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

      44615




      44615










      asked 4 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
            3 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            Oh, that's a good point. Is there a fix for this?
            $endgroup$
            – Randall
            3 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
              3 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              Oh, that's a good point. Is there a fix for this?
              $endgroup$
              – Randall
              3 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
              3 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              Oh, that's a good point. Is there a fix for this?
              $endgroup$
              – Randall
              3 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
              3 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              Oh, that's a good point. Is there a fix for this?
              $endgroup$
              – Randall
              3 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
              3 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              Oh, that's a good point. Is there a fix for this?
              $endgroup$
              – Randall
              3 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
            3 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
            3 hours ago












            $begingroup$
            Oh, that's a good point. Is there a fix for this?
            $endgroup$
            – Randall
            3 hours ago




            $begingroup$
            Oh, that's a good point. Is there a fix for this?
            $endgroup$
            – Randall
            3 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

                    flock() on closed filehandle LOCK_FILE at /usr/bin/apt-mirror

                    Image
                    0 I recently upgraded an Ubuntu 16.04 virtual machine to 18.04. I regularly use this VM to run apt-mirror at school on their high-speed internet, then rsync these files to my rack-mount server at home for updating multiple computers at home without wasting the tiny amount of bandwidth I have there. Since updating I can't get apt-mirror to run on my VM. It keeps giving the error: flock() on closed filehandle LOCK_FILE at /usr/bin/apt-mirror line 214 immediately followed by: apt-mirror is already running, exiting at /usr/bin/apt-mirror line 217 apt-mirror is NOT running, and does not have a cron job. I've tried rebooting, and even looked for the old-style lockfile to delete, but I guess that method is no longer used. Is there some way to force unlock this so I can run apt-mirror? UPDATE: So... I f...
                    Read more

                    Mangá

                    Image
                      Nota:  Não confundir com Manga. Mangás e Animes Mangá Mangaká • Tankōbon Film comic La nouvelle manga Mangá original em inglês Anime História Animação influenciada por animes • Filler • OVA • Seiyū Públicos Kodomo • Shōjo • Shōnen Josei • Seinen Gêneros Mahō shōjo • Mecha • Harém Ecchi • Hentai ( Yaoi • Yuri Futanari • Shotacon • Lolicon Toddlercon ) Termos Bishōjo • Chibi • Fan service Gaiden • Kawaii • Kaitō • Light novel Mahō shōnen • Moe (antropomorfismo • Kemonomimi Nekomimi ) • Super deformed Omake • Tsundere • Yonkoma Listas Mangás • Animes • Ecchi • Mangaka • Estúdios • Revistas Fãs ( otaku ) Anime Music Video Convenções • Cosplay Dōjinshi • Fansub • Fandub • Fujoshi OS-tan • Scanlation Portal de Anime e mangá v d e O mangá (português brasileiro) ou manga (português europeu) [ 1 ] (em japonês: 漫画 , manga ? , lit. “história em quadrinhos”) , é a ...
                    Read more

                    Eduardo VII do Reino Unido

                    Image
                    Eduardo VII Rei do Reino Unido da Grã-Bretanha e Irlanda e dos Domínios Britânicos de Além-mar Imperador da Índia Rei do Reino Unido e Imperador da Índia Reinado 22 de janeiro de 1901 a 6 de maio de 1910 Coroação 9 de agosto de 1902 Delhi Durbar 1 de janeiro de 1903 Predecessora Vitória Sucessor Jorge V   Esposa Alexandra da Dinamarca Descendência Alberto Vitor, Duque de Clarence e Avondale Jorge V do Reino Unido Luísa, Princesa Real Vitória de Gales Maud de Gales Alexandre João de Gales Casa Saxe-Coburgo-Gota Nome completo Alberto Eduardo Nascimento 9 de novembro de 1841   Palácio de Buckingham, Londres, Reino Unido Morte 6 de maio de 1910 (68 anos)   Palácio de Buckingham, Londres, Reino Unido Enterro Capela de São Jorge, Windsor, Berkshire, Reino Unido 20 de maio de 1910 Pai Alberto de Saxe-Coburgo-Gota Mãe Vitória do Reino Unido Assinatura ...
                    Read more