
# 6.7: Inverse and Implicit Functions. Open and Closed Maps


I. "If $$f \in C D^{1}$$ at $$\vec{p},$$ then $$f$$ resembles a linear map (namely $$d f )$$ at $$\vec{p}."$$ Pursuing this basic idea, we first make precise our notion of "$$f \in C D^{1}$$ at $$\vec{p}$$."

Definition 1

A map $$f : E^{\prime} \rightarrow E$$ is continuously differentiable, or of class $$C D^{1}$$ (written $$f \in C D^{1}),$$ at $$\vec{p}$$ iff the following statement is true:

$\begin{array}{l}{\text { Given any } \varepsilon>0, \text { there is } \delta>0 \text { such that } f \text { is differentiable on the }} \\ {\text { globe } \overline{G}=\overline{G_{\vec{p}}(\delta)}, \text { with }} \\ {\qquad\|d f(\vec{x} ; \cdot)-d f(\vec{p} ; \cdot)\|<\varepsilon \text { for all } \vec{x} \in \overline{G}.}\end{array}$

By Problem 10 in §5, this definition agrees with Definition 1 §5, but is no longer limited to the case $$E^{\prime}=E^{n}\left(C^{n}\right).$$ See also Problems 1 and 2 below.

We now obtain the following result.

Theorem $$\PageIndex{1}$$

Let $$E^{\prime}$$ and $$E$$ be complete. If $$f : E^{\prime} \rightarrow E$$ is of class $$C D^{1}$$ at $$\vec{p}$$ and if $$d f(\vec{p} ; \cdot)$$ is bijective (§6), then $$f$$ is one-to-one on some globe $$\overline{G}=\overline{G_{\vec{p}}}(\delta).$$

Thus $$f$$ "locally" resembles df $$(\vec{p} ; \cdot)$$ in this respect.

Proof

Set $$\phi=d f(\vec{p} ; \cdot)$$ and

$\left\|\phi^{-1}\right\|=\frac{1}{\varepsilon}$

(cf. Theorem 2 of §6).

By Definition 1, fix $$\delta>0$$ so that for $$\vec{x} \in \overline{G}=\overline{G_{\vec{p}}(\delta)}$$.

$\|d f(\vec{x} ; \cdot)-\phi\|<\frac{1}{2} \varepsilon.$

Then by Note 5 in §2,

$(\forall \vec{x} \in \overline{G})\left(\forall \vec{u} \in E^{\prime}\right) \quad|d f(\vec{x} ; \vec{u})-\phi(\vec{u})| \leq \frac{1}{2} \varepsilon|\vec{u}|.$

Now fix any $$\vec{r}, \vec{s} \in \overline{G}, \vec{r} \neq \vec{s},$$ and set $$\vec{u}=\vec{r}-\vec{s} \neq 0.$$ Again, by Note 5 in §2,

$|\vec{u}|=\left|\phi^{-1}(\phi(\vec{u}))\right| \leq\left\|\phi^{-1}\right\||\phi(\vec{u})|=\frac{1}{\varepsilon}|\phi(\vec{u})|;$

so

$0<\varepsilon|\vec{u}| \leq|\phi(\vec{u})|.$

By convexity, $$\overline{G} \supseteq I=L[\vec{s}, \vec{r}],$$ so (1) holds for $$\vec{x} \in I, \vec{x}=\vec{s}+t \vec{u}, 0 \leq t \leq 1$$.

Noting this, set

$h(t)=f(\vec{s}+t \vec{u})-t \phi(\vec{u}), \quad t \in E^{1}.$

Then for $$0 \leq t \leq 1$$,

\begin{aligned} h^{\prime}(t) &=D_{\vec{u}} f(\vec{s}+t \vec{u})-\phi(\vec{u}) \\ &=d f(\vec{s}+t \vec{u} ; \vec{u})-\phi(\vec{u}). \end{aligned}

(Verify!) Thus by (1) and (2),

\begin{aligned} \sup _{0 \leq t \leq 1}\left|h^{\prime}(t)\right| &=\sup _{0 \leq t \leq 1}|d f(\vec{s}+t \vec{u} ; \vec{u})-\phi(\vec{u})| \\ & \leq \frac{\varepsilon}{2}|\vec{u}| \leq \frac{1}{2}|\phi(\vec{u})|. \end{aligned}

