Expressing multi-variable functions

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the expression and equivalence of multi-variable functions, specifically whether a function of the form f = f(h(a,b), c, d) can be expressed as f = g(a, b, u(c,d)). Participants explore the implications of such transformations and the conditions under which they hold, touching on concepts from calculus and analysis.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that for any function f: ℝ⁴ → ℝ, there exist functions g: ℝ³ → ℝ and u: ℝ² → ℝ such that f(x₁,x₂,x₃,x₄) = g(x₁,x₂,u(x₃,x₄)).
  • Others challenge this claim by providing specific examples, such as f(x₁,x₂,x₃,x₄) = x₁x₃ + x₄, questioning what g would be in this case.
  • Some participants argue that while f(h(a,b), c, d) can be expressed as k(a,b,c,d), it cannot be expressed as g(a,b,u(c,d)) without specific assumptions about h and u.
  • A later reply discusses the implications of the Implicit Function Theorem and whether functions N and M can exist to express c in the form c = N(d,e,M(a,b)).

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the equivalence of the function expressions, with no consensus reached on whether one form is more general than the other. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specific conditions under which these transformations can be made.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the lack of specific definitions for functions u and h introduces ambiguity, and the discussion is limited by the assumptions made about these functions. The implications of cardinality and bijections are also referenced but not fully resolved.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying multi-variable calculus, function transformations, and the implications of the Implicit Function Theorem in mathematical analysis.

Physics_wiz
Messages
227
Reaction score
0
I have a simple question, let's say I have a function f = f(h(a,b), c, d). Can I express this as f = g(a, b, u(c,d))? Are the two expressions equivalent or is one different/more general than the other?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your question was not detailed enough that there could be clear answer, because you did not specify what kind of function u is supposed to be. Also... it seems that the h is misdirection there.

The following claim should be true, perhaps it answers something:

For arbitrary function [tex]f:\mathbb{R}^4\to\mathbb{R}[/tex], there exists functions [tex]g:\mathbb{R}^3\to\mathbb{R}[/tex] and [tex]u:\mathbb{R}^2\to\mathbb{R}[/tex], so that

[tex] f(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4) = g(x_1,x_2,u(x_3,x_4)),\quad\forall\; x_1,\ldots,x_4\in\mathbb{R}.[/tex]

The reason for this is that [tex]\mathbb{R}[/tex] and [tex]\mathbb{R}^2[/tex] have the same cardinality, so that there exists a bijection [tex]u:\mathbb{R}^2\to\mathbb{R}[/tex]. The g can then be defined with

[tex] g(x_1,x_2,y) = f(x_1,x_2,u^{-1}(y)).[/tex]

You can make the question more difficult by assuming more about f and demanding g and u to satisfy some conditions.
 
jostpuur said:
The following claim should be true, perhaps it answers something:

For arbitrary function [tex]f:\mathbb{R}^4\to\mathbb{R}[/tex], there exists functions [tex]g:\mathbb{R}^3\to\mathbb{R}[/tex] and [tex]u:\mathbb{R}^2\to\mathbb{R}[/tex], so that

[tex] f(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4) = g(x_1,x_2,u(x_3,x_4)),\quad\forall\; x_1,\ldots,x_4\in\mathbb{R}.[/tex]

The reason for this is that [tex]\mathbb{R}[/tex] and [tex]\mathbb{R}^2[/tex] have the same cardinality, so that there exists a bijection [tex]u:\mathbb{R}^2\to\mathbb{R}[/tex].

I don't think I agree with that.

Let [tex]f(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4)=x_1x_3+x_4[/tex]. Now, what function [tex]g(x_1,x_2,u(x_3,x_4))[/tex] is equal to [tex]f(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4)[/tex]
 
Physics_wiz said:
I don't think I agree with that.

Do you know what cardinality and bijection mean?

Let [tex]f(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4)=x_1x_3+x_4[/tex]. Now, what function [tex]g(x_1,x_2,u(x_3,x_4))[/tex] is equal to [tex]f(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4)[/tex]

I don't know a nice formula that you could write into a calculator, but a function g defined by

[tex] g(x_1,x_2,y) = x_1 (p_1\circ u^{-1})(y) + (p_2\circ u^{-1})(y),[/tex]

where [tex]u:\mathbb{R}^2\to\mathbb{R}[/tex] is some bijection, and [tex]p_1,p_2:\mathbb{R}^2\to\mathbb{R}[/tex] the projections, does the job.
 
I read a little about cardinality...I think I understand. Can anyone direct me to where I can look to answer my original question? (i.e. what topics names I can look up in calculus or analysis)
 
Physics_wiz said:
I have a simple question, let's say I have a function f = f(h(a,b), c, d). Can I express this as f = g(a, b, u(c,d))? Are the two expressions equivalent or is one different/more general than the other?

In general, f(h(a,b), c, d) can be written as k(a,b,c, d) but cannot be written as g(a,b,u(c,d)) since the last assumes that c and d appear throughout f only in a specific form: u(c,d). k(a,b,c,d) is "more general" than either f(h(a,b),c,d) or g(a,b,u(c,d)) but it is impossible to say whether one of those two is "more general" than the other without specific h or u.
 
Ok, here's where the original question came from...maybe this helps.

Say I have a function [tex]F(a,b,c) = G(d,e)[/tex]. Assume the Implicit Function Theorem conditions are satisfied. So, I can solve for c as follows: [tex]c = H(G(d,e),a,b)[/tex]. Now, in this case, can I write c as [tex]c = N(d,e,M(a,b))[/tex]? Why or why not?
 
HallsofIvy said:
In general, f(h(a,b), c, d) can be written as k(a,b,c, d) but cannot be written as g(a,b,u(c,d)) since the last assumes that c and d appear throughout f only in a specific form: u(c,d).

Do you mean that this cannot be done when u has already been fixed, or something else has been assumed of the u, or is there a contradiction with my post?
 
Physics_wiz said:
Ok, here's where the original question came from...maybe this helps.

Say I have a function [tex]F(a,b,c) = G(d,e)[/tex]. Assume the Implicit Function Theorem conditions are satisfied. So, I can solve for c as follows: [tex]c = H(G(d,e),a,b)[/tex]. Now, in this case, can I write c as [tex]c = N(d,e,M(a,b))[/tex]? Why or why not?

Anyone? Do the functions N and M exist so I can write [tex]c = N(d,e,M(a,b))[/tex]? By the way, N and M can be anything...I just wanted to know if they exist.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K