Reason: Proof of lem:derivative-continuity-rules-1d-2026a by epsilon-delta arguments from the derivative and continuity definitions. Approved by Aaron.
Proof
Throughout, differentiability at an interior point x0 of I is the condition of Derivative at an Interior Point; its admissible increments are the real numbers h with x0+h∈I. Continuity is the condition of Continuity at a Point. We repeatedly use the triangle inequality for real numbers.
Claim 1. Write L=f′(x0). Applying the definition of the derivative with ε=1, there is δ0>0 such that for every admissible h with 0<∣h∣<δ0,
hf(x0+h)−f(x0)−L<1,
hence ∣f(x0+h)−f(x0)∣≤(∣L∣+1)∣h∣. Let ε>0 and put δ=min(δ0,ε/(∣L∣+1)). For x∈I with ∣x−x0∣<δ: if x=x0 then ∣f(x)−f(x0)∣=0<ε; otherwise x=x0+h with h=x−x0 admissible and 0<∣h∣<δ, so
∣f(x)−f(x0)∣≤(∣L∣+1)∣h∣<ε.
Hence f is continuous at x0.
Claim 2. Let ε>0. Choose δ1>0 for f and δ2>0 for g so that the respective difference quotients at x0 are within ε/2 of f′(x0) and of g′(x0) for admissible h with 0<∣h∣<δ1 (respectively δ2). The difference quotient of f+g at x0 is the sum of the two difference quotients, so for admissible h with 0<∣h∣<min(δ1,δ2),
If f is constant, every difference quotient equals 0, so the defining condition holds with derivative 0 for every δ; in particular for c=0 the function cf is the constant 0 and (cf)′(x0)=0=cf′(x0). For c=0, choose δ3>0 so that the difference quotient of f is within ε/∣c∣ of f′(x0) for admissible 0<∣h∣<δ3; multiplying by c shows that the difference quotient of cf is within ε of cf′(x0).
Claim 3. By Claim 1 applied to g, with ε=1 in the continuity condition there is δg>0 such that ∣g(x0+h)−g(x0)∣<1, and hence ∣g(x0+h)∣≤K with K=∣g(x0)∣+1≥1, for every admissible h with ∣h∣<δg. For admissible h=0, the identity
Let ε>0. Choose δa>0 so that the difference quotient of f is within ε/(3K) of f′(x0) for admissible 0<∣h∣<δa; choose δb>0 so that ∣g(x0+h)−g(x0)∣<ε/(3(∣f′(x0)∣+1)) for admissible ∣h∣<δb (possible by Claim 1 applied to g); choose δc>0 so that the difference quotient of g is within ε/(3(∣f(x0)∣+1)) of g′(x0) for admissible 0<∣h∣<δc. For admissible h with 0<∣h∣<min(δg,δa,δb,δc), the three terms on the right of the last display are bounded in absolute value by ε/3 each, so the difference quotient of fg is within ε of f′(x0)g(x0)+f(x0)g′(x0). This proves the product rule.
Claim 4. Let ε>0. For φ+ψ: choose δ1,δ2>0 with ∣φ(x)−φ(x0)∣<ε/2 for all x∈E with ∣x−x0∣<δ1, and ∣ψ(x)−ψ(x0)∣<ε/2 for all x∈E with ∣x−x0∣<δ2; then for x∈E with ∣x−x0∣<min(δ1,δ2),
Choose δ2>0 so that ∣ψ(x)−ψ(x0)∣<min(1,2(∣φ(x0)∣+1)ε) for x∈E with ∣x−x0∣<δ2, so that also ∣ψ(x)∣≤∣ψ(x0)∣+1 there, and choose δ1>0 so that ∣φ(x)−φ(x0)∣<2(∣ψ(x0)∣+1)ε for x∈E with ∣x−x0∣<δ1. For x∈E with ∣x−x0∣<min(δ1,δ2), the first term is smaller than ε/2 in absolute value and the second is at most ∣φ(x0)∣⋅2(∣φ(x0)∣+1)ε<ε/2, so ∣φ(x)ψ(x)−φ(x0)ψ(x0)∣<ε. Finally, for a constant function the difference of values at x and x0 is 0 for all x∈E, so any δ works. ■