what does it mean by determinant of Jacobian matrix = 0?












5












$begingroup$


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







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    5












    $begingroup$


    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







    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      5












      5








      5





      $begingroup$


      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







      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      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






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited 2 hours ago









      El Pasta

      44415




      44415










      asked 3 hours ago









      Yibei HeYibei He

      1758




      1758






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2












          $begingroup$

          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.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            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



















          2












          $begingroup$

          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 $v$.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













            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
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            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









            2












            $begingroup$

            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.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              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
















            2












            $begingroup$

            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.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              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














            2












            2








            2





            $begingroup$

            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.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            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.







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            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


















            • $begingroup$
              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











            2












            $begingroup$

            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 $v$.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$


















              2












              $begingroup$

              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 $v$.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$
















                2












                2








                2





                $begingroup$

                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 $v$.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$



                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 $v$.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered 2 hours ago









                Robert IsraelRobert Israel

                320k23209459




                320k23209459






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    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.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    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





















































                    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







                    -

                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Fluorita

                    Image
                    Fluorita Fluorita (blau) amb pirita (daurat). Fórmula química CaF 2 Epònim fluor Localitat tipus Jáchymov Classificació Categoria Halurs Nickel-Strunz 10a ed. 3.AB.25 Nickel-Strunz 9a ed. 3.AB.25 Nickel-Strunz 8a ed. III/A.08 Dana 9.2.1.1 Heys 8.4.7 Propietats Sistema cristal·lí Cúbic Hàbit cristal·lí Sol presentar cubs; menys freqüentment dodecaedres. De vegades hexaoctaedres i tetrahexaedres. Per la combinació d'aquestes formes, les arestes dels cubs són sovint modificades. De vegades els cristalls poden presentar diferències de creixement entre les cares. Sovint s'observen cristalls compostos per sobrecreixement. Pot ser massiva, compacta, terrosa, columnar (poc freqüent), globular en agregats o botroïdal. Estructura cristal·lina a = 5.4626Å Simetria Classe (H-M): m 3 m (4/ m 3 2/ m ) - Hexoctaèdric; Grup espacial: Fm 3 m Color Blanc, groc, verd, violeta, vermell, rosa, blau o negre Mac...
                    Read more

                    Hulsita

                    Image
                    Hulsita Hulsita de la localitat tipus Fórmula química Fe 2+ 2 Fe 3+ O 2 BO 3 Epònim Alfred Hulse Brooks Localitat tipus mont Brooks, península de Seward, Nome Borough, Alaska, Estats Units Classificació Categoria borats Nickel-Strunz 10a ed. 6.AB.45 Nickel-Strunz 9a ed. 6.AB.45 Nickel-Strunz 8a ed. V/G.03 Dana 24.2.3.1 Heys 9.6.4 Propietats Sistema cristal·lí monoclínic Estructura cristal·lina a = 10,68Å; b = 3,09Å; c = 5,43Å; β = 94,15° Color negre Macles en [001]; un membre de la macla es troba girat 120° en relació a l'altre Exfoliació bona en {110} Duresa 3 Lluïssor vítria, submetàl·lica Densitat 4,28 g/cm 3 (mesurada); Més informació Estatus IMA mineral heretat (G) i mineral heretat (G) Any d'aprovació 1908 Referències [1] La hulsita és un mineral de la classe dels borats, que pertany al grup de la pinakiolita. Rep el seu nom en honor del nord-americà ...
                    Read more

                    Península de Txukotka

                    Image
                    Península de Txukotka Tipus Península Ubicació 66° N, 172° O  /  66°N , 172°O  / 66; -172 Mar mar dels Txuktxis La península de Txukotka a l'extrem oriental de Sibèria La península de Txukotka o península dels Txuktxis (en rus Чуко́тский полуо́стров , Txukotski poluóstrov ) és una península que es troba a l'extrem oriental d'Euràsia. Contingut 1 Descripció 2 Població 3 Vegeu també 4 Bibliografia Descripció L'estret de Bering, entre la península de Txukotka i la península de Seward a Alaska Foto de satèl·lit de la zona amb la península de Txukotka a l'esquerra El seu punt més extrem és el cap Dezhnev a la vora del nucli d'Uelen, un dels poquíssims llocs habitats de la zona. Al nord limita amb el mar dels Txuktxis i amb el mar de Bering al sud i amb l'estret de Bering a l'est. A la costa sud es troben la badia de Sant Lawrence i la badia de Kresta. La penínsu...
                    Read more