Partial derivative of $xyfracx^2-y^2x^2+y^2$ [duplicate]

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
2
down vote

favorite













This question already has an answer here:



  • Show that both mixed partial derivatives exist at the origin but are not equal

    1 answer



I am asked to show, that




$f(x,y)=begincases xyfracx^2-y^2x^2+y^2spacetextfor, (x,y)neq (0,0)\ 0spacetextfor, (x,y)=(0,0)endcases$



is everywhere two times partial differentiable, but it is still $D_1D_2f(0,0)neq D_2D_1 f(0,0)$




But this does not make much sense in my opinion. Since $f(0,0)=0$ hence it should be equal?



I calculated $fracpartial^2 f(x,y)partial xpartial y$ and $fracpartial^2 f(x,y)partial ypartial x$ and I got in both cases the same result (for $(x,y)neq (0,0)$) which is:



$fracx^6+9x^4y^2-9x^2y^4-y^6(x^2+y^2)^3$



Wolframalpha says, that this is correct.



So is there a mistake in the task? Or do I not understand it?



Also, when I want to show, that $f$ is everywhere two times partial differentiable. Is it enough to calculate $fracpartial^2 fpartial^2 x$ and $fracpartial^2 fpartial^2 y$ and not needed to go by the definition, since we know, that this function is differentiable as a function in $mathbbR$?



What do you think?
Thanks in advance.







share|cite|improve this question












marked as duplicate by Hans Lundmark, Sil, Adrian Keister, amWhy, Lord Shark the Unknown Aug 14 at 2:25


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.














  • This is Peano's counter-example which shows that being twice differentiable is not the same as having all partial derivatives of order two. The hypotheses of Schwarz' theorem are a sufficient condition for this to happen.
    – Bernard
    Aug 13 at 10:25














up vote
2
down vote

favorite













This question already has an answer here:



  • Show that both mixed partial derivatives exist at the origin but are not equal

    1 answer



I am asked to show, that




$f(x,y)=begincases xyfracx^2-y^2x^2+y^2spacetextfor, (x,y)neq (0,0)\ 0spacetextfor, (x,y)=(0,0)endcases$



is everywhere two times partial differentiable, but it is still $D_1D_2f(0,0)neq D_2D_1 f(0,0)$




But this does not make much sense in my opinion. Since $f(0,0)=0$ hence it should be equal?



I calculated $fracpartial^2 f(x,y)partial xpartial y$ and $fracpartial^2 f(x,y)partial ypartial x$ and I got in both cases the same result (for $(x,y)neq (0,0)$) which is:



$fracx^6+9x^4y^2-9x^2y^4-y^6(x^2+y^2)^3$



Wolframalpha says, that this is correct.



So is there a mistake in the task? Or do I not understand it?



Also, when I want to show, that $f$ is everywhere two times partial differentiable. Is it enough to calculate $fracpartial^2 fpartial^2 x$ and $fracpartial^2 fpartial^2 y$ and not needed to go by the definition, since we know, that this function is differentiable as a function in $mathbbR$?



What do you think?
Thanks in advance.







share|cite|improve this question












marked as duplicate by Hans Lundmark, Sil, Adrian Keister, amWhy, Lord Shark the Unknown Aug 14 at 2:25


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.














  • This is Peano's counter-example which shows that being twice differentiable is not the same as having all partial derivatives of order two. The hypotheses of Schwarz' theorem are a sufficient condition for this to happen.
    – Bernard
    Aug 13 at 10:25












up vote
2
down vote

favorite









up vote
2
down vote

favorite












This question already has an answer here:



  • Show that both mixed partial derivatives exist at the origin but are not equal

    1 answer



I am asked to show, that




$f(x,y)=begincases xyfracx^2-y^2x^2+y^2spacetextfor, (x,y)neq (0,0)\ 0spacetextfor, (x,y)=(0,0)endcases$



is everywhere two times partial differentiable, but it is still $D_1D_2f(0,0)neq D_2D_1 f(0,0)$




But this does not make much sense in my opinion. Since $f(0,0)=0$ hence it should be equal?



