Transformations and their inverse

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the relationship between transformations and their inverses, specifically focusing on the Jacobian matrix. It is established that if a function f(x, y) transforms variables u and v, the Jacobian of the inverse transformation is indeed the reciprocal of the Jacobian of the original transformation. The participants confirm that there are no shortcuts for finding the inverse functions f-1 or g-1 without deriving them directly. This highlights the importance of understanding the Jacobian in the context of transformations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of multivariable calculus, specifically Jacobian matrices.
  • Familiarity with functions and their inverses in mathematical transformations.
  • Knowledge of transformation techniques in calculus.
  • Basic proficiency in mathematical notation and terminology.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of Jacobian matrices in detail.
  • Learn about inverse functions and their applications in transformations.
  • Explore examples of transformations in multivariable calculus.
  • Research the implications of the Jacobian determinant in change of variables.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of calculus, and anyone involved in advanced mathematical transformations will benefit from this discussion.

FunkyDwarf
Messages
481
Reaction score
0
Hey guys

This isn't related to a particular question but i thought might be too specific for the general forum so here we go...

If you have a function f(x,y) such that u = f(x) and v= g(x) and you have some transformation T(u,v) i know you can find the inverse by getting x and y in terms of u and v and getting the Jacobian matrix etc. BUT if you can't (or like me too lazy/stupid) to be able to find f-1 or g-1 then is there a shortcut? I ask this knowing half the answer: i remembe there being a relation between the jacobian for a transform and its inverse but i don't know what it is.

The reason i ask the rest of the shpeel before it is to make sure I am understanding that correctly as well.

Thanks
-G
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There's no shortcut...
 
Ah finally found what i think it is:
Remark: A useful fact is that the Jacobian of the inverse transformation is the reciprocal of the Jacobian of the original transformation.
Is this not true?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K