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 only know how to prove this for functions on a convex set by using the mean value theorem, but is this also true for this general case when nothing is said about the domain of the function besides the fact that it is a subset of $\mathbb{R}^n$?

share|improve this question
    
sorry spelling mistake –  Xin Wang Nov 17 '13 at 16:35
1  
Even for connected $U \subset \mathbb{R}^n$ it need not be true. Consider $(r\cos\varphi,r\sin\varphi) \mapsto \varphi$ on $\{(x,y) : x^2+y^2 > 1, y\neq 0 \lor x > 0\}$ with $-\pi < \varphi < \pi$. –  Daniel Fischer Nov 17 '13 at 16:44
1  
One can prove this for quasiconvex domains (which are more general than convex): see here. And I think this is as far as one can go. If the domain is not quasiconvex, then the intrinsic distance function has bounded derivative but is not Lipschitz. –  user103402 Nov 17 '13 at 16:46

2 Answers 2

up vote 3 down vote accepted

The function $f(x) = \operatorname{sgn} x$ defined on the domain $D = \mathbb{R} \setminus \{0\}$ is differentiable at every point of $D$ and the derivative is continuous and bounded (it's identically zero), but it is not Lipschitz.

share|improve this answer

If the domain is not connected the assertion is incorrect. Define a function on the union of intervals $[2n, 2n+1]$ to be equal to $n^2$ on the corresponding interval $[2n, 2n+1]$. This is continuously differentiable but not Lipschitz.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

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.