A question about Upper Darboux Integrals

  • Thread starter Thread starter Artusartos
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integrals
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
1 reply · 1K views
Artusartos
Messages
236
Reaction score
0
In this link:

http://math.berkeley.edu/~scanez/courses/math104/fall11/homework/hw10-solns.pdf

For qustion 32.6, I'm not sure if I'm understanding how there can be a "sequence" of upper and lower darboux integrals.

So (for example), what is the difference between [tex]U_{10}[/tex] and [tex]U_{11}[/tex]? Does it mean that [tex]U_{10}[/tex] is the upper darboux integral when there are 10 partitions (10 rectangles)...and [tex]U_{11}[/tex] is the upper darboux integral when there are 11 partitions? So, if we have [tex]U_1[/tex], does it mean that there is only one partition (so only one rectangle)?

Thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, for each n, U_n is just any upper Darboux sum. It corresponds to some partition P_n which could have any number of subintervals. Likewise L_n is any old sequence of lower Darboux sums which corresponds to some other partition Q_n. The hypothesis is that the difference (U_n-L_n) converges to 0.

There is no stipulated relation between consecutive partitions in the sequence. In particular they are not assumed to be refinements of previous partitions.