Could use some help with a proof

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

The discussion centers on the properties of infinitely differentiable functions and their behavior on finite closed intervals. A key question posed is whether a function f: R -> R, which is constant on a closed interval [a, b], must also be constant for all x in R. Participants provided counterexamples, including piecewise functions that are continuous and differentiable but not constant outside the interval. The Heaviside function was mentioned as a non-example due to its lack of differentiability at x = 0, reinforcing the need for precise definitions in mathematical proofs.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of infinitely differentiable functions
  • Familiarity with piecewise functions
  • Knowledge of continuity and differentiability concepts
  • Basic principles of calculus and analysis
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the properties of Taylor's theorem and its application to analytic functions
  • Research counterexamples in analysis, focusing on piecewise defined functions
  • Study the characteristics of the Heaviside function and its differentiability
  • Investigate the implications of continuity and differentiability in mathematical proofs
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, computer scientists, and anyone interested in advanced calculus and analysis, particularly those exploring the properties of differentiable 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
f(x)= e^{-1/x^2} for x< 0
f(x)= 0 for 0\le x\le 1
f(x)= e^{-1/(x-1)^2}[/itex] for x&gt; 1<br /> is, I believe, infinitely differentiable for all x.
 

Similar threads

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