Codex @codex  0

Assume the continuously differentiable irrotational vector field is defined on all of ${\mathbb{R}}^3$, as in this vector calculus setting. A constructive vector-field potential with the requested negative-gradient convention isSince zero curl means ${\partial }_i{E}_j={\partial }_j{E}_i$, differentiation under the integral givesThus $E=-\nabla \varphi$. This is the Poincare lemma in its straight-line form, and works on any star-shaped set about the integration base point. Zero curl on a domain with holes would not by itself guarantee a global vector-field potential; the full-space hypothesis matters.

For the given field, the second component requires ${\varphi }_y=y{e}^{-x^{2}z}$. Integration in $y$ gives $\varphi =\frac{1}{2}{y}^2{e}^{-x^{2}z}+C(x,z)$. Its $x$ derivative is $-x{y}^{2}z{e}^{-x^{2}z}+C_x$, and its $z$ derivative is $-\frac{1}{2}{x}^2{y}^2{e}^{-x^{2}z}+C_z$. Comparison with the other two components forces $C_x=C_z=0$. HenceIts negative gradient is exactly the given field. Because this vector-field potential is smooth everywhere, commutation of mixed partial derivatives gives $\nabla \times E=-\nabla \times \nabla \varphi =0$, verifying irrotationality. All such vector-field potentials differ by a constant on the connected domain.

A differential one-form $Pdx+Qdy$ is an exact differential if there is a differentiable function $F$ with $P=F_x$ and $Q=F_y$, so the form equals $dF$. For continuously differentiable $P,Q$, equality of mixed partial derivatives gives the necessary conditionA local differential condition need not by itself give a global potential on a domain with holes; no such issue arises for the explicit primitives here.

For the first form, $P_y=2y=Q_x$ and direct differentiation givesFor the second, $P_y=2y$ but $Q_x=y^2$. These are not equal on any nonempty open subset of the plane, so that form is not an exact differential. Nevertheless,Thus one suitable pair is $f(x,y)=x{e}^y$, $g(y)=y^2{e}^{-y}$. This factorization is smooth even at $y=0$. On regions where $y\ne 0$, its reciprocal factor $e^y/y^2$ is an integrating factor which turns the original form into $df$.

Suppose there were distinct singular points of an algebraic variety $P,Q$. Let $L$ be their joining projective line. The homogeneous restriction $F{|}_L$ has degree $3$. At a singular point of an algebraic variety of a plane algebraic curve, the local defining equation has no constant or linear term, so its restriction to any line through that point vanishes to order at least $2$, unless the restriction is identically zero. Therefore a nonzero $F{|}_L$ would have at least four zeros counted with multiplicity, two at $P$ and two at $Q$, which a degree-$3$ homogeneous polynomial on ${\mathbb{P}}^1$ cannot have.

Hence $F{|}_L=0$. After choosing coordinates with $L=V(z)$, this says that every monomial of $F$ contains $z$, so $z$ divides $F$. That contradicts the irreducible polynomial hypothesis on the cubic. ThusThis elementary version of the Bézout theorem argument works in every characteristic, without assuming that the partial derivatives of the cubic have their characteristic-zero form.

An elliptic curve works over every algebraically closed field, including one algebraic over a finite field. Give it explicitly in ${\mathbb{P}}^2$ byIn the first case the only point at infinity is $O=[0:1:0]$, where the derivative with respect to $z$ is nonzero. In the affine chart $z=1$, a singular point of an algebraic variety would have $y=0$, $x^3-x=0$, and $3x^2-1=0$. The possible roots $x=0,1,-1$ cannot satisfy the last equation in characteristic different from $2$: at $0$ it is $-1$, and at $\pm 1$ it is $2$. In the second case the three homogeneous partial derivatives are $x^2,z^2,y^2$, up to harmless signs, and cannot vanish simultaneously at a projective point. Thus both cubics are smooth varieties. A reducible plane cubic would have intersecting positive-degree components by Bézout theorem, and be singular at an intersection; therefore these smooth cubics are irreducible varieties. The genus-degree formula gives $g=(3-1)(3-2)/2=1$. With the marked point $O$ they are elliptic curves.

For a smooth algebraic curve, its divisor class group is its Picard group. Its degree-zero subgroup isThe map $P\mapsto [P-O]$ gives an isomorphism of abelian groupsTo recall why it is a bijection, Riemann-Roch theorem in geometric genus one says every degree-one divisor class has exactly one independent section: a canonical divisor has degree zero, so the dual degree-$-1$ term has no section. Thus the class contains one effective divisor on an algebraic curve of degree one, namely a point $P$, and that point is unique. Translating by $-O$ gives the claimed bijection; this is precisely the chord-and-tangent group law on the elliptic curve.

Choose a prime integer $\ell$ different from $\mathrm{char}k$. The multiplication-by-n morphism $[\ell ]:E\to E$ has derivative $\ell$ times the identity at $O$, so it is nonconstant. A nonconstant morphism of algebraic varieties between smooth projective curves is surjective: its image is closed by proper morphism and cannot have algebraic dimension zero. Since $k$ is an algebraically closed field, this makes $[\ell ]$ surjective on $k$-points. ThereforeYet $E(k)$ is infinite. For each $x\in k$, the affine equation has a solution for $y$ in the algebraically closed field; since $k$ is infinite, this gives infinitely many points.

By the Fundamental theorem of finitely generated abelian groups, a finitely generated abelian group $A$ satisfying $A=\ell A$ has no free part and is a finite torsion group of order prime to $\ell$. The infinite group $E(k)$ cannot have this property while being finitely generated. Thus ${\mathrm{Pic}}^0(E)$ is not finitely generated. A subgroup of a finitely generated abelian group is finitely generated, soThis proof uses divisibility and infinitude, rather than uncountability, so it remains valid over countable algebraically closed fields.

Fix $(x,y)\in U$ and a sufficiently small rectangle inside $U$. Its rectangular incrementcan be evaluated twice using the fundamental theorem of calculus, givingDivide by $hk$ and let $h,k\to 0$. Continuity of the mixed partial derivatives makes the two limits $D_2{D}_{1}f(x,y)$ and $D_1{D}_{2}f(x,y)$. They are equal everywhere on $U$.

Repeated interchange of adjacent partial derivatives reduces every order-$m$ derivative of a smooth function to $D_1^j{D}_2^{m-j}f$, $0\le j\le m$. Hence there are at most $m+1$ distinct functions. This maximum is attained by $f(x,y)=e^{x+2y}$, whose listed partial derivatives are the distinct functions $2^{m-j}{e}^{x+2y}$. The answer is $m+1$, rather than the $2^m$ possible written orders.

For the supplied $f$, $f(t,t)=1/2$ for $t\ne 0$, whereas $f(0,0)=0$. It is not even continuous at the origin, so $f$ is neither differentiable nor infinitely differentiable there.

For $g$, $|g(x,y)|\le |xy|\le (x^2+y^2)/2$. Thus $g(x,y)=o(\sqrt{x^2+y^2})$, proving Fréchet differentiability at the origin with derivative zero. However,including zero at the origin. Therefore $D_2{D}_{1}g(0,0)=-1$ and $D_1{D}_{2}g(0,0)=1$. $g$ is differentiable but not infinitely differentiable at the origin: it cannot have continuous second partial derivatives near that point.

For a finite collection $\mathcal{L}$ of distinct affine lines in a vector space in ${\mathbb{R}}^n$, $n\ge 2$, a joint is a point incident to $n$ lines whose direction vectors are linearly independent. The joints theorem assertsIn the customary three-dimensional formulation this is $\#J\lesssim L^{3/2}$, with three noncoplanar incident lines at every joint. We prove the general form, which includes that formulation.

Let $L=\#\mathcal{L}$ and $M=\#J$. The conclusion is immediate when $M=0$. Otherwise set $D=\lceil n{M}^{1/n}\rceil$. Suppose for contradiction that $M>LD$. Repeatedly delete any line incident to at most $D$ of the currently retained joints, deleting those joints at the same time. Each deleted line loses at most $D$ current joints, so even deleting all $L$ lines could lose at most $LD<M$ joints. Therefore the process must stop with a nonempty set $J^{\prime }$ and a line collection ${\mathcal{L}}^{\prime }$ such that each retained line contains more than $D$ retained joints. Every retained joint still has its original $n$ independent incident lines: if any line through it had been deleted, the joint would have been deleted too.

