Does $f(0)=0$ Imply That $f'(x)=0$?
At a glance
- 1. Read the condition
f(0) = 0 says only that the function’s value at zero is zero.
- 2. Check the derivative
A derivative depends on how function values change near a point, not just on one value.
- 3. Use a counterexample
For f(x) = x, f(0) = 0 but f'(x) = 1 everywhere.
- 4. Identify the stronger condition
If f'(x) = 0 throughout an interval containing zero, then f is constant there.
No. Knowing that tells you the function’s value at one input. It does not tell you how the function changes near that input, which is what a derivative measures. In particular, it does not imply that , much less that for every .
For example, take . Then , but for every real . The graph passes through the origin and has a nonzero slope everywhere.
What the condition tells you
The equation means that the point lies on the graph of . It is a condition on the function’s height at the input , not on its slope. Many functions with different slopes—and even functions with no derivative at zero—can pass through that point.
The derivative at zero, when it exists, is defined by the limit
Since , this becomes
To evaluate this limit, you need to know how behaves for inputs close to zero. The single value does not provide that information.
Counterexamples: different slopes, same value
Consider the family of functions , where is any real number. Every member satisfies
while its derivative is . Choosing gives a zero derivative; choosing gives a derivative of ; choosing gives a derivative of . Thus the value at zero is compatible with many different derivatives.
A nonlinear example makes the same point. If , then , but : the derivative is zero at zero, yet it is not zero at other inputs. If instead , then and . The extra term changes the slope without changing the value at zero.
These examples distinguish two possible readings of the question:
- If you mean “Does imply ?”, the answer is no; is a counterexample.
- If you mean “Does imply for every ?”, the answer is also no; the same counterexample has derivative everywhere.
The function may not be differentiable
The condition does not even guarantee that exists. For example, let . Then , but the left-hand slope at zero is and the right-hand slope is . Because these one-sided slopes differ, the derivative at zero does not exist.
So it is useful to keep three questions separate: what is the function’s value, does its derivative exist, and what is the derivative’s value? Knowing the answer to the first question does not settle the other two.
When does a zero derivative imply something?
A stronger condition is that at every point of an interval. If is differentiable on an interval containing , then the Mean Value Theorem shows that is constant on that interval. If it also satisfies , that constant must be zero, so throughout the interval.
The direction of the implication matters:
This does not reverse to say that forces . A single point on the graph cannot determine the behavior of the whole function.
Common mistakes
Confusing a zero value with a zero slope. The equation says the graph crosses or touches the horizontal level at . It does not say the graph is flat there. The line passes through the origin with slope .
Assuming the derivative exists. A function can have a well-defined value at zero and still have a corner, cusp, or other failure of differentiability there. The absolute-value example has a corner.
Reading as a statement at one point. The notation with variable usually asserts that the derivative is zero for every input in the stated domain. A claim about only the derivative at zero would be written . Neither claim follows from alone.
References
- Calculus: Early Transcendentals, James Stewart
Spotted an error? Send a correction. Read how we write and check articles in our editorial policy.