Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.


I'm having a bit of trouble understanding the proof of Darboux's Theorem on the IVP of derivatives.

Why should there be an extremum such that $g'(x) = 0$ from the fact that $g'(a)>0$ and $g'(b)<0$ ?

share|improve this question
What is $g$? The wikipedia page uses $f$ and $\phi$... –  Matthew Conroy Sep 7 '12 at 16:35
I can't understand what you mean by "...only a maximum". –  Siminore Sep 7 '12 at 17:09

1 Answer 1

Suppose that $g$ attains a local maximum at $a$. Then $$\lim_{x \to a+} \frac{g(x)-g(a)}{x-a} \leq 0.$$ Analogously, if $g$ attains a local maximum at $b$, then $$\lim_{x \to b-} \frac{g(x)-g(b)}{x-b}\geq 0.$$ But both contradict $g'(a)>0$ and $g'(b)<0$. Hence the maximum, which exists since $g$ is continuous on $[a,b]$, must lie inside $[a,b]$.

Actually, you can visualize the setting: $g'(a)>0$ means that $g$ leaves $a$ in an increasing way, and then reaches $b$ in a decreasing way. Therefore $g$ must attain a maximum somewhere between $a$ and $b$.

share|improve this answer
+Upvote for the intuition in your final paragraph –  Tucker Rapu Mar 1 at 12:18

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.