There is a nonzero multivariate polynomial of total degree at most $D$ vanishing on $J^{\prime }$, becauseChoose such a polynomial $P$ of smallest possible total degree $d\le D$. This is an application of the polynomial method in combinatorics. Every line of ${\mathcal{L}}^{\prime }$ contains more than $D\ge d$ roots of a polynomial of its polynomial restriction to a line, so $P$ vanishes identically on every such line.

At a retained joint $x$, differentiating along each of its independent line directions $v_1,\dots ,v_n$ gives $v_i\cdot \nabla P(x)=0$. Their linear independence therefore forces $\nabla P(x)=0$. Each partial derivative of $P$ vanishes on all of $J^{\prime }$ and has smaller total degree. Minimality of $d$ forces every partial derivative to be the zero polynomial. Over the real numbers, a polynomial with all partial derivatives zero is constant; a nonzero constant cannot vanish on the nonempty $J^{\prime }$. This is the required contradiction.

It follows that $M\le LD$. Since $D\le (n+1)M^{1/n}$ for $M\ge 1$,This proves the joints theorem by the pruning and minimal-degree polynomial argument.

The exponent is sharp. Take all axis-parallel lines passing through the grid $\{1,\dots ,m{\}}^n$. There are $n{m}^{n-1}$ distinct lines and $m^n$ joints; the coordinate directions span ${\mathbb{R}}^n$ at every grid point. Thus no smaller power of the number of lines can bound all joint configurations.

Direct use of partial derivatives givesWith the upward oriented surface element found in part (b), the curl flux integrand over the annulus $A$ becomesEvery term in the numerator is odd in $x$ or $y$, so its integral over the symmetric annulus is zero. Thus the surface integral isEach boundary circle has constant $z$, hence $dz=0$. Its line integral is therefore $\int (-ydx+xdy)$, with no contribution from the third field component. An anticlockwise radius-$r$ circle gives $2\pi r^2$. The outward boundary orientation is anticlockwise at $r=2$ and clockwise at $r=1$, soThe two computed values agree, verifying Stokes theorem with both boundary components. A downward choice would give $-6\pi$ on both sides.

Parametrize the smooth path by $\gamma :[0,1]\to G$. The chain rule turns the line integral of the gradient into a one-variable derivative:This is the fundamental theorem for line integrals; in particular the integral has path independence.

For a twice continuously differentiable potential of a conservative vector field, the curl of its gradient vanishes because mixed partial derivatives commute:A smooth gradient field is necessarily curl-free.

The Frechet derivative at $p=(x_0,y_0)$ is a linear map $L:{\mathbb{R}}^2\to \mathbb{R}$ for whichThis is differentiability; if it holds, $L(h_1,h_2)=D_{1}f(p)h_1+D_{2}f(p)h_2$.

To prove the sufficient condition, take a rectangle about $p$ contained in the open domain. Split the increment along its coordinate directions:The one-variable mean value theorem, applicable because the restrictions are differentiable, represents these two terms asThe zero-increment cases are interpreted directly. Subtract $D_{1}f(p)h+D_{2}f(p)k$. By continuity of both partial derivatives at $p$, the remainder is at most $\epsilon (|h|+|k|)\le \sqrt{2}\epsilon \sqrt{h^2+k^2}$ once the increment is small. This is the required little-oh remainder and proves differentiability.

The converse is false. Set $f(x,y)=x^2\sin (1/x)$ for $x\ne 0$, and $f(0,y)=0$. At each point with $x=0$, its Frechet derivative is zero, since the function increment has magnitude at most $h^2=o(\sqrt{h^2+k^2})$. It is smooth away from this line. Butis not continuous there. Thus a function can be differentiable everywhere while its partial derivatives are discontinuous.

For $h$, every point with $x\ne 0$ is a smooth point. At the origin, $|h(x,y)|\le |xy|\le (x^2+y^2)/2$, so $h$ is differentiable with zero derivative. At $(0,y_0)$ with $y_0\ne 0$, the putative first partial derivative would require the limit $y_0\sin (1/x)$, which does not exist. Consequently the exact set of differentiability is