(Explain!) Now, by Corollary 1 in Chapter 5, §4,

$|h(1)-h(0)| \leq(1-0) \cdot \sup _{0 \leq t \leq 1}\left|h^{\prime}(t)\right| \leq \frac{1}{2}|\phi(\vec{u})|.$

As $$h(0)=f(\vec{s})$$ and

$h(1)=f(\vec{s}+\vec{u})-\phi(\vec{u})=f(\vec{r})-\phi(\vec{u}),$

we obtain (even if $$\vec{r}=\vec{s})$$

$|f(\vec{r})-f(\vec{s})-\phi(\vec{u})| \leq \frac{1}{2}|\phi(\vec{u})| \quad(\vec{r}, \vec{s} \in \overline{G}, \vec{u}=\vec{r}-\vec{s}).$

But by the triangle law,

$|\phi(\vec{u})|-|f(\vec{r})-f(\vec{s})| \leq|f(\vec{r})-f(\vec{s})-\phi(\vec{u})|.$

Thus

$|f(\vec{r})-f(\vec{s})| \geq \frac{1}{2}|\phi(\vec{u})| \geq \frac{1}{2} \varepsilon|\vec{u}|=\frac{1}{2} \varepsilon|\vec{r}-\vec{s}|$

by (2).

Hence $$f(\vec{r}) \neq f(\vec{s})$$ whenever $$\vec{r} \neq \vec{s}$$ in $$\overline{G};$$ so $$f$$ is one-to-one on $$\overline{G},$$ as claimed.$$\quad \square$$

Corollary $$\PageIndex{1}$$

Under the assumptions of Theorem 1, the maps $$f$$ and $$f^{-1}$$ (the inverse of $$f$$ restricted to $$\overline{G}$$) are uniformly continuous on $$\overline{G}$$ and $$f[\overline{G}],$$ respectively.

Proof

By (3),

\begin{aligned}|f(\vec{r})-f(\vec{s})| & \leq|\phi(\vec{u})|+\frac{1}{2}|\phi(\vec{u})| \\ & \leq|2 \phi(\vec{u})| \\ & \leq 2\|\phi\||\vec{u}| \\ &=2\|\phi\||\vec{r}-\vec{s}| \quad(\vec{r}, \vec{s} \in \overline{G}). \end{aligned}

This implies uniform continuity for $$f$$. (Why?)

Next, let $$g=f^{-1}$$ on $$H=f[\overline{G}]$$.

If $$\vec{x}, \vec{y} \in H,$$ let $$\vec{r}=g(\vec{x})$$ and $$\vec{s}=g(\vec{y});$$ so $$\vec{r}, \vec{s} \in \overline{G},$$ with $$\vec{x}=f(\vec{r})$$ and $$\vec{y}=f(\vec{s}).$$ Hence by (4),

$|\vec{x}-\vec{y}| \geq \frac{1}{2} \varepsilon|g(\vec{x})-g(\vec{y})|,$

proving all for $$g,$$ too.$$\quad \square$$

Again, $$f$$ resembles $$\phi$$ which is uniformly continuous, along with $$\phi^{-1}$$.

II. We introduce the following definition.

Definition 2

A map $$f :(S, \rho) \rightarrow\left(T, \rho^{\prime}\right)$$ is closed (open) on $$D \subseteq S$$ iff, for any $$X \subseteq D$$ the set $$f[X]$$ is closed (open) in $$T$$ whenever $$X$$ is so in $$S.$$

Note that continuous maps have such a property for inverse images (Problem 15 in Chapter 4, §2).

Corollary $$\PageIndex{2}$$

Under the assumptions of Theorem 1, $$f$$ is closed on $$\overline{G},$$ and so the set $$f[\overline{G}]$$ is closed in $$E.$$

Similarly for the map $$f^{-1}$$ on $$f[\overline{G}]$$.

