Applying the Mean Value Theorem to sequences of function

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of the Mean Value Theorem (MVT) in the context of sequences of functions. Participants are exploring how to correctly apply the theorem and its implications for uniform convergence.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning the correct intervals for applying the MVT, with suggestions to consider different intervals. There are discussions about the implications of uniform convergence and how it relates to the application of the theorem. Some are attempting to clarify terms and expressions derived from the MVT.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing suggestions and questioning each other's reasoning. Some have offered guidance on specific aspects of the problem, while others are exploring different interpretations of the theorem's application.

Contextual Notes

There are mentions of assumptions regarding uniform convergence and the dependence of certain variables on others, which are under scrutiny. Participants express uncertainty about the necessity of certain variations of the MVT as presented in their texts.

jdinatale
Messages
153
Reaction score
0
As usual, I typed up the problem and my attempt in LaTeX:

MVT.png


Maybe I'm not applying the MVT correctly, but my result does not seem to help me solve the problem in anyway. What are your thoughts?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Maybe you shouldn't apply the mean value theorem on [a,b] but rather on [x,x0]??
 
micromass said:
Maybe you shouldn't apply the mean value theorem on [a,b] but rather on [x,x0]??

Thanks, that would help. Ok I tried your suggestion and here is the result. The problem is now making use of the [itex]f'_n(c) - f'_m(c)[/itex] since they do not appear in the triangle inequality. And also, I am not using the assumption that [itex]f'_n[/itex] converges uniformly.

MVT-1.png
 
In your triangle inequality, you have a term

[tex]|(f_n(x)-f_m(x))-(f_n(x_0)-f_m(x_0))|[/tex]

Isn't this the same as the numerator of what you got after applying the mean value theorem??
 
micromass said:
In your triangle inequality, you have a term

[tex]|(f_n(x)-f_m(x))-(f_n(x_0)-f_m(x_0))|[/tex]

Isn't this the same as the numerator of what you got after applying the mean value theorem??

Well, no, it's slightly different:

[tex]|f_n(x) + f_m(x) - f_n(x_0) - f_m(x_0)|[/tex]

We need it to be [tex]f_n(x) - f_m(x)[/tex] instead of +

Oh btw, I noticed in your profile that it says you are 15. Is that true? Because that's incredible that you know so much math at that age, really astonishing.
 
Oh, how did you get that + in the mean value theorem? That isn't correct. The mean value theorem says that

[tex](f_n-f_m)^\prime(c)(x-x_0)=(f_n-f_m)(x)-(f_n-f_m)(x_0)[/tex]

You seemed to have applied the mean-value theorem to [itex]f_n+f_m[/itex]...
 
Micromass, I believe I have found the solution! Here is my completed proof, what do you think?


MVT-2.png
 
Hmm, you know that that c is depend on n and m right?? You act like there is only one c, but there are multiple c's.

And to be sure you really get it: where exactly do you need uniform convergence of [itex](f^\prime_n)_n[/itex]??
 
micromass said:
Hmm, you know that that c is depend on n and m right?? You act like there is only one c, but there are multiple c's.

And to be sure you really get it: where exactly do you need uniform convergence of [itex](f^\prime_n)_n[/itex]??

Oh, well it was my understanding that the c was only dependent on the [tex][x, x_0][/tex]. I guess I didn't understand that c could be different for different m's and n's.

We need uniform convergence of [itex](f^\prime_n)_n[/itex] because we have to use the Cauchy Criterion for Uniform Convergence.

Well, since my proof is incorrect then, could you point me in the right direction so that I can try to complete this?
 
  • #10
The mean value theorem on a function actually implies:

[tex]|g(a)-g(b)|\leq |a-b| \sup_{c\in [a,b]}|g^\prime(c)|[/tex]

I suggest you use this. It will become apparent where the uniform convergence is used.
 
  • #11
micromass said:
The mean value theorem on a function actually implies:

[tex]|g(a)-g(b)|\leq |a-b| \sup_{c\in [a,b]}|g^\prime(c)|[/tex]

I suggest you use this. It will become apparent where the uniform convergence is used.

I guess I'm not quite sure I understand. My book has no mention of this variation to the MVT. Are you certain that it is necessary to solve this problem?
 
  • #12
jdinatale said:
I guess I'm not quite sure I understand. My book has no mention of this variation to the MVT.

It's quite easy to prove from the MVT.

Are you certain that it is necessary to solve this problem?

I think it's the easiest and cleanest way...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K