A step in understanding intermediate value property for derivativeFixed Points: Intermediate Value TheoremFinding maximum and minimim of function on an interval. Are there multiple ones?Polynomial must be monotone between its extremaWhy exactly does a function need to be continuous on a closed interval for the intermediate value theorem to apply?Does Proofwiki correctly state the intermediate value theorem?Closed Interval MethodNowhere differentiable continuous functions and local extremaContinuous function with no local maximumThe Second Derivative Test and the Mean Value Theorem

What is the name of this plot that has rows with two connected dots?

Defending Castle from Zombies

Is allowing Barbarian features to work with Dex-based attacks imbalancing?

If the UK Gov. has authority to cancel article 50 notification, why do they have to agree an extension with the EU

Is it unusual for a math department not to have a mail/web server?

Template factorial function without template specialization

Why does the weaker C–H bond have a higher wavenumber than the C=O bond?

Find feasible point in polynomial time in linear programming

How could a self contained organic body propel itself in space

Drawing probabilities on a simplex in TikZ

Why doesn't Starship have four landing legs?

What is Soda Fountain Etiquette?

Should I judge the efficacy of Samadhi based on the ethical qualities of the meditator?

Can a network vulnerability be exploited locally?

Should I ask for a raise one month before the end of an internship?

Why nature prefers simultaneous events?

Is there an in-universe explanation given to the senior Imperial Navy Officers as to why Darth Vader serves Emperor Palpatine?

Is this password scheme legit?

Is the internet in Madagascar faster than in UK?

How to handle inventory and story of a player leaving

Did ancient peoples ever hide their treasure behind puzzles?

Is there a way to tell what frequency I need a PWM to be?

The meaning of asynchronous vs synchronous

Can I get a PhD for developing educational software?



A step in understanding intermediate value property for derivative


Fixed Points: Intermediate Value TheoremFinding maximum and minimim of function on an interval. Are there multiple ones?Polynomial must be monotone between its extremaWhy exactly does a function need to be continuous on a closed interval for the intermediate value theorem to apply?Does Proofwiki correctly state the intermediate value theorem?Closed Interval MethodNowhere differentiable continuous functions and local extremaContinuous function with no local maximumThe Second Derivative Test and the Mean Value Theorem






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








3












$begingroup$


Let $f:Irightarrow mathbbR$ be a differentiable function where $I$ is an open interval. Let $a,bin I$ be such that $f'(a)<0$ and $f'(b)>0$. Then there is $c$ between $a$ and $b$ such that $f'(c)=0$.



Proof: (1) We show that there is local minimum $c$ for $f$ in the interval $(a,b)$.



(2) If (1) is not true, then either $c=a$ will be a local minimum or $c=b$ will be a local minimum.



(3) Suppose $c=a$ is local minimum. Then $f(a+h)-f(a)ge 0$ in small neighbourhood $[a,a+h)$ of $a$, hence $lim_hrightarrow 0^+ fracf(a+h)-f(a))hge 0$ i.e. $f'(a)ge 0$, contradiction.



(4) If $c=b$ is a local minimum, then $f$ is decreasing in local neighbourhood of $b$ i.e. $f(b)le f(b-h)$ for small neighbourhood $(b-h,b]$ of $b$. But then $lim_hrightarrow 0^+ fracf(b-h)-f(b)-hge 0$ i.e. $f'(b)le 0$, contradiction.



(5) Thus, local minimum must be inside $(a,b)$ and consequently, $f'(c)=0$.




Q. In the whole argument, we tried to find local minimum. It is natural question to ask why don't we try for local maximum. If $c=a$ or $c=b$ is a local maximum, then the arguments as in (3) and (4) do not give any contradiction actually. So we can not conclude that local maximum does or doesn't exist in $(a,b)$.



On the other hand, we can give an example of a function, such as $f(x)=x^2$ for $xin [-1,1]$, where $f'(-1)<0$ and $f'(1)>0$. The point $c$ of local maximum is the boundary point $1$, and hence it is not in $(-1,1)$.



Geometrically, how can we justify that we should seek for local minumum but not local maximum to get desired $c$?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    If you get a valid proof using local minimum that is the end of the proof. You don't have to justify why you are not taking a local maximum.
    $endgroup$
    – Kavi Rama Murthy
    Aug 16 at 9:21










  • $begingroup$
    If I am explaining this proof in classroom and I wrote Step (1), immediately a student may ask why don't we work for searching local maximum?
    $endgroup$
    – Beginner
    Aug 16 at 9:34

















3












$begingroup$


Let $f:Irightarrow mathbbR$ be a differentiable function where $I$ is an open interval. Let $a,bin I$ be such that $f'(a)<0$ and $f'(b)>0$. Then there is $c$ between $a$ and $b$ such that $f'(c)=0$.



