differentiable function question in many variables
up vote
-2
down vote
favorite
it is known that $f(0,0) = 0$ and $f$ is differentiable at $(0,0)$. It is also known that for every $t>0$ we have $f(cos(t)/t , sin(t)/t) > 0$.
Show that necessarily $operatorname{Gradient}(0,0) = (0,0)$.
I have no clue how to solve this. I have tried to show through limits, I have tried to get something from the definition ( that with $varepsilon, :(x/y) to 0$ at the limit)
I am sorry for the bad latex language really.
vector-analysis
add a comment |
up vote
-2
down vote
favorite
it is known that $f(0,0) = 0$ and $f$ is differentiable at $(0,0)$. It is also known that for every $t>0$ we have $f(cos(t)/t , sin(t)/t) > 0$.
Show that necessarily $operatorname{Gradient}(0,0) = (0,0)$.
I have no clue how to solve this. I have tried to show through limits, I have tried to get something from the definition ( that with $varepsilon, :(x/y) to 0$ at the limit)
I am sorry for the bad latex language really.
vector-analysis
add a comment |
up vote
-2
down vote
favorite
up vote
-2
down vote
favorite
it is known that $f(0,0) = 0$ and $f$ is differentiable at $(0,0)$. It is also known that for every $t>0$ we have $f(cos(t)/t , sin(t)/t) > 0$.
Show that necessarily $operatorname{Gradient}(0,0) = (0,0)$.
I have no clue how to solve this. I have tried to show through limits, I have tried to get something from the definition ( that with $varepsilon, :(x/y) to 0$ at the limit)
I am sorry for the bad latex language really.
vector-analysis
it is known that $f(0,0) = 0$ and $f$ is differentiable at $(0,0)$. It is also known that for every $t>0$ we have $f(cos(t)/t , sin(t)/t) > 0$.
Show that necessarily $operatorname{Gradient}(0,0) = (0,0)$.
I have no clue how to solve this. I have tried to show through limits, I have tried to get something from the definition ( that with $varepsilon, :(x/y) to 0$ at the limit)
I am sorry for the bad latex language really.
vector-analysis
vector-analysis
edited Nov 13 at 17:39
asked Nov 13 at 17:15
Razi Awad
236
236
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
Suppose that the gradient of $f$ at $(0,0)$ exists and is not $(0,0).$
That would imply that if you look at a small enough neighborhood of $(0,0),$
within that neighborhood $f$ would look like a linear function (informally speaking), and that linear function would be increasing in some directions from $(0,0)$ and decreasing in other directions from $(0,0).$
Now ask how $f$ can look like a decreasing function in some directions from $(0,0)$ and still have $fleft(frac{cos t}{t},frac{sin t}{t}right) > 0$ for every positive real number $t.$
If the answer is that it cannot, then $f$ cannot have a non-zero gradient at $(0,0).$
The problem of writing the proof is mainly how to relate the given facts to the formal definition of the gradient and the theorems about it.
can you explain how did you know / prove that in a small neighborhood the function is decreasing mathmatically
– Razi Awad
yesterday
I don't believe it is decreasing. You're supposed to prove that the function looks like a constant $0$ in the neighborhood of $(0,0).$ The idea is to suppose is is decreasing in some direction (which is the same as saying at least one of your partial derivatives is non-zero), and show a contradiction. Classic proof by contradiction: assume the truth of a statement (even though you believe is false); show by assuming it is true it leads to a contradiction; therefore it really is false.
– David K
yesterday
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
Suppose that the gradient of $f$ at $(0,0)$ exists and is not $(0,0).$
That would imply that if you look at a small enough neighborhood of $(0,0),$
within that neighborhood $f$ would look like a linear function (informally speaking), and that linear function would be increasing in some directions from $(0,0)$ and decreasing in other directions from $(0,0).$
Now ask how $f$ can look like a decreasing function in some directions from $(0,0)$ and still have $fleft(frac{cos t}{t},frac{sin t}{t}right) > 0$ for every positive real number $t.$
If the answer is that it cannot, then $f$ cannot have a non-zero gradient at $(0,0).$
The problem of writing the proof is mainly how to relate the given facts to the formal definition of the gradient and the theorems about it.
can you explain how did you know / prove that in a small neighborhood the function is decreasing mathmatically
– Razi Awad
yesterday
I don't believe it is decreasing. You're supposed to prove that the function looks like a constant $0$ in the neighborhood of $(0,0).$ The idea is to suppose is is decreasing in some direction (which is the same as saying at least one of your partial derivatives is non-zero), and show a contradiction. Classic proof by contradiction: assume the truth of a statement (even though you believe is false); show by assuming it is true it leads to a contradiction; therefore it really is false.
