7
$\begingroup$

I'm a bit embarrassed to admit that:

a) This is a rather unmotivated question.

b) I can't remember whether or not I've asked this before, but searching doesn't seem to turn anything up so ...

Consider some "shape" function $\phi: \mathbf{R} \to \mathbf{R}$. Then given some function $f: \mathbf{R} \to \mathbf{R}$, one can ask whether the "difference quotient",

$\lim_{y\to x} \frac{f(y)-f(x)}{\phi(y-x)}$,

exists at various points $x$. Letting $\phi(x) = x$ corresponds to taking normal derivatives, and intuitively when the limit exists this means that near $x$, the function $f$ "looks like" $\phi$ does near 0.

However, if the ratio $\phi(x)/x$ is not bounded above or away from 0 as $x\to 0$ (I'm mostly thinking of the case when it is neither, so that $\phi$ is "wildly oscillating" in some sense), then anywhere the above limit exists and is nonzero, the function $f$ is necessarily non-differentiable.

My question: If $\phi$ is some wildly oscillating function as described above (pick your favorite), can there be an $f$ for which this limit exists everywhere?

(Edit: I suppose I really want $\phi$ and $f$ to be continuous functions.)

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
7
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Do you want the limit to be nonzero almost everywhere? $\endgroup$
    – Douglas Zare
    Mar 15, 2010 at 22:50
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ How about taking $\phi$ to be a discontinuous additive function and $f=\phi$? $\endgroup$
    – Jonas Meyer
    Mar 15, 2010 at 22:51
  • $\begingroup$ @Douglas Zare Not necessarily. Is there an easy (non-constant) example if it isn't required? @Jonas Meyer Good point. I guess I really want $\phi$ to be continuous, and $f$ to be a continuous nowhere-differentiable function. I really should have put the adjective continuous in a lot of places. $\endgroup$
    – Mike Hall
    Mar 16, 2010 at 0:32
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Mike, Any $C^{0,\alpha}$-function $f$ and $\phi(x)=|x|^\beta$ for $0<\beta<\alpha<1$ will do. $\endgroup$
    – Anton Petrunin
    Mar 16, 2010 at 1:12
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ But Anton, I don't think that meets the "wildly oscillating" criterion. $\endgroup$
    – Jonas Meyer
    Mar 16, 2010 at 1:18

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
6
$\begingroup$

Assume WLOG that $\phi(x)>0$ when $x>0$. Since the limit described exists for all $x$ in the source of $f$. We get for any $x$ the bound:

$f(x+\delta)-f(x) \leq C\phi(\delta)$

for $0 < \delta < \delta_0$ for some $C,\delta_0>0$ which may depend on $x$.

diving by $\delta$ we get by the assumptions on $\phi$ that

$\underline{\lim}_{\delta \to 0} ( \frac{f(x+\delta) - f(x)}{\delta}) \leq 0$

This is one the four derivatives of $f$, and proposition 2 chapter 5 in Real Analysis by H.L. Royden states that if $f$ is continuous then it is (non-strictly) decreasing. Similar for increasing. So $f$ is constant.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ “Assume WLOG that $\phi(x)>0$ when $x>0$.” Why? M Hall specifically wants to consider the ‘wildly oscillatory’ case. (I am supposing that $x \mapsto x\sin(1/x)$ is wildly oscillatory, anyway.) $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    May 9, 2011 at 2:13
  • $\begingroup$ Wildly oscilating refers to $\phi(x)/x$ being both close to zero and unbounded for very small $x$. The assumption WLOG refers to the fact that the limit would not exist if $\phi$ were not strictly positive or negative in a small $(0,\epsilon)$ (assuming continuity). $\endgroup$
    – Thomas Kragh
    May 27, 2011 at 15:12

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.