Proof: (1) We show that there is local minimum $c$ for $f$ in the interval $(a,b)$.



(2) If (1) is not true, then either $c=a$ will be a local minimum or $c=b$ will be a local minimum.



(3) Suppose $c=a$ is local minimum. Then $f(a+h)-f(a)ge 0$ in small neighbourhood $[a,a+h)$ of $a$, hence $lim_hrightarrow 0^+ fracf(a+h)-f(a))hge 0$ i.e. $f'(a)ge 0$, contradiction.



(4) If $c=b$ is a local minimum, then $f$ is decreasing in local neighbourhood of $b$ i.e. $f(b)le f(b-h)$ for small neighbourhood $(b-h,b]$ of $b$. But then $lim_hrightarrow 0^+ fracf(b-h)-f(b)-hge 0$ i.e. $f'(b)le 0$, contradiction.



(5) Thus, local minimum must be inside $(a,b)$ and consequently, $f'(c)=0$.




Q. In the whole argument, we tried to find local minimum. It is natural question to ask why don't we try for local maximum. If $c=a$ or $c=b$ is a local maximum, then the arguments as in (3) and (4) do not give any contradiction actually. So we can not conclude that local maximum does or doesn't exist in $(a,b)$.



On the other hand, we can give an example of a function, such as $f(x)=x^2$ for $xin [-1,1]$, where $f'(-1)<0$ and $f'(1)>0$. The point $c$ of local maximum is the boundary point $1$, and hence it is not in $(-1,1)$.



Geometrically, how can we justify that we should seek for local minumum but not local maximum to get desired $c$?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    If you get a valid proof using local minimum that is the end of the proof. You don't have to justify why you are not taking a local maximum.
    $endgroup$
    – Kavi Rama Murthy
    Aug 16 at 9:21










  • $begingroup$
    If I am explaining this proof in classroom and I wrote Step (1), immediately a student may ask why don't we work for searching local maximum?
    $endgroup$
    – Beginner
    Aug 16 at 9:34













3












3








3





$begingroup$


Let $f:Irightarrow mathbbR$ be a differentiable function where $I$ is an open interval. Let $a,bin I$ be such that $f'(a)<0$ and $f'(b)>0$. Then there is $c$ between $a$ and $b$ such that $f'(c)=0$.



Proof: (1) We show that there is local minimum $c$ for $f$ in the interval $(a,b)$.



(2) If (1) is not true, then either $c=a$ will be a local minimum or $c=b$ will be a local minimum.



(3) Suppose $c=a$ is local minimum. Then $f(a+h)-f(a)ge 0$ in small neighbourhood $[a,a+h)$ of $a$, hence $lim_hrightarrow 0^+ fracf(a+h)-f(a))hge 0$ i.e. $f'(a)ge 0$, contradiction.



(4) If $c=b$ is a local minimum, then $f$ is decreasing in local neighbourhood of $b$ i.e. $f(b)le f(b-h)$ for small neighbourhood $(b-h,b]$ of $b$. But then $lim_hrightarrow 0^+ fracf(b-h)-f(b)-hge 0$ i.e. $f'(b)le 0$, contradiction.



(5) Thus, local minimum must be inside $(a,b)$ and consequently, $f'(c)=0$.




Q. In the whole argument, we tried to find local minimum. It is natural question to ask why don't we try for local maximum. If $c=a$ or $c=b$ is a local maximum, then the arguments as in (3) and (4) do not give any contradiction actually. So we can not conclude that local maximum does or doesn't exist in $(a,b)$.



On the other hand, we can give an example of a function, such as $f(x)=x^2$ for $xin [-1,1]$, where $f'(-1)<0$ and $f'(1)>0$. The point $c$ of local maximum is the boundary point $1$, and hence it is not in $(-1,1)$.



Geometrically, how can we justify that we should seek for local minumum but not local maximum to get desired $c$?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




Let $f:Irightarrow mathbbR$ be a differentiable function where $I$ is an open interval. Let $a,bin I$ be such that $f'(a)<0$ and $f'(b)>0$. Then there is $c$ between $a$ and $b$ such that $f'(c)=0$.



Proof: (1) We show that there is local minimum $c$ for $f$ in the interval $(a,b)$.



(2) If (1) is not true, then either $c=a$ will be a local minimum or $c=b$ will be a local minimum.



