Brouwer fixed-point theorem: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Ascchrvalstr m →Convexity: Rewrite math expressions using LaTeX |
|||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
Consider the function | Consider the function | ||
:<math>f(x) = x+1</math> | :<math>f(x) = x+1</math> | ||
with domain [-1,1]. The range of the function is [0,2]. Thus, f is not an endomorphism. | with domain <math>[-1,1]</math>. The range of the function is <math>[0,2]</math>. Thus, f is not an endomorphism. | ||
===Boundedness=== | ===Boundedness=== | ||
| Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
Convexity is not strictly necessary for Brouwer's fixed-point theorem. Because the properties involved (continuity, being a fixed point) are invariant under [[homeomorphism]]s, Brouwer's fixed-point theorem is equivalent to forms in which the domain is required to be a closed unit ball <math>D^n</math>. For the same reason it holds for every set that is homeomorphic to a closed ball (and therefore also [[closed set|closed]], bounded, [[connected space|connected]], [[simply connected|without holes]], etc.). | Convexity is not strictly necessary for Brouwer's fixed-point theorem. Because the properties involved (continuity, being a fixed point) are invariant under [[homeomorphism]]s, Brouwer's fixed-point theorem is equivalent to forms in which the domain is required to be a closed unit ball <math>D^n</math>. For the same reason it holds for every set that is homeomorphic to a closed ball (and therefore also [[closed set|closed]], bounded, [[connected space|connected]], [[simply connected|without holes]], etc.). | ||
The following example shows that Brouwer's fixed-point theorem does not work for domains with holes. Consider the | The following example shows that Brouwer's fixed-point theorem does not work for domains with holes. Consider the function <math>f(x)=-x</math>, which is a continuous function from the unit circle to itself. Since <math>-x\neq x</math> holds for any point of the unit circle, <math>f</math> has no fixed point. The analogous example works for the <math>n</math>-dimensional sphere (or any symmetric domain that does not contain the origin). The unit circle is closed and bounded, but it has a hole (and so it is not convex). The function <math>f</math> {{em|does}} have a fixed point for the unit disc, since it takes the origin to itself. | ||
A formal generalization of Brouwer's fixed-point theorem for "hole-free" domains can be derived from the [[Lefschetz fixed-point theorem]].<ref>{{cite web | url=https://math.stackexchange.com/q/323841 | title=Why is convexity a requirement for Brouwer fixed points? | publisher=Math StackExchange | access-date=22 May 2015 | author=Belk, Jim}}</ref> | A formal generalization of Brouwer's fixed-point theorem for "hole-free" domains can be derived from the [[Lefschetz fixed-point theorem]].<ref>{{cite web | url=https://math.stackexchange.com/q/323841 | title=Why is convexity a requirement for Brouwer fixed points? | publisher=Math StackExchange | access-date=22 May 2015 | author=Belk, Jim}}</ref> | ||
| Line 58: | Line 58: | ||
# Take two sheets of graph paper of equal size with coordinate systems on them, lay one flat on the table and crumple up (without ripping or tearing) the other one and place it, in any fashion, on top of the first so that the crumpled paper does not reach outside the flat one. There will then be at least one point of the crumpled sheet that lies directly above its corresponding point (i.e. the point with the same coordinates) of the flat sheet. This is a consequence of the ''n'' = 2 case of Brouwer's theorem applied to the continuous map that assigns to the coordinates of every point of the crumpled sheet the coordinates of the point of the flat sheet immediately beneath it. | # Take two sheets of graph paper of equal size with coordinate systems on them, lay one flat on the table and crumple up (without ripping or tearing) the other one and place it, in any fashion, on top of the first so that the crumpled paper does not reach outside the flat one. There will then be at least one point of the crumpled sheet that lies directly