Proof: Local extremum implies partial derivatives = 0

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion revolves around proving that if a function \( f: \mathbb{R}^m \to \mathbb{R} \) has a local extremum at a point \( P_0 \), then all partial derivatives \( \frac{\partial f}{\partial x_j}(P_0) = 0 \) for \( j \in \{1, 2, ..., m\} \). This is established using Fermat's theorem, which states that if \( f \) is differentiable and has a local extremum at \( P_0 \), then the gradient \( \nabla f(P_0) = \overrightarrow{0} \). The proof involves analyzing a function \( g(t) \) derived from \( f \) by fixing all variables except one, demonstrating that \( g \) also has a local minimum, thus confirming the condition of Fermat's theorem.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of multivariable calculus, specifically local extrema.
  • Familiarity with Fermat's theorem in the context of differentiable functions.
  • Knowledge of partial derivatives and their significance in optimization.
  • Ability to analyze functions of multiple variables and their behavior.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of Fermat's theorem in higher dimensions.
  • Explore the concept of gradients and their role in optimization problems.
  • Learn about the Hessian matrix and its use in determining the nature of critical points.
  • Investigate applications of local extrema in real-world optimization scenarios.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, particularly those focusing on calculus, optimization, and mathematical analysis. This discussion is beneficial for anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of multivariable functions and their critical points.

nuuskur
Science Advisor
Messages
928
Reaction score
1,226

Homework Statement


Let f\colon\mathbb{R}^m\to\mathbb{R}. All partial derivatives of f are defined at point P_0\colon = (x_1, x_2, ... , x_m).
If f has local extremum at P_0 prove that \frac{\partial f}{\partial x_j} (P_0) = 0, j\in \{1, 2, ..., m\}

Homework Equations


Fermat's theorem:
Let f\colon\mathbb{R}^m\to\mathbb{R}. If f is differentiable and has local extremum at point P_0 then \nabla f(P_0) = \overrightarrow{0}

The Attempt at a Solution


Assume f has local minimum at point P_0, then there exists \varepsilon > 0 such that f(P)\geq f(P_0) for every P\in B(P_0,\varepsilon).
Let j\in \{1,2, ..., m\}. Observe the function:
g(t) = f(x_1, x_2, ... x_{j-1}, t, x_{j+1}, ... , x_m)
Note that:
1) g is defined within t\in (x_j -\varepsilon, x_j +\varepsilon)
2) the function g has local minimum at the point t = x_j
3) g is differentiable at t = x_j, also g'(x_j) = f_{x_j}'(P_0)

Define for every t\in\mathbb{R}\ \ \ S_t\colon = (x_1, ...,x_{j-1}, t, x_{j+1}, ..., x_m) then for every t\in (x_j -\varepsilon, x_j +\varepsilon) it follows that d(Q_t, P_0) = |t - x_j| < \varepsilon, therefore Q_t\in D\subset\mathbb{R}^m i.e g is defined at point t and for every t:
g(t) = f(Q_t)\geq f(P_0) = g(x_j) which means g has local minimum at the point x_j.

From 2) and 3) - according to Fermat's theorem f_{x_j}'(P_0) = g'(x_j) = 0 _{\blacksquare}
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
St is Qt?

Fermat's theorem, as you write it here, covers ##\mathbb{R}^m\to\mathbb{R}## already, if you can use ít where is the point of reducing it to the 1-dimensional case? But then the whole problem looks trivial.
 
Oops, sleight of hand, Qt is St, yes.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K