what does it mean by determinant of Jacobian matrix = 0?
$begingroup$
I have an example:
$$ u={x+yover 1-xy} $$
$$ v = tan^{-1}(x)+tan^{-1}(y) $$
So by calculating the determinant of the Jacobian matrix I get zero. Does it mean there is no functional relationship between u and v? What does $|J|=0$ mean?
calculus linear-algebra jacobian
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I have an example:
$$ u={x+yover 1-xy} $$
$$ v = tan^{-1}(x)+tan^{-1}(y) $$
So by calculating the determinant of the Jacobian matrix I get zero. Does it mean there is no functional relationship between u and v? What does $|J|=0$ mean?
calculus linear-algebra jacobian
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I have an example:
$$ u={x+yover 1-xy} $$
$$ v = tan^{-1}(x)+tan^{-1}(y) $$
So by calculating the determinant of the Jacobian matrix I get zero. Does it mean there is no functional relationship between u and v? What does $|J|=0$ mean?
calculus linear-algebra jacobian
$endgroup$
I have an example:
$$ u={x+yover 1-xy} $$
$$ v = tan^{-1}(x)+tan^{-1}(y) $$
So by calculating the determinant of the Jacobian matrix I get zero. Does it mean there is no functional relationship between u and v? What does $|J|=0$ mean?
calculus linear-algebra jacobian
calculus linear-algebra jacobian
edited 2 hours ago
El Pasta
44415
44415
asked 3 hours ago
Yibei HeYibei He
1758
1758
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
By the Inverse Function Theorem, it means that your function is not locally invertible at any point where the Jacobian has determinant $0$. The function in question is the map $f: D to mathbb{R}^2$ defined by $f(x,y) = (u(x,y), v(x,y))$ in your notation, where $D$ is the appropriate domain given your coordinate functions.
This is the higher-dimensional analogue to the behavior we see for $f: mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ by $f(x)=x^2$ about the origin. There is no neighborhood $(-epsilon, epsilon)$ around $0$ for which the restriction of $f$ to that neighborhood is one-to-one: there's always a little piece that will make it fail the horizontal line test.
As an aside, $|J|=0$ indicating that your function is not locally invertible also means you cannot use the resulting transformation to perform multivariable substitution in integrals.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
That's not true. The Inverse Function Theorem is an "if", not an "if and only if": it says nothing about what happens when the Jacobian has determinant $0$. The function might still be locally invertible. For example, in the case $n=1$ the function $f(x) = x^3$ has derivative $0$ at $x=0$ but is locally invertible there.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Oh, that's a good point. Is there a fix for this?
$endgroup$
– Randall
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
OP: you should probably un-accept this. This isn't a good answer.
$endgroup$
– Randall
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
What you can say is that, if the function is locally invertible, the inverse function is not differentiable at the point in question. This follows from the (multivariate) chain rule.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In this case, there is a functional relationship between $u$ and $v$: in fact $u = tan(v)$. Thus the transformation $(x,y) to (u,v)$ is not invertible: there is no way to get $x$ and $y$ back from $u$ and $v$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
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%2f3077789%2fwhat-does-it-mean-by-determinant-of-jacobian-matrix-0%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
By the Inverse Function Theorem, it means that your function is not locally invertible at any point where the Jacobian has determinant $0$. The function in question is the map $f: D to mathbb{R}^2$ defined by $f(x,y) = (u(x,y), v(x,y))$ in your notation, where $D$ is the appropriate domain given your coordinate functions.
This is the higher-dimensional analogue to the behavior we see for $f: mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ by $f(x)=x^2$ about the origin. There is no neighborhood $(-epsilon, epsilon)$ around $0$ for which the restriction of $f$ to that neighborhood is one-to-one: there's always a little piece that will make it fail the horizontal line test.
As an aside, $|J|=0$ indicating that your function is not locally invertible also means you cannot use the resulting transformation to perform multivariable substitution in integrals.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
That's not true. The Inverse Function Theorem is an "if", not an "if and only if": it says nothing about what happens when the Jacobian has determinant $0$. The function might still be locally invertible. For example, in the case $n=1$ the function $f(x) = x^3$ has derivative $0$ at $x=0$ but is locally invertible there.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Oh, that's a good point. Is there a fix for this?
$endgroup$
– Randall
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
OP: you should probably un-accept this. This isn't a good answer.
$endgroup$
– Randall
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
What you can say is that, if the function is locally invertible, the inverse function is not differentiable at the point in question. This follows from the (multivariate) chain rule.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
By the Inverse Function Theorem, it means that your function is not locally invertible at any point where the Jacobian has determinant $0$. The function in question is the map $f: D to mathbb{R}^2$ defined by $f(x,y) = (u(x,y), v(x,y))$ in your notation, where $D$ is the appropriate domain given your coordinate functions.
This is the higher-dimensional analogue to the behavior we see for $f: mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ by $f(x)=x^2$ about the origin. There is no neighborhood $(-epsilon, epsilon)$ around $0$ for which the restriction of $f$ to that neighborhood is one-to-one: there's always a little piece that will make it fail the horizontal line test.
As an aside, $|J|=0$ indicating that your function is not locally invertible also means you cannot use the resulting transformation to perform multivariable substitution in integrals.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
That's not true. The Inverse Function Theorem is an "if", not an "if and only if": it says nothing about what happens when the Jacobian has determinant $0$. The function might still be locally invertible. For example, in the case $n=1$ the function $f(x) = x^3$ has derivative $0$ at $x=0$ but is locally invertible there.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Oh, that's a good point. Is there a fix for this?
