In the following corollary to the inverse mapping theorem by Serge Lang, Fundamentals of Differential Geometry, 1999, p.17-18, there are two things in the proof which I don't understand, the first step and the last one:
If there is an identity up to isomorphism between E and $ F_1 $ as established by $ f'(x_0) $, why can we limit our consideration in the proof to the actual identity? This I have seen several times in proofs, but I don't understand why it can be done here and what the precise circumstances have to be in a proof to allow for this.
I dont't see why the local inverse $ \big( \varphi'(0,0) \big)^{-1} $, which is called g at the end of the proof, satisfies the two requirements defined in the corollary for the map g used there.
Thanks for any help.
Notes: $E, F_1, F_2 $ are Banach spaces. "Morphism" means a $ C^p $-map with $ p \geq 1 $. "Local isomorphism" means a local $ C^p $-isomorphism (dt.: lokaler $ C^p $-Diffeomorphismus). "Toplinear isomorphism" means an isomorphism between topological vector spaces.
Maybe the following drawing is helpful:



The proof is indeed worded poorly wrt $\varphi'(0,0)$. It is also not necessary to do the identification $E=F_1$; the complication you get from considering them to be different is very manageable. Additionally using the word toplinear is a crime. Let me rewrite the proof with your two questions in mind: