Lagrange Remainder: Clarifying MVT Statement

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

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the Mean Value Theorem (MVT) and its application in the context of the Lagrange Remainder in Taylor series. The original poster seeks clarification on how a specific identity related to the remainder term is derived using MVT.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between the Mean Value Theorem and the integral form of the theorem as it pertains to the Lagrange Remainder. There is a focus on identifying which version of MVT applies to the given context.

Discussion Status

Some participants are examining different interpretations of the Mean Value Theorem and its implications for the problem at hand. There is an ongoing inquiry into the suitability of various forms of MVT, with no clear consensus reached yet.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential confusion regarding the labeling of theorems and their applicability, as well as the complexity of the problem setup. There is an acknowledgment of the need for further exploration of the integral forms of MVT.

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
3K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
10K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K