How to “see” discontinuity of second derivative from graph of function











up vote
16
down vote

favorite
11












Suppose we have a real function $ f: mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ that is two times differentiable and we draw its graph ${(x,f(x)), x in mathbb{R} } $. We know, for example, that when the first derivative is not continuous at a point we then have an "corner" in the graph. How about a discontinuity of $f''(x)$ at a point $x_0$ though? Can we spot that just by drawing the graph of $f(x)$ -not drawing the graph of the first derivative and noticing it has an "corner" at $x_0$, that's cheating. What about discontinuities of higher derivatives, which will of course be way harder to "see"?










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 2




    It's likely that you actually have something else that you are thinking of and not what you ask. For example, you might be thinking that $|x|$ has discontinuous derivative, but that is not true. Actually, $|x|$ has no derivative at $0$ at all. Could you name from top of your head a differentiable function on whole $mathbb R$, but it's derivative not continuous? What you probably have in mind is $n$ times differentiable, but not $n+1$ times.
    – Ennar
    Nov 6 at 21:00












  • Yeah I might have mistakenly (?) said discontinuous at a point meaning either undefined (which is what the answers cover) or defined but discontinuous (so any examples on this?).
    – Dimitris
    Nov 6 at 21:12






  • 2




    Defined but discontinuous is not as easy to find as it might seem. The problem is that derivatives, even though not necessarily continuous, still have intermediate value property, so functions with jump discontinuities are not derivatives. Classic example of differentiable function with discontinuous derivative is $x^2sin(1/x)$ for $x>0$, and $0$ otherwise. Plot it and tell me if you can spot that the derivative is discontinuous :)
    – Ennar
    Nov 6 at 21:16










  • I don't think you can see it, but you can feel it. The second derivative is acceleration, or force. If you're cruising down the freeway and then step on the gas (maybe you're passing someone), your distance ($f(t)$) and speed ($f^prime(x)$) are both continuous, but your acceleration ($f^{primeprime}(x)$) just had a jump discontinuity.
    – JonathanZ
    Nov 7 at 21:29








  • 1




    @CarstenS Sure, but if I remember correctly, cubic splines have jumps in the third derivative and the junction points
    – martini
    Nov 7 at 22:36















up vote
16
down vote

favorite
11












Suppose we have a real function $ f: mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ that is two times differentiable and we draw its graph ${(x,f(x)), x in mathbb{R} } $. We know, for example, that when the first derivative is not continuous at a point we then have an "corner" in the graph. How about a discontinuity of $f''(x)$ at a point $x_0$ though? Can we spot that just by drawing the graph of $f(x)$ -not drawing the graph of the first derivative and noticing it has an "corner" at $x_0$, that's cheating. What about discontinuities of higher derivatives, which will of course be way harder to "see"?










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 2




    It's likely that you actually have something else that you are thinking of and not what you ask. For example, you might be thinking that $|x|$ has discontinuous derivative, but that is not true. Actually, $|x|$ has no derivative at $0$ at all. Could you name from top of your head a differentiable function on whole $mathbb R$, but it's derivative not continuous? What you probably have in mind is $n$ times differentiable, but not $n+1$ times.
    – Ennar
    Nov 6 at 21:00












  • Yeah I might have mistakenly (?) said discontinuous at a point meaning either undefined (which is what the answers cover) or defined but discontinuous (so any examples on this?).
    – Dimitris
    Nov 6 at 21:12






  • 2




    Defined but discontinuous is not as easy to find as it might seem. The problem is that derivatives, even though not necessarily continuous, still have intermediate value property, so functions with jump discontinuities are not derivatives. Classic example of differentiable function with discontinuous derivative is $x^2sin(1/x)$ for $x>0$, and $0$ otherwise. Plot it and tell me if you can spot that the derivative is discontinuous :)
    – Ennar
    Nov 6 at 21:16










  • I don't think you can see it, but you can feel it. The second derivative is acceleration, or force. If you're cruising down the freeway and then step on the gas (maybe you're passing someone), your distance ($f(t)$) and speed ($f^prime(x)$) are both continuous, but your acceleration ($f^{primeprime}(x)$) just had a jump discontinuity.
    – JonathanZ
    Nov 7 at 21:29








  • 1




    @CarstenS Sure, but if I remember correctly, cubic splines have jumps in the third derivative and the junction points
    – martini
    Nov 7 at 22:36













up vote
16
down vote

favorite
11









up vote
16
down vote

favorite
11






11





Suppose we have a real function $ f: mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ that is two times differentiable and we draw its graph ${(x,f(x)), x in mathbb{R} } $. We know, for example, that when the first derivative is not continuous at a point we then have an "corner" in the graph. How about a discontinuity of $f''(x)$ at a point $x_0$ though? Can we spot that just by drawing the graph of $f(x)$ -not drawing the graph of the first derivative and noticing it has an "corner" at $x_0$, that's cheating. What about discontinuities of higher derivatives, which will of course be way harder to "see"?










share|cite|improve this question















Suppose we have a real function $ f: mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ that is two times differentiable and we draw its graph ${(x,f(x)), x in mathbb{R} } $. We know, for example, that when the first derivative is not continuous at a point we then have an "corner" in the graph. How about a discontinuity of $f''(x)$ at a point $x_0$ though? Can we spot that just by drawing the graph of $f(x)$ -not drawing the graph of the first derivative and noticing it has an "corner" at $x_0$, that's cheating. What about discontinuities of higher derivatives, which will of course be way harder to "see"?







real-analysis functions derivatives






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Nov 6 at 19:22

























asked Nov 6 at 19:04









Dimitris

6121619




6121619








  • 2




    It's likely that you actually have something else that you are thinking of and not what you ask. For example, you might be thinking that $|x|$ has discontinuous derivative, but that is not true. Actually, $|x|$ has no derivative at $0$ at all. Could you name from top of your head a differentiable function on whole $mathbb R$, but it's derivative not continuous? What you probably have in mind is $n$ times differentiable, but not $n+1$ times.
    – Ennar
    Nov 6 at 21:00












  • Yeah I might have mistakenly (?) said discontinuous at a point meaning either undefined (which is what the answers cover) or defined but discontinuous (so any examples on this?).
    – Dimitris
    Nov 6 at 21:12






  • 2




    Defined but discontinuous is not as easy to find as it might seem. The problem is that derivatives, even though not necessarily continuous, still have intermediate value property, so functions with jump discontinuities are not derivatives. Classic example of differentiable function with discontinuous derivative is $x^2sin(1/x)$ for $x>0$, and $0$ otherwise. Plot it and tell me if you can spot that the derivative is discontinuous :)
    – Ennar
    Nov 6 at 21:16










  • I don't think you can see it, but you can feel it. The second derivative is acceleration, or force. If you're cruising down the freeway and then step on the gas (maybe you're passing someone), your distance ($f(t)$) and speed ($f^prime(x)$) are both continuous, but your acceleration ($f^{primeprime}(x)$) just had a jump discontinuity.
    – JonathanZ
    Nov 7 at 21:29








  • 1




    @CarstenS Sure, but if I remember correctly, cubic splines have jumps in the third derivative and the junction points
    – martini
    Nov 7 at 22:36














