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.

Let $$g_1 (x)=\frac{1}{e^{\frac{1}{x}}}, g_2 \equiv 0.$$ Can someone please explain to me how to show, that the function $$f:\mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{R},\ x \mapsto \begin{cases} g_1 (x) & x>0\\ g_2 (x) & \text{else}\\ \end{cases} $$ is in $C^ \infty(\mathbb{R})$ ?

I wasn't even able to manage to prove that $f|_{(0,\infty)}$ is in $C^ \infty(0,\infty)$ (let alone to prove that all derivatives exist in $0$, which actually seems to me to be the key point), since I wasn't able to guess a general formula for calculating the derivatives (which I did for some values using a CAS), because it just gets horrible complicated after the fourth derivative; my idea was to succesively calculate the derivatives using the chain, sum and product rule and to prove that way, that the function ought to be in $C^ \infty(\mathbb{R})$. Is there maybe a sleeker way to achieve this ?

Afterswards I should use $f$ to prove that $$F:\mathbb{R}^k\rightarrow \mathbb{R}, \ (x_1,\ldots,x_k) \mapsto \begin{cases} G_1 (x_1,\ldots,x_k) & |(x_1,\ldots,x_k)|<1\\ g_2 (x) & \text{else}\\ \end{cases} $$

is also in $C^ \infty(\mathbb{R^k})$ , for $G_1 (x_1,\ldots,x_k)=e^{-\frac{1}{1-|(x_1,\ldots,x_k)|^2}}$. The only thing that came to my mind for this, was to maybe try prove that all partial derivatives of all orders of $F$ are continuously differentiable, since that would imply that $F$ would be smooth and that $$F(x_1,\ldots,x_k)=f(1-|(x_1,\ldots,x_k)|^2),$$ but I'm not sure about that.

share|improve this question
    
This is Lemma 2.20 in John Lee's Introduction to Smooth Manifolds for which the author provides a thorough proof, including the induction argument that Boston alludes to. –  ItsNotObvious Mar 19 '12 at 18:37

2 Answers 2

up vote 1 down vote accepted

It is clear that $g_2$ is $C^\infty$ with derivatives equal to $g_2$.

A proof by induction shows that $g_1$ is $C^\infty$ on $(0,+\infty)$ with $g_1^{(n)}(x)=\frac{P_n(x)}{x^{2n}}e^{-1/x}$ with $(P_n)$ a sequence of polynomials satisfying $P_{n+1}(x)=x^2 P_n'(x)+(1-2nx)P_n(x)$. From the latter, you can easily deduce that $P_n$ has degree $n-1$.

The problem is at $0$. From the formula above, it follows that $f$ is also infinitely many times differentiable at $0$ with derivatives equal to $0$.

Therefore $f$ is $C^\infty$ on $\mathbb{R}$.

Then you can use $f$ and the appropriate composition to show that $F$ is $C^\infty$.

share|improve this answer

For $x>0$, $h(x)=-1/x$ is a smooth function because it's a rational function (i.e. polynomial $-1$ divided by polynomial $x$) and the denominator (i.e. $x$) is non-zero. This then implies that $e^{-1/x}=e^{h(x)}$ is smooth (for $x>0$) since it is the composition of smooth functions.

For $x<0$, $g_2(x)=0$ is obviously smooth.

This takes care of $f(x)$ for all $x\not=0$. Thus the only potential problem spot is $x=0$. Notice that for $x<0$, $f(x)=0$, so all derivatives of all orders must be $0$ at $x=0$ to match this data.

$\lim\limits_{h\to 0^+} \frac{f(0+h)-f(0)}{h} = \lim\limits_{h\to 0^+} \frac{e^{-1/h}-0}{h} = \lim\limits_{h\to 0^+} \frac{e^{-1/h}}{h} = \lim\limits_{t\to \infty} \frac{e^{-t}}{1/t} = \lim\limits_{t\to \infty} te^{-t}=0$ (use L'Hopital on $t/e^t$ or some other method). Thus the derivative from the right is 0. This matches the left hand limit so $f'(0)$ exists and is $0$.

Consider $\ell(x)=\frac{e^{-1/x}}{x^k}$ then $\ell'(x) = \frac{e^{-1/x}}{x^{k+2}}-\frac{e^{-1/x}k}{x^{k+1}}$

Now for $x>0$, $f'(x)=-\frac{e^{-1/x}}{x^2}$ and by the line above $f^{(m)}(x)$ is a linear combination of terms of the form $e^{-1/x}$ divided by a positive power of $x$. At this point a slight adjustment of the above limit will establish that the $m$-th derivative from the right is $0$. So derivatives of all orders exist at $0$ and are equal to $0$.

This will show that $f(x)$ is smooth. Then your final function is smooth because it is the composition of smooth functions.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

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

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.