Using Rolle's Theorem: Proving Existence of Roots Between Two Rooted Functions

  • Thread starter Tomp
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Theorem
In summary: However, I do not believe that this is what the question asks, as the given information does not seem to provide a clear path to finding a root for g.That there exists a x0 between (r1,r2) such that f'(x0) = 0Okay, good. So now you have an interval a < r1 < x0 < r2 < b.Now, you have to do a little bit of work showing that the curve of g(x) crosses the x-axis somewhere in this interval ( Hint ).For your two functions, you can't assume that f(a) = f(b).Here's why I'm saying what I'm saying :
  • #1
Tomp
27
0
I'm doing a question and I am getting stuck and need help. I am not sure where to start or how to do a proof for this question. We have not done a question like this in class before.

Homework Statement



Question:
Consider the continuous functions f(x) = 1 - e^(x)*sin(x) and g(x) = 1 + e^(x)*cos(x). Using Rolle's Theorem, prove that between any two roots of f there exists at least one root of g.

Hint
Remember that, a root of f is a point x in the domain of f such that f(x) = 0.


Where would you start with this proof?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Okay, first things first. State the Rolle conditions as they pertain to f and what the Rolle conditions imply.
 
  • #3
Zondrina said:
Okay, first things first. State the Rolle conditions as they pertain to f and what the Rolle conditions imply.

f must be continuous between two roots [a,b] and also differentiable on (a,b)...f(a)=f(b)=0 (roots) there exists c in (a,b) such that f'(c) = 0 ...
 
  • #4
Tomp said:
f must be continuous between two roots [a,b] and also differentiable on (a,b)...f(a)=f(b)=0 (roots) there exists c in (a,b) such that f'(c) = 0 ...

What you said here is incorrect.

f must be continuous between two roots [a,b]

[a,b] is not a root, it's an interval of definition. The rest looks good though. So f is continuous on the closed interval, and differentiable on the open interval. My only question is, are you GIVEN that f(a) = f(b) = 0? You cannot automatically assume this.
 
  • #5
Zondrina said:
What you said here is incorrect.



[a,b] is not a root, it's an interval of definition. The rest looks good though. So f is continuous on the closed interval, and differentiable on the open interval. My only question is, are you GIVEN that f(a) = f(b) = 0? You cannot automatically assume this.

This doesn't necessarily need to be true, f(a) can just equal f(b), but i assumed that they equaled zero as it's asling about the roots
 
  • #6
Tomp said:
This doesn't necessarily need to be true, f(a) can just equal f(b), but i assumed that they equaled zero as it's asling about the roots

Usually you're given a condition on f(a) or f(b) or both. Sometimes you're even given conditions about the derivatives like f'(a) = 0.

For your two functions, you can't assume that f(a) = f(b).
 
  • #7
Here's why I'm saying what I'm saying :

Consider :

f(x) = (x-a)2(x-b)

Then we can clearly see f(a) = f(b), but with your functions unless stated otherwise you cannot assume f(a) = f(b).
 
  • #8
Zondrina said:
Here's why I'm saying what I'm saying :

Consider :

f(x) = (x-a)2(x-b)

Then we can clearly see f(a) = f(b), but with your functions unless stated otherwise you cannot assume f(a) = f(b).

I understand what you are saying. This is all that was given in the question and now I am stumped!
 
  • #9
Tomp said:
I understand what you are saying. This is all that was given in the question and now I am stumped!

Hmm okay then... Given the question, I suppose you could then start by assuming that f has roots within the interval [a,b]. Say r1, r2[itex]\in[/itex][a,b] so that f(r1) = f(r2) = 0.

Now using the Rolle conditions, what does this tell you?
 
  • #10
Zondrina said:
Hmm okay then... Given the question, I suppose you could then start by assuming that f has roots within the interval [a,b]. Say r1, r2[itex]\in[/itex][a,b] so that f(r1) = f(r2) = 0.

Now using the Rolle conditions, what does this tell you?

That there exists a x0 between (r1,r2) such that f'(x0) = 0
 
  • #11
Okay, good. So now you have an interval a < r1 < x0 < r2 < b.

Now, you have to do a little bit of work showing that the curve of g(x) crosses the x-axis somewhere in this interval ( Hint ).

Perhaps taking derivatives and analyzing a few things would be appropriate.
 

1. What is Rolle's theorem?

Rolle's theorem is a fundamental theorem in calculus that relates to the behavior of differentiable functions on a closed interval. It states that if a function is continuous on a closed interval and differentiable on the open interval, and the function has the same values at the endpoints of the interval, then there exists at least one point within the interval where the derivative of the function is equal to zero.

2. What is the significance of Rolle's theorem?

Rolle's theorem is significant because it provides a necessary condition for finding extreme values of a function. It also serves as the basis for the proof of the mean value theorem, which is a fundamental theorem in calculus that has many applications in mathematics and real-world problems.

3. Can Rolle's theorem be applied to all types of functions?

No, Rolle's theorem can only be applied to differentiable functions. This means that the function must have a well-defined derivative at every point in the interval. If a function is not differentiable at a certain point, then Rolle's theorem cannot be used to determine the existence of a point where the derivative is equal to zero.

4. How is Rolle's theorem different from the mean value theorem?

Rolle's theorem is a special case of the mean value theorem. While Rolle's theorem states that there exists at least one point within an interval where the derivative is equal to zero, the mean value theorem states that there exists at least one point within the interval where the derivative is equal to the average rate of change of the function over the interval.

5. Can Rolle's theorem be used to find the maximum or minimum value of a function?

No, Rolle's theorem only guarantees the existence of a point where the derivative is equal to zero. It does not provide any information about the value of the function at that point. To find the maximum or minimum value of a function, other techniques such as the first or second derivative test must be used in conjunction with Rolle's theorem.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
763
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
277
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
841
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
666
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
387
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
270
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
281
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
1K
Back
Top