Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I have a question related to two theorems in the book Differential Equations, Dynamical Systems, and Linear Algebra [Hirsch & Smale,1974]. First let me describe the framework.

Let us consider a $C^1$-vector field $f:\mathbb R^n\to\mathbb R^n$ and an ODE $$ \dot x = f(x)\quad(1) $$ with initial condition $x(0) = x_0$. The correspondent flow we denote by $\phi(t,x)$, i.e. $$ \begin{cases} \frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}(t,x) &= f(x) \\ \\ \phi(0,x) &= x. \end{cases} $$ I.e. if $x(t)$ solves the problem $(1)$ with initial conditions $x(0) = x_0$ then $x(t) = \phi(t,x_0)$.

Let us consider a $n-1$-dimensional hyperplane $$ H = \{x\in \mathbb R^n:h(x) = 0\} $$ where $h$ is a linear function: $h(0) = 0$. An open subset $S$ of $H$ is called a local section at $0$ if $0\in S$ and $h(f(x))\neq 0$ for any $x\in S$. In other words, $S$ is an $n-1$-dimensional section at $0$ which is transversal to the flow.

Proposition 1. (p. 243) Let $S$ be a local section at $0$ as above, and suppose $\phi(t_0,x_0) = 0$. There is an open set $U$ containing $x_0$ and a unique $C^1$ function $\tau:U\to\mathbb R$ such that $\tau(x_0) = t_0$ and $\phi(\tau(x),x) \in S$ for all $x\in U$.

The meaning of the proposition is clear: if from the point $x_0$ we hit the section $S$ in $t_0$ time units, then for all $x$ in a small neighborhood of $x_0$ we still hit $S$ in the time period which varies smoothly.

Note, that if $x_0\in S$ then $\tau(x)$ is not necessary a first hitting time of $S$ starting from $x$. I think that $$ D \tau(x_0)\cdot f(x_0)<0 $$ since we move on the same orbit, in a small neighborhood $U$ of $x_0$ and so $\tau$ have to decrease. In particular, $D \tau(x_0)\neq 0$.

Nevertheless, in Proposition 3 of the book (page 283-284) it is proved that if $x_0 = 0$ belongs to the periodic orbit, then $D\tau(0) = 0$. My guess is that the derivative here is $n-1$-dim vector of the restricted function $\tau|_S$, just the notation is used the same for the derivatives of $\tau$ and $\tau|_S$.

I hope you can help me to resolve this confusion, it particular - to justify formally that $D\tau\cdot f<0$ (for the unrestricted $\tau$). Applying the implicit function theorem we have $$ D\tau = -\frac{Dh \;D_x\phi}{Dh\cdot f}. $$

If some points are left unclear, I will be happy to fix them.

share|improve this question
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.