3
$\begingroup$

Show that any function $f$ which is not continuous on $[a,b]$, but satisfies the intermediate value property, assumes some value infinitely often.

Here $f$ has the intermediate value property if:

whenever $(c,d)$ is a subinterval of $[a,b]$, $f$ achieves every value between $f(c)$ and $f(d)$.

I am close to the answer here. I know there exists an $\epsilon$ such that for all $\delta_n = {1\over n}$ we have an $x_n$ such that $|x_n-x_0|<1/n$ but $|f(x_n)-f(x_0)| \geq \epsilon$, where $f$ is not continuous at $x_0$.

I'd like to be able to say that we can select these $x_n$ so that $(f(x_n))$ is a sequence of distinct elements, and then somehow proceed. How should I do this, and is this the correct way to go?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Hint: Perhaps you should consider proving the contrapositive. The problem with your approach is that you want to show you can pick such $x_n$ with $f(x_n)$ all the same. $\endgroup$ – Ted Shifrin May 7 '14 at 3:34
  • $\begingroup$ Ok the contrapositive certainly makes this easier. Now what do I do once the $(f(x_n))$ are all distinct? I suppose that is my main question. $\endgroup$ – Johnny Apple May 7 '14 at 3:40
2
$\begingroup$

Your approach is fine. For each $n$ you've got an $x_n$ in $(x_0-\frac1n,x_0+\frac1n)$ such that either $f(x_n)\ge f(x_0)+\epsilon$ or else $f(x_n)\le f(x_0)-\epsilon$. Now use the IVP [*] to get a $y_n$ in $(x_0-\frac1n,x_0+\frac1n)$ such that $f(y_n)$ is equal to $f(x_0)+\epsilon$ or $f(x_0)-\epsilon$. Conclude that at least one of those two values must be assumed infinitely often.

[*] Suppose, e.g., that $x_n\gt x_0$. The IVP applied to the interval $[x_0,x_n]$ says that, in that interval, $f$ assumes all values between $f(x_0)$ and $f(x_n)$. If $f(x_n)\ge f(x_0)+\epsilon$ then then $f(x_0)+\epsilon$ is one of those values; if $f(x_n)\le f(x_0)-\epsilon$ then . . .

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I'm not seeing how you get the $y_n$ from the IVP. $\endgroup$ – Johnny Apple May 7 '14 at 3:46
  • $\begingroup$ And, how do you know the $f(x_n)$ are distinct? $\endgroup$ – Johnny Apple May 7 '14 at 3:53
  • $\begingroup$ Why do you care if the $f(x_n)$ are distinct? If they are all equal, how is that a problem? $\endgroup$ – bof May 7 '14 at 3:56
  • $\begingroup$ You do need the $y_n$ to be distinct is all, I suppose. But that can be done via subsequences, correct? $\endgroup$ – Johnny Apple May 7 '14 at 3:57
  • $\begingroup$ The $y_n$ don't all have to be distinct, just so they take infinitely many different values. This is guaranteed by the condition $|y_n-x_0|\lt1/n$. If there were only finitely many different $y_n$, then one of them would be nearest to $x_0$; i.e., it would make sense to define $d=\min\{|y_n-x_0|:n\in\mathbb N\}$; and of course $d\gt0$ since $y_n\ne x_0$. Now what happens if we take $n$ big enough so that $1\n\lt d$? $\endgroup$ – bof May 7 '14 at 4:11
1
$\begingroup$

Suppose that $f$ satisfies the conclusion of the IVT, i.e., $f$ is a Darboux function. If $f$ takes on each value a finite number of times, then $f$ is continuous.

We argue by contradiction. Suppose that $f$ is not continuous, so there is some $x_0$ and $\epsilon>0$ such that given any $\delta>0$ we have $0<|x-x_0|< \delta$ and $|f(x)-f(x_0)|> \epsilon$. Then either $|f(x)-f(x_0)|> \epsilon$ for infinitely many $x>x_0$ or else for infinitely many $x<x_0$ (if were not the case, we can shrink the interval and $f$ would be continuous), say the first. Similarly $f(x)-f(x_0)>\epsilon$ or $f(x)-f(x_0)<-\epsilon$ for infinitely many $x$, say again the first.

So there are infinitely many $x>x_0$ such that $f(x)-f(x_0)> \epsilon$.

Let $a_1>x_0$ such that $f(x_0)+\epsilon< f(a_1)$. Since $f$ is Darboux there is some $b_1 \in (x_0, a_1)$ such that $f(b_1)=f(x_0)+\epsilon$. Now let $a_2\in (x_0,b_1)$ so that $f(x_0)+\epsilon< f(a_2)$, and again we thus have some $b_2\in (x_0,a_2)$ for which $f(b_2)=f(x_0)+\epsilon$. By induction we can have $f(b_n)=f(x_0)+\epsilon$ for all $n$, where $b_i\not= b_j$ if $i\not=j$. Hence $f$ takes on $f(x_0)+\epsilon$ a infinite number of times, a contradiction.

$\endgroup$

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.