Prove that there is a number $x_0 in (0,1]$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ and $f(x)>0$ for $0le x < x_0$.












1












$begingroup$


Suppose that the function $f:[0,1]rightarrow mathbb{R}$ is continuous, $f(0)>0$, and $f(1)=0$. Prove that there is a number $x_0 in (0,1]$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ and $f(x)>0$ for $0le x < x_0$; that is, there is a smallest point in the interval $[0,1]$ at which the function $f$ attains the value $0$.





Since $f$ is continuous on a closed an bounded interval, $[0,1]$, then by the extreme value theorem, $f$ attains both a minimum and a maximum value. The minimum value will obviously be $0$, but I'm not really sure where to go after stating this. Any suggestions?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I would do a proof by contradiction.
    $endgroup$
    – shade4159
    Nov 6 '13 at 4:43










  • $begingroup$
    @shade4159 I'm not really sure how I would show this by contradiction. If I suppose there is not a number $x_0in (0,1]$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ and $f(x)>0$ for $0le x<x_0$, then can't there still be a minimum and maximum on the interval?
    $endgroup$
    – TheMobiusLoops
    Nov 6 '13 at 4:51






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Assume there is no smallest point in the interval $[0,1]$ at which $f$ attains the value $0$. So $forall x_0 in [0,1]| f(x_0) = 0, exists x_1 in [0,1]| f(x_1) = 0, x_1 < x_0$
    $endgroup$
    – shade4159
    Nov 6 '13 at 4:56
















1












$begingroup$


Suppose that the function $f:[0,1]rightarrow mathbb{R}$ is continuous, $f(0)>0$, and $f(1)=0$. Prove that there is a number $x_0 in (0,1]$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ and $f(x)>0$ for $0le x < x_0$; that is, there is a smallest point in the interval $[0,1]$ at which the function $f$ attains the value $0$.





Since $f$ is continuous on a closed an bounded interval, $[0,1]$, then by the extreme value theorem, $f$ attains both a minimum and a maximum value. The minimum value will obviously be $0$, but I'm not really sure where to go after stating this. Any suggestions?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I would do a proof by contradiction.
    $endgroup$
    – shade4159
    Nov 6 '13 at 4:43










  • $begingroup$
    @shade4159 I'm not really sure how I would show this by contradiction. If I suppose there is not a number $x_0in (0,1]$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ and $f(x)>0$ for $0le x<x_0$, then can't there still be a minimum and maximum on the interval?
    $endgroup$
    – TheMobiusLoops
    Nov 6 '13 at 4:51






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Assume there is no smallest point in the interval $[0,1]$ at which $f$ attains the value $0$. So $forall x_0 in [0,1]| f(x_0) = 0, exists x_1 in [0,1]| f(x_1) = 0, x_1 < x_0$
    $endgroup$
    – shade4159
    Nov 6 '13 at 4:56














1












1








1





$begingroup$


Suppose that the function $f:[0,1]rightarrow mathbb{R}$ is continuous, $f(0)>0$, and $f(1)=0$. Prove that there is a number $x_0 in (0,1]$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ and $f(x)>0$ for $0le x < x_0$; that is, there is a smallest point in the interval $[0,1]$ at which the function $f$ attains the value $0$.





Since $f$ is continuous on a closed an bounded interval, $[0,1]$, then by the extreme value theorem, $f$ attains both a minimum and a maximum value. The minimum value will obviously be $0$, but I'm not really sure where to go after stating this. Any suggestions?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




Suppose that the function $f:[0,1]rightarrow mathbb{R}$ is continuous, $f(0)>0$, and $f(1)=0$. Prove that there is a number $x_0 in (0,1]$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ and $f(x)>0$ for $0le x < x_0$; that is, there is a smallest point in the interval $[0,1]$ at which the function $f$ attains the value $0$.





