📝 Jacobian determinant in two variables (15 MCQs)
📖 From Calculus • 15. Multiple Integrals Calculus • 15 questions available
What is Jacobian determinant in two variables?
Definition:
The Jacobian determinant for is .
Example:
For polar coords, .
Reason:
The Jacobian measures the local scaling factor of the transformation, crucial for correcting the area element in the new coordinates.
📝 All Jacobian determinant in two variables MCQs
Q1. Let and . Which statement best explains why the Jacobian is useful when transforming a double integral?
📖 Explanation: The Jacobian describes the local area-scaling factor produced by a transformation. For this mapping, small regions in the -plane generally correspond to differently scaled regions in the -plane. Therefore, the Jacobian must be included when changing variables in a double integral. It does not eliminate the need to transform the region.
Q2. For and , what is ?
📖 Explanation: Solving the equations gives and . Differentiating these expressions gives a determinant of . Because area scaling uses the absolute value of the determinant, the required factor is .
Q3. A transformation satisfies at a point. Assuming the transformation is locally invertible there, what is the corresponding area-scaling factor from the -plane back to the -plane?
📖 Explanation: For a locally invertible transformation, the Jacobian of the inverse transformation is the reciprocal of the original Jacobian, provided the original determinant is nonzero. Since the given determinant is , the inverse transformation has determinant . The absolute value gives the same positive area-scaling factor.
Q4. A student claims that if at one point, the transformation must map the entire plane onto a single curve. What is the best evaluation of this reasoning?
📖 Explanation: A zero Jacobian at a particular point indicates that the transformation loses local area information there. It does not imply that the entire mapping collapses globally. Other points may have nonzero Jacobians and remain locally invertible. The student's conclusion improperly extends a local condition to the whole domain.
Q5. Consider and . A student computes the Jacobian as and concludes that the transformation is locally invertible everywhere except at the origin. What should be concluded?
📖 Explanation: Differentiating gives . The determinant is , which is positive except at . Thus the computed expression and conclusion are correct. The determinant does not need to be negative; a nonzero positive determinant also establishes local invertibility.
Q6. Suppose a region in the -plane is bounded by . A transformation uses and . Which transformed region is most appropriate?
📖 Explanation: Each pair of boundary lines becomes a constant-coordinate line under the transformation. The lines and become and , while and become and . Therefore, the transformed region is the stated rectangle.
Q7. A rectangular region in the -plane has area . At every point of its image, the absolute Jacobian equals . What is the area of the corresponding region in the -plane?
📖 Explanation: The absolute Jacobian gives the local factor by which an area element in the -plane changes when mapped into the -plane. Since that factor is constantly , the total area is multiplied by . Thus an original area of becomes .
Q8. A designer wants coordinates whose constant-coordinate curves align with the boundaries and in the first quadrant. Which choice is most natural for simplifying the region?
📖 Explanation: When boundaries are given directly by expressions such as and , choosing those expressions as new variables converts the boundaries into coordinate lines. This is a modeling strategy: choose variables that match the geometry of the region rather than selecting variables arbitrarily.
Q9. For and , a student differentiates and obtains . Which critique is correct?
📖 Explanation: The partial derivatives are . Therefore the determinant is . The student's answer comes from confusing the derivatives of the product with the original expression. This is a common differentiation error.
Q10. A graph shows a family of curves forming parallel lines of slope , while forms parallel lines of slope . Which transformation is consistent with this geometry?
📖 Explanation: For , fixing gives , or , a family of slope lines. For , fixing gives , a family of slope lines. Reversing the names of the variables preserves the same two families, so both A and B fit the graph.
Q11. A region is described by and lies entirely in the first quadrant. A student chooses and . Which advantage does this choice provide?
📖 Explanation: The chosen variables represent radial distance squared and angular position. The circular boundary becomes , while the first-quadrant restriction gives a simple angular interval for . This transforms a curved region into a rectangular-type parameter region, although the Jacobian is still essential for correctly transforming area elements.
Q12. Two students use different valid changes of variables to evaluate the same double integral. Student A obtains a simple rectangular region but a complicated Jacobian. Student B obtains a less simple region but a constant Jacobian. Which principle should determine the better method?
📖 Explanation: A change of variables should be judged by the complete transformed integral, not by one feature alone. A simple region may compensate for a complicated Jacobian, while a constant Jacobian may compensate for more complicated bounds. The best transformation is the one that minimizes the combined difficulty of the integrand, bounds, and scaling factor.
Q13. Let and . At , what does the nonzero Jacobian tell you about the transformation near that point?
📖 Explanation: The Jacobian at is nonzero because . A nonzero determinant means the transformation has locally independent directions and therefore is locally invertible near that point. It does not establish global one-to-one behavior, nor does it imply that area is preserved without scaling.
Q14. A transformation maps a small square of area near a point in the -plane to a region whose area is approximately in the -plane. Which conclusion is most reasonable about the local Jacobian magnitude?
📖 Explanation: For sufficiently small regions, the absolute value of the Jacobian approximates the local area-scaling factor. The observed area changes from to approximately , so the scaling factor is . Thus the magnitude of is approximately near that point.
Q15. Suppose and . An integral is transformed using . A student argues that the factor should be because . Which response best resolves the disagreement?
📖 Explanation: The determinant equals , whose magnitude is . However, when rewriting in terms of , the required factor is the absolute value of the inverse Jacobian, namely . The student's mistake is using the Jacobian in the wrong direction.