$endgroup$
– Randall
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
OP: you should probably un-accept this. This isn't a good answer.
$endgroup$
– Randall
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
What you can say is that, if the function is locally invertible, the inverse function is not differentiable at the point in question. This follows from the (multivariate) chain rule.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
By the Inverse Function Theorem, it means that your function is not locally invertible at any point where the Jacobian has determinant $0$. The function in question is the map $f: D to mathbb{R}^2$ defined by $f(x,y) = (u(x,y), v(x,y))$ in your notation, where $D$ is the appropriate domain given your coordinate functions.
This is the higher-dimensional analogue to the behavior we see for $f: mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ by $f(x)=x^2$ about the origin. There is no neighborhood $(-epsilon, epsilon)$ around $0$ for which the restriction of $f$ to that neighborhood is one-to-one: there's always a little piece that will make it fail the horizontal line test.
As an aside, $|J|=0$ indicating that your function is not locally invertible also means you cannot use the resulting transformation to perform multivariable substitution in integrals.
$endgroup$
By the Inverse Function Theorem, it means that your function is not locally invertible at any point where the Jacobian has determinant $0$. The function in question is the map $f: D to mathbb{R}^2$ defined by $f(x,y) = (u(x,y), v(x,y))$ in your notation, where $D$ is the appropriate domain given your coordinate functions.
This is the higher-dimensional analogue to the behavior we see for $f: mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ by $f(x)=x^2$ about the origin. There is no neighborhood $(-epsilon, epsilon)$ around $0$ for which the restriction of $f$ to that neighborhood is one-to-one: there's always a little piece that will make it fail the horizontal line test.
As an aside, $|J|=0$ indicating that your function is not locally invertible also means you cannot use the resulting transformation to perform multivariable substitution in integrals.
edited 3 hours ago
answered 3 hours ago
RandallRandall
9,50911230
9,50911230
$begingroup$
That's not true. The Inverse Function Theorem is an "if", not an "if and only if": it says nothing about what happens when the Jacobian has determinant $0$. The function might still be locally invertible. For example, in the case $n=1$ the function $f(x) = x^3$ has derivative $0$ at $x=0$ but is locally invertible there.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Oh, that's a good point. Is there a fix for this?
$endgroup$
– Randall
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
OP: you should probably un-accept this. This isn't a good answer.
$endgroup$
– Randall
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
What you can say is that, if the function is locally invertible, the inverse function is not differentiable at the point in question. This follows from the (multivariate) chain rule.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
That's not true. The Inverse Function Theorem is an "if", not an "if and only if": it says nothing about what happens when the Jacobian has determinant $0$. The function might still be locally invertible. For example, in the case $n=1$ the function $f(x) = x^3$ has derivative $0$ at $x=0$ but is locally invertible there.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Oh, that's a good point. Is there a fix for this?
$endgroup$
– Randall
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
OP: you should probably un-accept this. This isn't a good answer.
$endgroup$
– Randall
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
What you can say is that, if the function is locally invertible, the inverse function is not differentiable at the point in question. This follows from the (multivariate) chain rule.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
That's not true. The Inverse Function Theorem is an "if", not an "if and only if": it says nothing about what happens when the Jacobian has determinant $0$. The function might still be locally invertible. For example, in the case $n=1$ the function $f(x) = x^3$ has derivative $0$ at $x=0$ but is locally invertible there.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
That's not true. The Inverse Function Theorem is an "if", not an "if and only if": it says nothing about what happens when the Jacobian has determinant $0$. The function might still be locally invertible. For example, in the case $n=1$ the function $f(x) = x^3$ has derivative $0$ at $x=0$ but is locally invertible there.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Oh, that's a good point. Is there a fix for this?
$endgroup$
– Randall
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Oh, that's a good point. Is there a fix for this?
$endgroup$
– Randall
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
OP: you should probably un-accept this. This isn't a good answer.
$endgroup$
– Randall
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
OP: you should probably un-accept this. This isn't a good answer.
$endgroup$
– Randall
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
What you can say is that, if the function is locally invertible, the inverse function is not differentiable at the point in question. This follows from the (multivariate) chain rule.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
What you can say is that, if the function is locally invertible, the inverse function is not differentiable at the point in question. This follows from the (multivariate) chain rule.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In this case, there is a functional relationship between $u$ and $v$: in fact $u = tan(v)$. Thus the transformation $(x,y) to (u,v)$ is not invertible: there is no way to get $x$ and $y$ back from $u$ and $v$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In this case, there is a functional relationship between $u$ and $v$: in fact $u = tan(v)$. Thus the transformation $(x,y) to (u,v)$ is not invertible: there is no way to get $x$ and $y$ back from $u$ and $v$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In this case, there is a functional relationship between $u$ and $v$: in fact $u = tan(v)$. Thus the transformation $(x,y) to (u,v)$ is not invertible: there is no way to get $x$ and $y$ back from $u$ and $v$.
$endgroup$
In this case, there is a functional relationship between $u$ and $v$: in fact $u = tan(v)$. Thus the transformation $(x,y) to (u,v)$ is not invertible: there is no way to get $x$ and $y$ back from $u$ and $v$.
answered 2 hours ago
Robert IsraelRobert Israel
320k23209459
320k23209459
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
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%2f3077789%2fwhat-does-it-mean-by-determinant-of-jacobian-matrix-0%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