Since $f$ is continuous on a closed an bounded interval, $[0,1]$, then by the extreme value theorem, $f$ attains both a minimum and a maximum value. The minimum value will obviously be $0$, but I'm not really sure where to go after stating this. Any suggestions?







real-analysis






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Nov 6 '13 at 4:34









TheMobiusLoopsTheMobiusLoops

664722




664722












  • $begingroup$
    I would do a proof by contradiction.
    $endgroup$
    – shade4159
    Nov 6 '13 at 4:43










  • $begingroup$
    @shade4159 I'm not really sure how I would show this by contradiction. If I suppose there is not a number $x_0in (0,1]$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ and $f(x)>0$ for $0le x<x_0$, then can't there still be a minimum and maximum on the interval?
    $endgroup$
    – TheMobiusLoops
    Nov 6 '13 at 4:51






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Assume there is no smallest point in the interval $[0,1]$ at which $f$ attains the value $0$. So $forall x_0 in [0,1]| f(x_0) = 0, exists x_1 in [0,1]| f(x_1) = 0, x_1 < x_0$
    $endgroup$
    – shade4159
    Nov 6 '13 at 4:56


















  • $begingroup$
    I would do a proof by contradiction.
    $endgroup$
    – shade4159
    Nov 6 '13 at 4:43










  • $begingroup$
    @shade4159 I'm not really sure how I would show this by contradiction. If I suppose there is not a number $x_0in (0,1]$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ and $f(x)>0$ for $0le x<x_0$, then can't there still be a minimum and maximum on the interval?
    $endgroup$
    – TheMobiusLoops
    Nov 6 '13 at 4:51






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Assume there is no smallest point in the interval $[0,1]$ at which $f$ attains the value $0$. So $forall x_0 in [0,1]| f(x_0) = 0, exists x_1 in [0,1]| f(x_1) = 0, x_1 < x_0$
    $endgroup$
    – shade4159
    Nov 6 '13 at 4:56
















$begingroup$
I would do a proof by contradiction.
$endgroup$
– shade4159
Nov 6 '13 at 4:43




$begingroup$
I would do a proof by contradiction.
$endgroup$
– shade4159
Nov 6 '13 at 4:43












$begingroup$
@shade4159 I'm not really sure how I would show this by contradiction. If I suppose there is not a number $x_0in (0,1]$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ and $f(x)>0$ for $0le x<x_0$, then can't there still be a minimum and maximum on the interval?
$endgroup$
– TheMobiusLoops
Nov 6 '13 at 4:51




$begingroup$
@shade4159 I'm not really sure how I would show this by contradiction. If I suppose there is not a number $x_0in (0,1]$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ and $f(x)>0$ for $0le x<x_0$, then can't there still be a minimum and maximum on the interval?
$endgroup$
– TheMobiusLoops
Nov 6 '13 at 4:51




1




1




$begingroup$
Assume there is no smallest point in the interval $[0,1]$ at which $f$ attains the value $0$. So $forall x_0 in [0,1]| f(x_0) = 0, exists x_1 in [0,1]| f(x_1) = 0, x_1 < x_0$
$endgroup$
– shade4159
Nov 6 '13 at 4:56




$begingroup$
Assume there is no smallest point in the interval $[0,1]$ at which $f$ attains the value $0$. So $forall x_0 in [0,1]| f(x_0) = 0, exists x_1 in [0,1]| f(x_1) = 0, x_1 < x_0$
$endgroup$
– shade4159
Nov 6 '13 at 4:56










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















1












$begingroup$

If there is no smallest root,
then, for any $c > 0$,
there is a root $r$
such that
$0 < r < c$.



Use this to prove that
$f$ is not continuous at zero.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    1












    $begingroup$

    The existence of a root is apparent in the region $(0,1]$ as 1 is a root. So, now that we know the roots exist, we can take the least root in the set $S:={x_imid f(x_i)=0}$ and call that element $x_0$, since the set of roots of a continuous function is closed. Since, for all $xin(0,x_0)$, $f(x)not=0$, $f(0)=1$, $f(x_0)=0$, and $f$ is continuous, all values between $x_0$ and $0$ must be greater than 0.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$





















      1












      $begingroup$

      For a proof by contradiction, assume:
      $$forall x_0 in [0,1] ,| , f(x_0) = 0, exists x_1 in [0,1],|, f(x_1) = 0, x_1 < x_0$$



      Then, since we are given $f$ is continuous on $[0,1]$ and $f(0) > 0$, it should be relatively simple to show a contradiction exists.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$





















        0












        $begingroup$

        Starting from the hypothesis that $f:[0,1]rightarrow mathbb{R}$ is a continuous function (on a compact set $[0,1]$) satisfying $f(0)>0$ and $f(1)=0$ one has in particular that there exist $c,d in [0,1]$ such that
        $displaystyle f(c)=inf_{xin [0,1]} f(x)$ and $displaystyle f(d)=sup_{x in [0,1]}f(x)$.