(3) Suppose $c=a$ is local minimum. Then $f(a+h)-f(a)ge 0$ in small neighbourhood $[a,a+h)$ of $a$, hence $lim_hrightarrow 0^+ fracf(a+h)-f(a))hge 0$ i.e. $f'(a)ge 0$, contradiction.



(4) If $c=b$ is a local minimum, then $f$ is decreasing in local neighbourhood of $b$ i.e. $f(b)le f(b-h)$ for small neighbourhood $(b-h,b]$ of $b$. But then $lim_hrightarrow 0^+ fracf(b-h)-f(b)-hge 0$ i.e. $f'(b)le 0$, contradiction.



(5) Thus, local minimum must be inside $(a,b)$ and consequently, $f'(c)=0$.




Q. In the whole argument, we tried to find local minimum. It is natural question to ask why don't we try for local maximum. If $c=a$ or $c=b$ is a local maximum, then the arguments as in (3) and (4) do not give any contradiction actually. So we can not conclude that local maximum does or doesn't exist in $(a,b)$.



On the other hand, we can give an example of a function, such as $f(x)=x^2$ for $xin [-1,1]$, where $f'(-1)<0$ and $f'(1)>0$. The point $c$ of local maximum is the boundary point $1$, and hence it is not in $(-1,1)$.



Geometrically, how can we justify that we should seek for local minumum but not local maximum to get desired $c$?







real-analysis calculus






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Aug 16 at 9:07









BeginnerBeginner

4,6241 gold badge12 silver badges28 bronze badges




4,6241 gold badge12 silver badges28 bronze badges














  • $begingroup$
    If you get a valid proof using local minimum that is the end of the proof. You don't have to justify why you are not taking a local maximum.
    $endgroup$
    – Kavi Rama Murthy
    Aug 16 at 9:21










  • $begingroup$
    If I am explaining this proof in classroom and I wrote Step (1), immediately a student may ask why don't we work for searching local maximum?
    $endgroup$
    – Beginner
    Aug 16 at 9:34
















  • $begingroup$
    If you get a valid proof using local minimum that is the end of the proof. You don't have to justify why you are not taking a local maximum.
    $endgroup$
    – Kavi Rama Murthy
    Aug 16 at 9:21










  • $begingroup$
    If I am explaining this proof in classroom and I wrote Step (1), immediately a student may ask why don't we work for searching local maximum?
    $endgroup$
    – Beginner
    Aug 16 at 9:34















$begingroup$
If you get a valid proof using local minimum that is the end of the proof. You don't have to justify why you are not taking a local maximum.
$endgroup$
– Kavi Rama Murthy
Aug 16 at 9:21




$begingroup$
If you get a valid proof using local minimum that is the end of the proof. You don't have to justify why you are not taking a local maximum.
$endgroup$
– Kavi Rama Murthy
Aug 16 at 9:21












$begingroup$
If I am explaining this proof in classroom and I wrote Step (1), immediately a student may ask why don't we work for searching local maximum?
$endgroup$
– Beginner
Aug 16 at 9:34




$begingroup$
If I am explaining this proof in classroom and I wrote Step (1), immediately a student may ask why don't we work for searching local maximum?
$endgroup$
– Beginner
Aug 16 at 9:34










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















7













$begingroup$

This is because it's assumed that $f'(a)<0$ and $f'(b)>0$. If you assume that $f'(a)>0$ and $ f'(b)<0$, then you will have to look for a global maximum.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$






















    1













    $begingroup$

    It is best to understand the meaning of sign of derivative. Let's see what the assumptions $f'(a) <0,f'(b)>0$ mean. Since $f'(a) <0$ the function $f$ is strictly decreasing at point $a$ which more formally means that there is an $h>0$ such that $f(a) >f(x) $ for all $xin(a, a+h) $. The graph of $f$ thus looks to be going downwards at $a$ as we move to the right of $a$. Similarly since $f'(b) >0$, the graph of $f$ moves upward at $b$ as we move from the left of $b$. If you draw such a graph on paper you will at once be convinced that there is local minimum of $f$ between $a$ and $b$.



    The conclusion can be reached without any graphical aid. Assume $f(a) leq f(b) $ (the case $f(a) >f(b) $ can be handled similarly). Since there are values of $f$ in interval $(a, a+h) $ which are less than $f(a) $ and also less than $f(b) $ because $f(a) leq f(b) $ it follows that the minimum value of $f$ in $[a, b] $ is attained at an interior point and this also acts as a local minimum.



