Proving if f'=g', then f=g+k for all k constant

  • Thread starter Thread starter k3k3
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Constant
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion revolves around proving that if the derivatives of two continuous functions, f and g, are equal on the interval (a,b), then there exists a constant k such that f(x) = g(x) + k for all x in [a,b]. The proof utilizes the Mean Value Theorem (MVT) and the concept of a function h defined as h(x) = f(x) - g(x). By showing that h'(x) = 0 for all x in (a,b), it is concluded that h is constant, leading to the result that f and g differ by a constant k.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of continuous functions and their properties.
  • Knowledge of differentiability and the Mean Value Theorem (MVT).
  • Familiarity with proof techniques, including proof by contradiction.
  • Basic understanding of function notation and derivatives.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Mean Value Theorem and its applications in calculus.
  • Explore proof techniques in calculus, particularly proof by contradiction.
  • Investigate the properties of continuous and differentiable functions.
  • Learn about the implications of equal derivatives in the context of function behavior.
USEFUL FOR

Students studying calculus, particularly those focusing on real analysis, as well as educators teaching concepts related to derivatives and function properties.

k3k3
Messages
76
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Let f and g be two continuous functions that are defined on [a,b] and differentiable on (a,b).

Claim: If f'=g' on (a,b), then there exists a constant k such that f(x)=g(x)+k for all x in [a,b]


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



Let h:[a,b]->R be defined by h(x)=g(x)+k-f(x)

h is continuous and differentiable on [a,b] by the assumptions of f and g already made.

Since f'=g' => g'-f'=0

So h'(x) = g'(x) - f'(x) = 0

By the mean value theorem, there exists a c in (a,b) so that

0=(h(b)-h(a))/(b-a) => h(a)=h(b)

I think I showed rolle's theorem. I am trying to use my assumption that f'=g' to show the claim. Any hints on this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Consider the function defined by h(x) = f(x)-g(x) and apply the mean value theorem to show that this is a constant function.
 
jgens said:
Consider the function defined by h(x) = f(x)-g(x) and apply the mean value theorem to show that this is a constant function.

If h(x)=f(x)-g(x), then h'(x)=f'(x)-g'(x) and, since f'=g' by assumption, f'(x)-g'(x)=0 for all x in (a,b). By MVT, there is a c in (a,b) so that h'(c)=h(b)-h(a) = 0 or

[f(b)-g(b)-f(a)+g(a)]/(b-a) = 0 => f(b)-f(a)=g(b)-g(a) ?

If h'(x) = 0 for all x in (a,b), then h is constant.

Is this what you meant?
 
k3k3 said:
Is this what you meant?

Not exactly. The idea is to suppose x,y \in (a,b) and compute h(x)-h(y) using the mean value theorem. This will tell you that the function is constant and complete the proof.
 
jgens said:
Not exactly. The idea is to suppose x,y \in (a,b) and compute h(x)-h(y) using the mean value theorem. This will tell you that the function is constant and complete the proof.

So choose x,y in (a,b) arbitrary so that h(x)-h(y) = 0?
 
k3k3 said:
So choose x,y in (a,b) arbitrary so that h(x)-h(y) = 0?

Do a proof by contradiction. Define h(x)=f(x)-g(x) and suppose it's not constant. What does the MVT tell you?
 
k3k3 said:
So choose x,y in (a,b) arbitrary so that h(x)-h(y) = 0?

Yes, but you need to prove that, not just write it down.

RGV
 
Dick said:
Do a proof by contradiction. Define h(x)=f(x)-g(x) and suppose it's not constant. What does the MVT tell you?