        In particular, one has the flag of inequalities
        $$f(c)leq f(1)=0<f(0)leq f(d).$$





        The proof that $f(x_0)=0$ for some $0leq x_0<1$ is a direct consequence for the intermediate value theorem for continuous functions. Indeed, if $f(c)=0$ then $x_0$ is a root of the equation $f(x)$ on the interval $[0,x_0]$. Otherwise, one has $f(c)<0<f(0)$ together with the continuity condition assures the existence of $x_0$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ fulfils on the open interval $(0,c)$.





        The proof that the inequality $f(x)>0$ holds on the interval $0leq x<x_0$ is a natural consequence of the continuity of the function on the point $0$.



        In concrete, for every $varepsilon>0$ it is possible to find a $delta>0$ such that for every $x in (-delta,delta)cap [0,x_0)$ there holds



        $$ -varepsilon<f(x)-f(0)<varepsilon.$$



        In particular, for the choice $varepsilon=f(0)$ we then have that $f(x)>0$ in a neighborhood $(0,delta)$ of the interval $[0,x_0)$ ($deltaleq x_0$). This proves that $f(x)>0$ on $(0,x_0)$. Thereby $f(x)>0$ on $[0,x_0)$, as desired.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$













        • $begingroup$
          The existence of $x_0$ with $f(x_0)=0$ is obvious as we may take $x_0=1$. The real challenge is to find $x_0$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ and $f(x)>0$ for $xin[0,x_0)$. And your proof at the end only shows that $f(x) >0$ in $[0,delta)$ and hence wrong. The right answer is given by considering set $A={xmid f(x) =0} $ and then using $x_0=inf,A$.
          $endgroup$
          – Paramanand Singh
          May 25 '18 at 8:11












        • $begingroup$
          Yes! You are indeed right. The set $A=f^{-1}({0})$ is closed. And due to continuity arguments on a compact set so that the existence of $x_0$ is guaranteed.
          $endgroup$
          – Nelson Faustino
          May 25 '18 at 15:01












        Your Answer








        StackExchange.ready(function() {
        var channelOptions = {
        tags: "".split(" "),
        id: "69"
        };
        initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

        StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
        // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
        if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
        StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
        createEditor();
        });
        }
        else {
        createEditor();
        }
        });

        function createEditor() {
        StackExchange.prepareEditor({
        heartbeatType: 'answer',
        autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
        convertImagesToLinks: true,
        noModals: true,
        showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
        reputationToPostImages: 10,
        bindNavPrevention: true,
        postfix: "",
        imageUploader: {
        brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
        contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
        allowUrls: true
        },
        noCode: true, onDemand: true,
        discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
        ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
        });


        }
        });














        draft saved

        draft discarded


















        StackExchange.ready(
        function () {
        StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f553852%2fprove-that-there-is-a-number-x-0-in-0-1-such-that-fx-0-0-and-fx0-f%23new-answer', 'question_page');
        }
        );

        Post as a guest















        Required, but never shown

























        4 Answers
        4






        active

        oldest

        votes








        4 Answers
        4






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes









        1












        $begingroup$

        If there is no smallest root,
        then, for any $c > 0$,
        there is a root $r$
        such that
        $0 < r < c$.



        Use this to prove that
        $f$ is not continuous at zero.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$


















          1












          $begingroup$

          If there is no smallest root,
          then, for any $c > 0$,
          there is a root $r$
          such that
          $0 < r < c$.



          Use this to prove that
          $f$ is not continuous at zero.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$
















            1












            1








            1





            $begingroup$

            If there is no smallest root,
            then, for any $c > 0$,
            there is a root $r$
            such that
            $0 < r < c$.



            Use this to prove that
            $f$ is not continuous at zero.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$



            If there is no smallest root,
            then, for any $c > 0$,
            there is a root $r$
            such that
            $0 < r < c$.



