Could use some help with a proof

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter csprof2000
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the question of whether a function that is infinitely differentiable and constant on a finite closed interval must be constant everywhere on the real line. Participants explore this concept through various examples and counterexamples, focusing on the properties of differentiability and continuity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether a function that is infinitely differentiable and constant on a closed interval must be constant everywhere, seeking a proof or counterexample.
  • Another participant points out that the Heaviside function is not differentiable at a specific point, challenging the initial assumptions about differentiability.
  • A participant proposes a piecewise function that is constant on the interval but not constant elsewhere, raising concerns about the continuity and differentiability of its second derivative.
  • Further contributions include links to external resources discussing non-analytic smooth functions, suggesting that Taylor's theorem may not apply to all infinitely differentiable functions.
  • Another participant suggests a different piecewise function and acknowledges issues with its second derivative, indicating ongoing uncertainty about the properties of the proposed functions.
  • One participant presents a specific function that is claimed to be infinitely differentiable everywhere, contributing to the exploration of counterexamples.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of differentiability and continuity, with no consensus reached on whether the initial claim holds true. Multiple competing examples and counterexamples are presented, indicating ongoing debate.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note limitations in their proposed functions, particularly regarding the continuity and differentiability of derivatives at specific points. The discussion remains open-ended with unresolved mathematical considerations.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying analysis, calculus, or mathematical proofs, particularly in the context of differentiability and continuity in functions.

csprof2000
Messages
286
Reaction score
0
Hello,

I've been wondering about something for a while now. As a computer scientist, I never had much in the way of analysis or advanced calculus, but there is something I have always assumed was true but have never been able to prove.

Say that you have a function f : R -> R which is infinitely differentiable (and continuous). The derivatives may eventually equal zero, but they must also be infinitely differentiable (and continuous) according to this same definition.

Further, assume that on some finite closed interval [a, b] the function is constant; that is, for any x in [a, b], f(x) = c for some finite value of c (with c constant).

Is it true that f(x) = c for all x in R?

Also, as a computer scientist, if the bottom line does not follow, I would definitely like an example of a function satisfying my requirements but which is not constant. No ad absurdum proofs, please. Thanks in advance for any help I may get in this matter.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Umm...

"infinitely differentiable (and continuous)"

The heaviside function is not differentiable at x = 0, last time I checked. Nor is it continuous there.
 
csprof2000 said:
Umm...

"infinitely differentiable (and continuous)"

The heaviside function is not differentiable at x = 0, last time I checked. Nor is it continuous there.
I know, I missed that part of your post (which is why I deleted it just before you replied) :rolleyes:
 
lol. I reread my post to make sure I said that. I agree the problem would have been a little flippant if I hadn't specified that. ;D

Thanks for your interest, though. It seems obvious to me, but is it so obvious? If it were so obvious, you'd think I'd have a proof by now...
 
Perhaps I misinterpretted - or misunderstand - your post but wouldn't the piecewise funcion:

c, a < x < b
f = (x - a)^2 + c, x < a
(x - b)^2 + c, x > b

satisfy the conditions? f(x) = c in some finite interval [a,b], is continuous for all values x, and I think is differentiable; moreover f(x) =/ c for all values x.
 
Well, the problem is that the second derivative,


f ' ' (x) = {2, x < a} or {0, a < x < b} or {2, b < x}

Therefore, the second derivative is neither continuous nor differentiable for x = a or x = b, which I require.
 
Oh, wow. Well, I suppose that does it. Clever...

Thanks, Moo of Doom, for showing me that... it's a perfect counterexample. Thanks!
 
Arby, I'd take a look at Moo of Doom's link. Taylor's theorem only applies to analytic functions, I believe. I already knew it was true for analytic functions, but... I thought it may have been true more generally.

Thanks for your help, everybody.
 
  • #10
Sorry didn't see it before I blinked, then I deleted it, thanks.
 
  • #11
What about a piecewise defined function:

f(x) =

(x+1)^2 for -inf < x < -1
0 for -1 <= x <= 1
(x-1)^2 for 1 < x < +inf


this is continuous and analytic and all those nice things isn't it?

Edit:
Whoops I'm not doing very well today. 2nd deriv problems...
 
Last edited:
  • #12
The function defined by
[tex]f(x)= e^{-1/x^2}[/tex] for x< 0
[tex]f(x)= 0[/tex] for [itex]0\le x\le 1[/itex]
[tex]f(x)= e^{-1/(x-1)^2}[/itex] for x> 1<br /> is, I believe, infinitely differentiable for all x.[/tex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K