I calculated $fracpartial^2 f(x,y)partial xpartial y$ and $fracpartial^2 f(x,y)partial ypartial x$ and I got in both cases the same result (for $(x,y)neq (0,0)$) which is:



$fracx^6+9x^4y^2-9x^2y^4-y^6(x^2+y^2)^3$



Wolframalpha says, that this is correct.



So is there a mistake in the task? Or do I not understand it?



Also, when I want to show, that $f$ is everywhere two times partial differentiable. Is it enough to calculate $fracpartial^2 fpartial^2 x$ and $fracpartial^2 fpartial^2 y$ and not needed to go by the definition, since we know, that this function is differentiable as a function in $mathbbR$?



What do you think?
Thanks in advance.







share|cite|improve this question













This question already has an answer here:



  • Show that both mixed partial derivatives exist at the origin but are not equal

    1 answer



I am asked to show, that




$f(x,y)=begincases xyfracx^2-y^2x^2+y^2spacetextfor, (x,y)neq (0,0)\ 0spacetextfor, (x,y)=(0,0)endcases$



is everywhere two times partial differentiable, but it is still $D_1D_2f(0,0)neq D_2D_1 f(0,0)$




But this does not make much sense in my opinion. Since $f(0,0)=0$ hence it should be equal?



I calculated $fracpartial^2 f(x,y)partial xpartial y$ and $fracpartial^2 f(x,y)partial ypartial x$ and I got in both cases the same result (for $(x,y)neq (0,0)$) which is:



$fracx^6+9x^4y^2-9x^2y^4-y^6(x^2+y^2)^3$



Wolframalpha says, that this is correct.



So is there a mistake in the task? Or do I not understand it?



Also, when I want to show, that $f$ is everywhere two times partial differentiable. Is it enough to calculate $fracpartial^2 fpartial^2 x$ and $fracpartial^2 fpartial^2 y$ and not needed to go by the definition, since we know, that this function is differentiable as a function in $mathbbR$?



What do you think?
Thanks in advance.





This question already has an answer here:



  • Show that both mixed partial derivatives exist at the origin but are not equal

    1 answer









share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Aug 13 at 9:39









Cornman

2,61921128




2,61921128




marked as duplicate by Hans Lundmark, Sil, Adrian Keister, amWhy, Lord Shark the Unknown Aug 14 at 2:25


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.






marked as duplicate by Hans Lundmark, Sil, Adrian Keister, amWhy, Lord Shark the Unknown Aug 14 at 2:25


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.













  • This is Peano's counter-example which shows that being twice differentiable is not the same as having all partial derivatives of order two. The hypotheses of Schwarz' theorem are a sufficient condition for this to happen.
    – Bernard
    Aug 13 at 10:25
















  • This is Peano's counter-example which shows that being twice differentiable is not the same as having all partial derivatives of order two. The hypotheses of Schwarz' theorem are a sufficient condition for this to happen.
    – Bernard
    Aug 13 at 10:25















This is Peano's counter-example which shows that being twice differentiable is not the same as having all partial derivatives of order two. The hypotheses of Schwarz' theorem are a sufficient condition for this to happen.
– Bernard
Aug 13 at 10:25




This is Peano's counter-example which shows that being twice differentiable is not the same as having all partial derivatives of order two. The hypotheses of Schwarz' theorem are a sufficient condition for this to happen.
– Bernard
Aug 13 at 10:25