            Use this to prove that
            $f$ is not continuous at zero.







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered Nov 6 '13 at 5:09









            marty cohenmarty cohen

            75.9k549130




            75.9k549130























                1












                $begingroup$

                The existence of a root is apparent in the region $(0,1]$ as 1 is a root. So, now that we know the roots exist, we can take the least root in the set $S:={x_imid f(x_i)=0}$ and call that element $x_0$, since the set of roots of a continuous function is closed. Since, for all $xin(0,x_0)$, $f(x)not=0$, $f(0)=1$, $f(x_0)=0$, and $f$ is continuous, all values between $x_0$ and $0$ must be greater than 0.






                share|cite|improve this answer











                $endgroup$


















                  1












                  $begingroup$

                  The existence of a root is apparent in the region $(0,1]$ as 1 is a root. So, now that we know the roots exist, we can take the least root in the set $S:={x_imid f(x_i)=0}$ and call that element $x_0$, since the set of roots of a continuous function is closed. Since, for all $xin(0,x_0)$, $f(x)not=0$, $f(0)=1$, $f(x_0)=0$, and $f$ is continuous, all values between $x_0$ and $0$ must be greater than 0.






                  share|cite|improve this answer











                  $endgroup$
















                    1












                    1








                    1





                    $begingroup$

                    The existence of a root is apparent in the region $(0,1]$ as 1 is a root. So, now that we know the roots exist, we can take the least root in the set $S:={x_imid f(x_i)=0}$ and call that element $x_0$, since the set of roots of a continuous function is closed. Since, for all $xin(0,x_0)$, $f(x)not=0$, $f(0)=1$, $f(x_0)=0$, and $f$ is continuous, all values between $x_0$ and $0$ must be greater than 0.






                    share|cite|improve this answer











                    $endgroup$



                    The existence of a root is apparent in the region $(0,1]$ as 1 is a root. So, now that we know the roots exist, we can take the least root in the set $S:={x_imid f(x_i)=0}$ and call that element $x_0$, since the set of roots of a continuous function is closed. Since, for all $xin(0,x_0)$, $f(x)not=0$, $f(0)=1$, $f(x_0)=0$, and $f$ is continuous, all values between $x_0$ and $0$ must be greater than 0.







                    share|cite|improve this answer














                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer








                    edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:20









                    Community

                    1




                    1










                    answered Nov 6 '13 at 4:44









                    Tim RatiganTim Ratigan

                    6,2351028




                    6,2351028























                        1












                        $begingroup$

                        For a proof by contradiction, assume:
                        $$forall x_0 in [0,1] ,| , f(x_0) = 0, exists x_1 in [0,1],|, f(x_1) = 0, x_1 < x_0$$



                        Then, since we are given $f$ is continuous on $[0,1]$ and $f(0) > 0$, it should be relatively simple to show a contradiction exists.






                        share|cite|improve this answer









                        $endgroup$


















                          1












                          $begingroup$

                          For a proof by contradiction, assume:
                          $$forall x_0 in [0,1] ,| , f(x_0) = 0, exists x_1 in [0,1],|, f(x_1) = 0, x_1 < x_0$$



                          Then, since we are given $f$ is continuous on $[0,1]$ and $f(0) > 0$, it should be relatively simple to show a contradiction exists.






                          share|cite|improve this answer









                          $endgroup$
















                            1












                            1








                            1





                            $begingroup$

                            For a proof by contradiction, assume:
                            $$forall x_0 in [0,1] ,| , f(x_0) = 0, exists x_1 in [0,1],|, f(x_1) = 0, x_1 < x_0$$



                            Then, since we are given $f$ is continuous on $[0,1]$ and $f(0) > 0$, it should be relatively simple to show a contradiction exists.






                            share|cite|improve this answer









                            $endgroup$



                            For a proof by contradiction, assume:
                            $$forall x_0 in [0,1] ,| , f(x_0) = 0, exists x_1 in [0,1],|, f(x_1) = 0, x_1 < x_0$$



                            Then, since we are given $f$ is continuous on $[0,1]$ and $f(0) > 0$, it should be relatively simple to show a contradiction exists.