Proof for $$E^{\prime}=E=E^{n}\left(C^{n}\right)$$ (for the general case, see Problem 6)

Given any closed $$X \subseteq \overline{G},$$ we must show that $$f[X]$$ is closed in $$E.$$

Now, as $$\overline{G}$$ is closed and bounded, it is compact (Theorem 4 of Chapter 4, §6).

So also is $$X$$ (Theorem 1 in Chapter 4, §6), and so is $$f[X]$$ (Theorem 1 of Chapter 4, §8).

By Theorem 2 in Chapter 4, §6, $$f[X]$$ is closed, as required.$$\quad \square$$

For the rest of this section, we shall set $$E^{\prime}=E=E^{n}\left(C^{n}\right)$$.

Theorem $$\PageIndex{2}$$

If $$E^{\prime}=E=E^{n}\left(C^{n}\right)$$ in Theorem 1, with other assumptions unchanged, then $$f$$ is open on the globe $$G=G_{\vec{p}}(\delta),$$ with $$\delta$$ sufficiently small.

Proof

We first prove the following lemma.

Lemma

$$f[G]$$ contains a globe $$G_{\vec{q}}(\alpha)$$ where $$\vec{q}=f(\vec{p})$$.

Proof

Indeed, let

$\alpha=\frac{1}{4} \varepsilon \delta,$

where $$\delta$$ and $$\varepsilon$$ are as in the proof of Theorem 1. (We continue the notation and formulas of that proof.)

Fix any $$\vec{c} \in G_{\vec{q}}(\alpha);$$ so

$|\vec{c}-\vec{q}|<\alpha=\frac{1}{4} \varepsilon \delta.$

Set $$h=|f-\vec{c}|$$ on $$E^{\prime}.$$ As $$f$$ is uniformly continuous on $$\overline{G},$$ so is $$h$$.

Now, $$\overline{G}$$ is compact in $$E^{n}\left(C^{n}\right);$$ so Theorem 2(ii) in Chapter 4, §8, yields a point $$\vec{r} \in \overline{G}$$ such that

$h(\vec{r})=\min h[\overline{G}].$

We claim that $$\vec{r}$$ is in $$G$$ (the interior of $$\overline{G})$$.

Otherwise, $$|\vec{r}-\vec{p}|=\delta ;$$ for by (4),

\begin{aligned} 2 \alpha=\frac{1}{2} \varepsilon \delta=\frac{1}{2} \varepsilon|\vec{r}-\vec{p}| & \leq|f(\vec{r})-f(\vec{p})| \\ & \leq|f(\vec{r})-\vec{c}|+|\vec{c}-f(\vec{p})| \\ &=h(\vec{r})+h(\vec{p}). \end{aligned}

But

$h(\vec{p})=|\vec{c}-f(\vec{p})|=|\vec{c}-\vec{q}|<\alpha;$

and so (7) yields

$h(\vec{p})<\alpha<h(\vec{r}),$

contrary to the minimality of $$h(\vec{r})$$ (see (6)). Thus $$|\vec{r}-\vec{p}|$$ cannot equal $$\delta$$.

We obtain $$|\vec{r}-\vec{p}|<\delta,$$ so $$\vec{r} \in G_{\vec{p}}(\delta)=G$$ and $$f(\vec{r}) \in f[G].$$ We shall now show that $$\vec{c}=f(\vec{r}).$$

To this end, we set $$\vec{v}=\vec{c}-f(\vec{r})$$ and prove that $$\vec{v}=\overrightarrow{0}.$$ Let

$\vec{u}=\phi^{-1}(\vec{v}),$

where

$\phi=d f(\vec{p} ; \cdot),$

as before. Then

$\vec{v}=\phi(\vec{u})=d f(\vec{p} ; \vec{u}).$

With $$\vec{r}$$ as above, fix some

$\vec{s}=\vec{r}+t \vec{u} \quad(0<t<1)$

with $$t$$ so small that $$\vec{s} \in G$$ also. Then by formula (3),

$|f(\vec{s})-f(\vec{r})-\phi(t \vec{u})| \leq \frac{1}{2}|t \vec{v}|;$

also,

$|f(\vec{r})-\vec{c}+\phi(t \vec{u})|=(1-t)|\vec{v}|=(1-t) h(\vec{r})$

by our choice of $$\vec{v}, \vec{u}$$ and $$h.$$ Hence by the triangle law,

$h(\vec{s})=|f(\vec{s})-\vec{c}| \leq\left(1-\frac{1}{2} t\right) h(\vec{r}).$

(Verify!)

