Property of Jacobian Determinant

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the property of the Jacobian determinant, specifically the equation ##\sum_j \frac{\partial ~ cof( \nabla \pmb{g} )}{\partial x_j} = 0##, which holds under the condition that the functions ##g_i## are suitably differentiable. Participants reference Jacobi's formula as a key derivation related to this property, highlighting its relevance in degree theory and the Brouwer fixed point theorem. Additionally, links to external resources, including a paper on Jacobi's formula and notes on the derivative of a determinant, are provided for further exploration.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector calculus and differentiability
  • Familiarity with determinants and cofactors in linear algebra
  • Knowledge of degree theory and Brouwer fixed point theorem
  • Basic understanding of Jacobi's formula and its applications
NEXT STEPS
  • Study Jacobi's formula in detail to understand its derivation and applications
  • Explore the implications of the Jacobian determinant in degree theory
  • Review the Brouwer fixed point theorem and its connection to Jacobians
  • Investigate the equality of mixed second partials in the context of differentiable functions
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of advanced calculus, and researchers interested in the properties of Jacobian determinants and their applications in theoretical frameworks such as degree theory and fixed point theorems.

Gear300
Messages
1,209
Reaction score
9
We can denote the jacobian of a vector map ##\pmb{g}(\pmb{x})## by ##\nabla \pmb{g}##, and we can denote its determinant by ##D \pmb{g}##. We were asked to prove that

##\sum_j \frac{\partial ~ {cof}(D \pmb{g})_{ij}}{\partial x_j} = 0##

generally holds so long as the ##g_i## are suitably differentiable not too long ago. Looking around, this property is mentioned in passing in papers here and there. Does this result go by a headword that I can look up. Like a theorem name of some sort? It is rumored to be an essential property for things like degree theory and the brouwer fixed point theorem.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
i can't really understand your notation, I assume cof stands for cofactor, but since to me a determinant is a number, hence does not have a cofactor, rather a matrix does. I have never seen this inequality in my study of either degree theory or brouwer's fix point theorem, and do not really know what it is saying, but just off the top of my head it looks as if it might follow from the equality of mixed 2nd partials. you might try working it out for n = 2 or 3.

well here is a discussion that gives a reason for it: see p. 2: he calls the general formula he is deriving Jacobi's formula, but this is just a step in the derivation.

https://www.impan.pl/~pmh/teach/algebra/additional/jacobi.pdf

also see page 6 in these notes:

https://www.gotohaggstrom.com/Jacobi’s formula for the derivative of a determinant.pdf
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jim mcnamara
You...are absolutely correct, my friend. I meant
## \sum_j \frac{ \partial ~ cof( \nabla \pmb{g} ) }{ \partial x_j } = 0 ~.##​
But that aside, the above statement is true. I had already proved it, so I was inquiring its significance. For example, I've seen it in the second page (pg 17) of the following link, The Jacobian Determinant Revisited. Although, I haven't searched around much thereafter. I am familiar with the content you've referred to above, so I think my inquiry is different. Funny thing is that I haven't bothered reading the paper I referenced. Perhaps I should give it a swirl.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
990
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K