Increasing, non-increasing, decreasing and non-decreasing functions

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion focuses on the definitions of increasing, non-increasing, decreasing, and non-decreasing functions. Participants explore the nuances of these definitions, particularly the use of inequalities in their formulation, and the implications of these definitions in mathematical contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants define a (strictly) increasing function as one where if $x_1 < x_2$, then $f(x_1) < f(x_2)$, while a non-decreasing function is defined such that if $x_1 < x_2$, then $f(x_1) \leq f(x_2)$.
  • Another participant notes that some definitions use "$\le$" instead of "<" for the variables $x_1$ and $x_2$, questioning whether this leads to any differences in meaning.
  • One participant argues that using "$\le$" for the definition of non-decreasing is unnecessary, as equality does not provide additional information about the function's behavior.
  • It is mentioned that non-decreasing functions can have "flat spots," indicating that they may remain constant over intervals.
  • There is a concern raised about using "$\le$" in the definition of strictly increasing functions, as it could lead to contradictions when $x_1 = x_2$.
  • Participants discuss whether the properties of non-decreasing functions can be expressed using "$\le$" instead of "$<$," with one participant asserting that both formulations are equivalent.
  • It is clarified that "non-decreasing" is distinct from "not decreasing," suggesting a subtlety in the terminology.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriateness of using "$\le$" in the definitions of increasing and non-decreasing functions. There is no consensus on whether the definitions provided are equivalent or if one is preferable over the other.

Contextual Notes

Some definitions and interpretations may depend on the context in which they are used, and the discussion highlights the potential for ambiguity in mathematical terminology.

ozkan12
Messages
145
Reaction score
0
Please can you give definitions of increasing, non-increasing, decreasing and non-decreasing functions ? I found something but there is a lot of differents between these definitions...Can you give these definitions ? Thank you so much, Best wishes :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A (strictly) increasing function $f$ is one where $x_1 < x_2 \implies f(x_1) < f(x_2)$.

A non-decreasing function $f$ is one where $x_1 < x_2 \implies f(x_1) \leq f(x_2)$.

The dual terms are (strictly) decreasing and non-increasing (reverse the direction of the inequalities), respectively.

Most functions are none of the four, these properties are SPECIAL.
 
Dear Deveno,

First of all, thank you for your attention...İn some books, I saw some definitions

For example, they give these definitions as follows,

A (strictly) increasing function $f$ is one where ${x}_{1}\le{x}_{2}\implies f\left({x}_{1}\right)<f\left({x}_{2}\right)$

A non-decreasing function ${x}_{1}\le{x}_{2}\implies f\left({x}_{1}\right)\le f\left({x}_{2}\right)$

That is, they use "$\le$" instead of "<" to array ${x}_{1}$ and ${x}_{2}$...İs there any difference these definitions ?
 
Not really, the $\leq$ for the $x_1,x_2$ is unnecessary in the definition of non-decreasing, we always have for ANY function $f$:

$x_1 = x_2 \implies f(x_1) = f(x_2)$

so that does not contain any information.

$x_1 \leq x_2$ means: $x_1 = x_2$ or $x_1 < x_2$.

If $x_1 = x_2$, then $f(x_1) = f(x_2)$, so certainly $f(x_1) \leq f(x_2)$ is true (one of the two possibilities:

$f(x_1) = f(x_2)$ or $f(x_1) < f(x_2)$ is true, namely the former).

The important thing is that non-decreasing functions might have "flat spots", for example they could be constant on some interval (like step-functions corresponding to riemann sums for an increasing function).

EDIT: Using $\leq$ for a strictly increasing function leads to falsehoods: if $x_1 = x_2$, we can NEVER have $f(x_1) < f(x_2)$.
 
Dear Deveno, thank you for your help and support :) Best wishes :)
 
Dear Deveno

Also, Can we say that if " ${x}_{1}\le{x}_{2}$" $f{x}_{1}\le f{x}_{2}$ for definition of non-decreasing function ? That is, can we use "$\le$" instead of "$<$" for ${x}_{1}$ and ${x}_{2}$ ? Thank you for your attention, Best wishes :)
 
ozkan12 said:
Can we say that if " ${x}_{1}\le{x}_{2}$" $f{x}_{1}\le f{x}_{2}$ for definition of non-decreasing function ? That is, can we use "$\le$" instead of "$<$" for ${x}_{1}$ and ${x}_{2}$ ?
This has been answered in post #4. The properties
\[
x_1\le x_2\implies f(x_1)\le f(x_2)
\]
and
\[
x_1< x_2\implies f(x_1)\le f(x_2)
\]
are equivalent.

Also note that "non-decreasing" is not the same as "not decreasing".
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
942
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K