above its corresponding point (i.e. the point with the same coordinates) of the flat sheet. This is a consequence of the ''n'' = 2 case of Brouwer's theorem applied to the continuous map that assigns to the coordinates of every point of the crumpled sheet the coordinates of the point of the flat sheet immediately beneath it. | ||
# Take an ordinary map of a country, and suppose that that map is laid out on a table inside that country. There will always be a "You are Here" point on the map which represents that same point in the country. | # Take an ordinary map of a country, and suppose that that map is laid out on a table inside that country. There will always be a "You are Here" point on the map which represents that same point in the country. | ||
# In three dimensions a consequence of the Brouwer fixed-point theorem is that, no matter how much you stir a | # In three dimensions a consequence of the Brouwer fixed-point theorem is that, no matter how much you stir a cocktail in a glass (or think about milk shake), when the liquid has come to rest, some point in the liquid will end up in exactly the same place in the glass as before you took any action, assuming that the final position of each point is a continuous function of its original position, that the liquid after stirring is contained within the space originally taken up by it, and that the glass (and stirred surface shape) maintain a convex volume. Ordering a cocktail [[shaken, not stirred]] defeats the convexity condition ("shaking" being defined as a dynamic series of non-convex inertial containment states in the vacant headspace under a lid). In that case, the theorem would not apply, and thus all points of the liquid disposition are potentially displaced from the original state. {{Citation needed|date=September 2018}} | ||
==Intuitive approach== | ==Intuitive approach== | ||
| Line 97: | Line 97: | ||
===First proofs=== | ===First proofs=== | ||
At the dawn of the 20th century, the interest in analysis situs did not stay unnoticed. However, the necessity of a theorem equivalent to the one discussed in this article was not yet evident. [[Piers Bohl]], a [[Latvia]]n mathematician, applied topological methods to the study of differential equations.<ref>J. J. O'Connor E. F. Robertson ''[http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Bohl.html Piers Bohl]''</ref> In 1904 he proved the three-dimensional case of | At the dawn of the 20th century, the interest in analysis situs did not stay unnoticed. However, the necessity of a theorem equivalent to the one discussed in this article was not yet evident. [[Piers Bohl]], a [[Latvia]]n mathematician, applied topological methods to the study of differential equations.<ref>J. J. O'Connor E. F. Robertson ''[http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Bohl.html Piers Bohl]''</ref> In 1904 he proved the three-dimensional case of the theorem,<ref name="Bohl1904" /> but his publication was not noticed.<ref>{{cite journal |first1=A. D. |last1=Myskis |first2=I. M. |last2=Rabinovic |title=Первое доказательство теоремы о неподвижной точке при непрерывном отображении шара в себя, данное латышским математиком П.Г.Болем |trans-title=The first proof of a fixed-point theorem for a continuous mapping of a sphere into itself, given by the Latvian mathematician P. G. Bohl |language=ru |journal=Успехи математических наук |volume=10 |issue=3 |year=1955 |pages=188–192 |url=http://mi.mathnet.ru/eng/umn/v10/i3/p179 }}</ref> | ||
It was Brouwer, finally, who gave the theorem its first patent of nobility. His goals were different from those of Poincaré. This mathematician was inspired by the foundations of mathematics, especially [[mathematical logic]] and [[topology]]. His initial interest lay in an attempt to solve [[Hilbert's fifth problem]].<ref>J. J. O'Connor E. F. Robertson ''[http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Brouwer.html Luitzen Egbertus Jan Brouwer]''</ref> In 1909, during a voyage to Paris, he met [[Henri Poincaré]], [[Jacques Hadamard]], and [[Émile Borel]]. The ensuing discussions convinced Brouwer of the importance of a better understanding of Euclidean spaces, and were the origin of a fruitful exchange of letters with Hadamard. For the next four years, he concentrated on the proof of certain great theorems on this question. In 1912 he proved the [[hairy ball theorem]] for the two-dimensional sphere, as well as the fact that every continuous map from the two-dimensional ball to itself has a fixed point.