L'Hospital's Rule .... Bartle and Sherbert Theorem 6.2.3 .... ....

  • MHB
  • Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Theorem
In summary: In other words, it says that if $f'(\gamma) = 0$ for some $\gamma$ between $\alpha$ and $\beta$, then $f(\beta) = 0$ for all $\beta$ within the given environment.
  • #1
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
3,998
48
I am reading "Introduction to Real Analysis" (Fourth Edition) by Robert G Bartle and Donald R Sherbert ...

I am focused on Chapter 6: Differentiation ...

I need help in fully understanding the proof of Theorem 6.3.3 (L'Hospital's Rule ... ) ...Theorem 6.3.3 and its proof ... ... read as follows:
View attachment 7302In the above proof we read the following:"... If \(\displaystyle a \lt \alpha \lt \beta \lt b\), then Rolle's Theorem implies that \(\displaystyle g( \beta ) \neq g( \alpha )\) ... ... "Can someone please explain EXACTLY how Rolle's Theorem implies that \(\displaystyle g( \beta ) \neq g( \alpha )\) ... ***Note***

I suspect B&S are using the contrapositive of Rollé's Theorem but i am unsure exactly how to form the contrapositive in this case ...Hope someone can help ...

Peter
The above post refers to Rolle's Theorem ... therefore I am providing B&S's statement of Rolle's Theorem ... as follows ...View attachment 7303
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You are right, it is essentially the contrapositive form of Rolle's theorem.

Rolle's theorem says that if $g(\beta) = g(\alpha)$ then there exists $\gamma$ between $\alpha$ and $\beta$ such that $g'(\gamma) = 0.$ The contrapositive says that if there does not exist $\gamma$ between $\alpha$ and $\beta$ such that $g'(\gamma) = 0$ then $g(\beta) \ne g(\alpha)$.

Theorem 6.3.3 contains the condition $g'(x) \ne0$ for all $x$ in $(a,b)$, which (again by using a contrapositive form) implies that there does not exist $\gamma$ between $\alpha$ and $\beta$ such that $g'(\gamma) = 0$.
 
  • #3
Opalg said:
You are right, it is essentially the contrapositive form of Rolle's theorem.

Rolle's theorem says that if $g(\beta) = g(\alpha)$ then there exists $\gamma$ between $\alpha$ and $\beta$ such that $g'(\gamma) = 0.$ The contrapositive says that if there does not exist $\gamma$ between $\alpha$ and $\beta$ such that $g'(\gamma) = 0$ then $g(\beta) \ne g(\alpha)$.

Theorem 6.3.3 contains the condition $g'(x) \ne0$ for all $x$ in $(a,b)$, which (again by using a contrapositive form) implies that there does not exist $\gamma$ between $\alpha$ and $\beta$ such that $g'(\gamma) = 0$.
Thanks for the help, Opalg ...

But ... just a clarification ...

The contrapositive of \(\displaystyle P \Longrightarrow Q\) is \(\displaystyle \neg Q \Longrightarrow \neg P\) ... where \(\displaystyle \neg P\) is more complex than just \(\displaystyle \neg ["f(a) = f(b)" ] \) ... Indeed it seems to me that \(\displaystyle \neg P\) is of the form \(\displaystyle \neg [ A \wedge B \wedge C ]\)

where

\(\displaystyle A \equiv \ ,"f \text{ is continuous on } I = [a, b]"\)

\(\displaystyle B \equiv \ "f' \text{ exists at every point of } (a, b)"\)

\(\displaystyle C \equiv \ "f(a) = f(b) = 0"\)Can you comment and clarify?

Peter
 
  • #4
Peter said:
The contrapositive of \(\displaystyle P \Longrightarrow Q\) is \(\displaystyle \neg Q \Longrightarrow \neg P\) ... where \(\displaystyle \neg P\) is more complex than just \(\displaystyle \neg ["f(a) = f(b)" ] \) ... Indeed it seems to me that \(\displaystyle \neg P\) is of the form \(\displaystyle \neg [ A \wedge B \wedge C ]\)

where

\(\displaystyle A \equiv \ ,"f \text{ is continuous on } I = [a, b]"\)

\(\displaystyle B \equiv \ "f' \text{ exists at every point of } (a, b)"\)

\(\displaystyle C \equiv \ "f(a) = f(b) = 0"\)Can you comment and clarify?
The way I look at it is this. The proof of 6.3.3 takes place in a background environment consisting of functions that are continuous on $[a,b]$ and differentiable on $(a,b)$. (There is also the background condition that $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are points satisfying $a<\alpha <\beta <b$.) Within that environment, Rolle's theorem says that $P\Longrightarrow Q$, where $P$ is the condition "$f(\alpha) = f(\beta) $" (and it is understood that $f$ refers to a function in the given environment) and $Q$ is the condition "there exists $\gamma$ with $\alpha< \gamma < \beta$ such that $f'(\gamma) = 0$". The contrapositive $\neg Q \Longrightarrow \neg P$ then also needs to be interpreted as taking place within the given environment of differentiable functions.
 

FAQ: L'Hospital's Rule .... Bartle and Sherbert Theorem 6.2.3 .... ....

What is L'Hospital's Rule?

L'Hospital's Rule is a mathematical theorem that allows us to evaluate the limit of a function that is in an indeterminate form, such as 0/0 or ∞/∞. It states that if the limit of a quotient of two functions is in an indeterminate form, then the limit of the quotient of their derivatives will be the same.

Who discovered L'Hospital's Rule?

L'Hospital's Rule was first discovered by the French mathematician Guillaume de l'Hôpital in the late 17th century. However, it is believed that the rule was actually first discovered by the Swiss mathematician Johann Bernoulli.

What is Bartle and Sherbert Theorem 6.2.3?

Bartle and Sherbert Theorem 6.2.3 is a specific case of L'Hospital's Rule that deals with the limit of a quotient of two functions when one of the functions approaches zero and the other approaches infinity. It states that in this case, the limit will be equal to the limit of the quotient of their derivatives.

Why is L'Hospital's Rule useful?

L'Hospital's Rule is useful because it provides us with a method for evaluating limits that cannot be easily solved using other techniques. It can also help simplify complicated expressions and make them easier to solve.

Are there any limitations to L'Hospital's Rule?

Yes, there are limitations to L'Hospital's Rule. It can only be applied to functions that are differentiable in the interval of interest, and the limit must be in an indeterminate form. Additionally, it is important to check for conditions where the rule may not apply, such as when the limit is approaching a finite number or negative infinity.

Back
Top