MVT tells me that there is a point in the interval (a,b) such that h'(c) = [h(b)-h(a)]/(b-a)

So f'(c)-g'(c) = [h(b)-h(a)]/(b-a) and f'(x) = g'(x) for all x in [a,b]

So 0 = [h(b)-h(a)]/(b-a) => h(b)=h(a) making it a constant function.
 
k3k3 said:
MVT tells me that there is a point in the interval (a,b) such that h'(c) = [h(b)-h(a)]/(b-a)

So f'(c)-g'(c) = [h(b)-h(a)]/(b-a) and f'(x) = g'(x) for all x in [a,b]

So 0 = [h(b)-h(a)]/(b-a) => h(b)=h(a) making it a constant function.

You aren't really stating that it in "proof by contradiction" form. Suppose h(a) is NOT equal to h(b) what would bother you about that?
 
  • #10
Dick said:
You aren't really stating that it in "proof by contradiction" form. Suppose h(a) is NOT equal to h(b) what would bother you about that?

What would bother me that is, when f'(x)=g'(x), is that h(a) is h(b). And when h'(x) = 0 for all x in (a,b), then h(x) is constant.
 
  • #11
k3k3 said:
What would bother me that is, when f'(x)=g'(x), is that h(a) is h(b). And when h'(x) = 0 for all x in (a,b), then h(x) is constant.

You are just stating what you already think you know without proving anything. If h(a)-h(b) is not zero then (h(a)-h(b))/(a-b) is not zero. The MVT should give you a contradiction that would prove that can't happen.
 
  • #12
Dick said:
You are just stating what you already think you know without proving anything. If h(a)-h(b) is not zero then (h(a)-h(b))/(a-b) is not zero. The MVT should give you a contradiction that would prove that can't happen.

Let me try this again, then...

I want to show that if f'=g' on (a,b), then there exists a constant k such that f(x)=g(x)+k for all x in [a,b]

Let f and g be two continuous functions that are defined on [a,b] and differentiable on (a,b).
Assume f'(x)=g'(x) for all x in [a,b]

Let h:[a,b]->ℝ be defined by h(x)=f(x)-g(x)

Suppose h(a)≠h(b)

Then there is no point c in (a,b) so that h'(c)=0

By the MVT, there is a point d in (x,y)\subset[a,b] such that h'(d) = [h(y)-h(x)]/(y-x)

Since h is differentiable on all of [a,b], h'(x)=f'(x)-g'(x)

And f'-g'=0 by assumption.

So h'(d)=0=[h(y)-h(x)]/(y-x) => h(y) = h(x) for all x,y in [a,b]

This means h'(x)=0 for all x in [a,b] and by the monotonicity theorem, h is constant on [a,b].

So f and g must be the same.
 
  • #13
k3k3 said:
Suppose h(a)≠h(b)

Then there is no point c in (a,b) so that h'(c)=0

Things start going wrong about here. That is just plain not true. You are negating statements wrong, I think. What does h(a)≠h(b) really imply?
 
  • #14
Dick said:
Things start going wrong about here. That is just plain not true. You are negating statements wrong, I think. What does h(a)≠h(b) really imply?

That the function has different values at the end points of the interval.
 
  • #15
k3k3 said:
That the function has different values at the end points of the interval.

What does h(a)≠h(b) imply if you use the mean value theorem?
 
  • #16
Dick said:
What does h(a)≠h(b) imply if you use the mean value theorem?

h'(c) = [h(b)-h(a)]/(b-a) ≠ 0
 
  • #17
k3k3 said:
h'(c) = [h(b)-h(a)]/(b-a) ≠ 0

Yes! There is c in (a,b) such that h'(c)≠0. But you know h'(x)=0 for all points c in (a,b). So?
 
  • #18
Dick said:
Yes! There is c in (a,b) such that h'(c)≠0. But you know h'(x)=0 for all points c in (a,b). So?

h'(c) must be 0 too since c is in (a,b)
 
  • #19
k3k3 said:
h'(c) must be 0 too since c is in (a,b)

Yes. So h'(c) must be both zero and nonzero. That's impossible, so your initial assumption h(a)≠h(b) must be wrong. So?
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K