<ref>{{cite journal |first=Hans |last=Freudenthal |author-link=Hans Freudenthal | title=The cradle of modern topology, according to Brouwer's inedita |journal=[[Historia Mathematica]] |volume=2 |issue=4 |pages=495–502 [p. 495] |year=1975 |doi=10.1016/0315-0860(75)90111-1 |doi-access=free }}</ref> These two results in themselves were not really new. As Hadamard observed, Poincaré had shown a theorem equivalent to the hairy ball theorem.<ref>{{cite journal |first=Hans |last=Freudenthal |author-link=Hans Freudenthal | title=The cradle of modern topology, according to Brouwer's inedita |journal=[[Historia Mathematica]] |volume=2 |issue=4 |pages=495–502 [p. 495] |year=1975 |doi=10.1016/0315-0860(75)90111-1 |quote=... cette dernière propriété, bien que sous des hypothèses plus grossières, ait été démontré par H. Poincaré |doi-access=free }}</ref> The revolutionary aspect of Brouwer's approach was his systematic use of recently developed tools such as [[homotopy]], the underlying concept of the Poincaré group. In the following year, Hadamard generalised the theorem under discussion to an arbitrary finite dimension, but he employed different methods. [[Hans Freudenthal]] comments on the respective roles as follows: <!-- NON-LITERAL QUOTATION! translated back from French -->"Compared to Brouwer's revolutionary methods, those of Hadamard were very traditional, but Hadamard's participation in the birth of Brouwer's ideas resembles that of a midwife more than that of a mere spectator."<ref>{{cite journal |first=Hans |last=Freudenthal |author-link=Hans Freudenthal | title=The cradle of modern topology, according to Brouwer's inedita |journal=[[Historia Mathematica]] |volume=2 |issue=4 |pages=495–502 [p. 501] |year=1975 |doi=10.1016/0315-0860(75)90111-1 |doi-access=free }}</ref> | It was Brouwer, finally, who gave the theorem its first patent of nobility. His goals were different from those of Poincaré. This mathematician was inspired by the foundations of mathematics, especially [[mathematical logic]] and [[topology]]. His initial interest lay in an attempt to solve [[Hilbert's fifth problem]].<ref>J. J. O'Connor E. F. Robertson ''[http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Brouwer.html Luitzen Egbertus Jan Brouwer]''</ref> In 1909, during a voyage to Paris, he met [[Henri Poincaré]], [[Jacques Hadamard]], and [[Émile Borel]]. The ensuing discussions convinced Brouwer of the importance of a better understanding of Euclidean spaces, and were the origin of a fruitful exchange of letters with Hadamard. For the next four years, he concentrated on the proof of certain great theorems on this question. In 1912 he proved the [[hairy ball theorem]] for the two-dimensional sphere, as well as the fact that every continuous map from the two-dimensional ball to itself has a fixed point.<ref>{{cite journal |first=Hans |last=Freudenthal |author-link=Hans Freudenthal | title=The cradle of modern topology, according to Brouwer's inedita |journal=[[Historia Mathematica]] |volume=2 |issue=4 |pages=495–502 [p. 495] |year=1975 |doi=10.1016/0315-0860(75)90111-1 |doi-access=free }}</ref> These two results in themselves were not really new. As Hadamard observed, Poincaré had shown a theorem equivalent to the hairy ball theorem.<ref>{{cite journal |first=Hans |last=Freudenthal |author-link=Hans Freudenthal | title=The cradle of modern topology, according to Brouwer's inedita |journal=[[Historia Mathematica]] |volume=2 |issue=4 |pages=495–502 [p. 495] |year=1975 |doi=10.1016/0315-0860(75)90111-1 |quote=... cette dernière propriété, bien que sous des hypothèses plus grossières, ait été démontré par H. Poincaré |doi-access=free }}</ref> The revolutionary aspect of Brouwer's approach was his systematic use of recently developed tools such as [[homotopy]], the underlying concept of the Poincaré group. In the following year, Hadamard generalised the theorem under discussion to an arbitrary finite dimension, but he employed different methods. [[Hans Freudenthal]] comments on the respective roles as follows: <!