In all that follows we suppose that is a function of which has a derivative for all values of in question. This assumption of course involves the continuity of .
The meaning of the sign of .
Theorem A. If then for all values of less than but sufficiently near to , and for all values of greater than but sufficiently near to .
For converges to a positive limit as . This can only be the case if and have the same sign for sufficiently small values of , and this is precisely what the theorem states. Of course from a geometrical point of view the result is intuitive, the inequality expressing the fact that the tangent to the curve makes a positive acute angle with the axis of . The reader should formulate for himself the corresponding theorem for the case in which .
An immediate deduction from Theorem A is the following important theorem, generally known as Rolle’s Theorem. In view of the great importance of this theorem it may be well to repeat that its truth depends on the assumption of the existence of the derivative for all values of in question.
Theorem B. If and , then there must be at least one value of which lies between and and for which .
There are two possibilities: the first is that is equal to zero throughout the whole interval . In this case is also equal to zero throughout the interval. If on the other hand is not always equal to zero, then there must be values of for which is positive or negative. Let us suppose, for example, that is sometimes positive. Then, by Theorem 2 of § 102, there is a value of , not equal to or , and such that is at least as great as the value of at any other point in the interval. And must be equal to zero. For if it were positive then would, by Theorem A, be greater than for values of greater than but sufficiently near to , so that there would certainly be values of greater than . Similarly we can show that cannot be negative.
Cor 1. If , then there must be a value of between and such that .
We have only to put and apply Theorem B to .
Cor 2. If for all values of in a certain interval, then is an increasing function of , in the stricter sense of § 95, throughout that interval.
Let and be two values of in the interval in question, and . We have to show that . In the first place cannot be equal to ; for, if this were so, there would, by Theorem B, be a value of between and for which . Nor can be greater than . For, since is positive, is, by Theorem A, greater than when is greater than and sufficiently near to . It follows that there is a value of between and such that ; and so, by Theorem B, that there is a value of between and for which .
Cor 3. The conclusion of Cor. still holds if the interval considered includes a finite number of exceptional values of for which does not exist, or is not positive, provided is continuous even for these exceptional values of .
It is plainly sufficient to consider the case in which there is one exceptional value of only, and that corresponding to an end of the interval, say to . If , we can choose so that , and throughout , so that , by Cor. 2. All that remains is to prove that . Now decreases steadily, and in the stricter sense, as decreases towards , and so
Cor 4. If throughout the interval , and , then is positive throughout the interval .
The reader should compare the second of these corollaries very carefully with Theorem A. If, as in Theorem A, we assume only that is positive at a single point , then we can prove that when and are sufficiently near to and . For and , by Theorem A. But this does not prove that there is any interval including throughout which is a steadily increasing function, for the assumption that and lie on opposite sides of is essential to our conclusion. We shall return to this point, and illustrate it by an actual example, in a moment (§ 124).