That given a continuous surface, contour lines exist

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on proving that given a continuous and differentiable function f: R² -> R, contour lines can always be drawn, despite the function not being bijective. The participants explore the implications of selecting arbitrary points on the surface and the behavior of curves intersecting at those points. A proof by contradiction is suggested, highlighting that continuous functions along specific axes may not yield equal z-values, as demonstrated with the function z = x² - y². The conversation emphasizes the need to consider the nature of tangent planes and the definition of contour lines at various points on the surface.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of continuous and differentiable functions in multivariable calculus
  • Familiarity with contour lines and their geometric interpretation
  • Knowledge of proof techniques, particularly proof by contradiction
  • Basic concepts of tangent planes in differential geometry
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of continuous functions in R² and their implications for contour lines
  • Learn about the concept of tangent planes and their role in defining contour lines
  • Explore proof techniques in multivariable calculus, focusing on contradiction proofs
  • Investigate specific examples of functions that illustrate the behavior of contour lines, such as f(x,y) = x² - y²
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of multivariable calculus, and anyone interested in the geometric properties of continuous functions and contour lines.

JamesTheBond
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Can you guys help me prove: Given a continuous and differentiable function (or surface) f: R^2 -> R, such that f(x,y) = z ... contour lines can always be drawn... the function is NOT bijective.

I've been thinking of choosing any arbitrary point and showing that the curves that intersect to form that point (over y-axis and x-axis) always manage to have certain z-values that are equal.

How do I point this is in mathematical terms?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Here is a start of my solution which I am stuck with.

Consider this continuous surface f(x,y) = z. Consider arbitrary surface point (i,j,z _i_j). This point must exist (given f(i,j) = z _i_j).

Proof by contradiction:
Consider continuous functions f(x,j) and f(i,y) which are curves that are part of the surface. f(x,j) = f(i,y) = z_i_j are equal IFF x = i and y = j.

If I can disprove the IFF part, then I should be done right?
 
Last edited:
I've been thinking of choosing any arbitrary point
Let P = (a, b, f(a, b)) be a point on the surface.

and showing that the curves that intersect to form that point (over y-axis and x-axis)
Consider the curves C = (x, b, f(x, b)) and D = (a, y, f(a, y)) that lie on the surface.

always manage to have certain z-values that are equal.
There exists an s and a t such that (s, b, f(s, b)) and (a, t, f(a, t)) have the same z-coordinate.


Incidentally, this hypothesis is false. For example, consider the point (0, 0, 0) on the surface:
z = x^2 - y^2​
The curve over the x-axis never shares a z-coordinate with a point over the y-axis. (Except at the origin when both z-coordinates are zero)


Hint: it might help to think, not of a surface in R^3, but of a function R^2-->R. (And I think you have one of the right ideas for proving this)
 
Last edited:
Hmm... I can't just use the curves along x and y axes. Because there are bound to be such R^2 -> R functions which elude only those particular axes?
 
The function is everywhere differentiable and continuous/
 
JamesTheBond said:
The function is everywhere differentiable and continuous/

Therefore at any point you can define a tangent plane. If the tangent plane is not horizontal then you can define the direction of the contour line using it.

If the tangent plane is horizontal then you need to refine what you mean by "drawing contours". There may be a finite number (including zero) or an infinite number of "contour lines" through such a point.

Examples: functions f(x,y) = x^2 + y^2. f(x,y) = x^2 - y^2, f(x,y) = 0 at the origin.
 
JamesTheBond said:
Hmm... I can't just use the curves along x and y axes. Because there are bound to be such R^2 -> R functions which elude only those particular axes?
Well, you hypothesized something much stronger than what you actually wanted to prove.

Maybe your idea is salvagable? Maybe if you examine all the ways things might behave, you'll come up with a different statement that you can prve, about those two curves?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K