  • 2




    It's likely that you actually have something else that you are thinking of and not what you ask. For example, you might be thinking that $|x|$ has discontinuous derivative, but that is not true. Actually, $|x|$ has no derivative at $0$ at all. Could you name from top of your head a differentiable function on whole $mathbb R$, but it's derivative not continuous? What you probably have in mind is $n$ times differentiable, but not $n+1$ times.
    – Ennar
    Nov 6 at 21:00












  • Yeah I might have mistakenly (?) said discontinuous at a point meaning either undefined (which is what the answers cover) or defined but discontinuous (so any examples on this?).
    – Dimitris
    Nov 6 at 21:12






  • 2




    Defined but discontinuous is not as easy to find as it might seem. The problem is that derivatives, even though not necessarily continuous, still have intermediate value property, so functions with jump discontinuities are not derivatives. Classic example of differentiable function with discontinuous derivative is $x^2sin(1/x)$ for $x>0$, and $0$ otherwise. Plot it and tell me if you can spot that the derivative is discontinuous :)
    – Ennar
    Nov 6 at 21:16










  • I don't think you can see it, but you can feel it. The second derivative is acceleration, or force. If you're cruising down the freeway and then step on the gas (maybe you're passing someone), your distance ($f(t)$) and speed ($f^prime(x)$) are both continuous, but your acceleration ($f^{primeprime}(x)$) just had a jump discontinuity.
    – JonathanZ
    Nov 7 at 21:29








  • 1




    @CarstenS Sure, but if I remember correctly, cubic splines have jumps in the third derivative and the junction points
    – martini
    Nov 7 at 22:36








2




2




It's likely that you actually have something else that you are thinking of and not what you ask. For example, you might be thinking that $|x|$ has discontinuous derivative, but that is not true. Actually, $|x|$ has no derivative at $0$ at all. Could you name from top of your head a differentiable function on whole $mathbb R$, but it's derivative not continuous? What you probably have in mind is $n$ times differentiable, but not $n+1$ times.
– Ennar
Nov 6 at 21:00






It's likely that you actually have something else that you are thinking of and not what you ask. For example, you might be thinking that $|x|$ has discontinuous derivative, but that is not true. Actually, $|x|$ has no derivative at $0$ at all. Could you name from top of your head a differentiable function on whole $mathbb R$, but it's derivative not continuous? What you probably have in mind is $n$ times differentiable, but not $n+1$ times.
– Ennar
Nov 6 at 21:00














Yeah I might have mistakenly (?) said discontinuous at a point meaning either undefined (which is what the answers cover) or defined but discontinuous (so any examples on this?).
– Dimitris
Nov 6 at 21:12




Yeah I might have mistakenly (?) said discontinuous at a point meaning either undefined (which is what the answers cover) or defined but discontinuous (so any examples on this?).
– Dimitris
Nov 6 at 21:12




2




2




Defined but discontinuous is not as easy to find as it might seem. The problem is that derivatives, even though not necessarily continuous, still have intermediate value property, so functions with jump discontinuities are not derivatives. Classic example of differentiable function with discontinuous derivative is $x^2sin(1/x)$ for $x>0$, and $0$ otherwise. Plot it and tell me if you can spot that the derivative is discontinuous :)
– Ennar
Nov 6 at 21:16




Defined but discontinuous is not as easy to find as it might seem. The problem is that derivatives, even though not necessarily continuous, still have intermediate value property, so functions with jump discontinuities are not derivatives. Classic example of differentiable function with discontinuous derivative is $x^2sin(1/x)$ for $x>0$, and $0$ otherwise. Plot it and tell me if you can spot that the derivative is discontinuous :)
– Ennar
Nov 6 at 21:16












I don't think you can see it, but you can feel it. The second derivative is acceleration, or force. If you're cruising down the freeway and then step on the gas (maybe you're passing someone), your distance ($f(t)$) and speed ($f^prime(x)$) are both continuous, but your acceleration ($f^{primeprime}(x)$) just had a jump discontinuity.
– JonathanZ
Nov 7 at 21:29






I don't think you can see it, but you can feel it. The second derivative is acceleration, or force. If you're cruising down the freeway and then step on the gas (maybe you're passing someone), your distance ($f(t)$) and speed ($f^prime(x)$) are both continuous, but your acceleration ($f^{primeprime}(x)$) just had a jump discontinuity.
– JonathanZ
Nov 7 at 21:29






1




1




@CarstenS Sure, but if I remember correctly, cubic splines have jumps in the third derivative and the junction points
– martini
Nov 7 at 22:36




@CarstenS Sure, but if I remember correctly, cubic splines have jumps in the third derivative and the junction points
– martini
Nov 7 at 22:36










5 Answers
5






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
50
down vote



accepted










Seeing the second derivative by eye is rather impossible as the examples in the other answers show. Nonetheless there is a good way to visualize the second derivative as curvature, which gives a good way to see the discontinuities if some additional visual aids are available.



Whereas the first derivative describes the slope of the line that best approximates the graph, the second derivative describes the curvature of the best approximating circle. The best approximating circle to the graph of $f:mathbb{R}tomathbb{R}$ at a point $x$ is the circle tangent to $(x,f(x))$ with radius equal to $((1+f'(x)^2)^{3/2})/leftvert f''(x) rightvert$. This leaves exactly two possible circles, and the sign of $f''(x)$ determines which is the correct one. That is, whether the circle should be above ($f''(x)>0$) or below ($f''(x)<0$) the graph. Note that the case when $f''(x)=0$ corresponds to a circle with "infinite" radius, i.e., just a line.



As a demonstration, consider the difference between some of the functions mentioned before. For $xmapsto x^3$, the second derivative is continuous, and the best approximating circle varies in a continuous manner ("continuous" here needs to be interpreted with care, since the radius passes through the degenerate $infty$-case when it switches sign)



approximating circles for cubic



For $xmapsto begin{cases}x^2,&x>0\-x^2,&xleq 0end{cases}$ the best approximating circle has a visible discontinuity at $x=0$, where the circle abruptly hops from one side to the other.



approximating circles for flipped quadratic



The pictures above were made with Sage. The code used to create the second one is below to play around with:



def tangent_circle(f,x0,df=None):
if df is None:
df = f.derivative(x)
r = (1+df(x=x0)^2)^(3/2)/df.derivative(x)(x=x0)
tang = df(x=x0)
unitnormal = vector(SR,(-tang,1))/sqrt(1+tang^2)
c = vector(SR,(x0,f(x0)))+unitnormal*r
return c,r

def plot_curvatures(f,df=None,plotrange=(-1.2,1.2),xran=(-1,1),framenum=50):
fplot = plot(f,(x,plotrange[0],plotrange[1]),aspect_ratio=1,color="black")
xmin = xran[0]
xmax = xran[1]
pts = [xmin+(xmax-xmin)*(k/(framenum-1)) for k in range(framenum)]
return [fplot+circle((x0,f(x0)),0.03,fill=True,color="blue")+circle(*tangent_circle(f,x0,df),color="blue") for x0 in pts]

f = lambda x: x^2 if x>0 else -x^2
df = 2*abs(x)
frames = plot_curvatures(f,df)
animate(frames,xmin=-1.5,xmax=1.5,ymin=-1,ymax=1)





share|cite|improve this answer



















  • 1




    Great figures. Did you make them yourself? [otherwise, please cite the source! Thanks]
    – AccidentalFourierTransform
    Nov 6 at 20:11