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
1
down vote



accepted










The limit definition of partial derivative at $(x,y)=(0,0)$:
$$f_x(0,0)=fracpartial fpartial x(0,0)=lim_hto 0 fracf(0+h,0)-f(0,0)h=fracfrac(0+h)cdot 0cdot ((0+h)^2-0^2)(0+h)^2+0^2-0h=0;\
f_y(0,0)=fracpartial fpartial y(0,0)=lim_hto 0 fracf(0,0+h)-f(0,0)h=fracfrac0cdot(0+h)cdot (0^2-(0+h)^2)0^2+(0+h)^2-0h=0.$$
Note that:
$$f_x(x,y)=fracpartial fpartial x=fracpartial fpartial xleft(fracx^3y-xy^3x^2+y^2right)=fracy(x^4+4x^2y^2-y^4)(x^2+y^2)^2;\
f_y(x,y)=fracpartial fpartial y=fracpartial fpartial yleft(fracx^3y-xy^3x^2+y^2right)=fracx^5-4x^3y^2-xy^4(x^2+y^2)^2.\
$$
The partial derivative of partial derivative:
$$fracpartial^2 fpartial xpartial y(0,0)=
lim_hto 0 fracf_x(0,0+h)-f_x(0,0)h=\
lim_hto 0 fracfrac(0+h)(0^4+4cdot 0^2(0+h)^2-(0+h)^4)(0^2+(0+h)^2)^2-0h=lim_hto 0 frac-h^5h^5=-1;\
fracpartial^2 fpartial ypartial x(0,0)=
lim_hto 0 fracf_y(0+h,0)-f_y(0,0)h=\
lim_hto 0 fracfrac(0+h)^5-4(0+h)^3cdot 0^2-(0+h)cdot 0^4((0+h)^2+0^2)^2-0h=lim_hto 0 frach^5h^5=1.$$






share|cite|improve this answer



























    up vote
    2
    down vote













    First a comment



    You wrote But this does not make much sense in my opinion. Since $f(0,0)=0$...



    How can you induce an affirmation on second derivatives of a map based on its value at a point?



    Second regarding partial second derivatives



    You have for $(x,y)neq(0,0)$



    $$begincases
    fracpartial fpartial x(x,y) = frac(x^2+y^2)(3x^2y-y^3)+2x^2y(y^2-x^2)(x^2+y^2)^2\
    fracpartial fpartial y(x,y) = frac(x^2+y^2)(x^3-3x y^2)+2xy^2(y^2-x^2)(x^2+y^2)^2
    endcases$$



    In particular
    $$beginalign*
    fracpartial fpartial x(0,y) &= -y text for y neq 0\
    fracpartial fpartial x(x,0) &= x text for x neq 0
    endalign*$$
    which implies
    $$
    fracpartial^2 fpartial x partial y(0,0) =1 neq -1 = fracpartial^2 fpartial y partial x(0,0)$$



    You can have a look here for more details.






    share|cite|improve this answer






















    • Isn't there a typo here and on your website? Don't you mean $fracpartial fpartial y(x,0)=x$ for $xneq 0$
      – Cornman
      Aug 13 at 10:26










    • Also should it not be $fracpartial^2 fpartial xpartial y (0,0)=-1$ and $fracpartial^2 fpartial ypartial x(0,0)=1$?
      – Cornman
      Aug 13 at 10:28










    • You’re right. I’ll edit my answer.
      – mathcounterexamples.net
      Aug 13 at 11:17










    • Regarding your question Also should it not be..., the answer is negative. What I wrote is correct.
      – mathcounterexamples.net
      Aug 13 at 15:44

















