Is the Inverse Function Theorem in R^2 Limited to Certain Neighborhoods?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the Inverse Function Theorem in R^2, specifically its application to the mapping F(r, θ) = (r*cosθ, r*sinθ). The theorem asserts that if the derivative matrix DF(x,y) is invertible at a point, there exists a neighborhood U around that point where the mapping is one-to-one and onto. However, the user identifies a contradiction when considering points where θ approaches infinity, suggesting that the mapping is not one-to-one in certain neighborhoods. The conclusion drawn is that the theorem's application requires careful selection of neighborhoods to maintain the one-to-one property.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Inverse Function Theorem in R^2
  • Familiarity with continuously differentiable functions
  • Knowledge of derivative matrices and their invertibility
  • Basic concepts of neighborhoods in topology
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of the Inverse Function Theorem in higher dimensions
  • Explore the concept of neighborhoods in topology and their significance in mappings
  • Investigate the properties of polar coordinates and their impact on function mappings
  • Learn about restrictions on domains and ranges in the context of inverse functions
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students studying multivariable calculus, and anyone interested in the applications of the Inverse Function Theorem in R^2.

WHOAguitarninja
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Aye...title should say in R^2, sorry about that.
I'm hitting somewhat of a wall in my understanding of a theorem (or rather a special case of a theorem). The theorem as stated in the book is as follows.

The Inverse FUnction Theorem in the Plane
Let O be an open subset of the plane R^2 and suppose that the mapping F: O\rightarrowR^{2} is continuously differentiable. Let (x, y) be a point in O at which the derivative matrix DF(x,y) is invertible.

Then there is a neighborhood U of the point (x,y) and a neighborhood V of its image F(x,y) such that F: U\rightarrowV is one to one and onto.

The theorem goes on to talk about the inverse functions, but that's not where I'm getting stuck. My problem is this. Consider the function F(r,\theta) = (r*cos\theta, r*sin\theta).

The determinant of the derivative matrix of this function is just r, so the theorem seems that it should only break down at r=0. However consider the point (r, 2*pi)It does not seem to me that it's 1-1 in a neighborhood around this point, which seems to contradict the theorem.

Where am I misunderstanding things. Is the mapping actually 1-1 here? It seems not to me as it seems to me if you just let theta go to infinity it circles the same ring in the image. I understand that if you restrict it to a ring then it invalidates the theorem as the neighborhood then isn't open due to the ring being thin. But I don't see any way to get around the looping problem.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
the theorem says the function is 1-1 on SOME nbhd, not on ALL nbhds.
 
So let me see if I understand the restriction correctly, as I don't think the book spells this out very well.

We can only state that it's 1-1 if V is some, perhaps restricted, neighborhood of the image of U. That much I see. However we also must restrict U to the neighborhood in which F:U->V is invertible? Otherwise we have that F^{-1}(1,0) can be equal to (1, 2*pi*n) for any n. Do we have to choose a range for the inverse from the outset in order to preserve 1-1? Is that correct?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K