# What is the best way to prove the mean value theorem [closed]

What is the best way to prove the mean value theorem.

-

## closed as unclear what you're asking by Jonas Meyer, John, Claude Leibovici, Najib Idrissi, SurbApr 23 at 7:27

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

What exactly do you mean by 'best'? –  Aryabhata Jan 18 '11 at 0:53
I guess I meant easiest/most common –  DogDog Jan 18 '11 at 1:25
Have you looked up any proofs yet? Are you looking for something easier than what you already have? –  Jonas Meyer Jan 18 '11 at 1:27
In English, "demonstrate" and "prove" are not synonyms. To "demonstrate the Mean Value Theorem" would be to show how it works (e.g., give a function that satisfies the hypothesis and show that the conclusion holds). To prove it is to provide a proof of the statement. –  Arturo Magidin Jan 18 '11 at 5:51

The most common way to prove the Mean Value Theorem is to first prove Rolle's Theorem; then, given the arbitrary setting of the Mean Value Theorem, you just "tilt your head and apply Rolle's Theorem".

That is, you draw the line joining $(a,f(a))$ and $(b,f(b))$, and let $g(x)$ be the function whose value is the vertical distance between $f(x)$ and this line. Then $g(x)$ is differentiable, and has $g(a)=g(b)=0$; applying Rolle's Theorem to $g$ and then translating this into what it means for $f(x)$ yields the Mean Value Theorem.

-
+1 "tilt your head and apply Rolle's Theorem" just made me laugh a lot. I'll try to see what effect this has on the students the next time I teach calculus. –  Adrián Barquero Jan 18 '11 at 4:48
Of course the natural next question is how you prove Rolle's theorem. –  Grumpy Parsnip Jan 18 '11 at 13:15
@Jim Conant: Most calculus textbooks I'm familiar with use the Extreme Value Theorem; if $f(x)=f(a)=f(b)$ for all $x$ in $[a,b]$, there is nothing to do; otherwise, there is an absolute extreme that is not the value at $a$, hence must be a point where the derivative vanishes. This is also what Spivak does. –  Arturo Magidin Jan 18 '11 at 14:02
I agree. My point, not very well expressed, was that Rolle's Theorem and MVT are basically the same theorem. Proving Rolle's theorem is 95% of the way to the general MVT.In any event, your answer is helpful and correct. –  Grumpy Parsnip Jan 18 '11 at 14:41
@Jim: Yes, they are "essentially the same theorem." Rolle's Theorem has the virtue of being slightly easier because one has a specific numerical "target" (a point where the derivative is $0$), but one could prove MVT directly by using the auxiliary function $g$ and invoking the Extreme Value Theorem for that one. –  Arturo Magidin Jan 18 '11 at 14:55

Have you seen the wikipedia article?

-