    The conditions in the question do not prohibit the existence of a local maximum and there may (or may not) be a local maximum also, but the conditions don't guarantee it. The local minimum on the other hand is guaranteed as shown in previous paragraph.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$






















      1













      $begingroup$

      You are right, $f'(c)=0$ may imply either minimum or maximum. For example, $y=frac14x^4-frac12x^2, xin (-2,2)$.



      $hspace4cm$enter image description here



      $f(0)=0$ is a local maximum. However, there are two global minimums, namely: $f(-1)=f(1)=-frac14$.



      The proof relies on the Extreme Value Theorem and assumes that the function attains its maximum and minimum in the closed interval, therefore it checks the three points: the point $c$ and the borders $a$ and $b$. It proves that the borders cannot be minimum, therefore the minimum occurs inside at the critical point $c$ for which $f'(c)=0$. And note there can be several points inside the interval for which $f'(c)=0$, but surely there exists such $c$ for which the function attains its minimum.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$














      • $begingroup$
        "There can be several points ... but surely...." If there are an infinite number of points with $f'(c) = 0$, it doesn't seem at all obvious that one of them must be the minimum. Not unless you teach concepts like Dedekind completeness before "Calculus 1", anyway.
        $endgroup$
        – alephzero
        Aug 16 at 18:11










      • $begingroup$
        At least one of them will be minimum by the EVT.
        $endgroup$
        – farruhota
        Aug 16 at 18:24


















      1













      $begingroup$

      A real point of confusion here is that you are assuming that a < b in your proof [witness the description of the open interval as '(a,b)', which notation assumes a < b]. The problem statement DOES NOT state this!



      If a < b as you assume, the conditions imply that the graph of f descends from left-to-right from a, and ascends from left-to-right to b, which as you infer puts a local minimum between them. However, if b < a, the graph of f -ascends- from left-to-right from b and -descends- from left-to-right to a, implying a local -maximum- between them.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$














      • $begingroup$
        Welcome to MSE. For some basic information about writing mathematics at this site see, e.g., basic help on mathjax notation, mathjax tutorial and quick reference, main meta site math tutorial and equation editing how-to.
        $endgroup$
        – José Carlos Santos
        Aug 16 at 18:13










      • $begingroup$
        I think the hole in the proof it's worse that that - the OP just assumes the minimum exists, and then shows it can't be at the ends of the interval. Replacing "minimum" with "extremum" doesn't make the argument any more convincing to a beginner.
        $endgroup$
        – alephzero
        Aug 16 at 18:15













      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function()
      var channelOptions =
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "69"
      ;
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
      createEditor();
      );

      else
      createEditor();

      );

      function createEditor()
      StackExchange.prepareEditor(
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: true,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: 10,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader:
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      ,
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      );



      );













      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3324900%2fa-step-in-understanding-intermediate-value-property-for-derivative%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes








      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      7













      $begingroup$

      This is because it's assumed that $f'(a)<0$ and $f'(b)>0$. If you assume that $f'(a)>0$ and $ f'(b)<0$, then you will have to look for a global maximum.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$



















        7













        $begingroup$

        This is because it's assumed that $f'(a)<0$ and $f'(b)>0$. If you assume that $f'(a)>0$ and $ f'(b)<0$, then you will have to look for a global maximum.






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$

















          7














          7










          7







          $begingroup$

          This is because it's assumed that $f'(a)<0$ and $f'(b)>0$. If you assume that $f'(a)>0$ and $ f'(b)<0$, then you will have to look for a global maximum.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          This is because it's assumed that $f'(a)<0$ and $f'(b)>0$. If you assume that $f'(a)>0$ and $ f'(b)<0$, then you will have to look for a global maximum.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Aug 16 at 10:14









          Clayton

          20.3k3 gold badges35 silver badges92 bronze badges




          20.3k3 gold badges35 silver badges92 bronze badges










          answered Aug 16 at 9:17









          MotylaNogaTomkaMazuraMotylaNogaTomkaMazura

          6,88610 silver badges17 bronze badges




          6,88610 silver badges17 bronze badges


























              1













              $begingroup$

              It is best to understand the meaning of sign of derivative. Let's see what the assumptions $f'(a) <0,f'(b)>0$ mean. Since $f'(a) <0$ the function $f$ is strictly decreasing at point $a$ which more formally means that there is an $h>0$ such that $f(a) >f(x) $ for all $xin(a, a+h) $. The graph of $f$ thus looks to be going downwards at $a$ as we move to the right of $a$. Similarly since $f'(b) >0$, the graph of $f$ moves upward at $b$ as we move from the left of $b$. If you draw such a graph on paper you will at once be convinced that there is local minimum of $f$ between $a$ and $b$.



