Prove Differentiability of g(x) at x1: mx1+b=x0

  • Thread starter Thread starter John O' Meara
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the differentiability of the function g(x) = f(mx + b) at the point x1, where mx1 + b = x0. It is established that if f is differentiable at x0, then g is also differentiable at x1, with the derivative g'(x1) equal to mf'(x0). The proof involves using the definition of differentiability, specifically evaluating the limit of the difference quotient for g. A substitution is made to relate the limit back to the differentiability of f at x0, confirming the result. The conversation concludes with a suggestion to apply this result to find the derivative of f(x) = (mx + b)^n using established differentiation rules.
John O' Meara
Messages
325
Reaction score
0
Suppose that a function f is differentiable at x0 and define g(x)=f(mx+b), where m and b are constants. Prove that if x1 is a point at which mx1+b=x0, then g(x) is differentiable at x1 and g'(x1)=mf'(x0).
Definition: A function f is said to be "differentiable at x0" if the limit
f'(x_{0})= lim_{h \rightarrow 0} \frac{f(x_{0}+h)-f(x_{0})}{h}
exists. If f is differentiable at each point of the open interval(a,b), then we say that f is "differentiable on (a,b)", and similarily for open intervals of the form (a,+\infty),(-\infty,b)and (-\infty,+\infty). In the last case we say f is "differentiable everywhere". I think this is a simple proof, but since I am doing this no my own with a book that doesn't do too many example proofs, I am lost. g(x1) = f(mx1+b) = f(x0), which I think proves the limit of g(x1) exists but g'(x1)=? Thanks for the help.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I think they want you to do it from the definition. I.e. show that the limit of
<br /> \frac{g(x_{1}+h)-g(x_{1})}{h}<br />
for h to zero exists by substituting the definition of g and using that the appropriate limit for f exists.
 
Sorry, if I gave the wrong impression, but the definition I included myself thinking it relevant. The definition was not part of the original question.
 
If you don't want to use the definition, you can directly prove if from the chain rule, I suppose.

I checked the proof from the definition, it works out nicely. Just remember to bring the limit you get back in the form
\lim_{\delta \to 0} \frac{f(x_0 + \delta) - f(x_0)}{\delta}
where \delta is some new quantity depending on h.

(I cannot really give you more hints without doing the calculation for you, so I suggest you give this a try and post what you get).
 
\lim_{h \rightarrow 0} \frac{ g(x_{1} +h) - g(x_{1})}{h} = \lim_{h \rightarrow 0} \frac{f(m(x_{1}+h)+b) - f(mx_{1} + b)}{h}
= \lim_{h \rightarrow 0} \frac{ f(mx_{1} + mh + b) - f(mx_{1} + b)}{h}
= \lim_{mh \rightarrow 0} m\frac{ f(mx_{1}+mh+b)-f(mx_{1}+b)}{mh}
= \lim_{mh \rightarrow 0} m\frac{ f(mx_{1}+b+mh)-f(mx_{1}+b)}{mh}
= m \lim_{\delta \rightarrow 0} \frac{ f(x_{0}+ \delta)-f(x_{0})}{\delta}
= mf&#039;(x_{0})

If this is ok, now I got to use this result to prove that f&#039;(x)=nm(mx+b)^{n-1} if f(x) = (mx+b)^{n}, where m and b are constants and n is any integer. I know that \frac{dx^n}{dx}=nx^{n-1} where n is any integer or do I use the definition given above in #1? Thanks again.
 
Last edited:
Very well.

The quickest way indeed seems to be, to use that
\frac{d}{dx}f(x) = n x^{n-1}
where f(x) = xn is differentiable anywhere, and use what you have just proven.
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Back
Top