Tuesday, 19 December 2017

soft question - What is the point of making dx an infinitesimal hyperreal?



It seems fairly common to describe dx in nonstandard analysis as an infinitesimal. But after thinking it through (and then skimming Keisler's text), I can't see the point and actually think it's misleading!




First, let me clearly point out that dy is not being used here as to express a "difference in y"; this post is following the convention that Δy is used for such things, and dy is reserved for the differential.



That is, suppose y=x2. A "change in y" is the quantity Δy given by, after fixing some change Δx in x:
Δy=(x+Δx)2x2=2x(Δx)+(Δx)2



This is not what dy is. We simply have dy=2xdx. In general, if y=f(x), then dy is simply defined to be f(x)dx. No differences, infinitesimal approximations, or anything of that flavor is going on here; dy is nothing more than a vessel for carrying around a copy of f(x).



(and dx was simply defined to be an independent, infinitesimal variable)




A typical application of a differential is that in a definite integral baf(x)dx, we might decide to write down a Riemann sum with H evenly spaced partitions for some infinite H, and substitute in the notation dx with the width of an interval baH to get
baf(x)dxHi=1f(a+baHi)baH
However, if I encode dx as an infinitesimal, then write baf(x)ϵ, there's no way to figure out what that means. You might write H=(ba)/ϵ and write down the Riemann sum above, but that gives the wrong answer if I encoded dx as 2ϵ. The best you can do is to undo the encoding; e.g.
baf(x)ϵHi=1f(a+baHi)ϵdxbaH



Thus, the encoding of the differential form as an infinitesimal does not seem to do anything useful for this application of differentials. But maybe we can do other interesting arithmetic with them. However, I don't think there's any application of quantities like (dy)2 or 1+dy or sin(dy) — it's the quantities like (Δy)2 or 1+Δy or sin(Δy) that we play with.



Instead, the only useful operations seem to be the ordinary differential form operations — things like adding two differential forms or multiplying a differential form by a function.



In sum, the only application of this definition seems to be to allow one to say that dydx is the ratio of two hyperreal-valued variables — but even in ordinary analysis we can understand that as a ratio of differential forms!




Furthermore, insistence that dx be infinitesimal appears to be completely irrelevant; you could do the same thing in standard analysis simply by removing the constraint that dx be infinitesimal. In fact, to some extent, people do do the same thing; e.g. defining the differential of a function f to be the function df(x,e)=f(x)e.



So, I pose my question — what is the point of making dx an infinitesimal hyperreal?


Answer



I assert that that there is no intrinsic reason to make dx an infinitesimal. However, conventions can force us to doing so; for example, it is a consequence of:




  • The functional form of the differential: df(x,y)=f(x)y

  • The habit of designating a particular variable (e.g. x) as special


  • The habit of implicitly partially evaluating differentials at the special difference Δx



And by making the second argument implicit and fixed, if we use df(x) to implicitly mean df(x,Δx), the notation lends itself to the variable form dy to be used in place of df(x) whenever y=f(x).



Under these conventions, if i is the identity function i(x)=x, then
dx=di(x)=di(x,Δx)=Δx



thus identifying the differential dx with the variable Δx which, conventionally, is infinitesimal-valued.


No comments:

Post a Comment

real analysis - How to find limhrightarrow0fracsin(ha)h

How to find lim without lhopital rule? I know when I use lhopital I easy get $$ \lim_{h\rightarrow 0}...