Riemann Integral-Questions

  • MHB
  • Thread starter evinda
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Riemann
In summary: P})-\mathcal{L}(g,\mathcal{P})< \frac{\epsilon}{2}$. From here, we can use the fact that $\mathcal{L}(f,\mathcal{P})\le\int_a^b f\le\mathcal{U}(f,\mathcal{P})$ and $\mathcal{L}(g,\mathcal{P})\le\int_a^b g\le\mathcal{U}(g,\mathcal{P})$ to get the desired inequalities.
  • #1
evinda
Gold Member
MHB
3,836
0
Hello! (Wave)

I am looking at the Riemann integral and I have two questions.

Theorem: Let $f: [a,b] \to \mathbb{R}$ bounded and $c \in (a,b)$. Then $f$ is integrable in $[a,b]$ iff it is integrable in $[a,c]$ and in $[c,b]$. In this case we have $\int_a^b f=\int_a^c f + \int_c^b f$.

At the proof, we use the Riemann criterion to conclude that $\mathcal{U}(f,P)-\mathcal{L}(f,P)<\epsilon$, so $f$ is integrable.

Then the following is stated:

We note that the quantities

$$\int_a^b f \text{ and } \int_a^c f + \int_c^b f$$

are between the numbers $\mathcal{L}(f,P)$ and $\mathcal{U}(f,P)$. Thus,

$$\left| \int_a^b f- \int_a^c f - \int_c^b f\right| \leq \mathcal{U}(f,P)-\mathcal{L}(f,P) < \epsilon.$$

Since the relation holds for any $\epsilon>0$, we get that $\int_a^b f=\int_a^c f+ \int_c^b f$.I haven't understood why the quantities$\int_a^b f \text{ and } \int_a^c f + \int_c^b f$ are between the numbers $\mathcal{L}(f,P)$ and $\mathcal{U}(f,P)$.
Could you explain it to me? 🧐

My second question is from the proof of the theorem that if $f,g: [a,b] \to \mathbb{R}$ integrable, then $f+g$ is integrable and $\int_a^b (f+g)=\int_a^b f +\int_a^b g$.

At the proof, we consider a partition of $[a,b]$, $\mathcal{P}=\{ a=t_0< \dots<t_n=b\}$.

Then $\mathcal{U}(f+g,P) \leq \mathcal{U}(f,\mathcal{P})+\mathcal{U}(g,\mathcal{P})$, $\mathcal{L}(f+g,P) \geq \mathcal{L}(f,\mathcal{P})+\mathcal{L}(g,\mathcal{P})$.

Now let $\epsilon>0$. SInce $f,g$ are integrable, there are partitions $\mathcal{P}_1, \mathcal{P}_2$ of $[a,b]$ such that

$$\mathcal{U}(f,\mathcal{P}_1)-\mathcal{L}(f,\mathcal{P}_1)< \frac{\epsilon}{2}, \mathcal{U}(g,\mathcal{P}_2)-\mathcal{L}(g,\mathcal{P}_2)< \frac{\epsilon}{2}$$

Then, if we set $\mathcal{P}=\mathcal{P}_1 \cup \mathcal{P}_2$, we have

$$\mathcal{U}(f,\mathcal{P})-\mathcal{L}(f,\mathcal{P})< \frac{\epsilon}{2}, \mathcal{U}(g,\mathcal{P})-\mathcal{L}(g,\mathcal{P})< \frac{\epsilon}{2}$$

From these relations we get that

$$\int_a^b f < \mathcal{L}(f, \mathcal{P})+\frac{\epsilon}{2}, \int_a^b g< \mathcal{L}(g, \mathcal{P})+\frac{\epsilon}{2}$$

and

$$\int_a^b f > \mathcal{U}(f, \mathcal{P})-\frac{\epsilon}{2}, \int_a^b g> \mathcal{U}(g, \mathcal{P})-\frac{\epsilon}{2}.$$

By adding the first two relations, we get that $\int_a^b f+\int_a^b g \leq \int_{\underline{a}}^{b} (f+g)+\epsilon$.

