(From Rudin Principles of Mathematical Analysis, 5.2)
Suppose $f'(x) > 0$ in ($a, b$). Prove that $f$ is strictly increasing in ($a, b$), and let $g$ be its inverse function.
Prove that $g$ is differentiable, and that $g'(f(x)) = \frac{1}{f′(x)} \quad (a < x < b)$
Here's an answer I found online:
Let $g : f(a, b) → (a, b) $ be the inverse function of $f$, i.e., $ g(f(x)) = x $ for all $x ∈ (a, b)$.
We now show that $g′(y) = \lim\limits_{z→y} \frac {g(z) − g(y)}{z − y}$ exists for all $y ∈ f(a, b)$.
Put $y = f(x)$ and $z = f(t)$, where $x, t ∈ (a, b)$, then since $f$ is continuous (by Theorem 5.2), so is $g$ (by Theorem 4.17), and $z → y$ implies $t → x$.
It follows that
$$\begin{align*} \lim_{z→y} \frac{g(z) − g(y)}{z − y} &= \lim_{t→x}\frac{g(f(t)) − g(f(x))}{f(t) − f(x)} \\ &= \lim_{t→x}\frac{t − x}{f(t) − f(x)} \\ &= \lim_{t→x}\frac{1}{\frac{f(t) − f(x)}{t − x}} \\ &= \frac{1}{f′(x)} \end{align*}$$
Question:
Why it is necessary to for g to be continuous? The only step that uses continuity is the changing of the limit values ( $z → y$ implies $t → x$), but that comes from $f$ I think?
In fact, we do need continuity of $g$.
If only g is continuous, then $z→y $ implies $f(z)→f(y) $. But this is unhelpful, since we want $t→x $.
Recall the only thing we know is that $y = f(x)$ and $z = f(t)$.
From this, we know $$g(z) = g( f(t)) = t$$ (since $g$ and $f$ are inverses).
Similarly: $$g(y) = g( f(x)) = x.$$
Now, suppose $g$ is continuous.
Then $z→y $ implies $g(z)→g(y) $. (def of continuity).
It follows immediately that $t→x $.