Proving Differentiability: Vector Calculus Homework

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ted123
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Differentiability
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
13 replies · 3K views
Ted123
Messages
428
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



[PLAIN]http://img261.imageshack.us/img261/1228/vectorcalc.png

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



[itex]f({\bf a+h})-f(\bf{a})={\bf c\times h} + \|{\bf a+h} \| ^2 {\bf c} - \|{\bf a}\| ^2 {\bf c}[/itex]

[itex]f({\bf a+h})-f({\bf a}) = {\bf c} \times {\bf h} + {\bf c} [({\bf a}+ {\bf h}) \cdot ({\bf a} + {\bf h})] - {\bf c}({\bf a}\cdot {\bf a})[/itex]

[itex]f({\bf a+h})-f({\bf a}) = {\bf c} \times {\bf h} + {\bf c} [({\bf a}\cdot {\bf a})+ 2({\bf a} \cdot {\bf h}) + ({\bf h}\cdot {\bf h})] - {\bf c}({\bf a}\cdot {\bf a})[/itex]

[itex]f({\bf a+h})-f({\bf a}) = {\bf c} \times {\bf h} + {\bf c} ({\bf a}\cdot {\bf a}) + 2{\bf c}({\bf a} \cdot {\bf h}) + {\bf c}({\bf h}\cdot {\bf h}) - {\bf c}({\bf a}\cdot {\bf a})[/itex]

[itex]f({\bf a+h})-f({\bf a}) = {\bf c} \times {\bf h} + 2 {\bf c} ({\bf a}\cdot {\bf h}) + {\bf c}({\bf h}\cdot {\bf h})[/itex]

Is this correct up to here?

From here can I do this?:

[itex]f({\bf a+h})-f({\bf a}) = {\bf c} \times {\bf h} + {\bf c} (2{\bf a}\cdot {\bf h} + {\bf h}\cdot {\bf h})[/itex]

Can I say that [itex]Df(a)(h) = (2{\bf a}\cdot {\bf c} + {\bf h}\cdot {\bf c})(h)[/itex]

[itex]E_f ({\bf a, h}) = c \times h[/itex]

But [itex]\frac{E_f ({\bf a, h})}{\|h\|} = \frac{c \times h}{\|h\|}[/itex] doesn't tend to 0 as h tends to 0!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Checking differentiability is always a little involved. Certainly if you try to prove it from the definition, which is quite hard sometimes. Luckily, there are theorems which make our life easier. I'm talking about the theorem which says that "if a function has continuous partial derivatives at a, then it is differentiable at a".

So, what I suggest is try to take the partial derivatives of f. But before we do this, we must try to write f in a suitable form. To do this, write [tex]c=(c_1,c_2,c_3)[/tex] and [tex]h=(h_1,h_2,h_3)[/tex]. Then

[tex]f(h_1,h_2,h_3)=(c_1,c_2,c_3)\times (h_1,h_2,h_3)+\|(h_1,h_2,h_3)\|^2(c_1,c_2,c_3)[/tex]

Try to calculate the vectorial product and the norm, then you will obtain a nice function.

The next step is to take the partial derivatives [tex]\frac{\partial f}{\partial h_i}[/tex] and to see if the result is continuous. If so, then our function is differentiable.

After doing this, if you really want to know the function Df(a)(h), then you can use the formula

[tex]Df(a)(h)=\sum_{i=1}^3{h_i\frac{\partial f}{\partial h_i}(a)}[/tex]

Good luck!
 
micromass said:
Checking differentiability is always a little involved. Certainly if you try to prove it from the definition, which is quite hard sometimes. Luckily, there are theorems which make our life easier. I'm talking about the theorem which says that "if a function has continuous partial derivatives at a, then it is differentiable at a".

So, what I suggest is try to take the partial derivatives of f. But before we do this, we must try to write f in a suitable form. To do this, write [tex]c=(c_1,c_2,c_3)[/tex] and [tex]h=(h_1,h_2,h_3)[/tex]. Then

[tex]f(h_1,h_2,h_3)=(c_1,c_2,c_3)\times (h_1,h_2,h_3)+\|(h_1,h_2,h_3)\|^2(c_1,c_2,c_3)[/tex]

Try to calculate the vectorial product and the norm, then you will obtain a nice function.

The next step is to take the partial derivatives [tex]\frac{\partial f}{\partial h_i}[/tex] and to see if the result is continuous. If so, then our function is differentiable.

After doing this, if you really want to know the function Df(a)(h), then you can use the formula

[tex]Df(a)(h)=\sum_{i=1}^3{h_i\frac{\partial f}{\partial h_i}(a)}[/tex]

Good luck!

Thanks but there is a very big problem with that. That is the question tells me to use the given definition!
 
micromass said:
Hmm. Thne I still suggest to write out the function with [tex]c=(c_1,c_2,c_3)[/tex] and [tex]h=(h_1,h_2,h_3)[/tex] and see where that gets us...

Well I've realized that, most fundamentally, Df(a) should be a linear map depending only on a (not h). So what I've written isn't even potentially correct.

On a secondary level, I've ignored the c x h term (and left it as part of the error). This term doesn't go to 0 as h does, so I have to account for it in the derivative rather than the error term.

Can you see how?
 
micromass said:
So you've gotten to the expression

[tex]f(a+h)-f(a)=c\times h+2c(a.h)+c(h.h)[/tex]

Try taking [tex]Df(a)(h)=c\times h+ 2c(a.h)[/tex]. That should do the trick...

But Df(a) is still not a linear map is it (as it contains h)?
 
micromass said:
I don't really see your problem? why can't it be linear?
Surely we have that [tex]Df(a)(\alpha h+\beta h^\prime)=\alpha Df(a)(h)+\beta Df(a)(h^\prime)[/tex]

So from the expression

[itex]f({\bf a} + {\bf h})-f({\bf a})= {\bf c} \times {\bf h} + 2 {\bf c}({\bf a}\cdot {\bf h}) + {\bf c}({\bf h} \cdot {\bf h})[/tex]<br /> <br /> can I take [itex]Df({\bf a})({\bf h})= {\bf c} \times {\bf h} + 2{\bf c} ({\bf a} \cdot {\bf h})[/itex] .<br /> <br /> This is linear since we have that [itex]Df({\bf a})(\alpha {\bf h} + \beta {\bf h^\prime})=\alpha Df({\bf a})({\bf h})+\beta Df({\bf a})({\bf h^\prime})[/itex]<br /> <br /> And take [itex]E_f ({\bf a, h}) = {\bf c(h\cdot h}) = {\bf c\|h\|}^2[/itex]<br /> <br /> And [itex]\displaystyle\lim_{{\bf h}\to {\bf 0}} \frac{E_f ({\bf a, h})}{\|h\|} = \lim_{{\bf h}\to {\bf 0}} \frac{{\bf c\| h\|}^2}{\|{\bf h}\|} = \lim_{{\bf h}\to {\bf 0}} {\bf c\|h\|} = {\bf 0}[/itex][/itex]
 
micromass said:
Yes, that's about it!

But [itex]Df(a)[/itex] is dependent upon h as well as a isn't it? It should only be dependent on a.
 
micromass said:
Df(a) is only dependent of a. Df(a)(h) is dependent of a and h, as it should be...

So what does [itex]Df(a)[/itex] equal?