              The conclusion can be reached without any graphical aid. Assume $f(a) leq f(b) $ (the case $f(a) >f(b) $ can be handled similarly). Since there are values of $f$ in interval $(a, a+h) $ which are less than $f(a) $ and also less than $f(b) $ because $f(a) leq f(b) $ it follows that the minimum value of $f$ in $[a, b] $ is attained at an interior point and this also acts as a local minimum.



              The conditions in the question do not prohibit the existence of a local maximum and there may (or may not) be a local maximum also, but the conditions don't guarantee it. The local minimum on the other hand is guaranteed as shown in previous paragraph.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$



















                1













                $begingroup$

                It is best to understand the meaning of sign of derivative. Let's see what the assumptions $f'(a) <0,f'(b)>0$ mean. Since $f'(a) <0$ the function $f$ is strictly decreasing at point $a$ which more formally means that there is an $h>0$ such that $f(a) >f(x) $ for all $xin(a, a+h) $. The graph of $f$ thus looks to be going downwards at $a$ as we move to the right of $a$. Similarly since $f'(b) >0$, the graph of $f$ moves upward at $b$ as we move from the left of $b$. If you draw such a graph on paper you will at once be convinced that there is local minimum of $f$ between $a$ and $b$.



                The conclusion can be reached without any graphical aid. Assume $f(a) leq f(b) $ (the case $f(a) >f(b) $ can be handled similarly). Since there are values of $f$ in interval $(a, a+h) $ which are less than $f(a) $ and also less than $f(b) $ because $f(a) leq f(b) $ it follows that the minimum value of $f$ in $[a, b] $ is attained at an interior point and this also acts as a local minimum.



                The conditions in the question do not prohibit the existence of a local maximum and there may (or may not) be a local maximum also, but the conditions don't guarantee it. The local minimum on the other hand is guaranteed as shown in previous paragraph.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$

















                  1














                  1










                  1







                  $begingroup$

                  It is best to understand the meaning of sign of derivative. Let's see what the assumptions $f'(a) <0,f'(b)>0$ mean. Since $f'(a) <0$ the function $f$ is strictly decreasing at point $a$ which more formally means that there is an $h>0$ such that $f(a) >f(x) $ for all $xin(a, a+h) $. The graph of $f$ thus looks to be going downwards at $a$ as we move to the right of $a$. Similarly since $f'(b) >0$, the graph of $f$ moves upward at $b$ as we move from the left of $b$. If you draw such a graph on paper you will at once be convinced that there is local minimum of $f$ between $a$ and $b$.



                  The conclusion can be reached without any graphical aid. Assume $f(a) leq f(b) $ (the case $f(a) >f(b) $ can be handled similarly). Since there are values of $f$ in interval $(a, a+h) $ which are less than $f(a) $ and also less than $f(b) $ because $f(a) leq f(b) $ it follows that the minimum value of $f$ in $[a, b] $ is attained at an interior point and this also acts as a local minimum.



                  The conditions in the question do not prohibit the existence of a local maximum and there may (or may not) be a local maximum also, but the conditions don't guarantee it. The local minimum on the other hand is guaranteed as shown in previous paragraph.






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  It is best to understand the meaning of sign of derivative. Let's see what the assumptions $f'(a) <0,f'(b)>0$ mean. Since $f'(a) <0$ the function $f$ is strictly decreasing at point $a$ which more formally means that there is an $h>0$ such that $f(a) >f(x) $ for all $xin(a, a+h) $. The graph of $f$ thus looks to be going downwards at $a$ as we move to the right of $a$. Similarly since $f'(b) >0$, the graph of $f$ moves upward at $b$ as we move from the left of $b$. If you draw such a graph on paper you will at once be convinced that there is local minimum of $f$ between $a$ and $b$.



                  The conclusion can be reached without any graphical aid. Assume $f(a) leq f(b) $ (the case $f(a) >f(b) $ can be handled similarly). Since there are values of $f$ in interval $(a, a+h) $ which are less than $f(a) $ and also less than $f(b) $ because $f(a) leq f(b) $ it follows that the minimum value of $f$ in $[a, b] $ is attained at an interior point and this also acts as a local minimum.



