0

Let $A\subset \mathbb{R}^n$ an open set, and $g:A\to \mathbb{R}$ continously differentiable such that $g'(x)\not=0 $ for $x\in A$. If $M = g^{-1}(\{0\})\not=\emptyset$, then I want to show that the tangent space in $x\in M$ is

$$\{v_x\in \mathbb{R}^n_x: v \cdot \nabla g(x) = 0 \}$$

Note: We have defined as the tangent space the image $f_{*}(\mathbb{R}^n_x)$ where $f_{*}$ is defined as follows, Let $M^{k}$ be a differentiable manifold in $\mathbb{R}^n$ and $f: U \to V$ a coordinate system around $p=f(x)$ so we define the linear transformation $f_{*}:\mathbb{R}^k_x \to \mathbb{R}^n_x$ as

$$f_{*}(v_x)= Df(x)(v)_{f(x)}$$

My attempt:

This result for me is clear, but the problem Is how to write this formally, then I want to say that since $M$ is a differentiable manifold we have a coordinate system $f$ , now, what I want to have is the Jacobian matrix and then compute its image, the thing is that I don't know who is $f$ explicitly (I have tried to see M as level curves, but I don't know how that thing may help me to explain the things better). Can you help to fix this an give to all of this order? please

user162343
  • 3,245
  • Take care of the notation $g'(x)$ since $x=(x_1,\ldots,x_n)\in\mathbb{R}^n$ : you must write that $Dg(x)\neq 0$ as linear map of $\mathcal{L}\left(\mathbb{R}^n;\mathbb{R}\right)$. I think that the correct hypothesis is that there is a non zero partial derivative $\frac{\partial g}{\partial x_{i}}(x)$ for all $x\in A$. – Nicolas May 13 '15 at 14:12
  • Yes, I think your notation is better, but this are the hypothesis given, as I have posted, may be it has to be understood as what you are saying – user162343 May 13 '15 at 14:16

1 Answers1

1

I deal with the more general case where the manifold $M$ is (locally) defined by $q$ equations $g_i(x)=0$, $1\leq i\leq n$, $g_i\in\mathcal{C}^k\left(A;\mathbb{R}\right)$ where $k$ is the smoothness of $M$, AND the $Dg_i(x)$ are linearly independant.

Because the gradient $\nabla g_i(x)$ is defined as follow : $$\left\langle \nabla g_i(x),v\right\rangle=Dg_i(x)[v]$$ for all vector $v$ (where $\left\langle .,.\right\rangle$ denotes the inner product of $\mathbb{R}^n$), we must show that $$T_xM=\bigcap_{i=1}^n\ker Dg_i(x)$$ where $T_xM$ is the tangent (vector) space at the point $x$.

If $x\in M$, then $g_i(x)=0$, hence $Dg_i(x)=0$ so that any tangent vector at $x$ is in $\ker Dg_i(x)$, $1\leq i\leq n$.

