Direction vectors are linearly dependent, if $D_vf(x)=D_wf(x)=0$ with $operatornamegrad f(x)neq 0$

Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Let $f colon mathbbR^2 to mathbbR$ be continuous differentiable and $x inmathbbR^2$ with $operatornamegrad f(x) neq 0$. Let $v,w in mathbbR^2$ be direction vectors.
If $D_v f(x) = D_w f(x)=0$ then are $v$ and $w$ linearly dependent.
For my proof I use the following theorem:
Let $U subset mathbbR^m$ be open and $f colon U to mathbbR$ continuous differentiable. Then it holds for $x in U$ and $v in mathbbR^m$ with $|v| = 1$ that $D_v f(x) = langle v, operatornamegrad f(x) rangle$.
Proof:
With the theorem above and the assumption, we know that
$$
langle v, operatornamegrad f(x) rangle
= langle w, operatornamegrad f(x) rangle.
$$
It holds that
beginalign*
langle v, operatornamegrad f(x) rangle
&oversetphantomD_vf(x)=D_wf(x)=
sum_i=1^2 v_i cdot fracpartial fpartial x_i
= v_1 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_1
+ v_2 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_2 \
&oversetD_vf(x)=D_wf(x)=
sum_i=1^2 w_i cdot fracpartial fpartial x_i
= w_1 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_1
+ w_2 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_2
= 0
endalign*
Therefore
beginalign*
&,
v_1 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_1
+ v_2 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_2
= w_1 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_1
+ w_2 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_2 \
iff&,
(v_1-w_1) fracpartial fpartial x_1
+ (v_2-w_2) fracpartial fpartial x_2
= 0
endalign*
Since $operatornamegrad f(x) = left(fracpartial fpartial x_1, fracpartial fpartial x_wright) neq 0$ this is a non trivial linear combination of $0$.
Hence $v$ and $w$ are linearly dependent.
Is this proof correct?
I am actually not sure if I used the correct scalar product $langle cdot, cdot rangle$.
Thanks in advance.
multivariable-calculus proof-verification
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Let $f colon mathbbR^2 to mathbbR$ be continuous differentiable and $x inmathbbR^2$ with $operatornamegrad f(x) neq 0$. Let $v,w in mathbbR^2$ be direction vectors.
If $D_v f(x) = D_w f(x)=0$ then are $v$ and $w$ linearly dependent.
For my proof I use the following theorem:
Let $U subset mathbbR^m$ be open and $f colon U to mathbbR$ continuous differentiable. Then it holds for $x in U$ and $v in mathbbR^m$ with $|v| = 1$ that $D_v f(x) = langle v, operatornamegrad f(x) rangle$.
Proof:
With the theorem above and the assumption, we know that
$$
langle v, operatornamegrad f(x) rangle
= langle w, operatornamegrad f(x) rangle.
$$
It holds that
beginalign*
langle v, operatornamegrad f(x) rangle
&oversetphantomD_vf(x)=D_wf(x)=
sum_i=1^2 v_i cdot fracpartial fpartial x_i
= v_1 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_1
+ v_2 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_2 \
&oversetD_vf(x)=D_wf(x)=
sum_i=1^2 w_i cdot fracpartial fpartial x_i
= w_1 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_1
+ w_2 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_2
= 0
endalign*
Therefore
beginalign*
&,
v_1 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_1
+ v_2 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_2
= w_1 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_1
+ w_2 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_2 \
iff&,
(v_1-w_1) fracpartial fpartial x_1
+ (v_2-w_2) fracpartial fpartial x_2
= 0
endalign*
Since $operatornamegrad f(x) = left(fracpartial fpartial x_1, fracpartial fpartial x_wright) neq 0$ this is a non trivial linear combination of $0$.
Hence $v$ and $w$ are linearly dependent.
Is this proof correct?
I am actually not sure if I used the correct scalar product $langle cdot, cdot rangle$.
