2
$\begingroup$

I've been restudying Real Analysis (in one dimension) and got stuck on one problem. I thought that my proof was correct, but, when I checked the solution, the proof that I saw was way more complicated than mine, so I'm assuming mine was incorrect. With that being said, I would like to know why my solution fails to be correct (or if that's actually the case). The problem is the following:

Let $f: [a, + \infty) \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ be twice differentiable. Prove that if $\lim_{x \rightarrow \infty} f(x)=f(a)$, then there exists $x \in (a, + \infty)$ such that $f''(x)=0$.

Here is my proof: If $f$ is constant, we must have $f(x)=f(a)$. Hence, $f''$ vanishes everywhere, and we are done.

Let's then suppose that $f$ is not constant. If $f'(a)$ was both the global maximum and minimum of $f'$, then, for every $x \in [a, + \infty)$, we would have $$f'(a) \leq f'(x) \leq f'(a).$$ That is, $f'$ is constant, and $f(x)=mx+b$ for some $m, b \in \mathbb{R}$ with $m \neq 0$ (since we are assuming $f$ not to be constant). Therefore, $\lim_{x \rightarrow \infty} f(x)=+ \infty$ or $\lim_{x \rightarrow \infty} f(x)=- \infty$, a contradiction. Thus, $f'(a)$ cannot be both the global maximum and minimum of $f'$. In other words, $f'$ attains an extremum at some point $x \in (a, + \infty)$; but since $f'$ is differentiable and $x$ is an interior point of $(a, + \infty)$, we conclude that $f''(x)=0,$ as desired.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ If $f$ is not constant, then it does not necessarily have any global extrema, unless its domain if a closed interval. $\endgroup$ – Yiorgos S. Smyrlis Nov 28 '20 at 14:00
  • $\begingroup$ Why do we assume that if $f$ is not constant that $f'(a)$ is both a global maximum and minimum? Surely this needs to be justified (or at least consider the case when this is not true)? Anyway what about the function $f:[\pi , \infty) \to \mathbb{R} , f(x):= \frac{sin(x)}{x}$? Hope this helps :) $\endgroup$ – THIG Nov 28 '20 at 14:01
  • $\begingroup$ But doesn't the fact that $\lim_{x \rightarrow \infty} f(x)=f(a)$ implies that $f(x)$ has either a maximum or minimum? $\endgroup$ – Will199 Nov 28 '20 at 14:12
0
$\begingroup$

Lemma. (Theorem of Darboux) If $f: [a,b]\to\mathbb R$ is differentiable, and $f'(a)<0<f'(b)$, then there exists a $c\in (a,b)$, such that $f'(c)$.

If $f''(x)\ne 0$, for all $x\in(a,\infty)$, then according to the above result, either $f''(x)>0$, for all $x\in(a,\infty)$ or $f''(x)<0$, for all $x\in(a,\infty)$.

Assume that $f''(x)>0$, for all $x\in(a,\infty)$. (The case, $f''(x)<0$, for all $x\in(a,\infty)$ is treated similarly.) Then $f'$ is strictly increasing, and hence there are three possibilities:

I. $f'(x)>0$, for all $x\in(a,\infty)$.

II. $f'(x)<0$, for all $x\in(a,\infty)$.

III. There is a $b>a$, such that $f'(x)<0$, for all $x\in(a,b)$ and $f'(x)>0$, for all $x\in(b,\infty)$.

In the cases I and III, $f$ tends necessarily to infinity, as $x\to\infty$. Observe that in I, $f'(x)>f'(a+1)>0$, for $x>a+1$, and hence $f(x)>(x-a-1)f'(a+1)+f(a+1)\to\infty$. Similarly, in III, $f'(x)>f'(b+1)>0$, for $x>b+1$, and hence $f(x)>(x-b-1)f'(b+1)+f(b+1)\to\infty$.

In case II, $f$ is strictly decreasing, and hence $$ \lim_{x\to\infty}f(x)\le f(a+1)<f(a). $$ So, all there cases lead to contradiction, and hence there exists a $x\in(a,\infty)$, where $f''(x)=0$.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you for the proof, Yiorgos, but do you mind verifying the veracity of my proof? $\endgroup$ – Will199 Nov 28 '20 at 17:53

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.