    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    1
    down vote



    accepted










    The limit definition of partial derivative at $(x,y)=(0,0)$:
    $$f_x(0,0)=fracpartial fpartial x(0,0)=lim_hto 0 fracf(0+h,0)-f(0,0)h=fracfrac(0+h)cdot 0cdot ((0+h)^2-0^2)(0+h)^2+0^2-0h=0;\
    f_y(0,0)=fracpartial fpartial y(0,0)=lim_hto 0 fracf(0,0+h)-f(0,0)h=fracfrac0cdot(0+h)cdot (0^2-(0+h)^2)0^2+(0+h)^2-0h=0.$$
    Note that:
    $$f_x(x,y)=fracpartial fpartial x=fracpartial fpartial xleft(fracx^3y-xy^3x^2+y^2right)=fracy(x^4+4x^2y^2-y^4)(x^2+y^2)^2;\
    f_y(x,y)=fracpartial fpartial y=fracpartial fpartial yleft(fracx^3y-xy^3x^2+y^2right)=fracx^5-4x^3y^2-xy^4(x^2+y^2)^2.\
    $$
    The partial derivative of partial derivative:
    $$fracpartial^2 fpartial xpartial y(0,0)=
    lim_hto 0 fracf_x(0,0+h)-f_x(0,0)h=\
    lim_hto 0 fracfrac(0+h)(0^4+4cdot 0^2(0+h)^2-(0+h)^4)(0^2+(0+h)^2)^2-0h=lim_hto 0 frac-h^5h^5=-1;\
    fracpartial^2 fpartial ypartial x(0,0)=
    lim_hto 0 fracf_y(0+h,0)-f_y(0,0)h=\
    lim_hto 0 fracfrac(0+h)^5-4(0+h)^3cdot 0^2-(0+h)cdot 0^4((0+h)^2+0^2)^2-0h=lim_hto 0 frach^5h^5=1.$$






    share|cite|improve this answer
























      up vote
      1
      down vote



      accepted










      The limit definition of partial derivative at $(x,y)=(0,0)$:
      $$f_x(0,0)=fracpartial fpartial x(0,0)=lim_hto 0 fracf(0+h,0)-f(0,0)h=fracfrac(0+h)cdot 0cdot ((0+h)^2-0^2)(0+h)^2+0^2-0h=0;\
      f_y(0,0)=fracpartial fpartial y(0,0)=lim_hto 0 fracf(0,0+h)-f(0,0)h=fracfrac0cdot(0+h)cdot (0^2-(0+h)^2)0^2+(0+h)^2-0h=0.$$
      Note that:
      $$f_x(x,y)=fracpartial fpartial x=fracpartial fpartial xleft(fracx^3y-xy^3x^2+y^2right)=fracy(x^4+4x^2y^2-y^4)(x^2+y^2)^2;\
      f_y(x,y)=fracpartial fpartial y=fracpartial fpartial yleft(fracx^3y-xy^3x^2+y^2right)=fracx^5-4x^3y^2-xy^4(x^2+y^2)^2.\
      $$
      The partial derivative of partial derivative:
      $$fracpartial^2 fpartial xpartial y(0,0)=
      lim_hto 0 fracf_x(0,0+h)-f_x(0,0)h=\
      lim_hto 0 fracfrac(0+h)(0^4+4cdot 0^2(0+h)^2-(0+h)^4)(0^2+(0+h)^2)^2-0h=lim_hto 0 frac-h^5h^5=-1;\
      fracpartial^2 fpartial ypartial x(0,0)=
      lim_hto 0 fracf_y(0+h,0)-f_y(0,0)h=\
      lim_hto 0 fracfrac(0+h)^5-4(0+h)^3cdot 0^2-(0+h)cdot 0^4((0+h)^2+0^2)^2-0h=lim_hto 0 frach^5h^5=1.$$






