Fermats theorem, Mathematics

Fermat's Theorem

 If f(x) has a relative extrema at x = c and f′(c) exists then x = c is a critical point of f(x). Actually, this will be a critical point that f′(c) =0.

 Proof

It is a fairly easy proof.  We will suppose that f(x) has a relative maximum to do the proof.

 The proof for a relative minimum is nearly the same. Therefore, if we suppose that we have a relative maximum at x = c after that we know that f(c) ≥ f(x) for all x which are sufficiently close to x = c.

 Particularly for all h which are sufficiently close to zero may be positive or negative we must contain,

f(c) ≥ f(c + h)

or, with a little rewrite we should have,

f(c + h) - f(c) < 0                                             (1)

Now, here suppose that h > 0 and divide both sides of (1) with h. It provides,

(f(c + h) - f(c))/h < 0

Since we're assuming that h > 0 we can here take the right-hand limit of both sides of such.

= limh0¯  (f(c + h) - f(c))/h < limh0¯ 0 = 0

We are also assume that f′(c) exists and recall this if a general limit exists then this should be equal to both one-sided limits. We can so say that,

f′(c) = limh0¯  (f(c + h) - f(c))/h = limh0¯  (f(c + h) - f(c))/h < 0

If we place this together we have here demonstrated that, f′(c) ≤ 0 .

Fine, now let's turn things around and suppose that h < 0 provides,and divide both sides of (1) with h. It  gives

(f(c + h) - f(c))/h > 0

Keep in mind that as we're assuming h < 0 we will require to switch the inequality while we divide thorugh a negative number. We can here do a same argument as above to find that,

f′(c) = limh0 (f(c + h) - f(c))/h = limh0¯  (f(c + h) - f(c))/h >   limh0¯ 0 = 0

The difference now is that currently we're going to be considering at the left-hand limit as we're assuming that h < 0 . This argument illustrates that f′(c) ≥ 0 .

 We've now shown that

 f′(c) ≤ 0 and f′(c)  ≥ 0. So only way both of such can be true at similar time is to have f′(c) = 0 and it means that x = c must be a critical point.

 As considered above, if we suppose that f(x) has a relative minimum then the proof is nearly  the same and therefore isn't illustraten here. The major differences are simply several inequalities require to be switched.

Posted Date: 4/13/2013 3:52:50 AM | Location : United States







Related Discussions:- Fermats theorem, Assignment Help, Ask Question on Fermats theorem, Get Answer, Expert's Help, Fermats theorem Discussions

Write discussion on Fermats theorem
Your posts are moderated
Related Questions
what is the unit price of 6.5 cups of pizza sauce?

find the domain of the function f(x) = (| sin inverse sin x | - cos inverse cos x) ^ 1/2


High Self-esteem Helps Learning :  Consider Ajay, a student of Class 2. He is constantly told by his irritated father, "How stupid you are! You don't even understand this! Even yo

Draw a graph which has slope of a line with rise of five and run of two is positive.

how to convert double integral into polar coordinates and change the limits of integration

High temperatures in certain city in the month of August follow uniform distribution over the interval 60-85 F. What is probability that a randomly selected August day has a Temper

the radii of circular base of right circular cylinder and cone are in the ratio of 3:4 and their height are in the ratio of the 2:3 what is the ratio of their volume?

the limit of f(x) as x approaches 5 is equal to 7. write the definition of limit as it applies to f at this point

Consider the equation x 2 y′′+ xy′- y = 4x ln x (a) Verify that x is a solution to the homogeneous equation. (b) Use the method of reduction of order to derive the second