Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Brouwer fixed-point theorem
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
===A proof by Hirsch=== There is also a quick proof, by [[Morris Hirsch]], based on the impossibility of a differentiable retraction. Let ''f'' denote a continuous map from the unit ball D<sup>n</sup> in n-dimensional Euclidean space to itself and assume that ''f'' fixes no point. By continuity and the fact that D<sup>n</sup> is compact, it follows that for some Ξ΅ > 0, β₯x - ''f''(x)β₯ > Ξ΅ for all x in D<sup>n</sup>. Then the map ''f'' can be approximated by a smooth map retaining the property of not fixing a point; this can be done by using the [[Weierstrass approximation theorem]] or by [[convolution|convolving]] with smooth [[bump function]]s. One then defines a retraction as above by sending each x to the point of βD<sup>n</sup> where the unique ray from x through ''f''(x) intersects βD<sup>n</sup>, and this must now be a differentiable mapping. Such a retraction must have a non-singular value p β βD<sup>n</sup>, by [[Sard's theorem]], which is also non-singular for the restriction to the boundary (which is just the identity). Thus the inverse image ''f''<sup> -1</sup>(p) would be a compact 1-manifold with boundary. Such a boundary would have to contain at least two endpoints, and these would have to lie on the boundary of the original ball. This would mean that the inverse image of one point on βD<sup>n</sup> contains a different point on βD<sup>n</sup>, contradicting the definition of a retraction D<sup>n</sup> β βD<sup>n</sup>.<ref>{{harvnb|Hirsch|1988}}</ref> R. Bruce Kellogg, Tien-Yien Li, and [[James A. Yorke]] turned Hirsch's proof into a [[Computability|computable]] proof by observing that the retract is in fact defined everywhere except at the fixed points.{{sfn|Kellogg|Li|Yorke|1976}} For almost any point ''q'' on the boundary β assuming it is not a fixed point β the 1-manifold with boundary mentioned above does exist and the only possibility is that it leads from ''q'' to a fixed point. It is an easy numerical task to follow such a path from ''q'' to the fixed point so the method is essentially computable.{{sfn|Chow|Mallet-Paret|Yorke|1978}} gave a conceptually similar path-following version of the homotopy proof which extends to a wide variety of related problems.
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)