Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!oliveb!pyramid!prls!philabs!linus!mbunix!bwk
From: bwk@mbunix.mitre.org (Barry W. Kort)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: Rolle's Theorem.
Summary: Rolling right along.
Keywords: Completeness
Message-ID: <44697@linus.UUCP>
Date: 10 Feb 89 19:37:05 GMT
References: <1706@tank.uchicago.edu> <9526@ihlpb.ATT.COM> <kXuo9-y00V4=88uEVm@andrew.cmu.edu> <2053@buengc.BU.EDU> <0XvA3xy00Xoj82iV53@andrew.cmu.edu> <2073@buengc.BU.EDU> <9551@ihlpb.ATT.COM> <849@csd4.milw.wisc.edu>
Sender: news@linus.UUCP
Reply-To: bwk@mbunix.mitre.org (Barry Kort)
Organization: The Gallimaufrey, Atsea, UK
Lines: 21

In article <849@csd4.milw.wisc.edu> markh@csd4.milw.wisc.edu
(Mark William Hopkins) writes:

>Rolle's Theorem goes like this:
>
>     Given a function f:[a, b] --> REAL
>     * with f DIFFERENTIABLE on the INTERIOR of [a, b]: (a, b) 
>     * and CONTINUOUS on the BOUNDARY: {a, b}, 
>
>     there is a point, c, in the interior (a, b) 
>     * at which the derivative of f vanishes.  

Mark, just so nobody falls off the boat, let me add the missing
antecedent:

      * and f(a) = f(b),

which should be inserted in the blank space in your statement
of the theorem.

--Barry Kort