Consider now $v\in \bigcap_{i=1}^n\ker Dg_i(x)$. By the assumption on the differentials $Dg_i(x)$, the matrix $$\begin{pmatrix}\frac{\partial g_{1}}{\partial x_{1}}(x) & \ldots & \frac{\partial g_{1}}{\partial x_{q}}(x) & \ldots & \frac{\partial g_{1}}{\partial x_{n}}(x)\\ \vdots & & \vdots & & \vdots\\ \frac{\partial g_{q}}{\partial x_{1}}(x) & \ldots & \frac{\partial g_{q}}{\partial x_{q}}(x) & \ldots & \frac{\partial g_{q}}{\partial x_{n}}(x) \end{pmatrix} $$ has a rank equals to $q$. We can permute its columns so that the matrix $\left(\frac{\partial g_{i}}{\partial x_{h}}(x)\right)_{1\leq i,j\leq q}$ is invertible. We then write $$\mathbb{R}^n\simeq\mathbb{R}^q\oplus\mathbb{R}^{n-q}\quad,\quad x=(x',x'')\quad,\quad v=(v',v'')$$ so that if $g=\left(g_1,\ldots,g_q\right):A\longrightarrow\mathbb{R}^q$, then $$0=Dg(x)[v]=Dg(x)_q[v']+Dg(x)_{n-q}[v'']$$ where $Dg(x)_q$ and $Dg(x)_{n-q}$ are the partial differentials of $g$ on $\mathbb{R}^q$ and $\mathbb{R}^{n-q}$, respectively. Hence $$v'=-Dg_{q}(x)^{-1}\left(Dg_{n-q}(x)[v'']\right).$$ We have proven that $g$ as an invertible partial differential : by the implicit functions theorem, we can (locally) write $h(x'')=x'$ where $h$ is the "implicit function", satisfying $Dh(x'')[v'']=v'$. Let us define the curve $$\gamma(t)=(\underbrace{h(x''+tv'')}_{\in\mathbb{R}^q},\underbrace{x''+tv''}_{\in\mathbb{R}^{n-q}})\in\mathbb{R}^n.$$ Then $$\gamma(0)=\left(h(x''),x''\right)=(x',x'')=x,$$ $$\dot{\gamma}(0)=\left(Dh(x'')[v''],v''\right)=(v',v'')=v.$$ We usually define the tangent (vector) space as the set of all such derivatives. But if we use the definition of the question, then each component $f_i(x)$ for $1\leq i\leq q$ can be taken as the $i$-th component of the vector $h(x''+tv'')\in\mathbb{R}^q$ and each component $f_j(x)$ for $q+1\leq j\leq n$ can be taken as the $(j-q)$-th component of the vector $x''+tv''\in\mathbb{R}^{n-q}$ : doing this, we have written the initial vector $v$ as $f_*(v)$ at the point $x$.

Nicolas
  • 3,326
  • In your case, there is one non zero partial derivative $\frac{\partial g}{\partial x_i}(x)$ hence you can take $q=1$. – Nicolas May 13 '15 at 15:27
  • Let me check it and I tell you if I got a doub right? – user162343 May 13 '15 at 15:51
  • Well I am not understanding the part after the matrix :( thanks a lot – user162343 May 13 '15 at 18:21
  • And the first part of the smoothness :( – user162343 May 13 '15 at 18:22
  • @user162343 I can specify some points if you want : 1) The first part about the smoothness is just the definition of "the smoothness of a submanifold in $\mathbb{R}^n$" : it is defined with some functions g_i that are $\mathcal{C}^{k_i}$, and if $k=\min{k_i}$ is the smoothness of the manifold. In your special case, it is just the regularity of the function $g$. – Nicolas May 13 '15 at 19:18
  • Ok, the thing is that we haven't cover this part :(, Can you offer me a prove of this with other machinery less suitable ? – user162343 May 13 '15 at 19:22
  • The part after the matrix is just an application of the implicit functions theorem : you need to have a Banach space which is decomposed in the direct sum of two (closed) subspaces, and a function such that the partial differential on one of the subspaces in an isomorphism (in finite dimension, you can check that the jacobian matrix is full ranked). Then there is an "implicit function" that is a local diffeomorphism between two neighborhoods of the two subspaces ; I used it to show that any vector $v$ in each $\ker Dg_i(x)$ can be expressed has the differential of $f_*$ at the point $x$.
  • – Nicolas May 13 '15 at 19:23
  • Unfortunately, I think there is no simple way to do this. The implicit functions theorem is needed when we do differential geometry in $\mathbb{R}^n$. It is not easy at the beginning, but you need to learn to use it. – Nicolas May 13 '15 at 19:24
  • Yes, I know that theorem, the thing is that the only thing about differential manifolds is the definition and the result posted here http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1280770/explain-why-this-set-is-not-a-differentiable-manifold?noredirect=1#comment2600641_1280770 – user162343 May 13 '15 at 19:28
  • @user162343 If you are not familiar to manifolds, maybe this question was a bit hard at first. Seeing your other question, I wonder if you have not a precise example in mind instead of the general abstract case ? If not, then I'm sorry I can not be more clear. – Nicolas May 13 '15 at 19:34
  • Ok so what can I do, jajajaj I am a little confused about all this questions because the lectures examples where clear, but this questions are very difficult to write for me, because I am not very acquainted :( – user162343 May 13 '15 at 19:37