                  The conditions in the question do not prohibit the existence of a local maximum and there may (or may not) be a local maximum also, but the conditions don't guarantee it. The local minimum on the other hand is guaranteed as shown in previous paragraph.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Aug 16 at 12:26









                  Paramanand SinghParamanand Singh

                  53k5 gold badges64 silver badges178 bronze badges




                  53k5 gold badges64 silver badges178 bronze badges
























                      1













                      $begingroup$

                      You are right, $f'(c)=0$ may imply either minimum or maximum. For example, $y=frac14x^4-frac12x^2, xin (-2,2)$.



                      $hspace4cm$enter image description here



                      $f(0)=0$ is a local maximum. However, there are two global minimums, namely: $f(-1)=f(1)=-frac14$.



                      The proof relies on the Extreme Value Theorem and assumes that the function attains its maximum and minimum in the closed interval, therefore it checks the three points: the point $c$ and the borders $a$ and $b$. It proves that the borders cannot be minimum, therefore the minimum occurs inside at the critical point $c$ for which $f'(c)=0$. And note there can be several points inside the interval for which $f'(c)=0$, but surely there exists such $c$ for which the function attains its minimum.






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$














                      • $begingroup$
                        "There can be several points ... but surely...." If there are an infinite number of points with $f'(c) = 0$, it doesn't seem at all obvious that one of them must be the minimum. Not unless you teach concepts like Dedekind completeness before "Calculus 1", anyway.
                        $endgroup$
                        – alephzero
                        Aug 16 at 18:11










                      • $begingroup$
                        At least one of them will be minimum by the EVT.
                        $endgroup$
                        – farruhota
                        Aug 16 at 18:24















                      1













                      $begingroup$

                      You are right, $f'(c)=0$ may imply either minimum or maximum. For example, $y=frac14x^4-frac12x^2, xin (-2,2)$.



                      $hspace4cm$enter image description here



                      $f(0)=0$ is a local maximum. However, there are two global minimums, namely: $f(-1)=f(1)=-frac14$.



                      The proof relies on the Extreme Value Theorem and assumes that the function attains its maximum and minimum in the closed interval, therefore it checks the three points: the point $c$ and the borders $a$ and $b$. It proves that the borders cannot be minimum, therefore the minimum occurs inside at the critical point $c$ for which $f'(c)=0$. And note there can be several points inside the interval for which $f'(c)=0$, but surely there exists such $c$ for which the function attains its minimum.






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$














                      • $begingroup$
                        "There can be several points ... but surely...." If there are an infinite number of points with $f'(c) = 0$, it doesn't seem at all obvious that one of them must be the minimum. Not unless you teach concepts like Dedekind completeness before "Calculus 1", anyway.
                        $endgroup$
                        – alephzero
                        Aug 16 at 18:11










                      • $begingroup$
                        At least one of them will be minimum by the EVT.
                        $endgroup$
                        – farruhota
                        Aug 16 at 18:24













                      1














                      1










                      1







                      $begingroup$

                      You are right, $f'(c)=0$ may imply either minimum or maximum. For example, $y=frac14x^4-frac12x^2, xin (-2,2)$.



                      $hspace4cm$enter image description here



                      $f(0)=0$ is a local maximum. However, there are two global minimums, namely: $f(-1)=f(1)=-frac14$.



                      The proof relies on the Extreme Value Theorem and assumes that the function attains its maximum and minimum in the closed interval, therefore it checks the three points: the point $c$ and the borders $a$ and $b$. It proves that the borders cannot be minimum, therefore the minimum occurs inside at the critical point $c$ for which $f'(c)=0$. And note there can be several points inside the interval for which $f'(c)=0$, but surely there exists such $c$ for which the function attains its minimum.






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$



                      You are right, $f'(c)=0$ may imply either minimum or maximum. For example, $y=frac14x^4-frac12x^2, xin (-2,2)$.



                      $hspace4cm$enter image description here



                      $f(0)=0$ is a local maximum. However, there are two global minimums, namely: $f(-1)=f(1)=-frac14$.



                      The proof relies on the Extreme Value Theorem and assumes that the function attains its maximum and minimum in the closed interval, therefore it checks the three points: the point $c$ and the borders $a$ and $b$. It proves that the borders cannot be minimum, therefore the minimum occurs inside at the critical point $c$ for which $f'(c)=0$. And note there can be several points inside the interval for which $f'(c)=0$, but surely there exists such $c$ for which the function attains its minimum.