      share|cite|improve this answer






















        up vote
        1
        down vote



        accepted







        up vote
        1
        down vote



        accepted






        The limit definition of partial derivative at $(x,y)=(0,0)$:
        $$f_x(0,0)=fracpartial fpartial x(0,0)=lim_hto 0 fracf(0+h,0)-f(0,0)h=fracfrac(0+h)cdot 0cdot ((0+h)^2-0^2)(0+h)^2+0^2-0h=0;\
        f_y(0,0)=fracpartial fpartial y(0,0)=lim_hto 0 fracf(0,0+h)-f(0,0)h=fracfrac0cdot(0+h)cdot (0^2-(0+h)^2)0^2+(0+h)^2-0h=0.$$
        Note that:
        $$f_x(x,y)=fracpartial fpartial x=fracpartial fpartial xleft(fracx^3y-xy^3x^2+y^2right)=fracy(x^4+4x^2y^2-y^4)(x^2+y^2)^2;\
        f_y(x,y)=fracpartial fpartial y=fracpartial fpartial yleft(fracx^3y-xy^3x^2+y^2right)=fracx^5-4x^3y^2-xy^4(x^2+y^2)^2.\
        $$
        The partial derivative of partial derivative:
        $$fracpartial^2 fpartial xpartial y(0,0)=
        lim_hto 0 fracf_x(0,0+h)-f_x(0,0)h=\
        lim_hto 0 fracfrac(0+h)(0^4+4cdot 0^2(0+h)^2-(0+h)^4)(0^2+(0+h)^2)^2-0h=lim_hto 0 frac-h^5h^5=-1;\
        fracpartial^2 fpartial ypartial x(0,0)=
        lim_hto 0 fracf_y(0+h,0)-f_y(0,0)h=\
        lim_hto 0 fracfrac(0+h)^5-4(0+h)^3cdot 0^2-(0+h)cdot 0^4((0+h)^2+0^2)^2-0h=lim_hto 0 frach^5h^5=1.$$






        share|cite|improve this answer












        The limit definition of partial derivative at $(x,y)=(0,0)$:
        $$f_x(0,0)=fracpartial fpartial x(0,0)=lim_hto 0 fracf(0+h,0)-f(0,0)h=fracfrac(0+h)cdot 0cdot ((0+h)^2-0^2)(0+h)^2+0^2-0h=0;\
        f_y(0,0)=fracpartial fpartial y(0,0)=lim_hto 0 fracf(0,0+h)-f(0,0)h=fracfrac0cdot(0+h)cdot (0^2-(0+h)^2)0^2+(0+h)^2-0h=0.$$
        Note that:
        $$f_x(x,y)=fracpartial fpartial x=fracpartial fpartial xleft(fracx^3y-xy^3x^2+y^2right)=fracy(x^4+4x^2y^2-y^4)(x^2+y^2)^2;\
        f_y(x,y)=fracpartial fpartial y=fracpartial fpartial yleft(fracx^3y-xy^3x^2+y^2right)=fracx^5-4x^3y^2-xy^4(x^2+y^2)^2.\
        $$
        The partial derivative of partial derivative:
        $$fracpartial^2 fpartial xpartial y(0,0)=
        lim_hto 0 fracf_x(0,0+h)-f_x(0,0)h=\
        lim_hto 0 fracfrac(0+h)(0^4+4cdot 0^2(0+h)^2-(0+h)^4)(0^2+(0+h)^2)^2-0h=lim_hto 0 frac-h^5h^5=-1;\
        fracpartial^2 fpartial ypartial x(0,0)=
        lim_hto 0 fracf_y(0+h,0)-f_y(0,0)h=\
        lim_hto 0 fracfrac(0+h)^5-4(0+h)^3cdot 0^2-(0+h)cdot 0^4((0+h)^2+0^2)^2-0h=lim_hto 0 frach^5h^5=1.$$







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Aug 13 at 11:02









        farruhota

        13.9k2632




        13.9k2632




















            up vote
            2
            down vote













            First a comment



            You wrote But this does not make much sense in my opinion. Since $f(0,0)=0$...



            How can you induce an affirmation on second derivatives of a map based on its value at a point?



