Proving bijection between a region

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gekko
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bijection
Gekko
Messages
69
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Prove bijection between the regions
0<x<1, 0<y<1, 0<u, 0<v, u+v<pi/2

Homework Equations



x=sinu/cosv y = sinv/cosu


The Attempt at a Solution



We need to show that an inverse function exists to prove the bijection so obviously, (u,v) maps to one and only one (x,y) for the above. But what about the other way around? What is the best approach
Do we need to calculate:
u=arcsin(xcosv), v=arccos(sinu/x), u=arccos(sinv/y), v=arcsin(ycosu) and then look at each individually? Or could we divide one by the other and obtain tan(u)tan(v)=xy so that u=arctan(xy/tan(v) and v=arctan(xy/tan(u))?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Gekko said:

Homework Statement



Prove bijection between the regions
0<x<1, 0<y<1, 0<u, 0<v, u+v<pi/2

Homework Equations



x=sinu/cosv y = sinv/cosu


The Attempt at a Solution



We need to show that an inverse function exists to prove the bijection so obviously, (u,v) maps to one and only one (x,y) for the above. But what about the other way around? What is the best approach
Do we need to calculate:
u=arcsin(xcosv), v=arccos(sinu/x), u=arccos(sinv/y), v=arcsin(ycosu) and then look at each individually? Or could we divide one by the other and obtain tan(u)tan(v)=xy so that u=arctan(xy/tan(v) and v=arctan(xy/tan(u))?
I'm not sure that you can solve for u and v from your equations for x and y. Maybe it's possible, but I haven't come up with anything. Your attempts seem like good ideas at first, but you need u in terms of x and y alone, and the same for v. If you have learned about the Inverse Function Theorem (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_function_theorem), you can use it to show that there is an inverse mapping from a point (x, y) to a point (u, v).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The u and v one paragraph above is the inverse transformation
 
Of course! Thanks
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...

Similar threads

Back
Top