Thanks in advance.
multivariable-calculus proof-verification
$(v_1-w_1),f_1^(1)+(v_2-w_2),f^(2)$ is not a linear combination of the vectors $v$ and $w$, nor does it imply that they are linearly dependent. E.g., if $nabla f=(1,1)$, then this quantity vanishes for $v=(1,0)$ and $w=(0,1)$.
â amd
Aug 25 at 1:27
@amd Thanks for pointing that out. Is the approach not suitable in general? How can I proof this instead?
â Cornman
Aug 25 at 1:37
Both $v$ and $w$ satisfy a particular homogeneous linear equation. What can you say about that equationâÂÂs solution space?
â amd
Aug 25 at 2:34
@amd I looked into my lecture notes, but I did not find anything about a homogeneous linear equation, which $v$ and $w$ satisfy. Do you have a source on this topic? Or do you just mean the quoted theorem, which gives: $beginpmatrix v_1& v_2\ w_1&w_2endpmatrixcdotoperatornamegradf(x)=beginpmatrix0\0endpmatrix$
â Cornman
Aug 25 at 3:31
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Let $f colon mathbbR^2 to mathbbR$ be continuous differentiable and $x inmathbbR^2$ with $operatornamegrad f(x) neq 0$. Let $v,w in mathbbR^2$ be direction vectors.
If $D_v f(x) = D_w f(x)=0$ then are $v$ and $w$ linearly dependent.
For my proof I use the following theorem:
Let $U subset mathbbR^m$ be open and $f colon U to mathbbR$ continuous differentiable. Then it holds for $x in U$ and $v in mathbbR^m$ with $|v| = 1$ that $D_v f(x) = langle v, operatornamegrad f(x) rangle$.
Proof:
With the theorem above and the assumption, we know that
$$
langle v, operatornamegrad f(x) rangle
= langle w, operatornamegrad f(x) rangle.
$$
It holds that
beginalign*
langle v, operatornamegrad f(x) rangle
&oversetphantomD_vf(x)=D_wf(x)=
sum_i=1^2 v_i cdot fracpartial fpartial x_i
= v_1 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_1
+ v_2 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_2 \
&oversetD_vf(x)=D_wf(x)=
sum_i=1^2 w_i cdot fracpartial fpartial x_i
= w_1 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_1
+ w_2 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_2
= 0
endalign*
Therefore
beginalign*
&,
v_1 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_1
+ v_2 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_2
= w_1 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_1
+ w_2 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_2 \
iff&,
(v_1-w_1) fracpartial fpartial x_1
+ (v_2-w_2) fracpartial fpartial x_2
= 0
endalign*
Since $operatornamegrad f(x) = left(fracpartial fpartial x_1, fracpartial fpartial x_wright) neq 0$ this is a non trivial linear combination of $0$.
Hence $v$ and $w$ are linearly dependent.
Is this proof correct?
I am actually not sure if I used the correct scalar product $langle cdot, cdot rangle$.
Thanks in advance.
multivariable-calculus proof-verification
Let $f colon mathbbR^2 to mathbbR$ be continuous differentiable and $x inmathbbR^2$ with $operatornamegrad f(x) neq 0$. Let $v,w in mathbbR^2$ be direction vectors.
If $D_v f(x) = D_w f(x)=0$ then are $v$ and $w$ linearly dependent.
For my proof I use the following theorem:
Let $U subset mathbbR^m$ be open and $f colon U to mathbbR$ continuous differentiable. Then it holds for $x in U$ and $v in mathbbR^m$ with $|v| = 1$ that $D_v f(x) = langle v, operatornamegrad f(x) rangle$.