                            share|cite|improve this answer












                            share|cite|improve this answer



                            share|cite|improve this answer










                            answered Nov 6 '13 at 5:08









                            shade4159shade4159

                            68749




                            68749























                                0












                                $begingroup$

                                Starting from the hypothesis that $f:[0,1]rightarrow mathbb{R}$ is a continuous function (on a compact set $[0,1]$) satisfying $f(0)>0$ and $f(1)=0$ one has in particular that there exist $c,d in [0,1]$ such that
                                $displaystyle f(c)=inf_{xin [0,1]} f(x)$ and $displaystyle f(d)=sup_{x in [0,1]}f(x)$.



                                In particular, one has the flag of inequalities
                                $$f(c)leq f(1)=0<f(0)leq f(d).$$





                                The proof that $f(x_0)=0$ for some $0leq x_0<1$ is a direct consequence for the intermediate value theorem for continuous functions. Indeed, if $f(c)=0$ then $x_0$ is a root of the equation $f(x)$ on the interval $[0,x_0]$. Otherwise, one has $f(c)<0<f(0)$ together with the continuity condition assures the existence of $x_0$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ fulfils on the open interval $(0,c)$.





                                The proof that the inequality $f(x)>0$ holds on the interval $0leq x<x_0$ is a natural consequence of the continuity of the function on the point $0$.



                                In concrete, for every $varepsilon>0$ it is possible to find a $delta>0$ such that for every $x in (-delta,delta)cap [0,x_0)$ there holds



                                $$ -varepsilon<f(x)-f(0)<varepsilon.$$



                                In particular, for the choice $varepsilon=f(0)$ we then have that $f(x)>0$ in a neighborhood $(0,delta)$ of the interval $[0,x_0)$ ($deltaleq x_0$). This proves that $f(x)>0$ on $(0,x_0)$. Thereby $f(x)>0$ on $[0,x_0)$, as desired.






                                share|cite|improve this answer









                                $endgroup$













                                • $begingroup$
                                  The existence of $x_0$ with $f(x_0)=0$ is obvious as we may take $x_0=1$. The real challenge is to find $x_0$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ and $f(x)>0$ for $xin[0,x_0)$. And your proof at the end only shows that $f(x) >0$ in $[0,delta)$ and hence wrong. The right answer is given by considering set $A={xmid f(x) =0} $ and then using $x_0=inf,A$.
                                  $endgroup$
                                  – Paramanand Singh
                                  May 25 '18 at 8:11












                                • $begingroup$
                                  Yes! You are indeed right. The set $A=f^{-1}({0})$ is closed. And due to continuity arguments on a compact set so that the existence of $x_0$ is guaranteed.
                                  $endgroup$
                                  – Nelson Faustino
                                  May 25 '18 at 15:01
















                                0












                                $begingroup$

                                Starting from the hypothesis that $f:[0,1]rightarrow mathbb{R}$ is a continuous function (on a compact set $[0,1]$) satisfying $f(0)>0$ and $f(1)=0$ one has in particular that there exist $c,d in [0,1]$ such that
                                $displaystyle f(c)=inf_{xin [0,1]} f(x)$ and $displaystyle f(d)=sup_{x in [0,1]}f(x)$.



                                In particular, one has the flag of inequalities
                                $$f(c)leq f(1)=0<f(0)leq f(d).$$





                                The proof that $f(x_0)=0$ for some $0leq x_0<1$ is a direct consequence for the intermediate value theorem for continuous functions. Indeed, if $f(c)=0$ then $x_0$ is a root of the equation $f(x)$ on the interval $[0,x_0]$. Otherwise, one has $f(c)<0<f(0)$ together with the continuity condition assures the existence of $x_0$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ fulfils on the open interval $(0,c)$.





                                The proof that the inequality $f(x)>0$ holds on the interval $0leq x<x_0$ is a natural consequence of the continuity of the function on the point $0$.



                                In concrete, for every $varepsilon>0$ it is possible to find a $delta>0$ such that for every $x in (-delta,delta)cap [0,x_0)$ there holds



                                $$ -varepsilon<f(x)-f(0)<varepsilon.$$



                                In particular, for the choice $varepsilon=f(0)$ we then have that $f(x)>0$ in a neighborhood $(0,delta)$ of the interval $[0,x_0)$ ($deltaleq x_0$). This proves that $f(x)>0$ on $(0,x_0)$. Thereby $f(x)>0$ on $[0,x_0)$, as desired.






