Physics Forums Insights
  • Physics
    • Physics Articles
    • Physics Tutorials
    • Physics Guides
    • Physics FAQs
  • Math
    • Math Articles
    • Math Tutorials
    • Math Guides
    • Math FAQs
  • Bio/Chem/Tech
    • Bio/Chem Articles
    • Computer Science Tutorials
    • Technology Guides
  • Education
    • Education Articles
    • Education Guides
  • Interviews
  • Quizzes
  • Forums
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu
differentiable function 2

A Continuous, Nowhere Differentiable Function: Part 2

May 7, 2015/2 Comments/in Mathematics Tutorials/by jbunniii
📖Read Time: 5 minutes
📊Readability: Advanced 📐 (Technical knowledge needed)
🔖Core Topics: inxfunctionseriesfouriercontinuous

This is Part 2 of a series of articles in which the goal is to exhibit a continuous function that is nowhere differentiable and to explore some interesting properties of a special type of Fourier series.

In Part 1, we defined the Weierstrass function,

$$w(x) = \sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\alpha^k \cos(\beta^k)$$

We showed that the series is absolutely and uniformly convergent, so ##w## is a continuous function. We also showed that the radius of convergence is ##1##, which is a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for the function to be non-smooth. In this post, we will continue working toward proving that in fact, ##w## is nowhere differentiable, provided that the condition ##\alpha \beta > 1## is satisfied.

To do this, we will identify a condition that must be satisfied by the Fourier series of a continuous function that is differentiable at a point ##x_0##, and we will show that the Weierstrass function does not satisfy this condition, hence it is nowhere differentiable.

The general form for the Fourier series of a ##2\pi##-periodic function ##f## is

$$f(x) = \sum_{n = -\infty}^{\infty}c_n e^{inx}$$

where convergence is understood to mean that the sequence of symmetric partial sums

$$f_N(x) = \sum_{n = -N}^{N} c_n e^{inx}$$

satisfies

$$\lim_{N \to \infty}f_n(x) = f(x)$$

for every ##x##. In the special case where ##f## is real and even, the partial sums can be rewritten as

$$f_N(x) = c_0 + \sum_{n=1}^{N} c_n(e^{inx} + e^{-inx}) = c_0 + \sum_{n=1}^{N} (2c_n) \cos(nx) = \sum_{n = 0}^{N} a_n \cos(nx)$$

where

$$a_n = \begin{cases} c_n & \text{if }n = 0 \\ 2c_n & \text{otherwise} \\ \end{cases}$$

In general, it’s hard to find useful conditions which must be satisfied by the sequence ##f_N## when ##f## is an arbitrary continuous function; indeed, one can construct a continuous functions whose Fourier series diverges at some or even infinitely many points. (That’s a subject for another blog post!)

However, by a technique called Cesàro summation, we can obtain a more well-behaved sequence of functions which always converges to ##f## in a controlled way which can be quantified.  To do this, let’s define

$$\overline{f}_N(x) = \frac{1}{N}\sum_{k=0}^{N-1}f_k(x) = \frac{1}{N}\sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \sum_{n=-k}^{k}c_n e^{inx}$$

In other words, we form a sequence ##(\overline{f}_n)## where the ##N##’th term is the average of the first ##N## partial sums of the Fourier series of ##f##. Examining the rightmost expression, we see that ##\overline{f}_N## sums a total of ##N## copies of ##c_0 e^{i0x} = c_0##, and ##N-1## copies of ##c_1 e^{i1x}## and ##c_{-1}e^{-i1x}##, and in general, ##N – |n|## copies of ##c_n e^{inx}##. Therefore, an equivalent way to express ##\overline{f}_N(x)## is

$$\overline{f}_N(x) = \frac{1}{N}\sum_{n=-N}^{N}(N-|n|)c_n e^{inx} = \sum_{n=-N}^{N}\left(1 – \frac{|n|}{N}\right)c_n e^{inx}$$

This shows that ##\overline{f}_N## is formed from the terms of the Fourier series by first weighting the Fourier coefficients ##(c_n)## by the triangular sequence

$$t_n = \begin{cases}1 – \frac{|n|}{N} & \text{if }|n| < N \\ 0 & \text{otherwise} \\ \end{cases}$$

This reduction of the influence of the higher-frequency terms is what allows the better convergence properties. In particular, we will prove the following.

Table of Contents

  • Theorem 1.
  • Lemma 2.
    • Proof of Lemma 2:
  • More Related Articles

Theorem 1.

If ##f## is a continuous function which is differentiable at ##x_0##, then the sequence of Cesàro sums ##\overline{f}_N(x)## of its Fourier series satisfies

$$\limsup_{N \to \infty} \frac{|\overline{f}’_N(x)|}{\log N} < \infty$$

where ##\overline{f}’_N## is the derivative of ##\overline{f}_N##.

We will then show that the Weierstrass function ##w## does not satisfy this condition at any point ##x_0##, and therefore is nowhere differentiable.

The key to proving Theorem 1 is the following characterization of the Cesàro sum:

Lemma 2.

If ##f## is a continuous, ##2\pi##-periodic function, then

$$\overline{f}_N(x) = \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} K_N(u)f(x-u) du = \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} K_N(x-u)f(u) du$$

where

$$K_N(x) = \frac{1}{N}\left(\frac{\sin\frac{Nx}{2}}{\sin\frac{x}{2}}\right)^2$$

is called the ##N##’th Fejér kernel. The equivalent expressions ##\int_{-\pi}^{\pi} K_N(u)f(x-u) du = \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} K_N(x-u)f(u) du## are called the convolution of ##K_N## and ##f##, which is often written as ##K_N \ast f = f \ast K_N##.