  • 2




    +1 lovely picture
    – Ethan Bolker
    Nov 6 at 21:30






  • 1




    Lines for first derivative, circles for second derivative, is there an analogue for the third derivative?
    – Surb
    Nov 7 at 8:31






  • 1




    @surb we're talking about a point (0D) on a curve (zeroth derivative), which get's inflated to a line (1D) for the first derivative and to a circle (2D) for the second derivative. A sphere (3D) for the third derivative seems only logical to me. Think of it like pulling the sphere through the plane which results in changing circles on the plane. The faster the circles change, the smaller the sphere.
    – DonQuiKong
    Nov 7 at 10:07








  • 1




    @DonQuiKong yeah, it is just a representation, however both the line and circle seem kind of the “aesthetically unique way to go” for approximating a curve to match the first and second derivative, respectively. It would be nice to formalise this in such a way that every order gives rise to a unique approximation, but I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be closed loops of any sort. And a sphere would not even be a better approximation to third order.
    – leftaroundabout
    Nov 7 at 11:23




















up vote
9
down vote













Whether or not you can "see" this is in some sense a question about the acuity of human vision. I think the answer is "no". If you graph the function
$$
g(x) = int_0^x |t|dt
$$

you will see the usual parabola in the right half plane and its negative in the left half plane. They meet at the origin with derivative $0$. The derivative of this function is $|x|$, whose derivative is undefined at $0$. The second derivative is $-1$ on the left and $1$ on the right, undefined at the origin.



Plot that and see if you can see the second derivative. Unless you draw it really carefully and know what you are looking for the graph will look like that of $x^3$, which is quite respectable.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • +1, I was just about to write this example.
    – Ennar
    Nov 6 at 19:19






  • 11




    FWIW, $g(x)=frac12 x|x|$.
    – AccidentalFourierTransform
    Nov 6 at 20:10










  • Also FWIW, $2g(x)$ is the second function in Eero Hakavuori's answer, whereas $x mapsto x^3$ is his first, and he shows how to see the different behaviour of their second derivatives at $0$.
    – Torsten Schoeneberg
    Nov 13 at 7:51


















up vote
2
down vote













Assuming your graph is made from reflective material, you can see discontinuous second derivatives in the reflection. For example, if you stand at $(0,-1)$ and look upwards at the graph of $f(x)=max{x,0}$ the reflection will have a discontinuity at the point of nondifferentiability of $f$, namely $(0,0)$, even though $f$ is continuous there. Similarly, if you look at a diffferentiable graph that is differentiable but not twice differentiable, the reflection will not be differentiable.






share|cite|improve this answer




























    up vote
    2
    down vote













    Some years ago I crammed my adult body into a rather small car of a child's ride called The Wild Mouse. It was a "roller coaster" with no perceptible vertical drops as it went in a helical fashion on a path that consisted of alternating line segments and quarter circles. Children could be delighted at a transition between line and circle because the path has a discontinuity in its second derivative at each transition.



    The car essentially moved at a constant speed, so on the straight segments the car was not accelerating, and there was "no" force on the car. However, a particle moving at constant speed in a circular path has constant non-zero acceleration pointing toward the circle's center, so the car, and child, experiences a force toward the circle center. The children could feel the discontinuity in the second derivative of the car's path.



    Railroad engineers have known about this abrupt change in force since before the mid 19th century, and used curves with spiral characteristics, now called "transition curves." Such curves are used by railroad and highway designers to provide smoother rides for their customers.






    share|cite|improve this answer




























      up vote
      0
      down vote













      Not sure if there is a "picture rigorous" way of checking, but there are subtle clues that could indicate it's possible.



      For instance, if you know the first derivative $f'$ has a "corner" at $x=a$, then the graph of $f$ has to be monotonically increasing/decreasing around $x=a$. Furthermore, this indicates a change in concavity has to be present. So places where you have




      • a change in concavity AND

      • don't change increasing/decreasing behavior (we allow derivative of zero here),


      then it could happen at that point (in terms of limiting down the choice of possibilities). Take for instance the antiderivative of $|x|$.



      enter image description here



      Obviously this isn't saying this is always true (see $x^3$ for instance). Just that if you want to narrow your focus to potential points, do this trick.



      Please let me know if there is something I'm missing or wrong about.






      share|cite|improve this answer



















      • 1




        So, what exactly do you see at that plot that would tell you there is no second derivative at $0$? Why don't you plot $x^3$ next to it and tell me the qualitative difference.
        – Ennar
        Nov 6 at 19:23












      • Not saying it occurs. Just that it is possible.
        – welshman500
        Nov 6 at 19:24






      • 1




        The question is how to spot it from the graph. With $|x|$ it's quite obvious where it isn't differentiable, and similarly for any continuous function not differentiable at some point. I wouldn't say you could see the same thing about second derivative just from the graph.
        – Ennar
        Nov 6 at 19:25








      • 3




        The antiderivative of $2x+|x|$ is strictly increasing and strictly concave up everywhere, but still has the same problems.
        – Teepeemm
        Nov 6 at 20:08











      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
      });
      });
      }, "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "69"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      convertImagesToLinks: true,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: 10,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














       

      draft saved


      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2987574%2fhow-to-see-discontinuity-of-second-derivative-from-graph-of-function%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      5 Answers
      5






      active

      oldest

      votes








      5 Answers
      5






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes








      up vote
      50
      down vote



      accepted










      Seeing the second derivative by eye is rather impossible as the examples in the other answers show. Nonetheless there is a good way to visualize the second derivative as curvature, which gives a good way to see the discontinuities if some additional visual aids are available.



      Whereas the first derivative describes the slope of the line that best approximates the graph, the second derivative describes the curvature of the best approximating circle. The best approximating circle to the graph of $f:mathbb{R}tomathbb{R}$ at a point $x$ is the circle tangent to $(x,f(x))$ with radius equal to $((1+f'(x)^2)^{3/2})/leftvert f''(x) rightvert$. This leaves exactly two possible circles, and the sign of $f''(x)$ determines which is the correct one. That is, whether the circle should be above ($f''(x)>0$) or below ($f''(x)<0$) the graph. Note that the case when $f''(x)=0$ corresponds to a circle with "infinite" radius, i.e., just a line.



