Is it theoretically possible to find g(x) from this equation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Zomboy
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the theoretical impossibility of deriving the function g(x) from the equation (x^2)yz - (y^2)(x^2) - x + g(x) = g(y,z). Participants clarify that g(x) is a function of one variable, while g(y,z) is a function of two variables, leading to a fundamental mismatch. The conclusion is that no such function g(x) exists in the given context, as demonstrated through specific examples where different values of y and z yield inconsistent forms of g(x). The notation used in the equation is deemed misleading, necessitating a clearer distinction between the functions involved.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of multivariable functions
  • Familiarity with partial derivatives
  • Knowledge of function notation and its implications
  • Basic algebraic manipulation skills
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of multivariable functions in calculus
  • Learn about partial derivatives and their applications
  • Explore function notation and its significance in mathematical expressions
  • Investigate examples of function transformations and their implications
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of calculus, and anyone interested in the complexities of function relationships and notation in mathematical equations.

Zomboy
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Is it theoretically possible to find "g(x)" from this equation?

So through my workings on this question I came up with this equation:

(x^2)yz - (y^2)(x^2) - x + g(x) = g(y,z)

* where g(x) is some function of x and g(y,z) is some function of y and z

I'd like to derive g(x) from this although I get the feeling that it simply can't be done. Can say a function of (x,y,z) + a function of (x) ever give you a function of (y,z)? Why can't you do this?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org


Your notation is bad. When you write g(x), it implies that is a function in one variable. But g(y,z) is a function of two variables. This is impossible.
 


Are you saying the g(x) and g(y,z) are different functions (in which case, you shouldn't use the same letter!) or that g(y,z) is "the same function as g(x) except using two variables" (which is meaningless).
 


Furthermore, (x^2)yz - (y^2)(x^2) - x is a function of three variables, x, y, and z.
 


Notation is bad, but we should be able to interpret g(x) and g(y,z) as two different functions, the point being that the first depends only on x, while the latter depends on y and z.

Such a g(x) does btw not exist in your particular case. For example, y=z=0 gives g(x)=x+C, and y=1,z=0, gives g(x)=x2+x+D, where C and D are some constants.
Can say a function of (x,y,z) + a function of (x) ever give you a function of (y,z)?
Yes, trivially, for example (x+y+z) + (-x) = (y+z).
 


Well, if you meant that g(x) and g(y,z) are different functions, then you would get:
(x^2)yz - (y^2)(x^2) - x + g(x) = h(y,z)
Its partial derivative with respect to x is:
2xyz-2xy^2-1+g'(x)=0

Since this is an expression with y and z in it, this means that there is no such g'(x) that depends only on x.

So we have to assume that you actually meant g(x,y,z) with depends on all of them.
In that case, you get:
$$2xyz-2xy^2-1+{\partial g \over \partial x}(x,y,z)={\partial g \over \partial x}(x,y,z)$$

But then, this would only be true if ##2xyz-2xy^2-1=0##.

So the question becomes: what did you actually mean?
The problem that you state has no sensible solution however it was meant.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K