2
$\begingroup$

Darboux's Theorem states that" If $f$ is differentiable on $[a,b]$ and if $k$ is a number between $f^{\prime}(a)$ and $f^{\prime}(b)$, then there is at least one point $c\in (a,b)$ such that $f^{\prime}(c) = k$."

Most commonly found proof goes as follows: Suppose that $f^{\prime}(a) < k < f^{\prime}(b)$. Let $F:[a,b]\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ be defined by $F(x) = f(x) -kx$ so that $F^{\prime}(x) = f^{\prime}(x) -k$. Then $F$ is differentiable on $[a,b]$ because so is the function $f$. We find $F^{\prime}(a) = f^{\prime}(a) -k <0$ and $F^{\prime}(b) = f^{\prime}(b) -k >0$. Note that $F^{\prime}(a) <0$ means $F(t_1)< F(a)$ for some $t_1\in (a,b)$. So, $F$ can not attain its minimum at $x=a$. Also, for $F^{\prime}(b)>0$, we can find $t_2\in (a,b)$ such that $F(b) < F(t_2)$. Thus neither $a$ nor $b$ can be a point where $F$ attains a local maximum or a local minimum. Since $F$ is continuous on $[a,b]$, it must attain its maximum at some point $c\in (a,b)$. This means that $F^{\prime}(c) = 0$ and hence $f^{\prime}(c) = k$ as desired.

My question is how can one conclude that $F^{\prime}(b) > 0$ means $F$ can not attain a maximum at $x=b$, the end point of the interval. Look at the example $f(x) =x^2$ on $[0,1]$, has absolute maximum at $x =1$ though $f^{\prime}(1) =2 >0$. Have I misunderstood any logic here? Please somebody explain this. Thanks !!!

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Does the Extreme value property for a continuous function on a closed interval $[a,b]$ ensures of the existence of local extremum ? $\endgroup$ – Mr. MBB Dec 24 '15 at 21:42
5
$\begingroup$

You’ve slightly misstated the argument, and the misstatement is the source of your difficulty. We have $F'(a)=f'(a)-k<0$, so $F$ cannot have its absolute minimum on $[a,b]$ at $a$: there is a $t_1\in(a,b)$ such that $F(t_1)<F(a)$. We also have $F'(b)=f'(b)-k>0$, so $F$ cannot have its absolute minimum on $[a,b]$ at $b$, either: there is a $t_2\in(a,b)$ such that $F(t_2)<F(b)$. Thus, it must have its absolute minimum on $[a,b]$ at some $c\in(a,b)$. By Fermat’s theorem $F'(c)=0$, and hence $f'(c)=k$.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ M Scott. As far as I know that $F^{\prime} (c) = 0$ is not required for absolute maximum or minimum. I gave an example :$f(x) = x^2, x\in [0,1]$ has absolute maximum at $x =1$ without being $F^{\prime}(1) =0$. $\endgroup$ – Mr. MBB Dec 24 '15 at 22:07
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @Mr.MBB: It is required when the absolute max. or min. is in the interior of the interval and the function is differentiable. That’s why it’s important that neither $a$ nor $b$ is the min. $\endgroup$ – Brian M. Scott Dec 24 '15 at 22:09
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks professor Scott. I really appreciate your help. $\endgroup$ – Mr. MBB Dec 24 '15 at 23:45
  • $\begingroup$ @Mr.MBB: You’re welcome! $\endgroup$ – Brian M. Scott Dec 24 '15 at 23:46
  • $\begingroup$ $F^{\prime}(a) <0$ and $F^{\prime}(b)>0$ means $F$ is not monotonic on $[a,b]$. This means that there exists $x<y<z$ all on $[a,b]$ such that(a) $F(x) <F(y)$ and $F(y)>F(z) $\endgroup$ – Mr. MBB Dec 27 '15 at 3:32

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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