As $$0<t<1,$$ this implies $$h(\vec{r})=0$$ (otherwise, $$h(\vec{s})<h(\vec{r}),$$ violating (6)).

Thus, indeed,

$|\vec{v}|=|f(\vec{r})-\vec{c}|=0,$

i.e.,

$\vec{c}=f(\vec{r}) \in f[G] \quad \text { for } \vec{r} \in G.$

But $$\vec{c}$$ was an arbitrary point of $$G_{\vec{q}}(\alpha).$$ Hence

$G_{\vec{q}}(\alpha) \subseteq f[G],$

proving the lemma.$$\quad \square$$

Proof of Theorem 2. The lemma shows that $$f(\vec{p})$$ is in the interior of $$f[G]$$ if $$\vec{p}, f, d f(\vec{p} ; \cdot),$$ and $$\delta$$ are as in Theorem 1.

But Definition 1 implies that here $$f \in C D^{1}$$ on all of $$G$$ (see Problem 1).

Also, $$d f(\vec{x} ; \cdot)$$ is bijective for any $$\vec{x} \in G$$ by our choice of $$G$$ and Theorems 1 and 2 in §6.

Thus $$f$$ maps all $$\vec{x} \in G$$ onto interior points of $$f[G];$$ i.e., $$f$$ maps any open set $$X \subseteq G$$ onto an open $$f[X],$$ as required.$$\quad \square$$

Note 1. A map

$f :(S, \rho) \underset{\text { onto }}{\longleftrightarrow} (T, \rho^{\prime})$

is both open and closed ("clopen") iff $$f^{-1}$$ is continuous - see Problem 15(iv)(v) in Chapter 4, §2, interchanging $$f$$ and $$f^{-1}.$$

Thus $$\phi=d f(\vec{p} ; \cdot)$$ in Theorem 1 is "clopen" on all of $$E^{\prime}$$.

Again, $$f$$ locally resembles $$d f(\vec{p} ; \cdot)$$.

III. The Inverse Function Theorem. We now further pursue these ideas.

Theorem $$\PageIndex{3}$$ (inverse functions)

Under the assumptions of Theorem 2, let $$g$$ be the inverse of $$f_{G}\left(f \text { restricted to } G=G_{\vec{p}}(\delta)\right)$$.

Then $$g \in C D^{1}$$ on $$f[G]$$ and $$d g(\vec{y} ; \cdot)$$ is the inverse of $$d f(\vec{x} ; \cdot)$$ whenever $$\vec{x}=g(\vec{y}), \vec{x} \in G.$$

Briefly: "The differential of the inverse is the inverse of the differential."

Proof

Fix any $$\vec{y} \in f[G]$$ and $$\vec{x}=g(\vec{y}) ;$$ so $$\vec{y}=f(\vec{x})$$ and $$\vec{x} \in G.$$ Let $$U=d f(\vec{x} ; \cdot).$$

As noted above, $$U$$ is bijective for every $$\vec{x} \in G$$ by Theorems 1 and 2 in §6; so we may set $$V=U^{-1}.$$ We must show that $$V=d g(\vec{y} ; \cdot).$$

To do this, give $$\vec{y}$$ an arbitrary (variable) increment $$\Delta \vec{y},$$ so small that $$\vec{y}+\Delta \vec{y}$$ stays in $$f[G]$$ (an open set by Theorem 2).