                                share|cite|improve this answer









                                $endgroup$













                                • $begingroup$
                                  The existence of $x_0$ with $f(x_0)=0$ is obvious as we may take $x_0=1$. The real challenge is to find $x_0$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ and $f(x)>0$ for $xin[0,x_0)$. And your proof at the end only shows that $f(x) >0$ in $[0,delta)$ and hence wrong. The right answer is given by considering set $A={xmid f(x) =0} $ and then using $x_0=inf,A$.
                                  $endgroup$
                                  – Paramanand Singh
                                  May 25 '18 at 8:11












                                • $begingroup$
                                  Yes! You are indeed right. The set $A=f^{-1}({0})$ is closed. And due to continuity arguments on a compact set so that the existence of $x_0$ is guaranteed.
                                  $endgroup$
                                  – Nelson Faustino
                                  May 25 '18 at 15:01














                                0












                                0








                                0





                                $begingroup$

                                Starting from the hypothesis that $f:[0,1]rightarrow mathbb{R}$ is a continuous function (on a compact set $[0,1]$) satisfying $f(0)>0$ and $f(1)=0$ one has in particular that there exist $c,d in [0,1]$ such that
                                $displaystyle f(c)=inf_{xin [0,1]} f(x)$ and $displaystyle f(d)=sup_{x in [0,1]}f(x)$.



                                In particular, one has the flag of inequalities
                                $$f(c)leq f(1)=0<f(0)leq f(d).$$





                                The proof that $f(x_0)=0$ for some $0leq x_0<1$ is a direct consequence for the intermediate value theorem for continuous functions. Indeed, if $f(c)=0$ then $x_0$ is a root of the equation $f(x)$ on the interval $[0,x_0]$. Otherwise, one has $f(c)<0<f(0)$ together with the continuity condition assures the existence of $x_0$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ fulfils on the open interval $(0,c)$.





                                The proof that the inequality $f(x)>0$ holds on the interval $0leq x<x_0$ is a natural consequence of the continuity of the function on the point $0$.



                                In concrete, for every $varepsilon>0$ it is possible to find a $delta>0$ such that for every $x in (-delta,delta)cap [0,x_0)$ there holds



                                $$ -varepsilon<f(x)-f(0)<varepsilon.$$



                                In particular, for the choice $varepsilon=f(0)$ we then have that $f(x)>0$ in a neighborhood $(0,delta)$ of the interval $[0,x_0)$ ($deltaleq x_0$). This proves that $f(x)>0$ on $(0,x_0)$. Thereby $f(x)>0$ on $[0,x_0)$, as desired.






                                share|cite|improve this answer









                                $endgroup$



                                Starting from the hypothesis that $f:[0,1]rightarrow mathbb{R}$ is a continuous function (on a compact set $[0,1]$) satisfying $f(0)>0$ and $f(1)=0$ one has in particular that there exist $c,d in [0,1]$ such that
                                $displaystyle f(c)=inf_{xin [0,1]} f(x)$ and $displaystyle f(d)=sup_{x in [0,1]}f(x)$.



                                In particular, one has the flag of inequalities
                                $$f(c)leq f(1)=0<f(0)leq f(d).$$





                                The proof that $f(x_0)=0$ for some $0leq x_0<1$ is a direct consequence for the intermediate value theorem for continuous functions. Indeed, if $f(c)=0$ then $x_0$ is a root of the equation $f(x)$ on the interval $[0,x_0]$. Otherwise, one has $f(c)<0<f(0)$ together with the continuity condition assures the existence of $x_0$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ fulfils on the open interval $(0,c)$.





                                The proof that the inequality $f(x)>0$ holds on the interval $0leq x<x_0$ is a natural consequence of the continuity of the function on the point $0$.



                                In concrete, for every $varepsilon>0$ it is possible to find a $delta>0$ such that for every $x in (-delta,delta)cap [0,x_0)$ there holds



                                $$ -varepsilon<f(x)-f(0)<varepsilon.$$



                                In particular, for the choice $varepsilon=f(0)$ we then have that $f(x)>0$ in a neighborhood $(0,delta)$ of the interval $[0,x_0)$ ($deltaleq x_0$). This proves that $f(x)>0$ on $(0,x_0)$. Thereby $f(x)>0$ on $[0,x_0)$, as desired.