                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer










                      answered Aug 16 at 13:20









                      farruhotafarruhota

                      25k2 gold badges9 silver badges46 bronze badges




                      25k2 gold badges9 silver badges46 bronze badges














                      • $begingroup$
                        "There can be several points ... but surely...." If there are an infinite number of points with $f'(c) = 0$, it doesn't seem at all obvious that one of them must be the minimum. Not unless you teach concepts like Dedekind completeness before "Calculus 1", anyway.
                        $endgroup$
                        – alephzero
                        Aug 16 at 18:11










                      • $begingroup$
                        At least one of them will be minimum by the EVT.
                        $endgroup$
                        – farruhota
                        Aug 16 at 18:24
















                      • $begingroup$
                        "There can be several points ... but surely...." If there are an infinite number of points with $f'(c) = 0$, it doesn't seem at all obvious that one of them must be the minimum. Not unless you teach concepts like Dedekind completeness before "Calculus 1", anyway.
                        $endgroup$
                        – alephzero
                        Aug 16 at 18:11










                      • $begingroup$
                        At least one of them will be minimum by the EVT.
                        $endgroup$
                        – farruhota
                        Aug 16 at 18:24















                      $begingroup$
                      "There can be several points ... but surely...." If there are an infinite number of points with $f'(c) = 0$, it doesn't seem at all obvious that one of them must be the minimum. Not unless you teach concepts like Dedekind completeness before "Calculus 1", anyway.
                      $endgroup$
                      – alephzero
                      Aug 16 at 18:11




                      $begingroup$
                      "There can be several points ... but surely...." If there are an infinite number of points with $f'(c) = 0$, it doesn't seem at all obvious that one of them must be the minimum. Not unless you teach concepts like Dedekind completeness before "Calculus 1", anyway.
                      $endgroup$
                      – alephzero
                      Aug 16 at 18:11












                      $begingroup$
                      At least one of them will be minimum by the EVT.
                      $endgroup$
                      – farruhota
                      Aug 16 at 18:24




                      $begingroup$
                      At least one of them will be minimum by the EVT.
                      $endgroup$
                      – farruhota
                      Aug 16 at 18:24











                      1













                      $begingroup$

                      A real point of confusion here is that you are assuming that a < b in your proof [witness the description of the open interval as '(a,b)', which notation assumes a < b]. The problem statement DOES NOT state this!



                      If a < b as you assume, the conditions imply that the graph of f descends from left-to-right from a, and ascends from left-to-right to b, which as you infer puts a local minimum between them. However, if b < a, the graph of f -ascends- from left-to-right from b and -descends- from left-to-right to a, implying a local -maximum- between them.






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$














                      • $begingroup$
                        Welcome to MSE. For some basic information about writing mathematics at this site see, e.g., basic help on mathjax notation, mathjax tutorial and quick reference, main meta site math tutorial and equation editing how-to.
                        $endgroup$
                        – José Carlos Santos
                        Aug 16 at 18:13










                      • $begingroup$
                        I think the hole in the proof it's worse that that - the OP just assumes the minimum exists, and then shows it can't be at the ends of the interval. Replacing "minimum" with "extremum" doesn't make the argument any more convincing to a beginner.
                        $endgroup$
                        – alephzero
                        Aug 16 at 18:15















                      1













                      $begingroup$

                      A real point of confusion here is that you are assuming that a < b in your proof [witness the description of the open interval as '(a,b)', which notation assumes a < b]. The problem statement DOES NOT state this!



                      If a < b as you assume, the conditions imply that the graph of f descends from left-to-right from a, and ascends from left-to-right to b, which as you infer puts a local minimum between them. However, if b < a, the graph of f -ascends- from left-to-right from b and -descends- from left-to-right to a, implying a local -maximum- between them.






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$














                      • $begingroup$
                        Welcome to MSE. For some basic information about writing mathematics at this site see, e.g., basic help on mathjax notation, mathjax tutorial and quick reference, main meta site math tutorial and equation editing how-to.
                        $endgroup$
                        – José Carlos Santos
                        Aug 16 at 18:13










                      • $begingroup$
                        I think the hole in the proof it's worse that that - the OP just assumes the minimum exists, and then shows it can't be at the ends of the interval. Replacing "minimum" with "extremum" doesn't make the argument any more convincing to a beginner.
                        $endgroup$
                        – alephzero
                        Aug 16 at 18:15













                      1














                      1










                      1







                      $begingroup$

                      A real point of confusion here is that you are assuming that a < b in your proof [witness the description of the open interval as '(a,b)', which notation assumes a < b]. The problem statement DOES NOT state this!



                      If a < b as you assume, the conditions imply that the graph of f descends from left-to-right from a, and ascends from left-to-right to b, which as you infer puts a local minimum between them. However, if b < a, the graph of f -ascends- from left-to-right from b and -descends- from left-to-right to a, implying a local -maximum- between them.