-- NON-LITERAL QUOTATION! translated back from French -->"Compared to Brouwer's revolutionary methods, those of Hadamard were very traditional, but Hadamard's participation in the birth of Brouwer's ideas resembles that of a midwife more than that of a mere spectator."<ref>{{cite journal |first=Hans |last=Freudenthal |author-link=Hans Freudenthal | title=The cradle of modern topology, according to Brouwer's inedita |journal=[[Historia Mathematica]] |volume=2 |issue=4 |pages=495–502 [p. 501] |year=1975 |doi=10.1016/0315-0860(75)90111-1 |doi-access=free }}</ref> | ||
| Line 112: | Line 112: | ||
Other areas are also touched. In [[game theory]], [[John Forbes Nash|John Nash]] used the theorem to prove that in the game of [[Hex (board game)|Hex]] there is a winning strategy for white.<ref>For context and references see the article [[Hex (board game)]].</ref> In economics, P. Bich explains that certain generalizations of the theorem show that its use is helpful for certain classical problems in game theory and generally for equilibria ([[Hotelling's law]]), financial equilibria and incomplete markets.<ref>P. Bich ''[http://www.ann.jussieu.fr/~plc/code2007/bich.pdf Une extension discontinue du théorème du point fixe de Schauder, et quelques applications en économie] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110611140634/http://www.ann.jussieu.fr/~plc/code2007/bich.pdf |date=June 11, 2011 }}'' Institut Henri Poincaré, Paris (2007)</ref> | Other areas are also touched. In [[game theory]], [[John Forbes Nash|John Nash]] used the theorem to prove that in the game of [[Hex (board game)|Hex]] there is a winning strategy for white.<ref>For context and references see the article [[Hex (board game)]].</ref> In economics, P. Bich explains that certain generalizations of the theorem show that its use is helpful for certain classical problems in game theory and generally for equilibria ([[Hotelling's law]]), financial equilibria and incomplete markets.<ref>P. Bich ''[http://www.ann.jussieu.fr/~plc/code2007/bich.pdf Une extension discontinue du théorème du point fixe de Schauder, et quelques applications en économie] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110611140634/http://www.ann.jussieu.fr/~plc/code2007/bich.pdf |date=June 11, 2011 }}'' Institut Henri Poincaré, Paris (2007)</ref> | ||
Brouwer's celebrity is not exclusively due to his topological work. The proofs of his great topological theorems are [[constructive proof|not constructive]],<ref>For a long explanation, see: {{cite journal |first=J. P. |last=Dubucs |url=http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/rhs_0151-4105_1988_num_41_2_4094 |title=L. J. E. Brouwer : Topologie et constructivisme |journal=Revue d'Histoire des Sciences |volume=41 |issue=2 |pages=133–155 |year=1988 |doi=10.3406/rhs.1988.4094 }}</ref> and Brouwer's dissatisfaction with this is partly what led him to articulate the idea of [[constructivism (mathematics)|constructivity]]. He became the originator and zealous defender of a way of formalising mathematics that is known as [[intuitionistic logic|intuitionism]], which at the time made a stand against [[set theory]].<ref>Later it would be shown that the formalism that was combatted by Brouwer can also serve to formalise intuitionism, with some modifications. For further details see [[constructive set theory]].</ref> Brouwer disavowed his original proof of the fixed-point theorem. | Brouwer's celebrity is not exclusively due to his topological work. The proofs of his great topological theorems are [[constructive proof|not constructive]],<ref>For a long explanation, see: {{cite journal |first=J. P. |last=Dubucs |url=http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/rhs_0151-4105_1988_num_41_2_4094 |title=L. J. E. Brouwer : Topologie et constructivisme |journal=Revue d'Histoire des Sciences |volume=41 |issue=2 |pages=133–155 |year=1988 |doi=10.3406/rhs.1988.4094 }}</ref> and Brouwer's dissatisfaction with this is partly what led him to articulate the idea of [[constructivism (mathematics)|constructivity]]. He became the originator and zealous defender of a way of formalising mathematics that is known as [[intuitionistic logic|intuitionism]], which at the time made a stand against [[set theory]].<ref>Later it would be shown that the formalism that was combatted by Brouwer can also serve to formalise intuitionism, with some modifications. For further details see [[constructive set theory]].</ref> Brouwer disavowed his original proof of the fixed-point theorem. | ||
