Theorem on continuous function crossing x-axis

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a theorem concerning continuous functions and their behavior at roots, specifically addressing the conditions under which a continuous function crosses the x-axis and the implications of its derivative at those points. The scope includes theoretical exploration and mathematical reasoning.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes a theorem stating that if a function f(x) is continuous on an interval and has non-zero derivatives at its roots, then there exists an interval around the roots with no other roots, and the function behaves predictably around those points.
  • Another participant suggests a more general theorem that if a function is differentiable at a point and its derivative is non-zero, then there exists an open interval around that point where the function does not equal its value at that point.
  • A third participant provides a proof for the result mentioned, detailing the implications of a non-zero derivative and establishing conditions under which the function does not equal its value at the root within a certain interval.
  • One participant introduces the inverse function theorem as a more complex approach to the problem, suggesting that it could be applied in this context.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants present various viewpoints and proofs related to the behavior of continuous functions at their roots, but there is no consensus on the original theorem's validity or its implications. Multiple competing views remain regarding the application of different theorems and proofs.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes assumptions about the continuity and differentiability of functions, as well as the implications of non-zero derivatives. The application of the inverse function theorem is mentioned but not fully explored, leaving potential limitations in understanding its relevance to the original theorem.

dimitri151
Messages
117
Reaction score
3
I think this is a theorem, and I'm telling myself that I've proved it. Just a shout out for any possible counter-examples:
If a function f(x) is continuous on some interval and has non-zero derivatives at its root(s) (where f(x')=0 ) then there is some interval around the roots where there are no other roots, and f(x)><0 for x><x' as f'(x')><0.

It just says a function crossing the x-axis comes from below and goes above or comes from above and goes below when the derivative at the point is not zero. Any counter-examples?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There is a more general theorem that can be proven:

If ##f## is differentiable at ##a## and ##f'(a)\neq 0##, then there is an open interval ##I## with ##a\in I## such that for all ##x\in I\setminus\{a\}##, ##f(x)\neq f(a)##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Here's a simple proof for the result mentioned by gopher_p.

Suppose that ##f'(a) \neq 0##. By definition, this means that
$$\lim_{h \rightarrow 0}\frac{f(a+h) - f(a)}{h} = f'(a) \neq 0$$
Therefore if we set ##\epsilon = |f'(a)|/2## then there is a ##\delta > 0## such that
$$\left|\frac{f(a+h) - f(a)}{h}\right| > \frac{|f'(a)|}{2} > 0$$
for all ##h## satisfying ##0 < |h| < \delta##. Therefore, for all such ##h##, we have
$$|f(a+h) - f(a)| > |h|\frac{|f'(a)|}{2} > 0$$
and as a result, ##f(a+h) \neq f(a)## for all ##h \in (-\delta, \delta) \setminus \{0\}##.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
if you don't mind the heavy machinery; using a tank to kill a fly and f' is continuous, just use the inverse function theorem.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K