Do there exist functions $F,G$ on $[0,1]$ with $0\le F,G< 1$, such that for all $x, y\in [0,1]$ with $x+y\le 1$, the following hold?

1) $G(x)\le x$,

2) $G(1)<1$,

3) $F(x)>0$ if $x>0$,

4) $\min(y,F(x)) \le G(x+y)-G(x)$.

  • $\begingroup$ The comments above are superseded by edits. $\endgroup$ – Yaakov Baruch Nov 22 '18 at 23:32
  • $\begingroup$ Is $F$ allowed to be discontinuous? $\endgroup$ – Reid Barton Nov 23 '18 at 0:14
  • $\begingroup$ What would obstruct G from being x up to 1/2, and then (x+3/2)/4 afterwards? (Answer: slope of 1/4 is too small.).Gerhard "There Should Be Enough F" Paseman, 2018.11.22. $\endgroup$ – Gerhard Paseman Nov 23 '18 at 0:24
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, $F$ (and $G$) can be discontinuous. $\endgroup$ – Yaakov Baruch Nov 23 '18 at 0:26

$\newcommand{\de}{\delta} \newcommand{\vp}{\varepsilon}$

No such functions $F,G$ exist.

Indeed, let $\vp_x:=F(x)$, so that, by property 3), $\vp_x>0$ for all $x\in(0,1]$. Take any $\de\in(0,1)$ and let \begin{equation} E:=E_\de:=\{x\in[\de,1]\colon\forall y\in[\de,x]\ \, G(y)\ge G(\de)+y-\de\}. \end{equation} Note that $\de\in E$. So, $E$ is a nonempty interval of the form $[\de,s]$ or $[\de,s)$ for some $s\in[\de,1]$.

If $E=[\de,s)$, then $s>\de$, because $E$ is nonempty. Also, by property 4), $G$ is nondecreasing. So, if $E=[\de,s)$, then \begin{equation} G(s)\ge G(s-)\ge\lim_{y\uparrow s}[G(\de)+y-\de]=G(\de)+s-\de, \end{equation} so that $s\in E$ and $E=[\de,s]$. Thus, in all cases, $E=[\de,s]$.

If $s\ne1$, then $s\in[\de,1)\subset(0,1)$. So, $\eta_s:=\vp_s\wedge(1-s)>0$ and, by property 4), for all $h\in(0,\eta_s]$ we have $G(s+h)\ge G(s)+h\ge G(\de)+s-\de+h$, so that $s+h\in E$ for all $h\in(0,\eta_s]$, which contradicts the fact that $E=[\de,s]$.

So, $s=1$, $E=[\de,1]$, and hence $G(1)\ge G(\de)+1-\de\ge1-\de$. Since $\de$ was an arbitrary number in $(0,1)$, we have $G(1)\ge1$, which contradicts property 2).

Thus, no such functions $F,G$ exist. One may also note that property 1) was not needed or used here.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ For those, like me, not used to the notation, notice that $a\wedge b$ above means $\min(a,b)$. $\endgroup$ – Yaakov Baruch Nov 23 '18 at 8:52
  • $\begingroup$ In lattice theory en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lattice_(order), the notation $a\wedge b$ is standard. It has twice as few characters (counting $\min$ as one character) as $\min(a,b)$ does. When one writes by hand, its $3$ versus $8$ characters. $\endgroup$ – Iosif Pinelis Nov 25 '18 at 21:49

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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