Compute Lebesgue integral as (improper) Riemann integral

In summary, the conversation discusses the evaluation of the equation ##\int_{\mathbb{R}}^{} \frac {1}{|x|}\, d\lambda(x)=\infty## using Lebesgue measure and integration. It is shown that the monotone convergence theorem can be used to prove this result, and the convention of working with extended real numbers is also discussed.
  • #1
SchroedingersLion
215
57
Hello everyone,

in a solution to my measure theory assignment, I have seen the equation

$$
\int_{\mathbb{R}}^{} \frac {1}{|x|}\, d\lambda(x)=\infty
$$
with ##\lambda## as the 1⁻dim Lebesgue measure.

I was wondering how that integral was evaluated as we had never proven any theorem that states that Lebesgue integrals can be computed as improper Riemann integrals. This simple equation makes it look trivial, but I don't see the reasoning. Under which condition can I just rewrite the integral as ## \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac {1}{|x|}\, dx ##?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I think you can easily stay within the Lebesgue integral definition. Given arbitrarily large ##M \gt 0##, can you find a set of positive measure on which the function integral must be greater than ##M##? Then show that the entire integral over the reals must be greater than ##M##.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes SchroedingersLion and Keith_McClary
  • #3
For each ##n \in \mathbb Z^{\geq 1}##, let ##f_n## be the characteristic function of ##(-n, -1/n) \cup (1/n, n)##. Observe that for all ##x \neq 0##, ##\left(\frac{1}{|x|}f_n(x)\right)_{n=1}^{\infty}## is a nonnegative increasing sequence which converges to ##1/|x|##.

Therefore by the monotone convergence theorem (second equality below), one can write
$$\begin{aligned}
\int_{\mathbb R}\frac{1}{|x|}d\lambda(x) &= \int_{\mathbb R}\frac{1}{|x|}\lim_{n \to \infty} f_n d\lambda(x) \\
&= \lim_{n \to \infty} \int_{\mathbb R}\frac{1}{|x|}f_n d\lambda(x) \\
&= \lim_{n \to \infty}\left(\int_{-n}^{-1/n}\frac{1}{|x|} d\lambda(x) + \int_{1/n}^{n}\frac{1}{|x|}d\lambda(x)\right) \\
&= \lim_{n \to \infty}\left( 2\int_{1/n}^{n}\frac{1}{x} d\lambda(x) \right)\\
&= \lim_{n \to \infty}2(\log(n) - \log(1/n)) \\
&= \lim_{n \to \infty}4\log(n) \\
&= \infty
\end{aligned}$$
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes SchroedingersLion
  • #4
@FactChecker Nice idea, cheers!

@jbunniii Thanks for showing how to properly reduce it to a Riemann integral!
 
  • #5
jbunniii said:
Therefore by the monotone convergence theorem (second equality below), one can write
##
\int_{\mathbb R}\frac{1}{|x|}d\lambda(x) = \int_{\mathbb R}\frac{1}{|x|}\lim_{n \to \infty} f_n d\lambda(x)
##
## = \lim_{n \to \infty} \int_{\mathbb R}\frac{1}{|x|}f_n d\lambda(x)
##

Often in calculus, we consider statements of the form ##lim_{x \rightarrow a} f(x) = lim_{x \rightarrow a} g(x) ## to be true when both limits fail to exist - or are both exist by being "infinity". It's an interesting technical question whether the monotone covergence is stated using this convention. Does the monotone convergence theorem deal only with convergence?
 
  • #6
Stephen Tashi said:
Often in calculus, we consider statements of the form ##lim_{x \rightarrow a} f(x) = lim_{x \rightarrow a} g(x) ## to be true when both limits fail to exist - or are both exist by being "infinity". It's an interesting technical question whether the monotone covergence is stated using this convention. Does the monotone convergence theorem deal only with convergence?
The monotone convergence theorem only deals with pointwise monotonically increasing sequences of nonnegative functions. Therefore the only possible type of convergence failure is divergence to ##+\infty##.

For this reason among others, it's conventional in the Lebesgue context to work with the extended real numbers, in which case divergence to ##+\infty## is actually convergence to ##+\infty##.

Whether or not we assume this convention, the monotone convergence theorem handles this case, in the sense that if either side diverges to ##+\infty## (or equivalently, converges in the extended reals to ##+\infty##), then both do.
 
  • Like
Likes sysprog

1. What is the difference between a Lebesgue integral and a Riemann integral?

The main difference between a Lebesgue integral and a Riemann integral is the method used to calculate the integral. A Riemann integral uses the concept of partitions and sums to approximate the area under a curve, while a Lebesgue integral uses the concept of measure to calculate the area. In general, Lebesgue integrals are more flexible and can handle a wider range of functions compared to Riemann integrals.

2. When is it necessary to compute a Lebesgue integral as an improper Riemann integral?

A Lebesgue integral needs to be computed as an improper Riemann integral when the function being integrated is not Riemann integrable, meaning it does not satisfy the necessary conditions for a Riemann integral. This can occur when the function has an infinite discontinuity or when the function is unbounded.

3. How do you compute a Lebesgue integral as an improper Riemann integral?

To compute a Lebesgue integral as an improper Riemann integral, you need to first determine the limits of integration and then use the definition of an improper Riemann integral to calculate the integral. This involves taking the limit of the integral as the upper or lower limit of integration approaches infinity or negative infinity, respectively.

4. What are the advantages of computing a Lebesgue integral as an improper Riemann integral?

One advantage of computing a Lebesgue integral as an improper Riemann integral is that it allows for a wider range of functions to be integrated. Additionally, it can be easier to calculate the integral using the definition of an improper Riemann integral compared to the more complex measure-based approach of a Lebesgue integral.

5. Are there any limitations to computing a Lebesgue integral as an improper Riemann integral?

One limitation of computing a Lebesgue integral as an improper Riemann integral is that it can only be used for functions that are Lebesgue integrable. This means that the function must have a finite measure, which may not always be the case. Additionally, the calculation may become more complex when dealing with multi-dimensional integrals.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
393
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
370
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top