Proof:
With the theorem above and the assumption, we know that
$$
langle v, operatornamegrad f(x) rangle
= langle w, operatornamegrad f(x) rangle.
$$
It holds that
beginalign*
langle v, operatornamegrad f(x) rangle
&oversetphantomD_vf(x)=D_wf(x)=
sum_i=1^2 v_i cdot fracpartial fpartial x_i
= v_1 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_1
+ v_2 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_2 \
&oversetD_vf(x)=D_wf(x)=
sum_i=1^2 w_i cdot fracpartial fpartial x_i
= w_1 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_1
+ w_2 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_2
= 0
endalign*
Therefore
beginalign*
&,
v_1 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_1
+ v_2 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_2
= w_1 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_1
+ w_2 cdot fracpartial fpartial x_2 \
iff&,
(v_1-w_1) fracpartial fpartial x_1
+ (v_2-w_2) fracpartial fpartial x_2
= 0
endalign*
Since $operatornamegrad f(x) = left(fracpartial fpartial x_1, fracpartial fpartial x_wright) neq 0$ this is a non trivial linear combination of $0$.
Hence $v$ and $w$ are linearly dependent.
Is this proof correct?
I am actually not sure if I used the correct scalar product $langle cdot, cdot rangle$.
Thanks in advance.
multivariable-calculus proof-verification
edited Aug 25 at 12:46
Jendrik Stelzner
7,57221037
7,57221037
asked Aug 25 at 1:03
Cornman
2,70421228
2,70421228
$(v_1-w_1),f_1^(1)+(v_2-w_2),f^(2)$ is not a linear combination of the vectors $v$ and $w$, nor does it imply that they are linearly dependent. E.g., if $nabla f=(1,1)$, then this quantity vanishes for $v=(1,0)$ and $w=(0,1)$.
â amd
Aug 25 at 1:27
@amd Thanks for pointing that out. Is the approach not suitable in general? How can I proof this instead?
â Cornman
Aug 25 at 1:37
Both $v$ and $w$ satisfy a particular homogeneous linear equation. What can you say about that equationâÂÂs solution space?
â amd
Aug 25 at 2:34
@amd I looked into my lecture notes, but I did not find anything about a homogeneous linear equation, which $v$ and $w$ satisfy. Do you have a source on this topic? Or do you just mean the quoted theorem, which gives: $beginpmatrix v_1& v_2\ w_1&w_2endpmatrixcdotoperatornamegradf(x)=beginpmatrix0\0endpmatrix$
â Cornman
Aug 25 at 3:31
add a comment |Â
$(v_1-w_1),f_1^(1)+(v_2-w_2),f^(2)$ is not a linear combination of the vectors $v$ and $w$, nor does it imply that they are linearly dependent. E.g., if $nabla f=(1,1)$, then this quantity vanishes for $v=(1,0)$ and $w=(0,1)$.
â amd
Aug 25 at 1:27
@amd Thanks for pointing that out. Is the approach not suitable in general? How can I proof this instead?
â Cornman
Aug 25 at 1:37
Both $v$ and $w$ satisfy a particular homogeneous linear equation. What can you say about that equationâÂÂs solution space?
â amd
Aug 25 at 2:34
@amd I looked into my lecture notes, but I did not find anything about a homogeneous linear equation, which $v$ and $w$ satisfy. Do you have a source on this topic? Or do you just mean the quoted theorem, which gives: $beginpmatrix v_1& v_2\ w_1&w_2endpmatrixcdotoperatornamegradf(x)=beginpmatrix0\0endpmatrix$
â Cornman
Aug 25 at 3:31
$(v_1-w_1),f_1^(1)+(v_2-w_2),f^(2)$ is not a linear combination of the vectors $v$ and $w$, nor does it imply that they are linearly dependent. E.g., if $nabla f=(1,1)$, then this quantity vanishes for $v=(1,0)$ and $w=(0,1)$.
â amd
Aug 25 at 1:27
$(v_1-w_1),f_1^(1)+(v_2-w_2),f^(2)$ is not a linear combination of the vectors $v$ and $w$, nor does it imply that they are linearly dependent. E.g., if $nabla f=(1,1)$, then this quantity vanishes for $v=(1,0)$ and $w=(0,1)$.