                                share|cite|improve this answer












                                share|cite|improve this answer



                                share|cite|improve this answer










                                answered May 24 '18 at 23:08









                                Nelson FaustinoNelson Faustino

                                1427




                                1427












                                • $begingroup$
                                  The existence of $x_0$ with $f(x_0)=0$ is obvious as we may take $x_0=1$. The real challenge is to find $x_0$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ and $f(x)>0$ for $xin[0,x_0)$. And your proof at the end only shows that $f(x) >0$ in $[0,delta)$ and hence wrong. The right answer is given by considering set $A={xmid f(x) =0} $ and then using $x_0=inf,A$.
                                  $endgroup$
                                  – Paramanand Singh
                                  May 25 '18 at 8:11












                                • $begingroup$
                                  Yes! You are indeed right. The set $A=f^{-1}({0})$ is closed. And due to continuity arguments on a compact set so that the existence of $x_0$ is guaranteed.
                                  $endgroup$
                                  – Nelson Faustino
                                  May 25 '18 at 15:01


















                                • $begingroup$
                                  The existence of $x_0$ with $f(x_0)=0$ is obvious as we may take $x_0=1$. The real challenge is to find $x_0$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ and $f(x)>0$ for $xin[0,x_0)$. And your proof at the end only shows that $f(x) >0$ in $[0,delta)$ and hence wrong. The right answer is given by considering set $A={xmid f(x) =0} $ and then using $x_0=inf,A$.
                                  $endgroup$
                                  – Paramanand Singh
                                  May 25 '18 at 8:11












                                • $begingroup$
                                  Yes! You are indeed right. The set $A=f^{-1}({0})$ is closed. And due to continuity arguments on a compact set so that the existence of $x_0$ is guaranteed.
                                  $endgroup$
                                  – Nelson Faustino
                                  May 25 '18 at 15:01
















                                $begingroup$
                                The existence of $x_0$ with $f(x_0)=0$ is obvious as we may take $x_0=1$. The real challenge is to find $x_0$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ and $f(x)>0$ for $xin[0,x_0)$. And your proof at the end only shows that $f(x) >0$ in $[0,delta)$ and hence wrong. The right answer is given by considering set $A={xmid f(x) =0} $ and then using $x_0=inf,A$.
                                $endgroup$
                                – Paramanand Singh
                                May 25 '18 at 8:11






                                $begingroup$
                                The existence of $x_0$ with $f(x_0)=0$ is obvious as we may take $x_0=1$. The real challenge is to find $x_0$ such that $f(x_0)=0$ and $f(x)>0$ for $xin[0,x_0)$. And your proof at the end only shows that $f(x) >0$ in $[0,delta)$ and hence wrong. The right answer is given by considering set $A={xmid f(x) =0} $ and then using $x_0=inf,A$.
                                $endgroup$
                                – Paramanand Singh
                                May 25 '18 at 8:11














                                $begingroup$
                                Yes! You are indeed right. The set $A=f^{-1}({0})$ is closed. And due to continuity arguments on a compact set so that the existence of $x_0$ is guaranteed.
                                $endgroup$
                                – Nelson Faustino
                                May 25 '18 at 15:01




                                $begingroup$
                                Yes! You are indeed right. The set $A=f^{-1}({0})$ is closed. And due to continuity arguments on a compact set so that the existence of $x_0$ is guaranteed.
                                $endgroup$
                                – Nelson Faustino
                                May 25 '18 at 15:01


















                                draft saved

                                draft discarded




















































                                Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                                • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                But avoid



                                • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                                To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                draft saved


                                draft discarded














                                StackExchange.ready(
                                function () {
                                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f553852%2fprove-that-there-is-a-number-x-0-in-0-1-such-that-fx-0-0-and-fx0-f%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                }
                                );

                                Post as a guest















                                Required, but never shown





















































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown

































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown







                                Popular posts from this blog

                                Willebadessen

                                Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten

                                Residenzschloss Arolsen