Proving differentiability of a piecewise function [closed]












0














Let $pinmathbb R$, and let $f:mathbb Rtomathbb R$ be defined by
$$begin{cases}x^p&xinmathbb Q\0&xinmathbb Rsetminusmathbb Qend{cases}$$
For what values of $p$ is $f$ differentiable at $0$?



Would this just be a direct proof of differentiability (i.e. using the limit definition of the derivative)? Don't really know how to go about proving this rigorously.










share|cite|improve this question















closed as off-topic by GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會, Saad, Paul Frost, José Carlos Santos, RRL Nov 30 '18 at 14:41


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會, Saad, Paul Frost, José Carlos Santos, RRL

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.













  • What do you know about differentiability? Can you show us your work?
    – GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
    Nov 30 '18 at 10:51
















0














Let $pinmathbb R$, and let $f:mathbb Rtomathbb R$ be defined by
$$begin{cases}x^p&xinmathbb Q\0&xinmathbb Rsetminusmathbb Qend{cases}$$
For what values of $p$ is $f$ differentiable at $0$?



Would this just be a direct proof of differentiability (i.e. using the limit definition of the derivative)? Don't really know how to go about proving this rigorously.










share|cite|improve this question















closed as off-topic by GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會, Saad, Paul Frost, José Carlos Santos, RRL Nov 30 '18 at 14:41


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會, Saad, Paul Frost, José Carlos Santos, RRL

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.













  • What do you know about differentiability? Can you show us your work?
    – GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
    Nov 30 '18 at 10:51














0












0








0







Let $pinmathbb R$, and let $f:mathbb Rtomathbb R$ be defined by
$$begin{cases}x^p&xinmathbb Q\0&xinmathbb Rsetminusmathbb Qend{cases}$$
For what values of $p$ is $f$ differentiable at $0$?



Would this just be a direct proof of differentiability (i.e. using the limit definition of the derivative)? Don't really know how to go about proving this rigorously.










share|cite|improve this question















Let $pinmathbb R$, and let $f:mathbb Rtomathbb R$ be defined by
$$begin{cases}x^p&xinmathbb Q\0&xinmathbb Rsetminusmathbb Qend{cases}$$
For what values of $p$ is $f$ differentiable at $0$?



Would this just be a direct proof of differentiability (i.e. using the limit definition of the derivative)? Don't really know how to go about proving this rigorously.







real-analysis






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Nov 30 '18 at 11:22









Lorenzo B.

1,8402520




1,8402520










asked Nov 30 '18 at 10:49









NickNick

344




344




closed as off-topic by GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會, Saad, Paul Frost, José Carlos Santos, RRL Nov 30 '18 at 14:41


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會, Saad, Paul Frost, José Carlos Santos, RRL

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.




closed as off-topic by GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會, Saad, Paul Frost, José Carlos Santos, RRL Nov 30 '18 at 14:41


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會, Saad, Paul Frost, José Carlos Santos, RRL

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.












  • What do you know about differentiability? Can you show us your work?
    – GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
    Nov 30 '18 at 10:51


















  • What do you know about differentiability? Can you show us your work?
    – GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
    Nov 30 '18 at 10:51
















What do you know about differentiability? Can you show us your work?
– GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
Nov 30 '18 at 10:51




What do you know about differentiability? Can you show us your work?
– GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
Nov 30 '18 at 10:51










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















1














Yes, with the definition of the derivative:



Let $q(x):= frac{f(x)-f(0)}{x-0}$ for $x ne 0$.



Then $q(x)=x^{p-1}$ if $x in mathbb Q$ and $q(x)=0$ if $x in mathbb R setminus mathbb Q$.



Case 1: $p=1$. Then $q(x)=1$ if $x in mathbb Q$. Can you see that $ lim_{x to 0}q(x)$ does not exist ?



Case 2: $p>1$. Then we have $|q(x)| le |x|^{p-1}$ for all $x$. Can you see that $ lim_{x to 0}q(x)=0$ ?