– David K
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
Suppose that the gradient of $f$ at $(0,0)$ exists and is not $(0,0).$
That would imply that if you look at a small enough neighborhood of $(0,0),$
within that neighborhood $f$ would look like a linear function (informally speaking), and that linear function would be increasing in some directions from $(0,0)$ and decreasing in other directions from $(0,0).$
Now ask how $f$ can look like a decreasing function in some directions from $(0,0)$ and still have $fleft(frac{cos t}{t},frac{sin t}{t}right) > 0$ for every positive real number $t.$
If the answer is that it cannot, then $f$ cannot have a non-zero gradient at $(0,0).$
The problem of writing the proof is mainly how to relate the given facts to the formal definition of the gradient and the theorems about it.
can you explain how did you know / prove that in a small neighborhood the function is decreasing mathmatically
– Razi Awad
yesterday
I don't believe it is decreasing. You're supposed to prove that the function looks like a constant $0$ in the neighborhood of $(0,0).$ The idea is to suppose is is decreasing in some direction (which is the same as saying at least one of your partial derivatives is non-zero), and show a contradiction. Classic proof by contradiction: assume the truth of a statement (even though you believe is false); show by assuming it is true it leads to a contradiction; therefore it really is false.
– David K
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
Suppose that the gradient of $f$ at $(0,0)$ exists and is not $(0,0).$
That would imply that if you look at a small enough neighborhood of $(0,0),$
within that neighborhood $f$ would look like a linear function (informally speaking), and that linear function would be increasing in some directions from $(0,0)$ and decreasing in other directions from $(0,0).$
Now ask how $f$ can look like a decreasing function in some directions from $(0,0)$ and still have $fleft(frac{cos t}{t},frac{sin t}{t}right) > 0$ for every positive real number $t.$
If the answer is that it cannot, then $f$ cannot have a non-zero gradient at $(0,0).$
The problem of writing the proof is mainly how to relate the given facts to the formal definition of the gradient and the theorems about it.
Suppose that the gradient of $f$ at $(0,0)$ exists and is not $(0,0).$
That would imply that if you look at a small enough neighborhood of $(0,0),$
within that neighborhood $f$ would look like a linear function (informally speaking), and that linear function would be increasing in some directions from $(0,0)$ and decreasing in other directions from $(0,0).$
Now ask how $f$ can look like a decreasing function in some directions from $(0,0)$ and still have $fleft(frac{cos t}{t},frac{sin t}{t}right) > 0$ for every positive real number $t.$
If the answer is that it cannot, then $f$ cannot have a non-zero gradient at $(0,0).$
The problem of writing the proof is mainly how to relate the given facts to the formal definition of the gradient and the theorems about it.
answered yesterday
David K
51.1k340113
51.1k340113
can you explain how did you know / prove that in a small neighborhood the function is decreasing mathmatically
– Razi Awad
yesterday
I don't believe it is decreasing. You're supposed to prove that the function looks like a constant $0$ in the neighborhood of $(0,0).$ The idea is to suppose is is decreasing in some direction (which is the same as saying at least one of your partial derivatives is non-zero), and show a contradiction. Classic proof by contradiction: assume the truth of a statement (even though you believe is false); show by assuming it is true it leads to a contradiction; therefore it really is false.
– David K
yesterday
add a comment |
can you explain how did you know / prove that in a small neighborhood the function is decreasing mathmatically
– Razi Awad
yesterday
I don't believe it is decreasing. You're supposed to prove that the function looks like a constant $0$ in the neighborhood of $(0,0).$ The idea is to suppose is is decreasing in some direction (which is the same as saying at least one of your partial derivatives is non-zero), and show a contradiction. Classic proof by contradiction: assume the truth of a statement (even though you believe is false); show by assuming it is true it leads to a contradiction; therefore it really is false.
– David K
yesterday
can you explain how did you know / prove that in a small neighborhood the function is decreasing mathmatically
– Razi Awad
yesterday
can you explain how did you know / prove that in a small neighborhood the function is decreasing mathmatically
– Razi Awad
yesterday
I don't believe it is decreasing. You're supposed to prove that the function looks like a constant $0$ in the neighborhood of $(0,0).$ The idea is to suppose is is decreasing in some direction (which is the same as saying at least one of your partial derivatives is non-zero), and show a contradiction. Classic proof by contradiction: assume the truth of a statement (even though you believe is false); show by assuming it is true it leads to a contradiction; therefore it really is false.
– David K
yesterday
I don't believe it is decreasing. You're supposed to prove that the function looks like a constant $0$ in the neighborhood of $(0,0).$ The idea is to suppose is is decreasing in some direction (which is the same as saying at least one of your partial derivatives is non-zero), and show a contradiction. Classic proof by contradiction: assume the truth of a statement (even though you believe is false); show by assuming it is true it leads to a contradiction; therefore it really is false.
– David K
yesterday
add a comment |
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2997007%2fdifferentiable-function-question-in-many-variables%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown