2
$\begingroup$

I'm having some confusion in the proof of Darboux's Theorem. It appears similar questions have been asked before, but I'm still confused by the replies, so I thought I would ask my own.

Here is my proof. Let $g(x) = f(x) - \gamma x$

Assume $f'(a) < f'(b)$ w.l.o.g.

We know $f'(a) < \gamma < f'(b)$ by hypothesis.

So, $f'(a) - \gamma = g'(a) < 0$ and $f'(b) - \gamma = g'(b) > 0$

Since $g'(a) < 0$ and $g'(b) > 0$, (opposite signs) we know $\exists c$ such that $g'(c) = 0$

That step right there is my confusion. I am basically using the IVT to claim there is a value in between. However, to use the IVT, the function has to be continuous. That is not an assumption in the problem, only that $f$ is continuous. I've found this question asked a couple of times, but the common reply seems to be that the derivative need not be continuous to have the intermediate value property because of Darboux's Theorem. But I am trying to prove Darboux's Theorem! So while I believe that fact, I can't use the theorem within its proof. I cannot seem to justify that step in the event that $g'$ is discontinuous.

I have been told there is another version of the proof combining the MVT and IVT. However, I've found it online in a few places, and I'm having a hard time following it. So I am trying to figure out how to do it this way since I don't understand the other way. Can someone explain to me why I can use the IVT without the derivative being continnuous?

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ The IVT states "Every continuous function has the intermediate-value-property". The Darboux theorem states "Every derivative has the intermediate-value-property". In spite of both theroems having the same conclusion, you cannot use the first to prove the latter because the differente premises don't grant that right away. (On the other hand, every contnuous function is the derivative of its integral, hence Darboux theroem implies IVT). $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 9, 2020 at 13:51
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry for my last comment. You can show $g$ has a global extreme value attained in $(a,b)$. $g'$ must be 0 at that point. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 9, 2020 at 14:00
  • $\begingroup$ @HagenvonEitzen So I'm still confused. Why is this proof commonly accepted? It seems like the statement of g' having the intermediate value property is literally the Darboux Theorem which is what we are trying to prove. So I don't see why it's justified. $\endgroup$
    – Nolan P
    Commented Dec 9, 2020 at 14:01
  • $\begingroup$ @DavidMitra how would I go about that? I don't think I've heard that term global extreme value before. $\endgroup$
    – Nolan P
    Commented Dec 9, 2020 at 14:02
  • $\begingroup$ Read the paper at numdam.org/article/NAM_1869_2_8__17_0.pdf Even if your French is as bad as my English, you will not have any problem. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 9, 2020 at 14:02

2 Answers 2

3
$\begingroup$

Since $g'(a)<0$, $g(x)<g(a)$ when $x>a$ and $x$ is close enough to $a$. And, since $g'(b)>0$, $g(x)<g(b)$ when $x<b$ and $x$ is close enough to $b$. So, $g$ has a minimum on $[a,b]$ which is attained at some $x_0\in(a,b)$. And so $g'(x_0)=0$, since:

  • if $x>x_0$, then $\frac{g(x)-g(x_0)}{x-x_0}\geqslant0$, and therefore $g'(x_0)=\lim_{x\to x_0^{\,+}}\frac{g(x)-g(x_0)}{x-x_0}\geqslant0$;
  • if $x<x_0$, then $\frac{g(x)-g(x_0)}{x-x_0}\leqslant0$, and therefore $g'(x_0)=\lim_{x\to x_0^{\,-}}\frac{g(x)-g(x_0)}{x-x_0}\leqslant0$.

And $g'(x_0)=0\iff f'(x_0)=\gamma$.

$\endgroup$
10
  • $\begingroup$ So g(x) < g(a) if x > a and g(x) < g(b) if x < b. So I see this implies a minimum because g(x) < g(a), so the minimum cannot be at the endpoint a. So I agree there is some $x_0 \in (a,b)$ that is the minimum. But, how can we conclude that $g'(x_0) = 0$ from that? Why couldn't it be negative or positive? We know g'(a) < 0 and g'(b) > 0, but why does the minimum have to be at 0? Couldn't it be at any number in between there? Does it make sense what I'm asking? $\endgroup$
    – Nolan P
    Commented Dec 9, 2020 at 15:48
  • $\begingroup$ Because if a differentiable function has a local minimum (or a local maximum) at some point $x_0$, then $f'(x_0)$ is always equal to $0$. Do you want a proof of this? $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 9, 2020 at 16:13
  • $\begingroup$ I myself am not convinced it occurs at 0, so I think that proof would help. Also, I am not sure who downvoted your post. I upvoted to make it 0 again. But yes I think that proof would help! $\endgroup$
    – Nolan P
    Commented Dec 9, 2020 at 19:28
  • $\begingroup$ Do you mean that you are not convinced that $g'(x_0)=0$? $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 9, 2020 at 19:30
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Consider the limit $\lim_{x\to x_0}\frac{g(x)-g(x_0)}{x-x_0}(=g'(x_0))$. Since $g$ has a local minimum at $x_0$, $\frac{g(x)-g(x_0)}{x-x_0}\geqslant0$ when $x>x_0$, and so $\lim_{x\to x_0^{\,+}}\frac{g(x)-g(x_0)}{x-x_0}\geqslant0$. By a similar argument, $\lim_{x\to x_0^{\,-}}\frac{g(x)-g(x_0)}{x-x_0}\leqslant0$. But both of these limits are equal to $\lim_{x\to x_0}\frac{g(x)-g(x_0)}{x-x_0}$, which is therefore equal to $0$. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 9, 2020 at 22:11
1
$\begingroup$

The function $g\colon [a,b]\to\Bbb R$ is continuous, hence attains its minimum at some $x_0\in [a,b]$.

  • We have $g'(x_0)\ge 0$: This is clear if $x_0=b$, so assume $x_0<b$. Then for all sufficiently small $h>0$, we have $x_0+h\le b$ and $g(x_0+h)\ge g(x_0)$, hence $\frac{g(x_0+h)-g(x_0)}{h}\ge 0$. By taking the limit as $h\to 0^+$, we find $g'(x_0)\ge 0$.

  • We have $g'(x_0)\le 0$: This is clear if $x_0=a$, so assume $x_0>a$. Then for all sufficiently small $h>0$, we have $x_0-h\ge h$ and $g(x_0-h)\ge g(x_0)$, hence $\frac{g(x_0-h)-g(x_0)}{-h}\le 0$. By taking the limit as $h\to 0^+$, we find $g'(x_0)\le 0$.

Therefore $g'(x_0)=0$.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Hmm. This does seem to work. I did not think about this. Only thing I will ask, in the first case you have $x_0 + h < b$ and in the second it is $x_0 - h > h$ Why not an a in the second one? This seems to make sense though. $\endgroup$
    – Nolan P
    Commented Dec 9, 2020 at 15:50

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .