Analyzing the Setup
Imagine you are standing on a path defined by a function f(x). You are given two critical constraints: the function is strictly increasing (f′(x)>0) and it is concave down (f′′(x)<0).
Think of this as a path that is always going uphill, but it is getting "tired"—the steepness is fading as you walk. This creates the characteristic "umbrella" shape.
We consider three points on this path: A at x=a, C at x=c, and B at x=b, where a<c<b. We aim to determine the relationship between the vertical rise between A and C and the vertical rise between C and B.
The Bridge of Lagrange
Whenever you encounter a ratio of differences such as c−af(c)−f(a), your mind should immediately jump to the Mean Value Theorem (LMVT). LMVT serves as the bridge between the average slope of a secant line and the instantaneous slope of a tangent line.
For the interval [a,c], there exists some α∈(a,c) such that the slope of the secant AC is exactly f′(α):
Similarly, for the interval [c,b], there exists some β∈(c,b) such that the slope of the secant CB is f′(β):
The Inequality Dance
Now, we incorporate the property of concavity. Since f′′(x)<0, the slope function f′(x) is strictly decreasing.
Because α lies in the interval (a,c) and β lies in the interval (c,b), we know for a fact that α<β. Therefore, the slope at α must be greater than the slope at β:
Substituting our LMVT results into this inequality, we obtain:
c−af(c)−f(a)>b−cf(b)−f(c)
The Final Victory
We are now ready to isolate the ratio of the vertical rises. We want to evaluate the expression f(b)−f(c)f(c)−f(a).
Since f(x) is strictly increasing, the term f(b)−f(c) is guaranteed to be positive. This allows us to cross-multiply the terms without reversing the inequality sign.
Rearranging the terms, we arrive at the final result:
f(b)−f(c)f(c)−f(a)>b−cc−a
You have just proven a fundamental property of concave functions using nothing but the elegance of calculus. Well done!