      As a demonstration, consider the difference between some of the functions mentioned before. For $xmapsto x^3$, the second derivative is continuous, and the best approximating circle varies in a continuous manner ("continuous" here needs to be interpreted with care, since the radius passes through the degenerate $infty$-case when it switches sign)



      approximating circles for cubic



      For $xmapsto begin{cases}x^2,&x>0\-x^2,&xleq 0end{cases}$ the best approximating circle has a visible discontinuity at $x=0$, where the circle abruptly hops from one side to the other.



      approximating circles for flipped quadratic



      The pictures above were made with Sage. The code used to create the second one is below to play around with:



      def tangent_circle(f,x0,df=None):
      if df is None:
      df = f.derivative(x)
      r = (1+df(x=x0)^2)^(3/2)/df.derivative(x)(x=x0)
      tang = df(x=x0)
      unitnormal = vector(SR,(-tang,1))/sqrt(1+tang^2)
      c = vector(SR,(x0,f(x0)))+unitnormal*r
      return c,r

      def plot_curvatures(f,df=None,plotrange=(-1.2,1.2),xran=(-1,1),framenum=50):
      fplot = plot(f,(x,plotrange[0],plotrange[1]),aspect_ratio=1,color="black")
      xmin = xran[0]
      xmax = xran[1]
      pts = [xmin+(xmax-xmin)*(k/(framenum-1)) for k in range(framenum)]
      return [fplot+circle((x0,f(x0)),0.03,fill=True,color="blue")+circle(*tangent_circle(f,x0,df),color="blue") for x0 in pts]

      f = lambda x: x^2 if x>0 else -x^2
      df = 2*abs(x)
      frames = plot_curvatures(f,df)
      animate(frames,xmin=-1.5,xmax=1.5,ymin=-1,ymax=1)





      share|cite|improve this answer



















      • 1




        Great figures. Did you make them yourself? [otherwise, please cite the source! Thanks]
        – AccidentalFourierTransform
        Nov 6 at 20:11






      • 2




        +1 lovely picture
        – Ethan Bolker
        Nov 6 at 21:30






      • 1




        Lines for first derivative, circles for second derivative, is there an analogue for the third derivative?
        – Surb
        Nov 7 at 8:31






      • 1




        @surb we're talking about a point (0D) on a curve (zeroth derivative), which get's inflated to a line (1D) for the first derivative and to a circle (2D) for the second derivative. A sphere (3D) for the third derivative seems only logical to me. Think of it like pulling the sphere through the plane which results in changing circles on the plane. The faster the circles change, the smaller the sphere.
        – DonQuiKong
        Nov 7 at 10:07








      • 1




        @DonQuiKong yeah, it is just a representation, however both the line and circle seem kind of the “aesthetically unique way to go” for approximating a curve to match the first and second derivative, respectively. It would be nice to formalise this in such a way that every order gives rise to a unique approximation, but I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be closed loops of any sort. And a sphere would not even be a better approximation to third order.
        – leftaroundabout
        Nov 7 at 11:23

















      up vote
      50
      down vote



      accepted










      Seeing the second derivative by eye is rather impossible as the examples in the other answers show. Nonetheless there is a good way to visualize the second derivative as curvature, which gives a good way to see the discontinuities if some additional visual aids are available.



      Whereas the first derivative describes the slope of the line that best approximates the graph, the second derivative describes the curvature of the best approximating circle. The best approximating circle to the graph of $f:mathbb{R}tomathbb{R}$ at a point $x$ is the circle tangent to $(x,f(x))$ with radius equal to $((1+f'(x)^2)^{3/2})/leftvert f''(x) rightvert$. This leaves exactly two possible circles, and the sign of $f''(x)$ determines which is the correct one. That is, whether the circle should be above ($f''(x)>0$) or below ($f''(x)<0$) the graph. Note that the case when $f''(x)=0$ corresponds to a circle with "infinite" radius, i.e., just a line.



      As a demonstration, consider the difference between some of the functions mentioned before. For $xmapsto x^3$, the second derivative is continuous, and the best approximating circle varies in a continuous manner ("continuous" here needs to be interpreted with care, since the radius passes through the degenerate $infty$-case when it switches sign)



      approximating circles for cubic



      For $xmapsto begin{cases}x^2,&x>0\-x^2,&xleq 0end{cases}$ the best approximating circle has a visible discontinuity at $x=0$, where the circle abruptly hops from one side to the other.



      approximating circles for flipped quadratic



      The pictures above were made with Sage. The code used to create the second one is below to play around with:



      def tangent_circle(f,x0,df=None):
      if df is None:
      df = f.derivative(x)
      r = (1+df(x=x0)^2)^(3/2)/df.derivative(x)(x=x0)
      tang = df(x=x0)
      unitnormal = vector(SR,(-tang,1))/sqrt(1+tang^2)
      c = vector(SR,(x0,f(x0)))+unitnormal*r
      return c,r

      def plot_curvatures(f,df=None,plotrange=(-1.2,1.2),xran=(-1,1),framenum=50):
      fplot = plot(f,(x,plotrange[0],plotrange[1]),aspect_ratio=1,color="black")
      xmin = xran[0]
      xmax = xran[1]
      pts = [xmin+(xmax-xmin)*(k/(framenum-1)) for k in range(framenum)]
      return [fplot+circle((x0,f(x0)),0.03,fill=True,color="blue")+circle(*tangent_circle(f,x0,df),color="blue") for x0 in pts]

      f = lambda x: x^2 if x>0 else -x^2
      df = 2*abs(x)
      frames = plot_curvatures(f,df)
      animate(frames,xmin=-1.5,xmax=1.5,ymin=-1,ymax=1)





      share|cite|improve this answer



















      • 1




        Great figures. Did you make them yourself? [otherwise, please cite the source! Thanks]
        – AccidentalFourierTransform
        Nov 6 at 20:11






      • 2




        +1 lovely picture
        – Ethan Bolker
        Nov 6 at 21:30






      • 1




        Lines for first derivative, circles for second derivative, is there an analogue for the third derivative?
        – Surb
        Nov 7 at 8:31






      • 1




        @surb we're talking about a point (0D) on a curve (zeroth derivative), which get's inflated to a line (1D) for the first derivative and to a circle (2D) for the second derivative. A sphere (3D) for the third derivative seems only logical to me. Think of it like pulling the sphere through the plane which results in changing circles on the plane. The faster the circles change, the smaller the sphere.
        – DonQuiKong
        Nov 7 at 10:07








      • 1




        @DonQuiKong yeah, it is just a representation, however both the line and circle seem kind of the “aesthetically unique way to go” for approximating a curve to match the first and second derivative, respectively. It would be nice to formalise this in such a way that every order gives rise to a unique approximation, but I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be closed loops of any sort. And a sphere would not even be a better approximation to third order.
        – leftaroundabout
        Nov 7 at 11:23















      up vote
      50
      down vote



      accepted







      up vote
      50
      down vote



      accepted






      Seeing the second derivative by eye is rather impossible as the examples in the other answers show. Nonetheless there is a good way to visualize the second derivative as curvature, which gives a good way to see the discontinuities if some additional visual aids are available.



      Whereas the first derivative describes the slope of the line that best approximates the graph, the second derivative describes the curvature of the best approximating circle. The best approximating circle to the graph of $f:mathbb{R}tomathbb{R}$ at a point $x$ is the circle tangent to $(x,f(x))$ with radius equal to $((1+f'(x)^2)^{3/2})/leftvert f''(x) rightvert$. This leaves exactly two possible circles, and the sign of $f''(x)$ determines which is the correct one. That is, whether the circle should be above ($f''(x)>0$) or below ($f''(x)<0$) the graph. Note that the case when $f''(x)=0$ corresponds to a circle with "infinite" radius, i.e., just a line.



      As a demonstration, consider the difference between some of the functions mentioned before. For $xmapsto x^3$, the second derivative is continuous, and the best approximating circle varies in a continuous manner ("continuous" here needs to be interpreted with care, since the radius passes through the degenerate $infty$-case when it switches sign)



      approximating circles for cubic



      For $xmapsto begin{cases}x^2,&x>0\-x^2,&xleq 0end{cases}$ the best approximating circle has a visible discontinuity at $x=0$, where the circle abruptly hops from one side to the other.



      approximating circles for flipped quadratic



      The pictures above were made with Sage. The code used to create the second one is below to play around with:



      def tangent_circle(f,x0,df=None):
      if df is None:
      df = f.derivative(x)
      r = (1+df(x=x0)^2)^(3/2)/df.derivative(x)(x=x0)
      tang = df(x=x0)
      unitnormal = vector(SR,(-tang,1))/sqrt(1+tang^2)
      c = vector(SR,(x0,f(x0)))+unitnormal*r
      return c,r

      def plot_curvatures(f,df=None,plotrange=(-1.2,1.2),xran=(-1,1),framenum=50):
      fplot = plot(f,(x,plotrange[0],plotrange[1]),aspect_ratio=1,color="black")
      xmin = xran[0]
      xmax = xran[1]
      pts = [xmin+(xmax-xmin)*(k/(framenum-1)) for k in range(framenum)]
      return [fplot+circle((x0,f(x0)),0.03,fill=True,color="blue")+circle(*tangent_circle(f,x0,df),color="blue") for x0 in pts]

      f = lambda x: x^2 if x>0 else -x^2
      df = 2*abs(x)
      frames = plot_curvatures(f,df)
      animate(frames,xmin=-1.5,xmax=1.5,ymin=-1,ymax=1)





      share|cite|improve this answer














      Seeing the second derivative by eye is rather impossible as the examples in the other answers show. Nonetheless there is a good way to visualize the second derivative as curvature, which gives a good way to see the discontinuities if some additional visual aids are available.



      Whereas the first derivative describes the slope of the line that best approximates the graph, the second derivative describes the curvature of the best approximating circle. The best approximating circle to the graph of $f:mathbb{R}tomathbb{R}$ at a point $x$ is the circle tangent to $(x,f(x))$ with radius equal to $((1+f'(x)^2)^{3/2})/leftvert f''(x) rightvert$. This leaves exactly two possible circles, and the sign of $f''(x)$ determines which is the correct one. That is, whether the circle should be above ($f''(x)>0$) or below ($f''(x)<0$) the graph. Note that the case when $f''(x)=0$ corresponds to a circle with "infinite" radius, i.e., just a line.



      As a demonstration, consider the difference between some of the functions mentioned before. For $xmapsto x^3$, the second derivative is continuous, and the best approximating circle varies in a continuous manner ("continuous" here needs to be interpreted with care, since the radius passes through the degenerate $infty$-case when it switches sign)



      approximating circles for cubic



      For $xmapsto begin{cases}x^2,&x>0\-x^2,&xleq 0end{cases}$ the best approximating circle has a visible discontinuity at $x=0$, where the circle abruptly hops from one side to the other.



      approximating circles for flipped quadratic



      The pictures above were made with Sage. The code used to create the second one is below to play around with:



      def tangent_circle(f,x0,df=None):
      if df is None:
      df = f.derivative(x)
      r = (1+df(x=x0)^2)^(3/2)/df.derivative(x)(x=x0)
      tang = df(x=x0)
      unitnormal = vector(SR,(-tang,1))/sqrt(1+tang^2)
      c = vector(SR,(x0,f(x0)))+unitnormal*r
      return c,r

      def plot_curvatures(f,df=None,plotrange=(-1.2,1.2),xran=(-1,1),framenum=50):
      fplot = plot(f,(x,plotrange[0],plotrange[1]),aspect_ratio=1,color="black")
      xmin = xran[0]
      xmax = xran[1]
      pts = [xmin+(xmax-xmin)*(k/(framenum-1)) for k in range(framenum)]
      return [fplot+circle((x0,f(x0)),0.03,fill=True,color="blue")+circle(*tangent_circle(f,x0,df),color="blue") for x0 in pts]

      f = lambda x: x^2 if x>0 else -x^2
      df = 2*abs(x)
      frames = plot_curvatures(f,df)
      animate(frames,xmin=-1.5,xmax=1.5,ymin=-1,ymax=1)






      share|cite|improve this answer














      share|cite|improve this answer



      share|cite|improve this answer








      edited Nov 6 at 20:33

























      answered Nov 6 at 20:10









      Eero Hakavuori

      1,50259




      1,50259








      • 1




        Great figures. Did you make them yourself? [otherwise, please cite the source! Thanks]
        – AccidentalFourierTransform
        Nov 6 at 20:11






      • 2




        +1 lovely picture
        – Ethan Bolker
        Nov 6 at 21:30






      • 1




        Lines for first derivative, circles for second derivative, is there an analogue for the third derivative?
        – Surb
        Nov 7 at 8:31






      • 1




        @surb we're talking about a point (0D) on a curve (zeroth derivative), which get's inflated to a line (1D) for the first derivative and to a circle (2D) for the second derivative. A sphere (3D) for the third derivative seems only logical to me. Think of it like pulling the sphere through the plane which results in changing circles on the plane. The faster the circles change, the smaller the sphere.
        – DonQuiKong
        Nov 7 at 10:07








      • 1




        @DonQuiKong yeah, it is just a representation, however both the line and circle seem kind of the “aesthetically unique way to go” for approximating a curve to match the first and second derivative, respectively. It would be nice to formalise this in such a way that every order gives rise to a unique approximation, but I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be closed loops of any sort. And a sphere would not even be a better approximation to third order.
        – leftaroundabout
        Nov 7 at 11:23
















      • 1




        Great figures. Did you make them yourself? [otherwise, please cite the source! Thanks]
        – AccidentalFourierTransform
        Nov 6 at 20:11






      • 2




        +1 lovely picture
        – Ethan Bolker
        Nov 6 at 21:30






      • 1




        Lines for first derivative, circles for second derivative, is there an analogue for the third derivative?
        – Surb
        Nov 7 at 8:31






      • 1




        @surb we're talking about a point (0D) on a curve (zeroth derivative), which get's inflated to a line (1D) for the first derivative and to a circle (2D) for the second derivative. A sphere (3D) for the third derivative seems only logical to me. Think of it like pulling the sphere through the plane which results in changing circles on the plane. The faster the circles change, the smaller the sphere.
        – DonQuiKong
        Nov 7 at 10:07








      • 1




        @DonQuiKong yeah, it is just a representation, however both the line and circle seem kind of the “aesthetically unique way to go” for approximating a curve to match the first and second derivative, respectively. It would be nice to formalise this in such a way that every order gives rise to a unique approximation, but I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be closed loops of any sort. And a sphere would not even be a better approximation to third order.
        – leftaroundabout
        Nov 7 at 11:23










      1




      1




      Great figures. Did you make them yourself? [otherwise, please cite the source! Thanks]
      – AccidentalFourierTransform
      Nov 6 at 20:11




      Great figures. Did you make them yourself? [otherwise, please cite the source! Thanks]
      – AccidentalFourierTransform
      Nov 6 at 20:11




