reformulate the definition of n-dimensional topological manifold using closed sets on the manifold's topology and on ##\mathbb R^n## ? I'm positive for this. Perhaps the definition of smooth manifold would be problematic, though.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K