Question

Give an example to show that Rolle’s theorem can fail if f is merely assumed to be almost everywhere differentiable, even if one adds the additional hypothesis that f is continuous. This example illustrates that everywhere differentiability is a significantly stronger property than almost everywhere differentiability. We will see further evidence of this fact later in these notes; there are many theorems that assert in their conclusion that a function is almost everywhere differentiable, but few that manage to conclude everywhere differentiability.

   Give an example to show that Rolle’s theorem can
fail if f is merely assumed to be almost everywhere differentiable,
even if one adds the additional hypothesis that f is continuous. This
example illustrates that everywhere differentiability is a significantly
stronger property than almost everywhere differentiability. We will
see further evidence of this fact later in these notes; there are many
theorems that assert in their conclusion that a function is almost everywhere differentiable, but few that manage to conclude everywhere
differentiability.
Show more…
An Introduction To Measure Theory (January 2011 Draft)
An Introduction To Measure Theory (January 2011 Draft)
Terence Tao 1st Edition
Chapter 1, Problem 3 ↓
AceChat toggle button
Close icon
Ace pointing down

Please give Ace some feedback

Your feedback will help us improve your experience

Thumb up icon Thumb down icon
Thanks for your feedback!
Profile picture
Give an example to show that Rolle’s theorem can fail if f is merely assumed to be almost everywhere differentiable, even if one adds the additional hypothesis that f is continuous. This example illustrates that everywhere differentiability is a significantly stronger property than almost everywhere differentiability. We will see further evidence of this fact later in these notes; there are many theorems that assert in their conclusion that a function is almost everywhere differentiable, but few that manage to conclude everywhere differentiability.
Close icon
Play audio
Feedback
Powered by NumerAI
Kathleen Carty Ivan Kochetkov
David Collins verified

Lucas Finney and 71 other educators are ready to help you.

Ask a new question

*

Labs

-

Want to see this concept in action?

NEW

Explore this concept interactively to see how it behaves as you change inputs.

View Labs

*

Recommended Videos

-
a-if-a-function-f-is-differentiable-at-a-point-prove-that-f-must-be-continuous-at-a-give-an-example-of-a-function-that-is-continuous-at-a-point-but-not-differentiable-there-6-give-an-example-21213

(a) If a function f is differentiable at a point a prove that f must be continuous at a. Give an example of a function that is continuous at a point but not differentiable there. (b) Give an example of a function f : R → R such that f and f² are not differentiable at x = 1, however f³ is differentiable at every x ∈ R. Prove your assertions.

a-function-f-defined-on-3-1-with-f-3f-10-such-that-f-is-continuous-everywhere-except-at-x-1-and-di-2

A function $f$ defined on $[-3,-1]$ with $f(-3)=f(-1)=0$ such that $f$ is continuous everywhere except at $x=-1$ and differentiable everywhere except at $x=-1$, and fails the conclusion of Rolle's Theorem.

Calculus: Early Transcendentals

Applications of the Derivative

The Mean Value Theorem

rolles-theorem-the-function-fxleftbeginarrayll0-x0-1-x-0-x-leq-1endarrayright-is-differentiable-on-0

Rolle's Theorem The function $f(x)=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}{0,} & {x=0} \\ {1-x,} & {0 < x \leq 1}\end{array}\right.$ is differentiable on $(0,1)$ and satisfies $f(0)=f(1)$ . However, its derivative is never zero on $(0,1) .$ Does this contradict Rolle's Theorem? Explain.

Calculus of a Single Variable

Applications of Differentiation

Rolle'cs Theorem and the Mean Value Theorem


*

Transcript

-
00:01 For this problem, we are asked to sketch and label the graph of a function defined on negative 3 to negative 1, with f of negative 3 equals f of negative 1 equals 0, such that f is continuous everywhere except x equals negative 1, and differentiable everywhere except at x equals negative 1, and fails the conclusion of rollis theorem.
00:18 So let's say we have x equals negative 3 here, x equals negative 1 here, and we have that the function would be equal to 0 at each one of those points, and we have that the function must be continuous everywhere, except at x equals negative 1...
Need help? Use Ace
Ace is your personal tutor. It breaks down any question with clear steps so you can learn.
Start Using Ace
Ace is your personal tutor for learning
Step-by-step explanations
Instant summaries
Summarize YouTube videos
Understand textbook images or PDFs
Study tools like quizzes and flashcards
Listen to your notes as a podcast
Continue solving this problem
Create a free account to:
  • View full step-by-step solution
  • Ask follow-up questions with Ace AI
  • Save progress and study later
Continue Free
Join the community

18,000,000+

Students on Numerade


Trusted by students at 8,000+ universities

Numerade

Get step-by-step video solution
from top educators

Continue with Clever
or



By creating an account, you agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
Already have an account? Log In

A free answer
just for you

Watch the video solution with this free unlock.

Numerade

Log in to watch this video
...and 100,000,000 more!


EMAIL

PASSWORD

OR
Continue with Clever