How Does Lipschitz Continuity Constrain a Function's Graph Between Two Lines?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around Lipschitz continuity of a function defined on the interval [0, ∞) and its implications for the function's graph. Participants are exploring how Lipschitz continuity constrains the graph of the function between two lines with specific slopes.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to apply the definition of Lipschitz continuity to show that the graph of the function lies between two lines. Some participants question whether dividing by (b-a) is sufficient for proof. Others suggest substituting variables to simplify the expressions.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, with some providing steps that seem to lead towards a resolution. There is a suggestion to extend the reasoning to local Lipschitz continuity, indicating a productive exploration of the topic.

Contextual Notes

There is a focus on the implications of Lipschitz continuity, particularly in terms of the slopes of the bounding lines. The discussion includes considerations of local Lipschitz continuity and how it may differ from global continuity.

Azael
Messages
257
Reaction score
1
Let the function
f:[0,\infty) \rightarrow \mathbb{R} be lipschitz continuous with lipschits constant K. Show that over small intervalls [a,b] \subset [0,\infty) the graph has to lie between two straight lines with the slopes k and -k.

This is how I have started:

Definition of lipschits continuity |f(x)-f(y)| \leq k|x-y|

b>a
|f(b)-f(a)| \leq k(b-a) \Leftrightarrow -k(b-a) \leq f(b)-f(a) \leq k(b-a)

But after this I am a bit stumped. I don't know how to continue
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Is it enough to just divide all sides with (b-a) to show that the slope of the grap is always less than K and more than -K?? To me it feels like it but I don't know if that is proof enough??
 
Replace b by x in your equations, and restrict x to lie between a and b. Then there is just one step left.
 
like this??

continuing from the last step of post one

=>
-k(x-a) \leq f(x)-f(a) \leq k(x-a) with a \leq x \leq b
<=>
f(a)-k(x-a) \leq f(x) \leq k(x-a)+f(a)

thanks a lot!
that seems to have solved it :)
 
Last edited:
If I want to show the same thing for a local lipschitz continuous function(that it lies between two straight lines with slope K(a,b) and -K(a,b) where K can be different for different intervalls) how do I proced. It is exactly the same as above but with K replaced with K(a,b) in all places?

so that I instead get as last line
f(a)-K(a,x)(x-a) \leq f(x) \leq f(a)+K(a,x)(x-a)
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K