==Proof outlines== | ==Proof outlines== | ||
| Line 123: | Line 123: | ||
:<math>\operatorname{deg}_p(f) = \sum_{x\in f^{-1}(p)} \operatorname{sign}\,\det (df_x).</math> | :<math>\operatorname{deg}_p(f) = \sum_{x\in f^{-1}(p)} \operatorname{sign}\,\det (df_x).</math> | ||
The degree is, roughly speaking, the number of "sheets" of the preimage ''f'' lying over a small open set around ''p'', with sheets counted oppositely if they are oppositely oriented. This is thus a generalization of [[winding number]] to higher dimensions. | The degree is, roughly speaking, the number of "sheets" of the preimage ''f'' lying over a small [[open set]] around ''p'', with sheets counted oppositely if they are oppositely oriented. This is thus a generalization of [[winding number]] to higher dimensions. | ||
The degree satisfies the property of ''homotopy invariance'': let <math>f</math> and <math>g</math> be two continuously differentiable functions, and <math>H_t(x)=tf+(1-t)g</math> for <math>0\le t\le 1</math>. Suppose that the point <math>p</math> is a regular value of <math>H_t</math> for all ''t''. Then <math>\deg_p f = \deg_p g</math>. | The degree satisfies the property of ''homotopy invariance'': let <math>f</math> and <math>g</math> be two continuously differentiable functions, and <math>H_t(x)=tf+(1-t)g</math> for <math>0\le t\le 1</math>. Suppose that the point <math>p</math> is a regular value of <math>H_t</math> for all ''t''. Then <math>\deg_p f = \deg_p g</math>. | ||
| Line 134: | Line 134: | ||
<math>H(t,x) = \frac{x-tf(x)}{\sup_{y\in K}\left|y-tf(y)\right|}</math> | <math>H(t,x) = \frac{x-tf(x)}{\sup_{y\in K}\left|y-tf(y)\right|}</math> | ||
defines a homotopy from the identity function to it. The identity function has degree one at every point. In particular, the identity function has degree one at the origin, so <math>g</math> also has degree one at the origin. As a consequence, the preimage <math>g^{-1}(0)</math> is not empty. The elements of <math>g^{-1}(0)</math> are precisely the fixed points of the original function ''f''. | defines a homotopy from the [[identity function]] to it. The identity function has degree one at every point. In particular, the identity function has degree one at the origin, so <math>g</math> also has degree one at the origin. As a consequence, the preimage <math>g^{-1}(0)</math> is not empty. The elements of <math>g^{-1}(0)</math> are precisely the fixed points of the original function ''f''. | ||
This requires some work to make fully general. The definition of degree must be extended to singular values of ''f'', and then to continuous functions. The more modern advent of [[homology theory]] simplifies the construction of the degree, and so has become a standard proof in the literature. | This requires some work to make fully general. The definition of degree must be extended to singular values of ''f'', and then to continuous functions. The more modern advent of [[homology theory]] simplifies the construction of the degree, and so has become a standard proof in the literature. | ||
=== A proof using the hairy ball theorem === | === A proof using the hairy ball theorem === | ||
