Integrating an inequality for two functions of the same variable

  • Thread starter Thread starter member 731016
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the falsehood of the statement that if \( f'(x) > g'(x) \) for all \( x \in (a,b) \), then \( f(x) > g(x) \) for all \( x \in (a,b) \). A counterexample is provided with \( f(x) = -e^{-x} \) and \( g(x) = 1 \), demonstrating that while \( f'(x) > g'(x) \), it does not imply \( f(x) > g(x) \). The participants emphasize the importance of considering initial conditions and constants when integrating inequalities, referencing the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus (FTC) as a critical tool in understanding these relationships.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of calculus, specifically integration and differentiation.
  • Familiarity with the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus (FTC).
  • Knowledge of inequalities and their properties in calculus.
  • Ability to construct and analyze counterexamples in mathematical proofs.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus in detail.
  • Learn how to construct and analyze counterexamples in mathematical arguments.
  • Explore the implications of initial conditions in calculus inequalities.
  • Investigate the properties of functions and their derivatives in relation to inequalities.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, calculus students, educators, and anyone interested in understanding the nuances of function behavior and inequalities in calculus.

member 731016
Homework Statement
Please see below
Relevant Equations
Please see below
For this true or false problem,
1717372927804.png

The answer if false, however, I am confused by this result as my working shows that the is true.

My working is, integrating both sides of the inequality we get ##\int f'(x) dx> \int g'(x) dx## for all ##x \in (a,b)## which is the equivalent to ##f(x) > g(x)## for all ##x \in (a,b)##.

Does someone please know what I have done wrong?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ChiralSuperfields said:
For this true or false problem,
View attachment 346371
The answer if false, however, I am confused by this result as my working shows that the is true.
Counterexample: ##f(x)=-e^{-x}## and ##g(x)=1##. Then for all ##x##: ##f'(x)>g'(x)## but ##f(x)<g(x)##.
 
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: member 731016
renormalize said:
Counterexample: ##f(x)=-e^{-x}## and ##g(x)=1##. Then for all ##x##: ##f'(x)>g'(x)## but ##f(x)<g(x)##.
Thank you for your reply @renormalize!

Sorry I am tying to generalize this without considering specific counter examples. I am trying to consider the most general case, this is why I integrate.

Thanks!
 
ChiralSuperfields said:
Sorry I am tying to generalize this without considering specific counter examples. I am trying to consider the most general case, this is why I integrate.
But this single counterexample is sufficient to show that your "general case" cannot be proven. Hence statement 6 is False, with no further work needed.
 
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: member 731016
renormalize said:
But this single counterexample is sufficient to show that your "general case" cannot be proven. Hence statement 6 is False, with no further work needed.
Thank you for your reply @renormalize !

Sorry I am still confused. I integrated the inequality and obeyed the laws of algebra and my integration still worked. I'm not sure what is going on, I think maybe the question is wrong.

Thanks!
 
ChiralSuperfields said:
Thank you for your reply @renormalize!

Sorry I am tying to generalize this without considering specific counter examples. I am trying to consider the most general case, this is why I integrate.

Thanks!
You can take the counterexample and put it in your chain of arguments to see at which step it fails. You can also use - which is what I do first - the fundamental theorem of calculus, either for the entire interval ##(a,b)## or for ##(a,x).##
 
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: member 731016
ChiralSuperfields said:
I'm not sure what is going on, I think maybe the question is wrong.
Don't forget about that sneaky constant that you should add when you evaluate an antiderivative.
If ##f' > g'## on (a,b), then what can you say about comparing ##\int {f'} + c_1## to ##\int {g'} + c_2##?
In other words, does the slope of ##f## being larger mean that the value of ##f## will be larger? Compare f(x)=2x with g(x)=x+1000 on (0,1).
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: Mark44, member 731016 and fresh_42
FactChecker said:
Don't forget about that sneaky constant that you should add when you evaluate an antiderivative.
If ##f' > g'## on (a,b), then what can you say about comparing ##\int {f'} + c_1## to ##\int {g'} + c_2##?
In other words, does the slope of ##f## being larger mean that the value of ##f## will be larger? Compare f(x)=2x with g(x)=x+1000 on (0,1).
That's why I like FTC as a first test. It forces you to use the constants and can help to see where a general argument might fail.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: member 731016 and FactChecker
##\int (f-g)'>c> 0 ##
It would work if we had ##\int f'-g' =0 ##, with an equality at some value ##x,## so that ##f(x)=g(x)##, i.e., if they're equal at some point and grow at the same rate . Like Fact Checker mentioned, said, one just grows faster than the other, but you don't have additional knowledge of initial conditions. This is a sort of PDE without additional conditions and an inequality.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: member 731016 and FactChecker
  • #10
The following inequality is true: if f(x) \leq g(x) on [a,b] then <br /> \int_a^b f(x)\,dx \leq \int_a^b g(x)\,dx. (We can replace the upper limits with an aarbitrary t \in [a,b].) Replacing f and g by derivatives and using the fundamental theorem, this implies <br /> \forall x \in [a,b] : f&#039;(x) \leq g&#039;(x) \quad \Rightarrow \quad \forall x \in [a,b] : f(x) - f(a) \leq g(x) - g(a). What this is saying is that if f increases more slowly than g and they start in the same place, then f will be less than g.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: member 731016 and FactChecker

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
8K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K