      2




      2




      +1 lovely picture
      – Ethan Bolker
      Nov 6 at 21:30




      +1 lovely picture
      – Ethan Bolker
      Nov 6 at 21:30




      1




      1




      Lines for first derivative, circles for second derivative, is there an analogue for the third derivative?
      – Surb
      Nov 7 at 8:31




      Lines for first derivative, circles for second derivative, is there an analogue for the third derivative?
      – Surb
      Nov 7 at 8:31




      1




      1




      @surb we're talking about a point (0D) on a curve (zeroth derivative), which get's inflated to a line (1D) for the first derivative and to a circle (2D) for the second derivative. A sphere (3D) for the third derivative seems only logical to me. Think of it like pulling the sphere through the plane which results in changing circles on the plane. The faster the circles change, the smaller the sphere.
      – DonQuiKong
      Nov 7 at 10:07






      @surb we're talking about a point (0D) on a curve (zeroth derivative), which get's inflated to a line (1D) for the first derivative and to a circle (2D) for the second derivative. A sphere (3D) for the third derivative seems only logical to me. Think of it like pulling the sphere through the plane which results in changing circles on the plane. The faster the circles change, the smaller the sphere.
      – DonQuiKong
      Nov 7 at 10:07






      1




      1




      @DonQuiKong yeah, it is just a representation, however both the line and circle seem kind of the “aesthetically unique way to go” for approximating a curve to match the first and second derivative, respectively. It would be nice to formalise this in such a way that every order gives rise to a unique approximation, but I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be closed loops of any sort. And a sphere would not even be a better approximation to third order.
      – leftaroundabout
      Nov 7 at 11:23






      @DonQuiKong yeah, it is just a representation, however both the line and circle seem kind of the “aesthetically unique way to go” for approximating a curve to match the first and second derivative, respectively. It would be nice to formalise this in such a way that every order gives rise to a unique approximation, but I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be closed loops of any sort. And a sphere would not even be a better approximation to third order.
      – leftaroundabout
      Nov 7 at 11:23












      up vote
      9
      down vote













      Whether or not you can "see" this is in some sense a question about the acuity of human vision. I think the answer is "no". If you graph the function
      $$
      g(x) = int_0^x |t|dt
      $$

      you will see the usual parabola in the right half plane and its negative in the left half plane. They meet at the origin with derivative $0$. The derivative of this function is $|x|$, whose derivative is undefined at $0$. The second derivative is $-1$ on the left and $1$ on the right, undefined at the origin.



      Plot that and see if you can see the second derivative. Unless you draw it really carefully and know what you are looking for the graph will look like that of $x^3$, which is quite respectable.






      share|cite|improve this answer





















      • +1, I was just about to write this example.
        – Ennar
        Nov 6 at 19:19






      • 11




        FWIW, $g(x)=frac12 x|x|$.
        – AccidentalFourierTransform
        Nov 6 at 20:10










      • Also FWIW, $2g(x)$ is the second function in Eero Hakavuori's answer, whereas $x mapsto x^3$ is his first, and he shows how to see the different behaviour of their second derivatives at $0$.
        – Torsten Schoeneberg
        Nov 13 at 7:51















      up vote
      9
      down vote













      Whether or not you can "see" this is in some sense a question about the acuity of human vision. I think the answer is "no". If you graph the function
      $$
      g(x) = int_0^x |t|dt
      $$

      you will see the usual parabola in the right half plane and its negative in the left half plane. They meet at the origin with derivative $0$. The derivative of this function is $|x|$, whose derivative is undefined at $0$. The second derivative is $-1$ on the left and $1$ on the right, undefined at the origin.



      Plot that and see if you can see the second derivative. Unless you draw it really carefully and know what you are looking for the graph will look like that of $x^3$, which is quite respectable.






      share|cite|improve this answer





















      • +1, I was just about to write this example.
        – Ennar
        Nov 6 at 19:19






      • 11




        FWIW, $g(x)=frac12 x|x|$.
        – AccidentalFourierTransform
        Nov 6 at 20:10










      • Also FWIW, $2g(x)$ is the second function in Eero Hakavuori's answer, whereas $x mapsto x^3$ is his first, and he shows how to see the different behaviour of their second derivatives at $0$.
        – Torsten Schoeneberg
        Nov 13 at 7:51













      up vote
      9
      down vote










      up vote
      9
      down vote









      Whether or not you can "see" this is in some sense a question about the acuity of human vision. I think the answer is "no". If you graph the function
      $$
      g(x) = int_0^x |t|dt
      $$

      you will see the usual parabola in the right half plane and its negative in the left half plane. They meet at the origin with derivative $0$. The derivative of this function is $|x|$, whose derivative is undefined at $0$. The second derivative is $-1$ on the left and $1$ on the right, undefined at the origin.



      Plot that and see if you can see the second derivative. Unless you draw it really carefully and know what you are looking for the graph will look like that of $x^3$, which is quite respectable.






      share|cite|improve this answer












      Whether or not you can "see" this is in some sense a question about the acuity of human vision. I think the answer is "no". If you graph the function
      $$
      g(x) = int_0^x |t|dt
      $$

      you will see the usual parabola in the right half plane and its negative in the left half plane. They meet at the origin with derivative $0$. The derivative of this function is $|x|$, whose derivative is undefined at $0$. The second derivative is $-1$ on the left and $1$ on the right, undefined at the origin.



      Plot that and see if you can see the second derivative. Unless you draw it really carefully and know what you are looking for the graph will look like that of $x^3$, which is quite respectable.







      share|cite|improve this answer












      share|cite|improve this answer



      share|cite|improve this answer










      answered Nov 6 at 19:15









      Ethan Bolker

      38.9k543102




      38.9k543102












      • +1, I was just about to write this example.
        – Ennar
        Nov 6 at 19:19






      • 11




        FWIW, $g(x)=frac12 x|x|$.
        – AccidentalFourierTransform
        Nov 6 at 20:10










      • Also FWIW, $2g(x)$ is the second function in Eero Hakavuori's answer, whereas $x mapsto x^3$ is his first, and he shows how to see the different behaviour of their second derivatives at $0$.
        – Torsten Schoeneberg
        Nov 13 at 7:51


















      • +1, I was just about to write this example.
        – Ennar
        Nov 6 at 19:19






      • 11




        FWIW, $g(x)=frac12 x|x|$.
        – AccidentalFourierTransform
        Nov 6 at 20:10










      • Also FWIW, $2g(x)$ is the second function in Eero Hakavuori's answer, whereas $x mapsto x^3$ is his first, and he shows how to see the different behaviour of their second derivatives at $0$.
        – Torsten Schoeneberg
        Nov 13 at 7:51
















      +1, I was just about to write this example.
      – Ennar
      Nov 6 at 19:19




      +1, I was just about to write this example.
      – Ennar
      Nov 6 at 19:19




      11




      11




      FWIW, $g(x)=frac12 x|x|$.
      – AccidentalFourierTransform
      Nov 6 at 20:10




      FWIW, $g(x)=frac12 x|x|$.
      – AccidentalFourierTransform
      Nov 6 at 20:10












      Also FWIW, $2g(x)$ is the second function in Eero Hakavuori's answer, whereas $x mapsto x^3$ is his first, and he shows how to see the different behaviour of their second derivatives at $0$.
      – Torsten Schoeneberg
      Nov 13 at 7:51