The [[hairy ball theorem]] states that on the unit sphere {{mvar|''S''}} in an odd-dimensional Euclidean space, there is no nowhere-vanishing continuous tangent vector field {{mvar|'''w'''}} on {{mvar|''S''}}. (The tangency condition means that {{mvar|'''w'''('''x''') ⋅ '''x'''}} = 0 for every unit vector {{mvar|'''x'''}}.) Sometimes the theorem is expressed by the statement that "there is always a place on the globe with no wind". An elementary proof of the hairy ball theorem can be found in {{harvtxt|Milnor|1978}}. | The [[hairy ball theorem]] states that on the [[unit sphere]] {{mvar|''S''}} in an odd-dimensional Euclidean space, there is no nowhere-vanishing continuous tangent vector field {{mvar|'''w'''}} on {{mvar|''S''}}. (The tangency condition means that {{mvar|'''w'''('''x''') ⋅ '''x'''}} = 0 for every [[unit vector]] {{mvar|'''x'''}}.) Sometimes the theorem is expressed by the statement that "there is always a place on the globe with no wind". An elementary proof of the hairy ball theorem can be found in {{harvtxt|Milnor|1978}}. | ||
In fact, suppose first that {{mvar|'''w'''}} is ''continuously differentiable''. By scaling, it can be assumed that {{mvar|'''w'''}} is a continuously differentiable unit tangent vector on {{mvar|'''S'''}}. It can be extended radially to a small spherical shell {{mvar|''A''}} of {{mvar|''S''}}. For {{mvar|''t''}} sufficiently small, a routine computation shows that the mapping {{mvar|'''f'''<sub>''t''</sub>}}({{mvar|'''x'''}}) = {{mvar|'''x'''}} + {{mvar|''t'' '''w'''('''x''')}} is a [[contraction mapping]] on {{mvar|''A''}} and that the volume of its image is a polynomial in {{mvar|''t''}}. On the other hand, as a contraction mapping, {{mvar|'''f'''<sub>''t''</sub>}} must restrict to a homeomorphism of {{mvar|''S''}} onto (1 + {{mvar|''t''<sup>2</sup>}})<sup>{{sfrac|1|2}}</sup> {{mvar|''S''}} and {{mvar|''A''}} onto (1 + {{mvar|''t''<sup>2</sup>}})<sup>{{sfrac|1|2}}</sup> {{mvar|''A''}}. This gives a contradiction, because, if the dimension {{mvar|''n''}} of the Euclidean space is odd, (1 + {{mvar|''t''<sup>2</sup>}})<sup>{{mvar|''n''}}/2</sup> is not a polynomial. | In fact, suppose first that {{mvar|'''w'''}} is ''continuously differentiable''. By scaling, it can be assumed that {{mvar|'''w'''}} is a continuously differentiable unit tangent vector on {{mvar|'''S'''}}. It can be extended radially to a small spherical shell {{mvar|''A''}} of {{mvar|''S''}}. For {{mvar|''t''}} sufficiently small, a routine computation shows that the mapping {{mvar|'''f'''<sub>''t''</sub>}}({{mvar|'''x'''}}) = {{mvar|'''x'''}} + {{mvar|''t'' '''w'''('''x''')}} is a [[contraction mapping]] on {{mvar|''A''}} and that the volume of its image is a polynomial in {{mvar|''t''}}. On the other hand, as a contraction mapping, {{mvar|'''f'''<sub>''t''</sub>}} must restrict to a homeomorphism of {{mvar|''S''}} onto (1 + {{mvar|''t''<sup>2</sup>}})<sup>{{sfrac|1|2}}</sup> {{mvar|''S''}} and {{mvar|''A''}} onto (1 + {{mvar|''t''<sup>2</sup>}})<sup>{{sfrac|1|2}}</sup> {{mvar|''A''}}. This gives a contradiction, because, if the dimension {{mvar|''n''}} of the Euclidean space is odd, (1 + {{mvar|''t''<sup>2</sup>}})<sup>{{mvar|''n''}}/2</sup> is not a polynomial. | ||
If {{mvar|'''w'''}} is only a ''continuous'' unit tangent vector on {{mvar|''S''}}, by the [[Weierstrass approximation theorem]], it can be uniformly approximated by a polynomial map {{mvar|'''u'''}} of {{mvar|''A''}} into Euclidean space. The orthogonal projection on to the tangent space is given by {{mvar|'''v'''}}({{mvar|'''x'''}}) = {{mvar|'''u'''}}({{mvar|'''x'''}}) - {{mvar|'''u'''}}({{mvar|'''x'''}}) ⋅ {{mvar|'''x'''}}. Thus {{mvar|'''v'''}} is polynomial and nowhere vanishing on {{mvar|''A''}}; by construction {{mvar|'''v'''}}/||{{mvar|'''v'''}}|| is a smooth unit tangent vector field on {{mvar|''S''}}, a contradiction. | If {{mvar|'''w'''}} is only a ''continuous'' unit tangent vector on {{mvar|''S''}}, by the [[Weierstrass approximation theorem]], it can be uniformly approximated by a polynomial map {{mvar|'''u'''}} of {{mvar|''A''}} into Euclidean space. The orthogonal projection on to the [[tangent space]] is given by {{mvar|'''v'''}}({{mvar|'''x'''}}) = {{mvar|'''u'''}}({{mvar|'''x'''}}) - {{mvar|'''u'''}}({{mvar|'''x'''}}) ⋅ {{mvar|'''x'''}}. Thus {{mvar|'''v'''}} is polynomial and nowhere vanishing on {{mvar|''A''}}; by construction {{mvar|'''v'''}}/||{{mvar|'''v'''}}|| is a smooth unit tangent vector field on {{mvar|''S''}}, a contradiction. | ||