            Second regarding partial second derivatives



            You have for $(x,y)neq(0,0)$



            $$begincases
            fracpartial fpartial x(x,y) = frac(x^2+y^2)(3x^2y-y^3)+2x^2y(y^2-x^2)(x^2+y^2)^2\
            fracpartial fpartial y(x,y) = frac(x^2+y^2)(x^3-3x y^2)+2xy^2(y^2-x^2)(x^2+y^2)^2
            endcases$$



            In particular
            $$beginalign*
            fracpartial fpartial x(0,y) &= -y text for y neq 0\
            fracpartial fpartial x(x,0) &= x text for x neq 0
            endalign*$$
            which implies
            $$
            fracpartial^2 fpartial x partial y(0,0) =1 neq -1 = fracpartial^2 fpartial y partial x(0,0)$$



            You can have a look here for more details.






            share|cite|improve this answer






















            • Isn't there a typo here and on your website? Don't you mean $fracpartial fpartial y(x,0)=x$ for $xneq 0$
              – Cornman
              Aug 13 at 10:26










            • Also should it not be $fracpartial^2 fpartial xpartial y (0,0)=-1$ and $fracpartial^2 fpartial ypartial x(0,0)=1$?
              – Cornman
              Aug 13 at 10:28










            • You’re right. I’ll edit my answer.
              – mathcounterexamples.net
              Aug 13 at 11:17










            • Regarding your question Also should it not be..., the answer is negative. What I wrote is correct.
              – mathcounterexamples.net
              Aug 13 at 15:44














            up vote
            2
            down vote













            First a comment



            You wrote But this does not make much sense in my opinion. Since $f(0,0)=0$...



            How can you induce an affirmation on second derivatives of a map based on its value at a point?



            Second regarding partial second derivatives



            You have for $(x,y)neq(0,0)$



            $$begincases
            fracpartial fpartial x(x,y) = frac(x^2+y^2)(3x^2y-y^3)+2x^2y(y^2-x^2)(x^2+y^2)^2\
            fracpartial fpartial y(x,y) = frac(x^2+y^2)(x^3-3x y^2)+2xy^2(y^2-x^2)(x^2+y^2)^2
            endcases$$



            In particular
            $$beginalign*
            fracpartial fpartial x(0,y) &= -y text for y neq 0\
            fracpartial fpartial x(x,0) &= x text for x neq 0
            endalign*$$
            which implies
            $$
            fracpartial^2 fpartial x partial y(0,0) =1 neq -1 = fracpartial^2 fpartial y partial x(0,0)$$



            You can have a look here for more details.






            share|cite|improve this answer






















            • Isn't there a typo here and on your website? Don't you mean $fracpartial fpartial y(x,0)=x$ for $xneq 0$
              – Cornman
              Aug 13 at 10:26










            • Also should it not be $fracpartial^2 fpartial xpartial y (0,0)=-1$ and $fracpartial^2 fpartial ypartial x(0,0)=1$?
              – Cornman
              Aug 13 at 10:28










            • You’re right. I’ll edit my answer.
              – mathcounterexamples.net
              Aug 13 at 11:17










            • Regarding your question Also should it not be..., the answer is negative. What I wrote is correct.
              – mathcounterexamples.net
              Aug 13 at 15:44












            up vote
            2
            down vote










            up vote
            2
            down vote









            First a comment



            You wrote But this does not make much sense in my opinion. Since $f(0,0)=0$...



            How can you induce an affirmation on second derivatives of a map based on its value at a point?



            Second regarding partial second derivatives



            You have for $(x,y)neq(0,0)$



            $$begincases
            fracpartial fpartial x(x,y) = frac(x^2+y^2)(3x^2y-y^3)+2x^2y(y^2-x^2)(x^2+y^2)^2\
            fracpartial fpartial y(x,y) = frac(x^2+y^2)(x^3-3x y^2)+2xy^2(y^2-x^2)(x^2+y^2)^2
            endcases$$



            In particular
            $$beginalign*
            fracpartial fpartial x(0,y) &= -y text for y neq 0\
            fracpartial fpartial x(x,0) &= x text for x neq 0
            endalign*$$
            which implies
            $$
            fracpartial^2 fpartial x partial y(0,0) =1 neq -1 = fracpartial^2 fpartial y partial x(0,0)$$



            You can have a look here for more details.






            share|cite|improve this answer














            First a comment



            You wrote But this does not make much sense in my opinion. Since $f(0,0)=0$...