As $$g$$ and $$f_{G}$$ are one-to-one, $$\Delta \vec{y}$$ uniquely determines

$\Delta \vec{x}=g(\vec{y}+\Delta \vec{y})-g(\vec{y})=\vec{t},$

and vice versa:

$\Delta \vec{y}=f(\vec{x}+\vec{t})-f(\vec{x}).$

Here $$\Delta \vec{y}$$ and $$\vec{t}$$ are the mutually corresponding increments of $$\vec{y}=f(\vec{x})$$ and $$\vec{x}=g(\vec{y}).$$ By continuity, $$\vec{y} \rightarrow \overrightarrow{0}$$ iff $$\vec{t} \rightarrow \overrightarrow{0}.$$

As $$U=d f(\vec{x} ; \cdot)$$,

$\lim _{\vec{t} \rightarrow \overline{0}} \frac{1}{|\vec{t}|}|f(\vec{x}+\vec{t})-f(\vec{t})-U(\vec{t})|=0,$

or

$\lim _{\vec{t} \rightarrow \overrightarrow{0}} \frac{1}{|\vec{t}|}|F(\vec{t})|=0,$

where

$F(\vec{t})=f(\vec{x}+\vec{t})-f(\vec{t})-U(\vec{t}).$

As $$V=U^{-1},$$ we have

$V(U(\vec{t}))=\vec{t}=g(\vec{y}+\Delta \vec{y})-g(\vec{y}).$

So from (9),

\begin{aligned} V(F(\vec{t})) &=V(\Delta \vec{y})-\vec{t} \\ &=V(\Delta \vec{y})-[g(\vec{y}+\Delta \vec{y})-g(\vec{y})]; \end{aligned}

that is,

$\frac{1}{|\Delta \vec{y}|}|g(\vec{y}+\Delta \vec{y})-g(\vec{y})-V(\Delta \vec{y})|=\frac{|V(F(\vec{t}))|}{|\Delta \vec{y}|}, \quad \Delta \vec{y} \neq \overrightarrow{0}.$

Now, formula (4), with $$\vec{r}=\vec{x}, \vec{s}=\vec{x}+\vec{t},$$ and $$\vec{u}=\vec{t},$$ shows that

$|f(\vec{x}+\vec{t})-f(\vec{x})| \geq \frac{1}{2} \varepsilon|\vec{t}|;$

i.e., $$|\Delta \vec{y}| \geq \frac{1}{2} \varepsilon|\vec{t}|.$$ Hence by (8),

$\frac{|V(F(\vec{t}))|}{|\Delta \vec{y}|} \leq \frac{|V(F(\vec{t}) |}{\frac{1}{2} \varepsilon|\vec{t}|}=\frac{2}{\varepsilon}\left|V\left(\frac{1}{|\vec{t}|} F(\vec{t})\right)\right| \leq \frac{2}{\varepsilon}\|V\| \frac{1}{|\vec{t}|}|F(\vec{t})| \rightarrow 0 \text { as } \vec{t} \rightarrow \overrightarrow{0}.$

Since $$\vec{t} \rightarrow \overrightarrow{0}$$ as $$\Delta \vec{y} \rightarrow \overrightarrow{0}$$ (change of variables!), the expression (10) tends to 0 as $$\Delta \vec{y} \rightarrow \overrightarrow{0}.$$

By definition, then, $$g$$ is differentiable at $$\vec{y},$$ with $$d g(\vec{y};)=V=U^{-1}$$.

Moreover, Corollary 3 in §6, applies here. Thus

$\left(\forall \delta^{\prime}>0\right)\left(\exists \delta^{\prime \prime}>0\right) \quad\|U-W\|<\delta^{\prime \prime} \Rightarrow\left\|U^{-1}-W^{-1}\right\|<\delta^{\prime}.$

Taking here $$U^{-1}=d g(\vec{y})$$ and $$W^{-1}=d g(\vec{y}+\Delta \vec{y}),$$ we see that $$g \in C D^{1}$$ near $$\vec{y}.$$ This completes the proof.$$\quad \square$$

Note 2. If $$E^{\prime}=E=E^{n}\left(C^{n}\right),$$ the bijectivity of $$\phi=d f(\vec{p} ; \cdot)$$ is equivalent to

$\operatorname{det}[\phi]=\operatorname{det}\left[f^{\prime}(\vec{p})\right] \neq 0$

(Theorem 1 of §6).