The continuous version of the hairy ball theorem can now be used to prove the Brouwer fixed point theorem. First suppose that {{mvar|''n''}} is even. If there were a fixed-point-free continuous self-mapping {{mvar|'''f'''}} of the closed unit ball {{mvar|''B''}} of the {{mvar|''n''}}-dimensional Euclidean space {{mvar|''V''}}, set | The continuous version of the hairy ball theorem can now be used to prove the Brouwer fixed point theorem. First suppose that {{mvar|''n''}} is even. If there were a fixed-point-free continuous self-mapping {{mvar|'''f'''}} of the closed unit ball {{mvar|''B''}} of the {{mvar|''n''}}-dimensional Euclidean space {{mvar|''V''}}, set | ||
| Line 177: | Line 177: | ||
===A combinatorial proof=== | ===A combinatorial proof=== | ||
The BFPT | The BFPT was proved by Knaster-Kuratowski-Mazurkiewicz using [[Sperner's lemma]]. We now give an outline of the proof for the special case in which ''f'' is a function from the standard ''n''-[[simplex]], <math>\Delta^n,</math> to itself, where | ||
:<math>\Delta^n = \left\{P\in\mathbb{R}^{n+1}\mid\sum_{i = 0}^{n}{P_i} = 1 \text{ and } P_i \ge 0 \text{ for all } i\right\}.</math> | :<math>\Delta^n = \left\{P\in\mathbb{R}^{n+1}\mid\sum_{i = 0}^{n}{P_i} = 1 \text{ and } P_i \ge 0 \text{ for all } i\right\}.</math> | ||
| Line 265: | Line 265: | ||
*{{cite journal|author=Gale, D. |year=1979|title=The Game of Hex and Brouwer Fixed-Point Theorem | journal=The American Mathematical Monthly | volume=86 | pages=818–827|doi=10.2307/2320146|jstor=2320146|issue=10}} | *{{cite journal|author=Gale, D. |year=1979|title=The Game of Hex and Brouwer Fixed-Point Theorem | journal=The American Mathematical Monthly | volume=86 | pages=818–827|doi=10.2307/2320146|jstor=2320146|issue=10}} | ||
*{{cite book |first=Morris W. |last=Hirsch | author-link=Morris Hirsch| title=Differential Topology |location=New York |publisher=Springer |year=1988 |isbn=978-0-387-90148-0 }} (see p. 72–73 for Hirsch's proof utilizing non-existence of a differentiable retraction) | *{{cite book |first=Morris W. |last=Hirsch | author-link=Morris Hirsch| title=Differential Topology |location=New York |publisher=Springer |year=1988 |isbn=978-0-387-90148-0 }} (see p. 72–73 for Hirsch's proof utilizing non-existence of a differentiable retraction) | ||
*{{cite book|mr=0115161|last1=Hilton|first1= Peter J.|last2= Wylie|first2= | *{{cite book|mr=0115161|last1=Hilton|first1= Peter J.|last2= Wylie|first2= Shaun|author-link=Peter Hilton|author-link2=Shaun Wylie|title= | ||
Homology theory: An introduction to algebraic topology|publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]]|location= New York |year=1960|isbn=0521094224}} | Homology theory: An introduction to algebraic topology|publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]]|location= New York |year=1960|isbn=0521094224}} | ||
*{{cite book |first=Vasile I. |last=Istrăţescu |title=Fixed Point Theory |series=Mathematics and its Applications|volume= 7 |publisher=D. Reidel|location=Dordrecht–Boston, MA |year=1981 |isbn=978-90-277-1224-0|mr=0620639 }} | *{{cite book |first=Vasile I. |last=Istrăţescu |title=Fixed Point Theory |series=Mathematics and its Applications|volume= 7 |publisher=D. Reidel|location=Dordrecht–Boston, MA |year=1981 |isbn=978-90-277-1224-0|mr=0620639 }} | ||
| Line 284: | Line 284: | ||
==External links== | ==External links== | ||
* [http://www.cut-the-knot.org/do_you_know/poincare.shtml#brouwertheorem Brouwer's Fixed Point Theorem for Triangles] at [[cut-the-knot]] | * [http://www.cut-the-knot.org/do_you_know/poincare.shtml#brouwertheorem Brouwer's Fixed Point Theorem for Triangles] at [[cut-the-knot]] | ||
* | * {{PlanetMath|BrouwerFixedPointTheorem}} | ||
* [http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath262/kmath262.htm Reconstructing Brouwer] at MathPages | * [http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath262/kmath262.htm Reconstructing Brouwer] at MathPages | ||
* [http://mathforum.org/mathimages/index.php/Brouwer_Fixed_Point_Theorem Brouwer Fixed Point Theorem] at Math Images. | * [https://web.archive.org/web/20110314100800/http://mathforum.org/mathimages/index.php/Brouwer_Fixed_Point_Theorem Brouwer Fixed Point Theorem] at Math Images. | ||
{{Authority control}} | {{Authority control}} | ||