â amd
Aug 25 at 1:27
@amd Thanks for pointing that out. Is the approach not suitable in general? How can I proof this instead?
â Cornman
Aug 25 at 1:37
@amd Thanks for pointing that out. Is the approach not suitable in general? How can I proof this instead?
â Cornman
Aug 25 at 1:37
Both $v$ and $w$ satisfy a particular homogeneous linear equation. What can you say about that equationâÂÂs solution space?
â amd
Aug 25 at 2:34
Both $v$ and $w$ satisfy a particular homogeneous linear equation. What can you say about that equationâÂÂs solution space?
â amd
Aug 25 at 2:34
@amd I looked into my lecture notes, but I did not find anything about a homogeneous linear equation, which $v$ and $w$ satisfy. Do you have a source on this topic? Or do you just mean the quoted theorem, which gives: $beginpmatrix v_1& v_2\ w_1&w_2endpmatrixcdotoperatornamegradf(x)=beginpmatrix0\0endpmatrix$
â Cornman
Aug 25 at 3:31
@amd I looked into my lecture notes, but I did not find anything about a homogeneous linear equation, which $v$ and $w$ satisfy. Do you have a source on this topic? Or do you just mean the quoted theorem, which gives: $beginpmatrix v_1& v_2\ w_1&w_2endpmatrixcdotoperatornamegradf(x)=beginpmatrix0\0endpmatrix$
â Cornman
Aug 25 at 3:31
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
For given $x$ in the domain of $f$ the derivative $df(x)$ (also denoted by $f'(x)$, or similar) is a linear map acting as
$$df(x):quad mathbb R^2tomathbb R,qquad Xmapstolanglenabla f(x),Xrangle ,$$
whereby $langlecdot,cdotrangle$ denotes the standard scalar product in $mathbb R^2$, as in the question.
Since $nabla f(x)ne0$ by assumption this map has rank $1$; hence its kernel $K$ has dimension $2-1=1$. We are told that both $v$ and $w$ are in $K$; therefore $v$ and $w$ have to be linearly dependent.
Note that this argument does not work for an $f:>mathbb R^ntomathbb R$ with $n>2$.
How do we get $df(x).X=langlenabla f(x), Xrangle$ and how is $langlecdot, cdotrangle$ defined here? Standard scalar product on $mathbbR^2$?
â Cornman
Aug 25 at 15:06
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
For given $x$ in the domain of $f$ the derivative $df(x)$ (also denoted by $f'(x)$, or similar) is a linear map acting as
$$df(x):quad mathbb R^2tomathbb R,qquad Xmapstolanglenabla f(x),Xrangle ,$$
whereby $langlecdot,cdotrangle$ denotes the standard scalar product in $mathbb R^2$, as in the question.
Since $nabla f(x)ne0$ by assumption this map has rank $1$; hence its kernel $K$ has dimension $2-1=1$. We are told that both $v$ and $w$ are in $K$; therefore $v$ and $w$ have to be linearly dependent.
Note that this argument does not work for an $f:>mathbb R^ntomathbb R$ with $n>2$.
How do we get $df(x).X=langlenabla f(x), Xrangle$ and how is $langlecdot, cdotrangle$ defined here? Standard scalar product on $mathbbR^2$?
â Cornman
Aug 25 at 15:06
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
For given $x$ in the domain of $f$ the derivative $df(x)$ (also denoted by $f'(x)$, or similar) is a linear map acting as
$$df(x):quad mathbb R^2tomathbb R,qquad Xmapstolanglenabla f(x),Xrangle ,$$
whereby $langlecdot,cdotrangle$ denotes the standard scalar product in $mathbb R^2$, as in the question.
Since $nabla f(x)ne0$ by assumption this map has rank $1$; hence its kernel $K$ has dimension $2-1=1$. We are told that both $v$ and $w$ are in $K$; therefore $v$ and $w$ have to be linearly dependent.
