MHB Understand Andrew Browder's Prop 8.13: Math Analysis Introduction

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion centers on Proposition 8.13 from Andrew Browder's "Mathematical Analysis: An Introduction," specifically within Chapter 8 on Differentiable Maps. The proposition involves the existence of differentials and the application of the reverse triangle inequality as stated in Duistermaat & Kolk's Lemma 1.1.7. Participants seek clarification on the rigorous justification for manipulating absolute values in the proof, particularly regarding the relationship between the function values and their differentials. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the limits and inequalities involved in the proof process.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of differentiable maps in mathematical analysis
  • Familiarity with limits and epsilon-delta definitions
  • Knowledge of absolute value properties and inequalities
  • Experience with the reverse triangle inequality as per Duistermaat & Kolk
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the detailed proof of Proposition 8.13 in Browder's "Mathematical Analysis: An Introduction"
  • Learn about the application of the reverse triangle inequality in mathematical proofs
  • Explore the implications of differentials in calculus and analysis
  • Review the concepts of limits and continuity in the context of differentiable functions
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, educators, and researchers focusing on real analysis, particularly those studying differentiable functions and their properties.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading Andrew Browder's book: "Mathematical Analysis: An Introduction" ... ...

I am currently reading Chapter 8: Differentiable Maps and am specifically focused on Section 8.2 Differentials ... ...

I need some further help in fully understanding the proof of Proposition 8.13 ...

Proposition 8.13 reads as follows:
View attachment 9404
View attachment 9405
I think that a fully detailed proof of Proposition 8.13 reads somewhat as follows:Browder's Definition 8.9 essentially means that $$\text{df}_p$$ exists if $$ \lim_{ h \to 0 } \frac{1}{| h | } (f(p + h) - f(p) - \text{df}_p h ) = 0$$
Thus ... if we take $$\epsilon = C - \| df_p \|$$ then we can find $$\delta$$ such that ...$$| | h | \lt \delta \Longrightarrow \frac{1}{ | h | } | (f(p + h) - f(p) - \text{df}_p h ) - 0 | \leq \epsilon$$ ... ... ... (1)so that $$| h | \lt \delta \Longrightarrow | (f(p + h) - f(p) - \text{df}_p h ) | \leq \epsilon | h | $$ ... ... ... (2)Now the reverse triangle inequality (Duistermaat & Kolk Lemma 1.1.7 (iv) ) states that$$\| x - y \| \geq | \ \| x \| - \| y \| \ |$$Using the reverse triangle inequality we have $$| (f(p + h) - f(p) ) - ( \text{df}_p h ) | \geq | \ | f(p + h) - f(p) | - | \text{df}_p h ) | \ | $$ ... ... ... (3)Now (2) and (3) $$\Longrightarrow $$$$| \ | f(p + h) - f(p) | - | \text{df}_p h ) | \ | \leq \epsilon |h|$$ $$\Longrightarrow | f(p + h) - f(p) | \leq | \text{df}_p h | + \epsilon |h|$$
Now $$| \text{df}_p h ) | \leq | \text{df}_p | | h ) |$$ (Is that correct? ) ... so that ...$$| f(p + h) - f(p) | \leq | \text{df}_p | | h ) | + \epsilon |h|$$
$$\Longrightarrow | f(p + h) - f(p) | \leq ( \| \text{df}_p \| + \epsilon ) |h| + C |h|$$
Is that correct?Now ... my specific problem is how to rigorously and validly make the move $$| \ | f(p + h) - f(p) | - | \text{df}_p h ) | \ | \leq \epsilon |h|$$ $$\Longrightarrow | f(p + h) - f(p) | \leq | \text{df}_p h | + \epsilon |h|$$... ... since I have effectively ignored the modulus signs around $$\ | f(p + h) - f(p) | - | \text{df}_p h ) |$$ ...
... that is I have assumed that $$| f(p + h) - f(p) | \geq | \text{df}_p h ) |$$ ...
Can someone please explain how i deal with this issue ...

Help will be much appreciated ...

Peter
 

Attachments

  • Browder - 1 - Proposition 8.13... PART 1 ........png
    Browder - 1 - Proposition 8.13... PART 1 ........png
    5.4 KB · Views: 166
  • Browder - 2 - Proposition 8.13... PART 2 ... ....png
    Browder - 2 - Proposition 8.13... PART 2 ... ....png
    2 KB · Views: 145
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Peter said:
Now ... my specific problem is how to rigorously and validly make the move $$| \ | f(p + h) - f(p) | - | \text{df}_p h ) | \ | \leq \epsilon |h|$$ $$\Longrightarrow | f(p + h) - f(p) | \leq | \text{df}_p h | + \epsilon |h|$$... ... since I have effectively ignored the modulus signs around $$\ | f(p + h) - f(p) | - | \text{df}_p h ) |$$ ...
... that is I have assumed that $$| f(p + h) - f(p) | \geq | \text{df}_p h ) |$$ ...
Can someone please explain how i deal with this issue ...
For real numbers $X$ and $Y$, $|X|\leqslant Y$ means $-Y\leqslant X\leqslant Y$. In particular, $|X|\leqslant Y \Longrightarrow X\leqslant Y$.

In this case, $| f(p + h) - f(p) | - | \text{df}_p h | \leqslant\bigl| \ | f(p + h) - f(p) | - | \text{df}_p h | \bigr| \leqslant | \text{df}_p h ) |$.
 
Opalg said:
For real numbers $X$ and $Y$, $|X|\leqslant Y$ means $-Y\leqslant X\leqslant Y$. In particular, $|X|\leqslant Y \Longrightarrow X\leqslant Y$.

In this case, $| f(p + h) - f(p) | - | \text{df}_p h | \leqslant\bigl| \ | f(p + h) - f(p) | - | \text{df}_p h | \bigr| \leqslant | \text{df}_p h ) |$.

Thanks for a most helpful Post, Opalg

Peter
 
As shown by this animation, the fibers of the Hopf fibration of the 3-sphere are circles (click on a point on the sphere to visualize the associated fiber). As far as I understand, they never intersect and their union is the 3-sphere itself. I'd be sure whether the circles in the animation are given by stereographic projection of the 3-sphere from a point, say the "equivalent" of the ##S^2## north-pole. Assuming the viewpoint of 3-sphere defined by its embedding in ##\mathbb C^2## as...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K