In this case, the fact that $$f$$ is one-to-one on $$G=G_{\vec{p}}(\delta)$$ means, componentwise (see Note 3 in §6), that the system of $$n$$ equations

$f_{i}(\vec{x})=f\left(x_{1}, \ldots, x_{n}\right)=y_{i}, \quad i=1, \ldots, n,$

has a unique solution for the $$n$$ unknowns $$x_{k}$$ as long as

$\left(y_{1}, \ldots, y_{n}\right)=\vec{y} \in f[G].$

Theorem 3 shows that this solution has the form

$x_{k}=g_{k}(\vec{y}), \quad k=1, \ldots, n,$

where the $$g_{k}$$ are of class $$C D^{1}$$ on $$f[G]$$ provided the $$f_{i}$$ are of class $$C D^{1}$$ near $$\vec{p}$$ and det $$\left[f^{\prime}(\vec{p})\right] \neq 0.$$ Here

$\operatorname{det}\left[f^{\prime}(\vec{p})\right]=J_{f}(\vec{p}),$

as in §6.

Thus again $$f$$ "locally" resembles a linear map, $$\phi=d f(\vec{p} ; \cdot)$$.

IV. The Implicit Function Theorem. Generalizing, we now ask, what about solving $$n$$ equations in $$n+m$$ unknowns $$x_{1}, \ldots, x_{n}, y_{1}, \ldots, y_{m}?$$ Say, we want to solve

$f_{k}\left(x_{1}, \ldots, x_{n}, y_{1}, \ldots, y_{m}\right)=0, \quad k=1,2, \ldots, n,$

for the first $$n$$ unknowns (or variables) $$x_{k},$$ thus expressing them as

$x_{k}=H_{k}\left(y_{1}, \ldots, y_{m}\right), \quad k=1, \ldots, n,$

with $$H_{k} : E^{m} \rightarrow E^{1}$$ or $$H_{k} : C^{m} \rightarrow C$$.

Let us set $$\vec{x}=\left(x_{1}, \ldots, x_{n}\right), \vec{y}=\left(y_{1}, \ldots, y_{m}\right),$$ and

$(\vec{x}, \vec{y})=\left(x_{1}, \ldots, x_{n}, y_{1}, \ldots, y_{m}\right)$

so that $$(\vec{x}, \vec{y}) \in E^{n+m}\left(C^{n+m}\right)$$.

Thus the system of equations (11) simplifies to

$f_{k}(\vec{x}, \vec{y})=0, \quad k=1, \ldots, n$

or

$f(\vec{x}, \vec{y})=\overrightarrow{0},$

where $$f=\left(f_{1}, \ldots, f_{n}\right)$$ is a map of $$E^{n+m}\left(C^{n+m}\right)$$ into $$E^{n}\left(C^{n}\right) ; f$$ is a function of $$n+m$$ variables, but it has $$n$$ components $$f_{k};$$ i.e.,

$f(\vec{x}, \vec{y})=f\left(x_{1}, \ldots, x_{n}, y_{1}, \ldots, y_{m}\right)$

is a vector in $$E^{n}\left(C^{n}\right)$$.

Theorem $$\PageIndex{4}$$ (implicit functions)

Let $$E^{\prime}=E^{n+m}\left(C^{n+m}\right), E=E^{n}\left(C^{n}\right),$$ and let $$f : E^{\prime} \rightarrow E$$ be of class $$C D^{1}$$ near

$(\vec{p}, \vec{q})=\left(p_{1}, \ldots, p_{n}, q_{1}, \ldots, q_{m}\right), \quad \vec{p} \in E^{n}\left(C^{n}\right), \vec{q} \in E^{m}\left(C^{m}\right).$

Let $$[\phi]$$ be the $$n \times n$$ matrix

$\left(D_{j} f_{k}(\vec{p}, \vec{q})\right), \quad j, k=1, \ldots, n.$

If $$\operatorname{det}[\phi] \neq 0$$ and if $$f(\vec{p}, \vec{q})=\overrightarrow{0},$$ then there are open sets

$P \subseteq E^{n}\left(C^{n}\right) \text { and } Q \subseteq E^{m}\left(C^{m}\right),$

with $$\vec{p} \in P$$ and $$\vec{q} \in Q,$$ for which there is a unique map

$H : Q \rightarrow P$

with

$f(H(\vec{y}), \vec{y})=\overrightarrow{0}$

for all $$\vec{y} \in Q;$$ furthermore, $$H \in C D^{1}$$ on $$Q$$.