Note that this argument does not work for an $f:>mathbb R^ntomathbb R$ with $n>2$.
How do we get $df(x).X=langlenabla f(x), Xrangle$ and how is $langlecdot, cdotrangle$ defined here? Standard scalar product on $mathbbR^2$?
â Cornman
Aug 25 at 15:06
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
For given $x$ in the domain of $f$ the derivative $df(x)$ (also denoted by $f'(x)$, or similar) is a linear map acting as
$$df(x):quad mathbb R^2tomathbb R,qquad Xmapstolanglenabla f(x),Xrangle ,$$
whereby $langlecdot,cdotrangle$ denotes the standard scalar product in $mathbb R^2$, as in the question.
Since $nabla f(x)ne0$ by assumption this map has rank $1$; hence its kernel $K$ has dimension $2-1=1$. We are told that both $v$ and $w$ are in $K$; therefore $v$ and $w$ have to be linearly dependent.
Note that this argument does not work for an $f:>mathbb R^ntomathbb R$ with $n>2$.
For given $x$ in the domain of $f$ the derivative $df(x)$ (also denoted by $f'(x)$, or similar) is a linear map acting as
$$df(x):quad mathbb R^2tomathbb R,qquad Xmapstolanglenabla f(x),Xrangle ,$$
whereby $langlecdot,cdotrangle$ denotes the standard scalar product in $mathbb R^2$, as in the question.
Since $nabla f(x)ne0$ by assumption this map has rank $1$; hence its kernel $K$ has dimension $2-1=1$. We are told that both $v$ and $w$ are in $K$; therefore $v$ and $w$ have to be linearly dependent.
Note that this argument does not work for an $f:>mathbb R^ntomathbb R$ with $n>2$.
edited Aug 25 at 15:13
answered Aug 25 at 12:28
Christian Blatter
165k7109310
165k7109310
How do we get $df(x).X=langlenabla f(x), Xrangle$ and how is $langlecdot, cdotrangle$ defined here? Standard scalar product on $mathbbR^2$?
â Cornman
Aug 25 at 15:06
add a comment |Â
How do we get $df(x).X=langlenabla f(x), Xrangle$ and how is $langlecdot, cdotrangle$ defined here? Standard scalar product on $mathbbR^2$?
â Cornman
Aug 25 at 15:06
How do we get $df(x).X=langlenabla f(x), Xrangle$ and how is $langlecdot, cdotrangle$ defined here? Standard scalar product on $mathbbR^2$?
â Cornman
Aug 25 at 15:06
How do we get $df(x).X=langlenabla f(x), Xrangle$ and how is $langlecdot, cdotrangle$ defined here? Standard scalar product on $mathbbR^2$?
â Cornman
Aug 25 at 15:06
add a comment |Â
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
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2893719%2fdirection-vectors-are-linearly-dependent-if-d-vfx-d-wfx-0-with-operator%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
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
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
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
$(v_1-w_1),f_1^(1)+(v_2-w_2),f^(2)$ is not a linear combination of the vectors $v$ and $w$, nor does it imply that they are linearly dependent. E.g., if $nabla f=(1,1)$, then this quantity vanishes for $v=(1,0)$ and $w=(0,1)$.
â amd
Aug 25 at 1:27
@amd Thanks for pointing that out. Is the approach not suitable in general? How can I proof this instead?
â Cornman
Aug 25 at 1:37
Both $v$ and $w$ satisfy a particular homogeneous linear equation. What can you say about that equationâÂÂs solution space?
â amd
Aug 25 at 2:34
@amd I looked into my lecture notes, but I did not find anything about a homogeneous linear equation, which $v$ and $w$ satisfy. Do you have a source on this topic? Or do you just mean the quoted theorem, which gives: $beginpmatrix v_1& v_2\ w_1&w_2endpmatrixcdotoperatornamegradf(x)=beginpmatrix0\0endpmatrix$
â Cornman
Aug 25 at 3:31