Here is an old Berkeley Preliminary Exam question (Spring 79).

Let $f : \mathbb{R}^n-\{0\} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ be differentiable. Suppose

$$\lim_{x\rightarrow0}\frac{\partial f}{\partial x_j}(x)$$ exists for each $j=1, \cdots ,n$.

(1) Can $f$ be extended to a continuous map from $\mathbb{R}^n$ to $\mathbb{R}$?

(2) Assuming continuity at the origin, is $f$ differentiable from $\mathbb{R}^n$ to $\mathbb{R}$?

End of question.

In the book by De Souza, the following solution is given for (1)

No, with the counter example $f(x,y)=\frac{xy}{x^2+y^2}$ for $(x,y)\neq (0,0)$.

This is not an extendable function, but $\lim_{x\rightarrow0}\frac{\partial f}{\partial x_j}(x)$ does not exists. I think the solution is wrong, any other correct counter example?



Let $n =1$ and $f(x) = \text{signum}(x)$. Surely $f$ satisfies the conditions and surely it cannot be extended to a continuous function.

Though it feels like cheating...

  • $\begingroup$ It did feel like cheating, haha, I can't think of something in n=2 yet. $\endgroup$
    – KWO
    Dec 4 '12 at 12:53
  • $\begingroup$ I now believe that the book might be wrong, conclusion in (1) might be correct. $\endgroup$
    – KWO
    Dec 4 '12 at 12:58
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, I retract my previous comment. $\endgroup$
    – KWO
    Dec 4 '12 at 13:00

In polar coordinates, with $\theta \in [0,2\pi), r \in (0,\infty)$: $f(r,\theta) = \sin \theta$. This takes every value in $[-1,1]$ in every neighbourhood of $(0,0)$.

Edited to add: As KWO points out in the comments, this example is flawed.

  • $\begingroup$ I think your example can be extended to continuous function, right? Just define f(0,0)=0 will do. $\endgroup$
    – KWO
    Dec 4 '12 at 14:11
  • $\begingroup$ @KWO: Read my last sentence again. $\endgroup$
    – TonyK
    Dec 4 '12 at 15:24
  • $\begingroup$ According to your argument $f_{\theta}=cos \theta$ also have trouble converging to zero, hence the hypothesis not satisfied. $\endgroup$
    – KWO
    Dec 5 '12 at 3:39
  • $\begingroup$ The hypothesis of the problem is that the limit of partial derivative exist when x goes to 0, in your construction, the limit of partial derivative with respect to theta does not exist when x goes to zero. $\endgroup$
    – KWO
    Dec 5 '12 at 10:51
  • $\begingroup$ OK, sorry. You are right (except that it's $f_x$ and $f_y$ that must tend to $0$, not $f_\theta$.) $\endgroup$
    – TonyK
    Dec 5 '12 at 11:07

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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