      Also FWIW, $2g(x)$ is the second function in Eero Hakavuori's answer, whereas $x mapsto x^3$ is his first, and he shows how to see the different behaviour of their second derivatives at $0$.
      – Torsten Schoeneberg
      Nov 13 at 7:51










      up vote
      2
      down vote













      Assuming your graph is made from reflective material, you can see discontinuous second derivatives in the reflection. For example, if you stand at $(0,-1)$ and look upwards at the graph of $f(x)=max{x,0}$ the reflection will have a discontinuity at the point of nondifferentiability of $f$, namely $(0,0)$, even though $f$ is continuous there. Similarly, if you look at a diffferentiable graph that is differentiable but not twice differentiable, the reflection will not be differentiable.






      share|cite|improve this answer

























        up vote
        2
        down vote













        Assuming your graph is made from reflective material, you can see discontinuous second derivatives in the reflection. For example, if you stand at $(0,-1)$ and look upwards at the graph of $f(x)=max{x,0}$ the reflection will have a discontinuity at the point of nondifferentiability of $f$, namely $(0,0)$, even though $f$ is continuous there. Similarly, if you look at a diffferentiable graph that is differentiable but not twice differentiable, the reflection will not be differentiable.






        share|cite|improve this answer























          up vote
          2
          down vote










          up vote
          2
          down vote









          Assuming your graph is made from reflective material, you can see discontinuous second derivatives in the reflection. For example, if you stand at $(0,-1)$ and look upwards at the graph of $f(x)=max{x,0}$ the reflection will have a discontinuity at the point of nondifferentiability of $f$, namely $(0,0)$, even though $f$ is continuous there. Similarly, if you look at a diffferentiable graph that is differentiable but not twice differentiable, the reflection will not be differentiable.






          share|cite|improve this answer












          Assuming your graph is made from reflective material, you can see discontinuous second derivatives in the reflection. For example, if you stand at $(0,-1)$ and look upwards at the graph of $f(x)=max{x,0}$ the reflection will have a discontinuity at the point of nondifferentiability of $f$, namely $(0,0)$, even though $f$ is continuous there. Similarly, if you look at a diffferentiable graph that is differentiable but not twice differentiable, the reflection will not be differentiable.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Nov 7 at 13:21









          Bananach

          3,61811229




          3,61811229






















              up vote
              2
              down vote













              Some years ago I crammed my adult body into a rather small car of a child's ride called The Wild Mouse. It was a "roller coaster" with no perceptible vertical drops as it went in a helical fashion on a path that consisted of alternating line segments and quarter circles. Children could be delighted at a transition between line and circle because the path has a discontinuity in its second derivative at each transition.



              The car essentially moved at a constant speed, so on the straight segments the car was not accelerating, and there was "no" force on the car. However, a particle moving at constant speed in a circular path has constant non-zero acceleration pointing toward the circle's center, so the car, and child, experiences a force toward the circle center. The children could feel the discontinuity in the second derivative of the car's path.



              Railroad engineers have known about this abrupt change in force since before the mid 19th century, and used curves with spiral characteristics, now called "transition curves." Such curves are used by railroad and highway designers to provide smoother rides for their customers.






              share|cite|improve this answer

























                up vote
                2
                down vote













                Some years ago I crammed my adult body into a rather small car of a child's ride called The Wild Mouse. It was a "roller coaster" with no perceptible vertical drops as it went in a helical fashion on a path that consisted of alternating line segments and quarter circles. Children could be delighted at a transition between line and circle because the path has a discontinuity in its second derivative at each transition.



                The car essentially moved at a constant speed, so on the straight segments the car was not accelerating, and there was "no" force on the car. However, a particle moving at constant speed in a circular path has constant non-zero acceleration pointing toward the circle's center, so the car, and child, experiences a force toward the circle center. The children could feel the discontinuity in the second derivative of the car's path.



                Railroad engineers have known about this abrupt change in force since before the mid 19th century, and used curves with spiral characteristics, now called "transition curves." Such curves are used by railroad and highway designers to provide smoother rides for their customers.






                share|cite|improve this answer























                  up vote
                  2
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  2
                  down vote









                  Some years ago I crammed my adult body into a rather small car of a child's ride called The Wild Mouse. It was a "roller coaster" with no perceptible vertical drops as it went in a helical fashion on a path that consisted of alternating line segments and quarter circles. Children could be delighted at a transition between line and circle because the path has a discontinuity in its second derivative at each transition.



                  The car essentially moved at a constant speed, so on the straight segments the car was not accelerating, and there was "no" force on the car. However, a particle moving at constant speed in a circular path has constant non-zero acceleration pointing toward the circle's center, so the car, and child, experiences a force toward the circle center. The children could feel the discontinuity in the second derivative of the car's path.



                  Railroad engineers have known about this abrupt change in force since before the mid 19th century, and used curves with spiral characteristics, now called "transition curves." Such curves are used by railroad and highway designers to provide smoother rides for their customers.






                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  Some years ago I crammed my adult body into a rather small car of a child's ride called The Wild Mouse. It was a "roller coaster" with no perceptible vertical drops as it went in a helical fashion on a path that consisted of alternating line segments and quarter circles. Children could be delighted at a transition between line and circle because the path has a discontinuity in its second derivative at each transition.



                  The car essentially moved at a constant speed, so on the straight segments the car was not accelerating, and there was "no" force on the car. However, a particle moving at constant speed in a circular path has constant non-zero acceleration pointing toward the circle's center, so the car, and child, experiences a force toward the circle center. The children could feel the discontinuity in the second derivative of the car's path.



                  Railroad engineers have known about this abrupt change in force since before the mid 19th century, and used curves with spiral characteristics, now called "transition curves." Such curves are used by railroad and highway designers to provide smoother rides for their customers.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Nov 12 at 6:00









                  euler1944

                  1215




                  1215






















                      up vote
                      0
                      down vote













                      Not sure if there is a "picture rigorous" way of checking, but there are subtle clues that could indicate it's possible.



                      For instance, if you know the first derivative $f'$ has a "corner" at $x=a$, then the graph of $f$ has to be monotonically increasing/decreasing around $x=a$. Furthermore, this indicates a change in concavity has to be present. So places where you have




                      • a change in concavity AND

                      • don't change increasing/decreasing behavior (we allow derivative of zero here),


                      then it could happen at that point (in terms of limiting down the choice of possibilities). Take for instance the antiderivative of $|x|$.



                      enter image description here



                      Obviously this isn't saying this is always true (see $x^3$ for instance). Just that if you want to narrow your focus to potential points, do this trick.



                      Please let me know if there is something I'm missing or wrong about.






                      share|cite|improve this answer



















                      • 1




                        So, what exactly do you see at that plot that would tell you there is no second derivative at $0$? Why don't you plot $x^3$ next to it and tell me the qualitative difference.
                        – Ennar
                        Nov 6 at 19:23












                      • Not saying it occurs. Just that it is possible.
                        – welshman500
                        Nov 6 at 19:24






                      • 1




                        The question is how to spot it from the graph. With $|x|$ it's quite obvious where it isn't differentiable, and similarly for any continuous function not differentiable at some point. I wouldn't say you could see the same thing about second derivative just from the graph.
                        – Ennar
                        Nov 6 at 19:25








                      • 3




                        The antiderivative of $2x+|x|$ is strictly increasing and strictly concave up everywhere, but still has the same problems.
                        – Teepeemm
                        Nov 6 at 20:08















                      up vote
                      0
                      down vote













                      Not sure if there is a "picture rigorous" way of checking, but there are subtle clues that could indicate it's possible.