Thus $$\vec{x}=H(\vec{y})$$ is a solution of (11) in vector form.

Proof

With the above notation, set

$F(\vec{x}, \vec{y})=(f(\vec{x}, \vec{y}), \vec{y}), \quad F : E^{\prime} \rightarrow E^{\prime}.$

Then

$F(\vec{p}, \vec{q})=(f(\vec{p}, \vec{q}), \vec{q})=(\overrightarrow{0}, \vec{q}),$

since $$f(\vec{p}, \vec{q})=\overrightarrow{0}$$.

As $$f \in C D^{1}$$ near $$(\vec{p}, \vec{q}),$$ so is $$F$$ (verify componentwise via Problem 9(ii) in §3 and Definition 1 of §5).

By Theorem 4, §3, $$\operatorname{det}\left[F^{\prime}(\vec{p}, \vec{q})\right]=\operatorname{det}[\phi] \neq 0$$ (explain!).

Thus Theorem 1 above shows that $$F$$ is one-to-one on some globe $$G$$ about $$(\vec{p}, \vec{q}).$$

Clearly $$G$$ contains an open interval about $$(\vec{p}, \vec{q}).$$ We denote it by $$P \times Q$$ where $$\vec{p} \in P, \vec{q} \in Q ; P$$ is open in $$E^{n}\left(C^{n}\right)$$ and $$Q$$ is open in $$E^{m}\left(C^{m}\right).$$

By Theorem 3, $$F_{P \times Q}$$ ($$F$$ restricted to $$P \times Q)$$ has an inverse

$g : A \underset{\text { onto }}{\longleftrightarrow} P \times Q,$

where $$A=F[P \times Q]$$ is open in $$E^{\prime}$$ (Theorem 2), and $$g \in C D^{1}$$ on $$A.$$ Let the map $$u=\left(g_{1}, \ldots, g_{n}\right)$$ comprise the first $$n$$ components of $$g$$ (exactly as $$f$$ comprises the first $$n$$ components of $$F )$$.

Then

$g(\vec{x}, \vec{y})=(u(\vec{x}, \vec{y}), \vec{y})$

exactly as $$F(\vec{x}, \vec{y})=(f(\vec{x}, \vec{y}), \vec{y}).$$ Also, $$u : A \rightarrow P$$ is of class $$C D^{1}$$ on $$A,$$ as $$g$$ is (explain!).

Now set

$H(\vec{y})=u(\overrightarrow{0}, \vec{y});$

here $$\vec{y} \in Q,$$ while

$(\overrightarrow{0}, \vec{y}) \in A=F[P \times Q],$

for $$F$$ preserves $$\vec{y}$$ (the last $$m$$ coordinates). Also set

$\alpha(\vec{x}, \vec{y})=\vec{x}.$

Then $$f=\alpha \circ F$$ (why?), and

$f(H(\vec{y}), \vec{y})=f(u(\overrightarrow{0}, \vec{y}), \vec{y})=f(g(\overrightarrow{0}, \vec{y}))=\alpha(F(g(\overrightarrow{0}, \vec{y}))=\alpha(\overrightarrow{0}, \vec{y})=\overrightarrow{0}$

by our choice of $$\alpha$$ and $$g$$ (inverse to $$F).$$ Thus

$f(H(\vec{y}), \vec{y})=\overrightarrow{0}, \quad \vec{y} \in Q,$

as desired.

Moreover, as $$H(\vec{y})=u(\overrightarrow{0}, \vec{y}),$$ we have

$\frac{\partial}{\partial y_{i}} H(\vec{y})=\frac{\partial}{\partial y_{i}} u(\overrightarrow{0}, \vec{y}), \quad \vec{y} \in Q, i \leq m.$

As $$u \in C D^{1},$$ all $$\partial u / \partial y_{i}$$ are continuous (Definition 1 in §5); hence so are the $$\partial H / \partial y_{i}.$$ Thus by Theorem 3 in §3, $$H \in C D^{1}$$ on $$Q.$$