Case 3: $p<1$. It is now your turn to investigate the existence of $ lim_{x to 0}q(x)$ .






share|cite|improve this answer





























    0














    First you need continuity in $0$. If $p<0$ then the function is not continuous in zero since $$a_n={pi over n}\b_n={1over n}$$while both $a_n ,b_n$ tend to $0$ we have $$f(a_n)=0to 0\f(b_n)=({1over n})^{p}=n^{-p}to infty$$since $p<0$. Also $p=0$ is invalid since $f(a_n)=0$ and $f(b_n)=1$. Therefore we need $p>0$. After attaining this primary result, now we apply the definition of differentiability in $0$ for which$$f'(0)=lim_{xto 0} {f(x)over x}$$defining the same $a_n$ and $b_n$ we have $$f'(a_n)=0$$and $$f'(b_n)=lim_{xto 0}x^{p-1}=0$$which imposes that $p>1$ with the same argument. Therefore the final answer would be $p>1$.






    share|cite|improve this answer




























      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes








      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      1














      Yes, with the definition of the derivative:



      Let $q(x):= frac{f(x)-f(0)}{x-0}$ for $x ne 0$.



      Then $q(x)=x^{p-1}$ if $x in mathbb Q$ and $q(x)=0$ if $x in mathbb R setminus mathbb Q$.



      Case 1: $p=1$. Then $q(x)=1$ if $x in mathbb Q$. Can you see that $ lim_{x to 0}q(x)$ does not exist ?



      Case 2: $p>1$. Then we have $|q(x)| le |x|^{p-1}$ for all $x$. Can you see that $ lim_{x to 0}q(x)=0$ ?



      Case 3: $p<1$. It is now your turn to investigate the existence of $ lim_{x to 0}q(x)$ .






      share|cite|improve this answer


























        1














        Yes, with the definition of the derivative:



        Let $q(x):= frac{f(x)-f(0)}{x-0}$ for $x ne 0$.



        Then $q(x)=x^{p-1}$ if $x in mathbb Q$ and $q(x)=0$ if $x in mathbb R setminus mathbb Q$.



        Case 1: $p=1$. Then $q(x)=1$ if $x in mathbb Q$. Can you see that $ lim_{x to 0}q(x)$ does not exist ?



        Case 2: $p>1$. Then we have $|q(x)| le |x|^{p-1}$ for all $x$. Can you see that $ lim_{x to 0}q(x)=0$ ?



        Case 3: $p<1$. It is now your turn to investigate the existence of $ lim_{x to 0}q(x)$ .






        share|cite|improve this answer
























          1












          1








          1






          Yes, with the definition of the derivative:



          Let $q(x):= frac{f(x)-f(0)}{x-0}$ for $x ne 0$.



          Then $q(x)=x^{p-1}$ if $x in mathbb Q$ and $q(x)=0$ if $x in mathbb R setminus mathbb Q$.



          Case 1: $p=1$. Then $q(x)=1$ if $x in mathbb Q$. Can you see that $ lim_{x to 0}q(x)$ does not exist ?



          Case 2: $p>1$. Then we have $|q(x)| le |x|^{p-1}$ for all $x$. Can you see that $ lim_{x to 0}q(x)=0$ ?



          Case 3: $p<1$. It is now your turn to investigate the existence of $ lim_{x to 0}q(x)$ .






          share|cite|improve this answer












          Yes, with the definition of the derivative:



          Let $q(x):= frac{f(x)-f(0)}{x-0}$ for $x ne 0$.



          Then $q(x)=x^{p-1}$ if $x in mathbb Q$ and $q(x)=0$ if $x in mathbb R setminus mathbb Q$.



          Case 1: $p=1$. Then $q(x)=1$ if $x in mathbb Q$. Can you see that $ lim_{x to 0}q(x)$ does not exist ?