                      For instance, if you know the first derivative $f'$ has a "corner" at $x=a$, then the graph of $f$ has to be monotonically increasing/decreasing around $x=a$. Furthermore, this indicates a change in concavity has to be present. So places where you have




                      • a change in concavity AND

                      • don't change increasing/decreasing behavior (we allow derivative of zero here),


                      then it could happen at that point (in terms of limiting down the choice of possibilities). Take for instance the antiderivative of $|x|$.



                      enter image description here



                      Obviously this isn't saying this is always true (see $x^3$ for instance). Just that if you want to narrow your focus to potential points, do this trick.



                      Please let me know if there is something I'm missing or wrong about.






                      share|cite|improve this answer



















                      • 1




                        So, what exactly do you see at that plot that would tell you there is no second derivative at $0$? Why don't you plot $x^3$ next to it and tell me the qualitative difference.
                        – Ennar
                        Nov 6 at 19:23












                      • Not saying it occurs. Just that it is possible.
                        – welshman500
                        Nov 6 at 19:24






                      • 1




                        The question is how to spot it from the graph. With $|x|$ it's quite obvious where it isn't differentiable, and similarly for any continuous function not differentiable at some point. I wouldn't say you could see the same thing about second derivative just from the graph.
                        – Ennar
                        Nov 6 at 19:25








                      • 3




                        The antiderivative of $2x+|x|$ is strictly increasing and strictly concave up everywhere, but still has the same problems.
                        – Teepeemm
                        Nov 6 at 20:08













                      up vote
                      0
                      down vote










                      up vote
                      0
                      down vote









                      Not sure if there is a "picture rigorous" way of checking, but there are subtle clues that could indicate it's possible.



                      For instance, if you know the first derivative $f'$ has a "corner" at $x=a$, then the graph of $f$ has to be monotonically increasing/decreasing around $x=a$. Furthermore, this indicates a change in concavity has to be present. So places where you have




                      • a change in concavity AND

                      • don't change increasing/decreasing behavior (we allow derivative of zero here),


                      then it could happen at that point (in terms of limiting down the choice of possibilities). Take for instance the antiderivative of $|x|$.



                      enter image description here



                      Obviously this isn't saying this is always true (see $x^3$ for instance). Just that if you want to narrow your focus to potential points, do this trick.



                      Please let me know if there is something I'm missing or wrong about.






                      share|cite|improve this answer














                      Not sure if there is a "picture rigorous" way of checking, but there are subtle clues that could indicate it's possible.



                      For instance, if you know the first derivative $f'$ has a "corner" at $x=a$, then the graph of $f$ has to be monotonically increasing/decreasing around $x=a$. Furthermore, this indicates a change in concavity has to be present. So places where you have




                      • a change in concavity AND

                      • don't change increasing/decreasing behavior (we allow derivative of zero here),


                      then it could happen at that point (in terms of limiting down the choice of possibilities). Take for instance the antiderivative of $|x|$.



                      enter image description here



                      Obviously this isn't saying this is always true (see $x^3$ for instance). Just that if you want to narrow your focus to potential points, do this trick.



                      Please let me know if there is something I'm missing or wrong about.







                      share|cite|improve this answer














                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer








                      edited Nov 6 at 19:23

























                      answered Nov 6 at 19:20









                      welshman500

                      366214




                      366214








                      • 1




                        So, what exactly do you see at that plot that would tell you there is no second derivative at $0$? Why don't you plot $x^3$ next to it and tell me the qualitative difference.
                        – Ennar
                        Nov 6 at 19:23












                      • Not saying it occurs. Just that it is possible.
                        – welshman500
                        Nov 6 at 19:24






                      • 1




                        The question is how to spot it from the graph. With $|x|$ it's quite obvious where it isn't differentiable, and similarly for any continuous function not differentiable at some point. I wouldn't say you could see the same thing about second derivative just from the graph.
                        – Ennar
                        Nov 6 at 19:25








                      • 3




                        The antiderivative of $2x+|x|$ is strictly increasing and strictly concave up everywhere, but still has the same problems.
                        – Teepeemm
                        Nov 6 at 20:08














                      • 1




                        So, what exactly do you see at that plot that would tell you there is no second derivative at $0$? Why don't you plot $x^3$ next to it and tell me the qualitative difference.
                        – Ennar
                        Nov 6 at 19:23












                      • Not saying it occurs. Just that it is possible.
                        – welshman500
                        Nov 6 at 19:24






                      • 1




                        The question is how to spot it from the graph. With $|x|$ it's quite obvious where it isn't differentiable, and similarly for any continuous function not differentiable at some point. I wouldn't say you could see the same thing about second derivative just from the graph.
                        – Ennar
                        Nov 6 at 19:25








                      • 3




                        The antiderivative of $2x+|x|$ is strictly increasing and strictly concave up everywhere, but still has the same problems.
                        – Teepeemm
                        Nov 6 at 20:08








                      1




                      1




                      So, what exactly do you see at that plot that would tell you there is no second derivative at $0$? Why don't you plot $x^3$ next to it and tell me the qualitative difference.
                      – Ennar
                      Nov 6 at 19:23






                      So, what exactly do you see at that plot that would tell you there is no second derivative at $0$? Why don't you plot $x^3$ next to it and tell me the qualitative difference.
                      – Ennar
                      Nov 6 at 19:23














                      Not saying it occurs. Just that it is possible.
                      – welshman500
                      Nov 6 at 19:24




                      Not saying it occurs. Just that it is possible.
                      – welshman500
                      Nov 6 at 19:24




                      1




                      1




                      The question is how to spot it from the graph. With $|x|$ it's quite obvious where it isn't differentiable, and similarly for any continuous function not differentiable at some point. I wouldn't say you could see the same thing about second derivative just from the graph.
                      – Ennar
                      Nov 6 at 19:25






                      The question is how to spot it from the graph. With $|x|$ it's quite obvious where it isn't differentiable, and similarly for any continuous function not differentiable at some point. I wouldn't say you could see the same thing about second derivative just from the graph.
                      – Ennar
                      Nov 6 at 19:25






                      3




                      3




                      The antiderivative of $2x+|x|$ is strictly increasing and strictly concave up everywhere, but still has the same problems.
                      – Teepeemm
                      Nov 6 at 20:08




                      The antiderivative of $2x+|x|$ is strictly increasing and strictly concave up everywhere, but still has the same problems.
                      – Teepeemm
                      Nov 6 at 20:08


















                       

                      draft saved


                      draft discarded



















































                       


                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2987574%2fhow-to-see-discontinuity-of-second-derivative-from-graph-of-function%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      這個網誌中的熱門文章

                      Tangent Lines Diagram Along Smooth Curve

                      Yusuf al-Mu'taman ibn Hud

                      Zucchini