$\dots$Could you explain to me how we get that

$$\int_a^b f < \mathcal{L}(f, \mathcal{P})+\frac{\epsilon}{2}, \int_a^b g< \mathcal{L}(g, \mathcal{P})+\frac{\epsilon}{2}$$

and

$$\int_a^b f > \mathcal{U}(f, \mathcal{P})-\frac{\epsilon}{2}, \int_a^b g> \mathcal{U}(g, \mathcal{P})-\frac{\epsilon}{2}.$$

? :unsure:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
evinda said:
I haven't understood why the quantities$\int_a^b f \text{ and } \int_a^c f + \int_c^b f$ are between the numbers $\mathcal{L}(f,P)$ and $\mathcal{U}(f,P)$.
Could you explain it to me?

Hey evinda!

Suppose we restrict the partition $P$ to the interval [a,c], which we'll call $P_1$.
Then $\mathcal{L}(f,P_1)\le\int_a^c f\le\mathcal{U}(f,P_1)$ isn't it? :unsure:

Suppose we do the same for the interval [c,b], can we find the inequality then? (Wondering)
 
  • #3


Hi there! I'll try my best to explain the answers to your questions.

For your first question, we can use the Riemann criterion to show that the quantities $\int_a^b f$ and $\int_a^c f + \int_c^b f$ are between $\mathcal{L}(f,P)$ and $\mathcal{U}(f,P)$. This is because the Riemann criterion states that for a bounded function $f$ to be integrable on $[a,b]$, the upper and lower sums of $f$ for any partition $P$ must be arbitrarily close. In other words, for any $\epsilon>0$, we can find a partition $P$ such that $\mathcal{U}(f,P)-\mathcal{L}(f,P)<\epsilon$. This shows that the upper and lower sums are "sandwiched" between $\mathcal{L}(f,P)$ and $\mathcal{U}(f,P)$, and therefore the integrals $\int_a^b f$ and $\int_a^c f + \int_c^b f$ must also be between these numbers.

For your second question, we can use the fact that $f$ and $g$ are integrable to show that $\int_a^b f < \mathcal{L}(f, \mathcal{P})+\frac{\epsilon}{2}$ and $\int_a^b g< \mathcal{L}(g, \mathcal{P})+\frac{\epsilon}{2}$. This is because, by definition of integrability, we can find partitions $\mathcal{P}_1$ and $\mathcal{P}_2$ such that $\mathcal{U}(f,\mathcal{P}_1)-\mathcal{L}(f,\mathcal{P}_1)< \frac{\epsilon}{2}$ and $\mathcal{U}(g,\mathcal{P}_2)-\mathcal{L}(g,\mathcal{P}_2)< \frac{\epsilon}{2}$. Then, by setting $\mathcal{P}=\mathcal{P}_1 \cup \mathcal{P}_2$, we can show that $\mathcal{U}(f,\mathcal{P})-\mathcal{L}(f,\mathcal{P})< \frac{\epsilon}{2}$ and $\mathcal{U
 

1. What is a Riemann Integral?

A Riemann Integral is a mathematical concept used to calculate the area under a curve. It is named after the German mathematician Bernhard Riemann and is an important tool in calculus.

2. How is a Riemann Integral calculated?

A Riemann Integral is calculated by dividing the area under a curve into smaller rectangles and then adding up the areas of these rectangles. The smaller the rectangles, the more accurate the calculation will be.

3. What is the difference between a Riemann Integral and a definite integral?

A Riemann Integral is a type of definite integral that uses the Riemann sum method to calculate the area under a curve. Other methods, such as the Trapezoidal rule, can also be used to calculate definite integrals.

4. What are the applications of Riemann Integrals?

Riemann Integrals have various applications in mathematics, physics, and engineering. They are commonly used to calculate the area under a curve, to find the volume of a solid, and to solve optimization problems.

5. What are the limitations of Riemann Integrals?

Riemann Integrals can only be used to calculate the area under continuous functions. They cannot be used for discontinuous functions or functions with infinite discontinuities. In addition, they may not be accurate for highly complex functions.

Similar threads

  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
2
Views
152
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
753
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
14
Views
214
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
107
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
2
Views
898
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
121
Back
Top