Finally, $$H$$ is unique for the given $$P, Q;$$ for

\begin{aligned} f(\vec{x}, \vec{y})=\overrightarrow{0} & \Longrightarrow(f(\vec{x}, \vec{y}), \vec{y})=(\overrightarrow{0}, \vec{y}) \\ & \Longrightarrow F(\vec{x}, \vec{y})=(\overrightarrow{0}, \vec{y}) \\ & \Longrightarrow g(F(\vec{x}, \vec{y}))=g(\overrightarrow{0}, \vec{y}) \\ & \Longrightarrow(\vec{x}, \vec{y})=g(\overrightarrow{0}, \vec{y})=(u(\overrightarrow{0}, \vec{y}), \vec{y}) \\ & \Longrightarrow \vec{x}=u(\overrightarrow{0}, \vec{y})=H(\vec{y}). \end{aligned}

Thus $$f(\vec{x}, \vec{y})=\overrightarrow{0}$$ implies $$\vec{x}=H(\vec{y});$$ so $$H(\vec{y})$$ is the only solution for $$\vec{x}. \quad \square$$

Note 3. $$H$$ is said to be implicitly defined by the equation $$f(\vec{x}, \vec{y})=\overrightarrow{0}.$$ In this sense we say that $$H(\vec{y})$$ is an implicit function, given by $$f(\vec{x}, \vec{y})=\overrightarrow{0}$$.

Similarly, under suitable assumptions, $$f(\vec{x}, \vec{y})=\overrightarrow{0}$$ defines $$\vec{y}$$ as a function of $$\vec{x}.$$

Note 4. While $$H$$ is unique for a given neighborhood $$P \times Q$$ of $$(\vec{p}, \vec{q}),$$ another implicit function may result if $$P \times Q$$ or $$(\vec{p}, \vec{q})$$ is changed.

For example, let

$f(x, y)=x^{2}+y^{2}-25$

(a polynomial; hence $$f \in C D^{1}$$ on all of $$E^{2}).$$ Geometrically, $$x^{2}+y^{2}-25=0$$ describes a circle.

Solving for $$x,$$ we get $$x=\pm \sqrt{25-y^{2}}.$$ Thus we have two functions:

$H_{1}(y)=+\sqrt{25-y^{2}}$

and

$H_{2}(y)=-\sqrt{25-y^{2}}.$

If $$P \times Q$$ is in the upper part of the circle, the resulting function is $$H_{1}.$$ Otherwise, it is $$H_{2}.$$ See Figure 28.

V. Implicit Differentiation. Theorem 4 only states the existence (and uniqueness) of a solution, but does not show how to find it, in general.

The knowledge itself that $$H \in C D^{1}$$ exists, however, enables us to use its derivative or partials and compute it by implicit differentiation, known from calculus.

Examples

(a) Let $$f(x, y)=x^{2}+y^{2}-25=0,$$ as above.

This time treating $$y$$ as an implicit function of $$x, y=H(x),$$ and writing $$y^{\prime}$$ for $$H^{\prime}(x),$$ we differentiate both sides of (x^{2}+y^{2}-25=0\) with respect to $$x,$$ using the chain rule for the term $$y^{2}=[H(x)]^{2}$$.

This yields $$2 x+2 y y^{\prime}=0,$$ whence $$y^{\prime}=-x / y$$.

Actually (see Note 4), two functions are involved: $$y=\pm \sqrt{25-x^{2}};$$ but both satisfy $$x^{2}+y^{2}-25=0;$$ so the result $$y^{\prime}=-x / y$$ applies to both.

Of course, this method is possible only if the derivative $$y^{\prime}$$ is known to exist. This is why Theorem 4 is important.

(b) Let

$f(x, y, z)=x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}-1=0, \quad x, y, z \in E^{1}.$

Again $$f$$ satisfies Theorem 4 for suitable $$x, y,$$ and $$z$$.

Setting $$z=H(x, y),$$ differentiate the equation $$f(x, y, z)=0$$ partially with respect to $$x$$ and $$y.$$ From the resulting two equations, obtain $$\frac{\partial z}{\partial x}$$ and $$\frac{\partial z}{\partial y}$$.