Is continuity of the second derivative necessary for the second derivative test?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the requirements for applying the second derivative test in calculus, specifically whether continuity of the second derivative is necessary in a neighborhood around a critical point. Participants explore differing interpretations of various sources regarding the conditions under which the second derivative test can be applied.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants reference a source suggesting that the second derivative test requires ##f''## to be continuous in a region around ##c##.
  • Others argue that ##f''## need not be defined in a region around ##c##, asserting that it only needs to be defined at ##c## itself.
  • One participant provides a proof indicating that continuity of ##f''## is not necessary for the second derivative test, emphasizing that the test can still be valid under certain conditions.
  • There is a suggestion that the requirement for continuity may be incorrectly stated in some sources, leading to confusion among participants.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the necessity of continuity of the second derivative for the second derivative test. Multiple competing views remain, with no consensus reached on the requirements.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the importance of definitions and the context in which the second derivative test is applied, noting that assumptions about continuity may vary between different proofs and sources.

PFuser1232
Messages
479
Reaction score
20
According to this link: http://tutorial.math.lamar.edu/Classes/CalcI/ShapeofGraphPtII.aspx
The second derivative test can only be applied if ##f''## is continuous in a region around ##c##.
But according to this link: http://calculus.subwiki.org/wiki/Second_derivative_test#Requirement_of_twice_differentiability
##f''## need not be defined in a region around ##c##.
I'm confused as to what is required for the second derivative test.
##f''## is allowed to have a discontinuity at ##c##, but not around ##c##? If ##f''## is continuous around ##c##, then ##\lim_{x→a} f''(x)## must equal ##f''(a)## where ##a## is in some region around ##c##, but according to the second link, ##f''(a)## doesn't have to be defined.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There is no need for ## f''## to be defined at points other than c. If ## f'(c)=0 ## and ## f''(c)>0 ##, using the definition ## f''(c)=\lim_{h\rightarrow 0}\frac{f'(c+h)-f'(c)}{h} ## this implies that within some neighborhood of ## c,f' ## is positive to the right of of ## c ## and negative to its left, so f must have a minimum at ## c ## .
 
wabbit said:
There is no need for ## f''## to be defined at points other than c. If ## f'(c)=0 ## and ## f''(c)>0 ##, using ## f''(c)=\lim_{h\rightarrow 0}\frac{f'(x+h)}{h} ## this implies that within some neighborhood of ## c,f' ## is positive to the right of of ## c ## and negative to its left, so f must have a minimum at ## c ## .

http://tutorial.math.lamar.edu/Classes/CalcI/DerivativeAppsProofs.aspx#Extras_DerAppPf_SDT

The author assumes that ##f''## is continuous around ##c## to prove the second derivative test.
 
MohammedRady97 said:
I'm confused as to what is required for the second derivative test.
Only that ##f''## is defined at ##c##. I don't see where in the first link it suggests a requirement for continuity: if it does it is wrong.
 
I just gave you a proof that does not require that assumption. Did you read it ? If you don't understand it I can help you with fleshing out the details.

Whatever the author assumes is irrelevant to the question you asked about which assumption is necessary.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PFuser1232

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K