          Case 2: $p>1$. Then we have $|q(x)| le |x|^{p-1}$ for all $x$. Can you see that $ lim_{x to 0}q(x)=0$ ?



          Case 3: $p<1$. It is now your turn to investigate the existence of $ lim_{x to 0}q(x)$ .







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Nov 30 '18 at 11:04









          FredFred

          44.3k1845




          44.3k1845























              0














              First you need continuity in $0$. If $p<0$ then the function is not continuous in zero since $$a_n={pi over n}\b_n={1over n}$$while both $a_n ,b_n$ tend to $0$ we have $$f(a_n)=0to 0\f(b_n)=({1over n})^{p}=n^{-p}to infty$$since $p<0$. Also $p=0$ is invalid since $f(a_n)=0$ and $f(b_n)=1$. Therefore we need $p>0$. After attaining this primary result, now we apply the definition of differentiability in $0$ for which$$f'(0)=lim_{xto 0} {f(x)over x}$$defining the same $a_n$ and $b_n$ we have $$f'(a_n)=0$$and $$f'(b_n)=lim_{xto 0}x^{p-1}=0$$which imposes that $p>1$ with the same argument. Therefore the final answer would be $p>1$.






              share|cite|improve this answer


























                0














                First you need continuity in $0$. If $p<0$ then the function is not continuous in zero since $$a_n={pi over n}\b_n={1over n}$$while both $a_n ,b_n$ tend to $0$ we have $$f(a_n)=0to 0\f(b_n)=({1over n})^{p}=n^{-p}to infty$$since $p<0$. Also $p=0$ is invalid since $f(a_n)=0$ and $f(b_n)=1$. Therefore we need $p>0$. After attaining this primary result, now we apply the definition of differentiability in $0$ for which$$f'(0)=lim_{xto 0} {f(x)over x}$$defining the same $a_n$ and $b_n$ we have $$f'(a_n)=0$$and $$f'(b_n)=lim_{xto 0}x^{p-1}=0$$which imposes that $p>1$ with the same argument. Therefore the final answer would be $p>1$.






                share|cite|improve this answer
























                  0












                  0








                  0






                  First you need continuity in $0$. If $p<0$ then the function is not continuous in zero since $$a_n={pi over n}\b_n={1over n}$$while both $a_n ,b_n$ tend to $0$ we have $$f(a_n)=0to 0\f(b_n)=({1over n})^{p}=n^{-p}to infty$$since $p<0$. Also $p=0$ is invalid since $f(a_n)=0$ and $f(b_n)=1$. Therefore we need $p>0$. After attaining this primary result, now we apply the definition of differentiability in $0$ for which$$f'(0)=lim_{xto 0} {f(x)over x}$$defining the same $a_n$ and $b_n$ we have $$f'(a_n)=0$$and $$f'(b_n)=lim_{xto 0}x^{p-1}=0$$which imposes that $p>1$ with the same argument. Therefore the final answer would be $p>1$.






                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  First you need continuity in $0$. If $p<0$ then the function is not continuous in zero since $$a_n={pi over n}\b_n={1over n}$$while both $a_n ,b_n$ tend to $0$ we have $$f(a_n)=0to 0\f(b_n)=({1over n})^{p}=n^{-p}to infty$$since $p<0$. Also $p=0$ is invalid since $f(a_n)=0$ and $f(b_n)=1$. Therefore we need $p>0$. After attaining this primary result, now we apply the definition of differentiability in $0$ for which$$f'(0)=lim_{xto 0} {f(x)over x}$$defining the same $a_n$ and $b_n$ we have $$f'(a_n)=0$$and $$f'(b_n)=lim_{xto 0}x^{p-1}=0$$which imposes that $p>1$ with the same argument. Therefore the final answer would be $p>1$.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Nov 30 '18 at 11:10









                  Mostafa AyazMostafa Ayaz

                  14.2k3937




                  14.2k3937















                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Probability when a professor distributes a quiz and homework assignment to a class of n students.

                      Aardman Animations

                      Are they similar matrix