$$\lim \limits_{t \to 0} \frac{f(x_0+tv)-f(x_0)}{t}$$ This is the formula I have in my textbook for a function defined in $\mathbb{R}^p$ with values in $\mathbb{R}^q$ that calculates the directional derivative. I don't understand where $t$ comes from. Since it's in place of the $x_0-x$, I would assume $t = x_0-x$, but since the function takes as an argument a $p$-dimensional vector, that would mean we are trying to do vector division, which is not possible. Can someone explain what it is that I'm not understanding?
2026-03-25 23:10:32.1774480232
Why does "t" in the formula for gateaux differentiation represent a scalar value?
58 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in MULTIVARIABLE-CALCULUS
- Equality of Mixed Partial Derivatives - Simple proof is Confusing
- $\iint_{S} F.\eta dA$ where $F = [3x^2 , y^2 , 0]$ and $S : r(u,v) = [u,v,2u+3v]$
- Proving the differentiability of the following function of two variables
- optimization with strict inequality of variables
- How to find the unit tangent vector of a curve in R^3
- Prove all tangent plane to the cone $x^2+y^2=z^2$ goes through the origin
- Holding intermediate variables constant in partial derivative chain rule
- Find the directional derivative in the point $p$ in the direction $\vec{pp'}$
- Check if $\phi$ is convex
- Define in which points function is continuous
Related Questions in LINEAR-TRANSFORMATIONS
- Unbounded linear operator, projection from graph not open
- I don't understand this $\left(\left[T\right]^B_C\right)^{-1}=\left[T^{-1}\right]^C_B$
- A different way to define homomorphism.
- Linear algebra: what is the purpose of passive transformation matrix?
- Find matrix representation based on two vector transformations
- Is $A$ satisfying ${A^2} = - I$ similar to $\left[ {\begin{smallmatrix} 0&I \\ { - I}&0 \end{smallmatrix}} \right]$?
- Let $T:V\to W$ on finite dimensional vector spaces, is it possible to use the determinant to determine that $T$ is invertible.
- Basis-free proof of the fact that traceless linear maps are sums of commutators
- Assuming that A is the matrix of a linear operator F in S find the matrix B of F in R
- For what $k$ is $g_k\circ f_k$ invertible?
Related Questions in GATEAUX-DERIVATIVE
- Prove $\lim_{h \to 0^{+}}\frac{\lVert u +hv \rVert_{\infty} - \lVert u \rVert_{\infty}}{h}=\max_{x \in M}(v\cdot \operatorname{sign}(u))$
- Lipschitz function which is Gâteaux-differentiable is Fréchet-differentiable
- Differentiability of Norms of $l_{\infty}$
- Find a counterexample that $f(x)$ is Gateaux differentiable and $\lambda(x)$ is not continous
- Directional derivatives of matrix trace functionals
- First Variation of CDF inside an Indicator Function
- Derivative of a functional with respect to another functional
- prove that the functional is $\alpha$-elliptic
- Question regarding Gateaux differentiability
- Taylor expansion for Gâteaux derivative
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
The direction is specified by the vector $v$ and the amount in that direction by the scalar $t$. Think, for fixed $v$, that $x_0+tv$ traces a line passing through $x_0$ in the direction $v$, as $t\in\mathbb R$. In a sense, study of the differentiability of $f:\mathbb R^p\to\mathbb R^q$ is reduced to study of the composition $t\mapsto f(x_0+tv)$, a function from $\mathbb R \to \mathbb R^q$.
The value of the derivative of this composite function depends on $v$, and if you replace $v$ with $2v$ the derivative of $f(x_0+t2v)$ with respect to $t$ at $t=0$ will of course be double that of $f(x_0+tv)$. This perhaps explains part of why the derivative of the original $f$ is usually said to be a linear transformation (or matrix, if you will), called $df(x_0)$ (or $M$ or $Df_{x_0}$ etc: textbooks differ), so that $$ \left.\frac d {dt}\right|_{t=0} f(x_0+tv) = (df(x_0))\,v$$ This recipe solves the scaling problem: if you double $v$, you will double the value of $df(x_0)v$ too.
You are right, one does not know how to divide by vectors in the obvious attempt to generalize the one-dimensional definition of the derivative. One can consider the business of looking at $tv$ with scalar $t$ and vector $v$ a kind of hack compromise between what one really wants but doesn't know how to do and what is easy to work with but is perhaps not instantly intuitive.