Implicit function Theorem for R^3

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the application of the Implicit Function Theorem in the context of R^3. It establishes that for a continuously differentiable function \( f: U \to \mathbb{R} \) with \( f(a, b, c) = 0 \) and \( D_3f(a, b, c) \neq 0 \), there exists an open ball \( V \subset \mathbb{R}^2 \) and a \( C^1 \) function \( \phi: V \to \mathbb{R} \) such that \( \phi(a, b) = c \) and \( f(x, y, \phi(x, y)) = 0 \) for all \( (x, y) \in V \). The proof is simplified by treating \( \mathbb{R}^3 \) as \( \mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R} \), allowing the application of known results from R^2. A clarification regarding a typographical error in the variable representation was also addressed.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Implicit Function Theorem
  • Knowledge of \( C^1 \) functions and their properties
  • Familiarity with partial derivatives and the notation \( D_3f \)
  • Basic concepts of multivariable calculus, particularly in \( \mathbb{R}^3 \)
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the proof of the Implicit Function Theorem in \( \mathbb{R}^2 \)
  • Explore applications of the Implicit Function Theorem in higher dimensions
  • Learn about the continuity and differentiability of \( C^1 \) functions
  • Investigate the role of Jacobians in multivariable calculus
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of multivariable calculus, and anyone interested in the applications of the Implicit Function Theorem in higher dimensions.

kalvin
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Let $U \subset \Bbb{R}^3$ be open and let $f : U → \Bbb{R}$ be a $C^1$
function. Let$ (a, b, c) \in U$
and suppose that$ f(a, b, c) = 0$ and $D_3f(a, b, c) \ne 0.$ Show there is an open ball$ V \subset \Bbb{R}^2$ containing $(a, b)$ and a $C^1$
function $\phi : V → \Bbb{R}$ such that $\phi(a, b) = c$ and
$f(x, y, \phi(x, y)) = 0$ for all$ (x, y) \in V$ . We call $\phi$ an implicit function determined by $f$ at $(a, b)$.

I know who how to do the proof in R^2 bout proving it for R^3 seems to be a lot trickier, any help
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi,

Consider $\Bbb{R}^{3}$ as $\Bbb{R}^{2}\times \Bbb{R}$, this is , take $(a,b,c)=(z,c)$, where $z=(a,c)$ and now the proof is identical to the one you know.
 
Fallen Angel said:
Hi,

Consider $\Bbb{R}^{3}$ as $\Bbb{R}^{2}\times \Bbb{R}$, this is , take $(a,b,c)=(z,c)$, where $z=(a,c)$ and now the proof is identical to the one you know.

Hi, I was just wondering if it was typo for z. Should z = (a, b) ? and not (a, c)? If it is not a typo do you think you could explain?

Thank you
 
Sorry, it was a typo, it should read $z=(a,b)$
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
532
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K