Intermediate Value Theorem ....Silva, Theorem 4.2.1 .... ....

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Theorem Value
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the Intermediate Value Theorem as presented in Cesar E. Silva's "Invitation to Real Analysis," specifically focusing on the proof of Theorem 4.2.1. Participants seek clarification on the conditions under which a function \( f(x) \) is shown to be less than zero for values of \( x \) within a specific interval.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Peter questions how it can be rigorously shown that \( f(x) < 0 \) for \( x \) such that \( b > x > \beta \).
  • One participant suggests that by the continuity of \( f \), there exist values of \( x \) such that \( |x - \beta| < \delta \) and \( \beta < x < b \), leading to \( f(x) < 0 \).
  • Peter expresses confusion regarding the continuity argument and references Apostol's theorem on the sign-preserving property of continuous functions.
  • Another participant clarifies their earlier statement by explaining that the continuity argument implies \( |f(x) - f(\beta)| < \epsilon \) leads to \( f(x) < \epsilon + f(\beta) < 0 \).

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants are engaged in a technical discussion with some agreement on the continuity argument but differing interpretations of how it applies to the proof. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the rigorous demonstration of \( f(x) < 0 \).

Contextual Notes

There are references to specific theorems and properties of continuous functions, but the discussion does not resolve the assumptions or definitions necessary for a complete understanding of the proof.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading Cesar E. Silva's book entitled "Invitation to Real Analysis" ... and am focused on Chapter 4: Continuous Functions ...

I need help to clarify an aspect of the proof of Theorem 4.2.1, the Intermediate Value Theorem ... ...

Theorem 4.2.1 and its related Corollary read as follows:
View attachment 9562
View attachment 9563
In the above proof by Silva, we read the following:

" ... ... So there exists $$x$$ with $$b \gt x \gt \beta$$ and such that $$f(x) \lt 0$$ ... ... "My question is as follows:

How can we be sure that $$f(x) \lt 0$$ given $$x$$ with $$b \gt x \gt \beta$$ ... indeed how do we show rigorously that for $$x$$ such that $$b \gt x \gt \beta$$ we have $$f(x) \lt 0$$ ...Help will be much appreciated ...

Peter
 

Attachments

  • Silva - 1 - Theorem 4.2.1 & Corollary 4.2.3 ... PART 1.png
    Silva - 1 - Theorem 4.2.1 & Corollary 4.2.3 ... PART 1.png
    17.8 KB · Views: 175
  • Silva - 2 - Theorem 4.2.1 & Corollary 4.2.3 ... PART 2 .png
    Silva - 2 - Theorem 4.2.1 & Corollary 4.2.3 ... PART 2 .png
    30.5 KB · Views: 168
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Peter,

Since $\beta<b$ and $\delta >0$, there are values of $x$ such that $|x-\beta|<\delta$ and $\beta < x< b$. The key here is to remember that $|x-\beta| <\delta$. By the continuity argument, $f(x)<0$ for all such $x$.
 
GJA said:
Hi Peter,

Since $\beta<b$ and $\delta >0$, there are values of $x$ such that $|x-\beta|<\delta$ and $\beta < x< b$. The key here is to remember that $|x-\beta| <\delta$. By the continuity argument, $f(x)<0$ for all such $x$.
Thanks for the help GJA!

At first I struggled with what you meant by ... " By the continuity argument, $f(x)<0$ for all such $x$ ... "

But then I found Apostol Theorem 3.7 (Calculus Vol. 1, page 143) which reads as follows:View attachment 9565Were you indeed invoking something like what Apostol calls the sign-preserving property of continuous functions?Thanks again for your help ...

Peter
 

Attachments

  • Ap[ostol - Calculus - Theorem 3.7 .png
    Ap[ostol - Calculus - Theorem 3.7 .png
    5.2 KB · Views: 168
Hi Peter,

Happy to help!

I wasn't quoting that purposely, though it is true. In fact, it's essentially what the author is proving by their choice of epsilon.

What I meant was: $|f(x)-f(\beta)|<\epsilon\,\Longrightarrow\, f(x)<\epsilon + f(\beta)<0.$

Hope this helps clear up the confusion on my earlier post.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K