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$



                      A real point of confusion here is that you are assuming that a < b in your proof [witness the description of the open interval as '(a,b)', which notation assumes a < b]. The problem statement DOES NOT state this!



                      If a < b as you assume, the conditions imply that the graph of f descends from left-to-right from a, and ascends from left-to-right to b, which as you infer puts a local minimum between them. However, if b < a, the graph of f -ascends- from left-to-right from b and -descends- from left-to-right to a, implying a local -maximum- between them.







                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer










                      answered Aug 16 at 18:10









                      PMarPMar

                      111 bronze badge




                      111 bronze badge














                      • $begingroup$
                        Welcome to MSE. For some basic information about writing mathematics at this site see, e.g., basic help on mathjax notation, mathjax tutorial and quick reference, main meta site math tutorial and equation editing how-to.
                        $endgroup$
                        – José Carlos Santos
                        Aug 16 at 18:13










                      • $begingroup$
                        I think the hole in the proof it's worse that that - the OP just assumes the minimum exists, and then shows it can't be at the ends of the interval. Replacing "minimum" with "extremum" doesn't make the argument any more convincing to a beginner.
                        $endgroup$
                        – alephzero
                        Aug 16 at 18:15
















                      • $begingroup$
                        Welcome to MSE. For some basic information about writing mathematics at this site see, e.g., basic help on mathjax notation, mathjax tutorial and quick reference, main meta site math tutorial and equation editing how-to.
                        $endgroup$
                        – José Carlos Santos
                        Aug 16 at 18:13










                      • $begingroup$
                        I think the hole in the proof it's worse that that - the OP just assumes the minimum exists, and then shows it can't be at the ends of the interval. Replacing "minimum" with "extremum" doesn't make the argument any more convincing to a beginner.
                        $endgroup$
                        – alephzero
                        Aug 16 at 18:15















                      $begingroup$
                      Welcome to MSE. For some basic information about writing mathematics at this site see, e.g., basic help on mathjax notation, mathjax tutorial and quick reference, main meta site math tutorial and equation editing how-to.
                      $endgroup$
                      – José Carlos Santos
                      Aug 16 at 18:13




                      $begingroup$
                      Welcome to MSE. For some basic information about writing mathematics at this site see, e.g., basic help on mathjax notation, mathjax tutorial and quick reference, main meta site math tutorial and equation editing how-to.
                      $endgroup$
                      – José Carlos Santos
                      Aug 16 at 18:13












                      $begingroup$
                      I think the hole in the proof it's worse that that - the OP just assumes the minimum exists, and then shows it can't be at the ends of the interval. Replacing "minimum" with "extremum" doesn't make the argument any more convincing to a beginner.
                      $endgroup$
                      – alephzero
                      Aug 16 at 18:15




                      $begingroup$
                      I think the hole in the proof it's worse that that - the OP just assumes the minimum exists, and then shows it can't be at the ends of the interval. Replacing "minimum" with "extremum" doesn't make the argument any more convincing to a beginner.
                      $endgroup$
                      – alephzero
                      Aug 16 at 18:15

















                      draft saved

                      draft discarded
















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid


                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function ()
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3324900%2fa-step-in-understanding-intermediate-value-property-for-derivative%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Category:9 (number) SubcategoriesMedia in category "9 (number)"Navigation menuUpload mediaGND ID: 4485639-8Library of Congress authority ID: sh85091979ReasonatorScholiaStatistics

                      Circuit construction for execution of conditional statements using least significant bitHow are two different registers being used as “control”?How exactly is the stated composite state of the two registers being produced using the $R_zz$ controlled rotations?Efficiently performing controlled rotations in HHLWould this quantum algorithm implementation work?How to prepare a superposed states of odd integers from $1$ to $sqrtN$?Why is this implementation of the order finding algorithm not working?Circuit construction for Hamiltonian simulationHow can I invert the least significant bit of a certain term of a superposed state?Implementing an oracleImplementing a controlled sum operation

                      Magento 2 “No Payment Methods” in Admin New OrderHow to integrate Paypal Express Checkout with the Magento APIMagento 1.5 - Sales > Order > edit order and shipping methods disappearAuto Invoice Check/Money Order Payment methodAdd more simple payment methods?Shipping methods not showingWhat should I do to change payment methods if changing the configuration has no effects?1.9 - No Payment Methods showing upMy Payment Methods not Showing for downloadable/virtual product when checkout?Magento2 API to access internal payment methodHow to call an existing payment methods in the registration form?