Proving Non-Convergence of an Improper Integral

In summary, the conversation discusses how to prove that the integral of sin^2(pi*(x+1/x))dx does not exist. The conversation starts with constructing a sequence and using the mean value theorem of integral calculus, but it is determined that the proof is not valid. The conversation then moves on to discussing the graph of the function and using a change of variable to prove that the integral diverges. The final solution involves recognizing that the integral is almost the integral of sin^2(pi*u)*(4/3)*du, which clearly diverges, and learning to put this into words is a useful skill for future proofs.
  • #1
JG89
728
1

Homework Statement



Prove that [tex] \int_0^{\infty} sin^2(\pi(x + 1/x))dx [/tex] does not exist.

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution

First, we can construct a sequence as follows:

[tex] \int_0^{\infty} f(x)dx = \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} S_n [/tex], where [tex] S_n =\int_0^{1} f(x)dx, \int_0^{2} f(x)dx, \int_0^{3} f(x)dx, \int_0^{4} f(x)dx, ..., \int_0^{n} f(x)dx [/tex]. Now, the sequence S_n converges as n approaches infinity if and only if [tex] |S_m - S_n| < \epsilon [/tex] for all epsilon > 0, provided that there is an integer N such that m,n > N. We set m = n + 1. We then have [tex] |S_{n+1} - S_n| = | \int_0^{n+1} f(x)dx - \int_0^{n} f(x)dx |[/tex].

Now,

[tex]\int_0^{n+1} f(x)dx - \int_0^{n} f(x)dx = \int_n^{n+1} f(x)dx = f(c) [/tex] for some c inbetween n and n + 1 (By the MVT of Integral Calculus). And so [tex] |S_{n+1} - S_n}| = f(c)[/tex]. Now, if |f(c)| < epsilon for sufficiently large c (remember that c goes to infinity as n goes to infinity), then this means that the function approaches a limit of 0, which it obviously doesn't as it's periodic. Thus the integral doesn't converge. QED.How does this proof look?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Nah, I don't buy that. The integrand isn't really periodic in the variable x, is it? It is periodic in the variable u=x+1/x and it's bounded in x. Try to exploit that.
 
  • #3
You don't think the entire proof works, or just the last part where I say the function is periodic? I'll get cracking back on this problem tomorrow, I've got to catch some sleep now. Goodnight.
 
Last edited:
  • #4
The whole proof. How do you know |f(c)|<epsilon is impossible? Even if it was periodic. It's a pile of junk. Throw it away. Think about the change of variable u=x+1/x for x larger than some number. Now it's periodic and positive in that range. Obviously divergent. But don't forget about accounting for du vs. dx.
 
  • #5
JG89 said:
You don't think the entire proof works, or just the last part where I say the function is periodic? I'll get cracking back on this problem tomorrow, I've got to catch some sleep now. Goodnight.

Goodnight. Think about it fresh in the morning.
 
  • #6
Sorry about the late reply, I've been tied up lately.

So I've tried using u = x + 1/x. Then du = (1 - 1/x^2)dx and so this is difficult to integrate...infact according to my integrator, it needs to use complex numbers and since I haven't learned that yet, I know that I'm not really looking to integrate the function...


Looking at the graph of the function, it seems that since it's continuously "wavy" and positive over all of R, then the area under the graph from 0 to infinity must be infinity, and so it diverges. I'm just having trouble proving this rigorously.
 
  • #7
JG89 said:
Sorry about the late reply, I've been tied up lately.

So I've tried using u = x + 1/x. Then du = (1 - 1/x^2)dx and so this is difficult to integrate...infact according to my integrator, it needs to use complex numbers and since I haven't learned that yet, I know that I'm not really looking to integrate the function...


Looking at the graph of the function, it seems that since it's continuously "wavy" and positive over all of R, then the area under the graph from 0 to infinity must be infinity, and so it diverges. I'm just having trouble proving this rigorously.

Right. But the point is that for large values of x, du is ALMOST dx. If x>2 then (1-1/x^2)>=3/4. Isn't that enough to prove it diverges?
 
  • #8
Hmmm...I'm not sure I'm entirely getting what you're saying, but I'll give it a shot:

For x getting larger and larger, du gets closer and closer to dx. I see that (1 - 1/x^2) increases monotonically towards 1 as x tends to infinity, so we could say that for very large values of x, du = dx + r(x), where r(x) is some function approximating the error. Since du gets closer and closer to dx, we know that r(x) goes to 0 as x approaches infinity. So using the substitution u = 1 + 1/x we have

[tex] \int_0^{\infty} sin^2(\pi(x + 1/x))dx = \lim_{\beta \rightarrow \infty} \int_0^{\beta} sin^2(\pi(u))(du - r(x)) [/tex].

Since as beta tends to infinity r(x) must go to 0 and we will have du = dx, we have [tex] \lim_{\beta \rightarrow \infty} \int_0^{\beta} sin^2(\pi(u))(du - r(x)) = \int_0^{\infty} sin^2(\pi(u))du [/tex] which obviously diverges since the integrand is positive and periodic.
 
  • #9
You have the right idea. But the expression is pretty awkward. Why not just say that for x>2 and u=x+1/x that the integral of sin^2(pi*(x+1/x))dx=sin^2(pi*u)(1-1/x^2)dx>the integral of sin^2(pi*u)*(4/3)*du. Since the latter diverges, the former must diverge.
 
  • #10
There we go...thanks for all the help!

Besides practice, practice, and some more practice, do you have any tips on how to recognize how one should start the proof?
 
  • #11
Feelings from the gut. I think you had that to begin with. You KNEW it diverged, right? See the big picture. Like, this is 'almost' this. Now learn to put 'almost' into words. That's how I do it.
 
Last edited:

Related to Proving Non-Convergence of an Improper Integral

1. What is an improper integral?

An improper integral is a type of mathematical integral that involves an unbounded interval, infinite limits of integration, or a function that is not defined at certain points within the interval of integration.

2. How do you prove the convergence of an improper integral?

To prove the convergence of an improper integral, you can use various methods such as the limit comparison test, comparison test, or the integral test. These methods involve evaluating the limit of the integral as the bounds of integration approach infinity.

3. Can an improper integral diverge?

Yes, an improper integral can diverge if the limit of the integral does not exist or if it approaches infinity. This means that the integral does not have a finite value and cannot be evaluated.

4. What is the significance of proving the convergence of an improper integral?

Proving the convergence of an improper integral is important because it ensures that the integral has a finite value and can be evaluated. This is necessary for many applications in mathematics and science.

5. Are there any special cases for improper integral proofs?

Yes, there are some special cases for improper integral proofs, such as when the integrand function has a discontinuity within the interval of integration or when the integrand function is unbounded. In these cases, additional techniques may be needed to prove the convergence of the integral.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
332
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
905
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
625
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
492
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
4
Views
398
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
15
Views
1K
Back
Top