Lagrange Remainder: Clarifying MVT Statement

  • Thread starter Thread starter icystrike
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Lagrange Remainder
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion clarifies the relationship between the Lagrange Remainder and the Mean Value Theorem (MVT) in calculus. The Lagrange Remainder is expressed as Rn = ∫x0x f(n+1)(t) (x - t)n / n! dt, and is linked to the second Mean Value Theorem for integrals. The participants emphasize that the first Mean Value Theorem does not yield the desired result, thus confirming the relevance of the second Mean Value Theorem for monotonic functions. The discussion highlights the need for clarity in distinguishing between the two theorems.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lagrange Remainder Theorem
  • Familiarity with Mean Value Theorem (MVT) concepts
  • Knowledge of integral calculus
  • Ability to work with limits and derivatives
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Lagrange Remainder Theorem in detail
  • Explore the Mean Value Theorem for integrals
  • Review monotonic functions and their properties
  • Practice problems involving the application of MVT in integration
USEFUL FOR

Students of calculus, mathematics educators, and anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of the relationship between the Lagrange Remainder and the Mean Value Theorem.

icystrike
Messages
444
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



This is not a homework problem but I would like to clarify my concern.

It is stated that a function can be written as such:

f(x) = \lim_{n \rightarrow ∞} \sum^{∞}_{k=0} f^{(k)} \frac{(x-x_{0})^k}{k!}

R_{n}=\int^{x}_{x_{0}} f^{(n+1)} (t) \frac{(x-t)^n}{n!} dt

They state that by MVT,

R_{n}= \frac{f^{(n+1)}(x^{*})}{(n+1)!} (x-x_{0})^{n+1}

For some x^{*} \in (x_{0},x)

I am wondering which statement of MVT leads to the second identity? Much thanks:)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
If MVT means "mean value theorem", then there is one about ## \int_a^b f(x)g(x) dx ##.
 
voko said:
If MVT means "mean value theorem", then there is one about ## \int_a^b f(x)g(x) dx ##.

Yes, I am aware that MVT is mean value theorem and it is related to the integral form of MVT. But I am wondering how did they manage to get the following result.

The first mean value theorem states:

\int^{b}_{a} G(t) dt = G(x) (b-a) for x \in (a,b)

Which does not lead to the result desired.

Therefore, I am convinced that it is related to the second mean value theorem:

If G : [a, b] → R is a monotonic (not necessarily decreasing and positive) function and φ : [a, b] → R is an integrable function, then there exists a number x in (a, b) such that

\int^{b}_{a} G(t)\phi(t) dt = G(a+)\int^{x}_{a}\phi(t) dt + G(b-)\int^{b}_{x}\phi(t) dt

However, I am not sure how do I go about deal with that
 
Yes, i have took the theorem stated above form the similar website
 
So you are saying you cannot see a useful one there?
 
I am convinced that it is related to the second mean value theorem:

If G : [a, b] → R is a monotonic (not necessarily decreasing and positive) function and φ : [a, b] → R is an integrable function, then there exists a number x in (a, b) such that

∫baG(t)ϕ(t)dt=G(a+)∫xaϕ(t)dt+G(b−)∫bxϕ(t)dt

However, I am not sure how do I go about deal with that
 
I fail to see why what is labeled as the "First mean value theorem for integration" in the article I linked is not suitable.

You are free to make it much more complex than it needs to be, of course.
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
7K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K