            How can you induce an affirmation on second derivatives of a map based on its value at a point?



            Second regarding partial second derivatives



            You have for $(x,y)neq(0,0)$



            $$begincases
            fracpartial fpartial x(x,y) = frac(x^2+y^2)(3x^2y-y^3)+2x^2y(y^2-x^2)(x^2+y^2)^2\
            fracpartial fpartial y(x,y) = frac(x^2+y^2)(x^3-3x y^2)+2xy^2(y^2-x^2)(x^2+y^2)^2
            endcases$$



            In particular
            $$beginalign*
            fracpartial fpartial x(0,y) &= -y text for y neq 0\
            fracpartial fpartial x(x,0) &= x text for x neq 0
            endalign*$$
            which implies
            $$
            fracpartial^2 fpartial x partial y(0,0) =1 neq -1 = fracpartial^2 fpartial y partial x(0,0)$$



            You can have a look here for more details.







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited Aug 13 at 11:18

























            answered Aug 13 at 10:16









            mathcounterexamples.net

            25k21754




            25k21754











            • Isn't there a typo here and on your website? Don't you mean $fracpartial fpartial y(x,0)=x$ for $xneq 0$
              – Cornman
              Aug 13 at 10:26










            • Also should it not be $fracpartial^2 fpartial xpartial y (0,0)=-1$ and $fracpartial^2 fpartial ypartial x(0,0)=1$?
              – Cornman
              Aug 13 at 10:28










            • You’re right. I’ll edit my answer.
              – mathcounterexamples.net
              Aug 13 at 11:17










            • Regarding your question Also should it not be..., the answer is negative. What I wrote is correct.
              – mathcounterexamples.net
              Aug 13 at 15:44
















            • Isn't there a typo here and on your website? Don't you mean $fracpartial fpartial y(x,0)=x$ for $xneq 0$
              – Cornman
              Aug 13 at 10:26










            • Also should it not be $fracpartial^2 fpartial xpartial y (0,0)=-1$ and $fracpartial^2 fpartial ypartial x(0,0)=1$?
              – Cornman
              Aug 13 at 10:28










            • You’re right. I’ll edit my answer.
              – mathcounterexamples.net
              Aug 13 at 11:17










            • Regarding your question Also should it not be..., the answer is negative. What I wrote is correct.
              – mathcounterexamples.net
              Aug 13 at 15:44















            Isn't there a typo here and on your website? Don't you mean $fracpartial fpartial y(x,0)=x$ for $xneq 0$
            – Cornman
            Aug 13 at 10:26




            Isn't there a typo here and on your website? Don't you mean $fracpartial fpartial y(x,0)=x$ for $xneq 0$
            – Cornman
            Aug 13 at 10:26












            Also should it not be $fracpartial^2 fpartial xpartial y (0,0)=-1$ and $fracpartial^2 fpartial ypartial x(0,0)=1$?
            – Cornman
            Aug 13 at 10:28




            Also should it not be $fracpartial^2 fpartial xpartial y (0,0)=-1$ and $fracpartial^2 fpartial ypartial x(0,0)=1$?
            – Cornman
            Aug 13 at 10:28












            You’re right. I’ll edit my answer.
            – mathcounterexamples.net
            Aug 13 at 11:17




            You’re right. I’ll edit my answer.
            – mathcounterexamples.net
            Aug 13 at 11:17












            Regarding your question Also should it not be..., the answer is negative. What I wrote is correct.
            – mathcounterexamples.net
            Aug 13 at 15:44




            Regarding your question Also should it not be..., the answer is negative. What I wrote is correct.
            – mathcounterexamples.net
            Aug 13 at 15:44


            這個網誌中的熱門文章

            How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

            Mutual Information Always Non-negative

            Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?