Y by mahanmath, jatin, alibez, zabihpourmahdi, fractals, Grotex, daisyxixi, adityaguharoy, Adventure10, Mango247, and 10 other users
Hey guys,here is my new idea.If it is right.it may be easy.but I think it will be nice,useful and great. 
I hope somebody can intreast in my idea,thanks
.And I wonder if others think it before 
theorem1
are n real numbers,such that

![$(ii), x_1 , x_2 , \cdots , x_n \in \left[ a ,b \right]$](//latex.artofproblemsolving.com/e/e/e/eee173ff0e4603ea46adec8170e0009e8c86c179.png)
(C is contant)
and
is a function on
,if
convave on
and convex on ![$\left[c,b\right]$](//latex.artofproblemsolving.com/f/c/d/fcd76c855fe854cd7af2dd9f293f039193302fa6.png)
LET
then:
is minimal for
(
)
and
is maximal for
(
)
Proof:just for the minimal(maximal is simalar).by induction.
If there is no
or just
,then the theorem is certainly true.
this is because
so that 
if there have![$x_1,x_2,\cdots,x_i \in \left[a,c\right]$](//latex.artofproblemsolving.com/d/6/3/d634cd3dc9004af6fe17d18bf0443041c3eec1ca.png)
case(i)
,we can get

case(ii) assume
be the minimum interger such that 
then we obtian

we reduce it to be
case.
so the theorem is proven.
theorem1'
are n real numbers,such that

![$(ii), x_1 , x_2 , \cdots , x_n \in \left[a,b\right]$](//latex.artofproblemsolving.com/b/6/0/b60563c744a7e5004c20e391ce42d8c4475e4e9e.png)
(C is contant)
and
is a function on
,if
convex on
and concave on ![$\left[c,b\right]$](//latex.artofproblemsolving.com/f/c/d/fcd76c855fe854cd7af2dd9f293f039193302fa6.png)
LET
then:
is minimal for
(
)
and
is maximal for
(
)
proof is similar to theorem1.
Application
1.http://www.mathlinks.ro/Forum/viewtopic.php?highlight=1%2B%5C%5Ccos&t=59649
Let ABC be an acute-angled triangle,Prove:

proof:just let
you will find
satisfy the condtion with theorem1',
so we just need to prove :

or
(
)
2..http://www.mathlinks.ro/Forum/viewtopic.php?t=64122


proof:let
and y,z similar
notice
and let
you will find
satisfy the condtion with theorem1,
wlog
then we should only to prove
(
) or
(
)
theorem2
are n real numbers,such that


(C is contant)
and
is a function on
,if
convave on
and convex on 
LET
then:
is minimal for 
and
is maximal for 
Proof:just for the minimal(maximal is simalar).
assume![$x_1,x_2,\cdots,x_i \in \left(-\infty,c \right]$](//latex.artofproblemsolving.com/d/4/8/d485886a4f50411b4f5423297c3b4b568653a525.png)
because
convave on ![$\left(-\infty,c \right]$](//latex.artofproblemsolving.com/3/7/f/37f2476e6d5628aee3ca26d6850c96d0a7928f5b.png)
then we get
and
so
so the theorem2 is proved.
theorem2'
are n real numbers,such that


(C is contant)
and
is a function on
,if
convex on
and concave on 
LET
then:
is minimal for 
and
is maximal for 
Application
http://www.mathlinks.ro/Forum/viewtopic.php?t=32031
http://www.mathlinks.ro/Forum/viewtopic.php?t=64793

find the minimum of
proof:let
then we calculate that
$f\"(t)=\frac{e^x(k(k+1)e^x-k)}{(1+e^x)^{k+2}}$
which impies it can use theorem2 .
Wlog
by theorem2 I think we should only consider the case
I think it can also work when find the maximum of
.
And I think there may be another more applications,If you find,please write it here,thanks
,and If there is something wrong in my post please point it out for me.thanks :)and welcome any advice.
(and I find the theorem2 is a little similar to VASC's Right-Convex Function Theorem )

I hope somebody can intreast in my idea,thanks


theorem1


![$(ii), x_1 , x_2 , \cdots , x_n \in \left[ a ,b \right]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/e/e/e/eee173ff0e4603ea46adec8170e0009e8c86c179.png)

and

![$\left[a,b\right]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/6/7/2/672d808e58fabed65fbce243a26364ab1a6d0cd5.png)

![$\left[ a,c \right]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/e/1/f/e1f7f7ff2379a5b26ce27ab219ee4b9275822e05.png)
![$\left[c,b\right]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/f/c/d/fcd76c855fe854cd7af2dd9f293f039193302fa6.png)
LET

then:



and



Proof:just for the minimal(maximal is simalar).by induction.
If there is no

![$x_1 \in \left[a,c\right]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/4/3/5/4359d5f63313b7789b554564d3cdce260f151cf3.png)
this is because
![$x_2,x_3,\cdots,x_n \in \left[c,b\right]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/5/8/9/58957bf527b3c4ea0a8b1b82096018bfe26efc51.png)

if there have
![$x_1,x_2,\cdots,x_i \in \left[a,c\right]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/d/6/3/d634cd3dc9004af6fe17d18bf0443041c3eec1ca.png)
case(i)


case(ii) assume


then we obtian

we reduce it to be

so the theorem is proven.
theorem1'


![$(ii), x_1 , x_2 , \cdots , x_n \in \left[a,b\right]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/b/6/0/b60563c744a7e5004c20e391ce42d8c4475e4e9e.png)

and

![$\left[a,b\right]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/6/7/2/672d808e58fabed65fbce243a26364ab1a6d0cd5.png)

![$\left[a,c\right]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/9/d/8/9d862534eb8bf217ae812d244f773061a5e3ac39.png)
![$\left[c,b\right]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/f/c/d/fcd76c855fe854cd7af2dd9f293f039193302fa6.png)
LET

then:



and



proof is similar to theorem1.
Application
1.http://www.mathlinks.ro/Forum/viewtopic.php?highlight=1%2B%5C%5Ccos&t=59649
Let ABC be an acute-angled triangle,Prove:

proof:just let


so we just need to prove :

or


2..http://www.mathlinks.ro/Forum/viewtopic.php?t=64122


proof:let

notice

and let


wlog





theorem2




and



![$\left(-\infty,c \right]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/3/7/f/37f2476e6d5628aee3ca26d6850c96d0a7928f5b.png)

LET

then:


and


Proof:just for the minimal(maximal is simalar).
assume
![$x_1,x_2,\cdots,x_i \in \left(-\infty,c \right]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/d/4/8/d485886a4f50411b4f5423297c3b4b568653a525.png)
because

![$\left(-\infty,c \right]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/3/7/f/37f2476e6d5628aee3ca26d6850c96d0a7928f5b.png)
then we get

and

so

so the theorem2 is proved.
theorem2'




and



![$\left(-\infty,c \right]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/3/7/f/37f2476e6d5628aee3ca26d6850c96d0a7928f5b.png)

LET

then:


and


Application
http://www.mathlinks.ro/Forum/viewtopic.php?t=32031
http://www.mathlinks.ro/Forum/viewtopic.php?t=64793

find the minimum of

proof:let

$f\"(t)=\frac{e^x(k(k+1)e^x-k)}{(1+e^x)^{k+2}}$
which impies it can use theorem2 .
Wlog

by theorem2 I think we should only consider the case

I think it can also work when find the maximum of

And I think there may be another more applications,If you find,please write it here,thanks

(and I find the theorem2 is a little similar to VASC's Right-Convex Function Theorem )