Proof of Lemma 2:

The Fourier coefficient ##c_n## is

$$c_n = \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi} f(x) e^{-inx} dx$$

Therefore,

$$\begin{aligned} \overline{f}_N(x) &= \frac{1}{N}\sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \sum_{n=-k}^{k}c_n e^{inx} \\ &= \frac{1}{2\pi N}\sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \sum_{n=-k}^{k}\left(\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}f(u)e^{-inu}du\right) e^{inx}\\ &= \frac{1}{2\pi N}\sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \sum_{n=-k}^{k} \left( \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} f(u) e^{in(x-u)}du\right) \\ &= \frac{1}{2\pi} \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} f(u) \left(\frac{1}{N}\sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \sum_{n=-k}^{k} e^{in(x-u)}\right) du \\  \end{aligned}$$

So it suffices to show that

$$K_N(x) = \frac{1}{N}\sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \sum_{n=-k}^{k} e^{inx}$$

Now, ##\sum_{n=-k}^{k} e^{inx} =1 + 2\sum_{n=1}^{k} \cos(nx)##. Multiply both sides by ##\sin(x/2)## and apply the trig identity ##\sin(a)\cos(b) = \frac{1}{2}[\sin(a+b) + \sin(a-b)]## on the right hand side. The sum telescopes, and the right hand side reduces to ##\sin((k+1/2)x)##. This yields the identity

$$\sin(x/2)\sum_{n=-k}^{k} e^{inx} = \sin((k+1/2)x)$$

Summing both sides from ##k=0## to ##N-1##, we have

$$\sin(x/2)\sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \sum_{n=-k}^{k} e^{inx} = \sum_{k=0}^{N-1}\sin((k+1/2)x)$$

Again multiply both sides by ##\sin(x/2)##, and apply the trig identity ##\sin(a)\sin(b) = \frac{1}{2}[\cos(a-b) – \cos(a+b)]## on the right hand side. The sum telescopes again, leaving us with

$$\sin^2(x/2) \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \sum_{n=-k}^{k} e^{inx} =  \frac{1}{2}(1 – \cos(Nx)) = \sin^2(Nx/2)$$

Dividing both sides by ##\sin^2(x/2)## gives us the desired result. ##\square##

We will apply Lemma 2 to complete the proof of Theorem 1 in the next post.

 

More Related Articles

  • Using the Fourier Series To Find Some Interesting Sums
  • A Continuous, Nowhere Differentiable Function: Part 1
  • Learn Further Sums Found Through Fourier Series
  • Some Misconceptions on Indefinite Integrals
Tags: calculus, differentiable function, Fourier series
Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on X
  • Share on WhatsApp
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Reddit
  • Share by Mail
https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/cont-funt-tut2.png 135 240 jbunniii https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Physics_Forums_Insights_logo.png jbunniii2015-05-07 02:37:212021-04-17 09:44:17A Continuous, Nowhere Differentiable Function: Part 2
You might also like
Riemann Hypothesis The Extended Riemann Hypothesis and Ramanujan’s Sum
Demystifying the Chain Rule in Calculus
Epsilontic limits and continuity Epsilontic – Limits and Continuity
calc precalc Beginners Guide to Precalculus, Calculus and Infinitesimals
differentiable function A Continuous, Nowhere Differentiable Function: Part 1
history of numbers Counting to p-adic Calculus: All Number Systems That We Have
2 replies
  1. zwierz says:
    March 19, 2017 at 10:45 am

    note also that the set of differentiable at least at one point functions has the first Baire category in ##C[a,b]##. This fact is much simpler to prove than to find nowhere differentiable function explicitly. So that in some sense the set of differentiable functions is very small in ##C[a,b]##

    Log in to Reply
  2. Greg Bernhardt says:
    May 7, 2015 at 2:38 am

    Nice jbunniii! Looking forward to part 3!

    Log in to Reply

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Trending Articles

  • Explosion-Generated Collapsing Vacuum Bubbles Reach 20,000 Kelvin
  • Explore Some Sins in Physics Didactics
  • It’s Elemental! The Periodic Table Quiz
  • Do Black Holes Really Exist?
  • Grab Bag Science Quiz and Trivia

Physics Forums

  • Classical Physics
  • Atomic and Condensed Matter
  • Quantum Physics
  • Special and General Relativity
  • Beyond the Standard Model
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
  • Cosmology
  • Other Physics Topics

Receive Insights Articles to Your Inbox

Enter your email address:

Blog Information

  • Become a Member!
  • Write for Us!
  • Table of Contents
  • Blog Author List

Popular Topics

astronomy (17) black holes (17) classical physics (35) cosmology (16) education (23) electromagnetism (19) general relativity (19) gravity (24) interview (21) mathematics (39) mathematics self-study (21) Physicist (26) programming (18) Quantum Field Theory (31) quantum mechanics (36) quantum physics (24) relativity (40) Special Relativity (16) technology (19) universe (21)
2026 © Physics Forums, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED - Contact Us - Privacy Policy - About PF Insights
  • Link to X
  • Link to Facebook
  • Link to LinkedIn
  • Link to Youtube
Link to: Frequently Made Errors in Mechanics: Forces Link to: Frequently Made Errors in Mechanics: Forces Frequently Made Errors in Mechanics: Forcesforces mistakesLink to: Explore Some Sins in Physics Didactics Link to: Explore Some Sins in Physics Didactics classroomExplore Some Sins in Physics Didactics
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top