Are these proofs correct(bounded and finite variation).

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proofs related to functions of bounded and finite variation, specifically examining the functions \( f(t) = \cos(ct) \) and \( g(t) = \sin(ct) \). Participants are analyzing the conditions under which these functions meet the criteria for bounded and finite variation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the proofs for the bounded variation of \( f(t) \) and finite variation of \( g(t) \), referencing the use of integrals and the mean value theorem. Questions arise regarding the notation and definitions used, particularly concerning the supremum and the interpretation of variation as a function of \( t \). There is also inquiry about the implications of combining functions of finite variation.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with some participants providing feedback on the proofs and raising questions about specific details and definitions. There is recognition of errors in the original posts, and participants are engaging in clarifying these points without reaching a definitive conclusion.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention the need for clarity in notation and definitions, particularly in relation to the supremum and intervals. There are also references to the need for proper LaTeX formatting for mathematical symbols.

Azael
Messages
257
Reaction score
1
First of all if you read this and the latex is all messed upp I am probably working on getting it right so please be patient till I get it right. No need to post a comment that it doesn't work. Thanks :wink:

I haven't taken a pure maths class in over 2,5 years so I can hardly remember how to write proofs

Problem 1.

Let [tex]C \in \mathbb{R}[/tex] be a arbitrary number. Show that the function
[tex]f:[a,b]\rightarrow \mathbb{R}[/tex]

given by [tex]f(t)=cos(ct)[/tex]

is of bounded variation. i.e it satisifies the condition

[tex]Sup V_f (t) < \infty[/tex]

Proof.

[tex]V_f (t) = \lim_{n\rightarrow \infty} Sup_{ t_k^n,t_{k-1}^n \in \pi_n } <br /> \sum_{k=1}^n |{(f(t_k^n)-f(t_{k-1}^n)}|[/tex]

with [tex]\pi_n : t_0^n < ... < t_n^n[/tex]

Since [tex]Cos(ct)[/tex]

is differentiable we can rewrite [tex]V_f (t)[/tex] with the mean value theorem

[tex]V_f (t) = \lim_{n\rightarrow \infty} Sup_{ t_k^n,t_{k-1}^n \in \pi_n } <br /> \sum_{k=1}^n \|{(f(t_k^n)-f(t_{k-1}^n)}| = \lim_{n\rightarrow \infty} Sup_{ t_k^n,t_{k-1}^n \in \pi_n } \sum_{k=1}^n |f^{'} (G)| (t_k^n - t_{k-1}^n)[/tex]

which is equal to(according to the definition of the riemann integral)

[tex]\int_{a}^{b} |f^{'} (x)| dx[/tex]

with [tex]f(x)=f(t)=cos(ct)[/tex] we get

[tex]\int_{a}^{b} |-csin(ct)| dx \leq \int_{a}^{b} |c| dx = |c|(b-a)[/tex]

So

[tex]Sup V_f (t) = Sup |c|(b-a) <\infty[/tex]
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
problem 2
show that the function [tex]g:[0,\infty) \rightarrow \mathbb{R}[/tex]
given by [tex]g(t)=sin(ct)[/tex] is of finite variation.

In the same manner as in problem one we get

[tex]V_f ((0,t)) = \int_{0}^{t} |f'(t)|dt = \int_{0}^{t} |ccos(ct)|dt \leq \int_{0}^{t} |c|dt=|c|t<\infty[/tex] for all t equal to or larger than zero. (how do I get the equal to or larger than symbol in latex? and the "for all" symbol?)

which shows that the function is of finite variation
 
Last edited:
problem 3
If the functions [tex]f,g:[0,\infty) \rightarrow \mathbb{R}[/tex] are of finite variation, show that any linear combination of them,
[tex]\alpha f + \beta g:[0,\infty) \rightarrow \mathbb{R}[/tex] [tex]\alpha,\beta \in \mathbb{R}[/tex] are of finite variation.

[tex]V_{f,g} ((0,t))=\lim_{n\rightarrow \infty} \Sup_{ t_k^n,t_{k-1}^n \in \pi_n }\sum_{k=1}^n |{\alpha f(t_k^n)+\beta g(t_k^n)-\alpha f(t_{k-1}^n)-\beta g(t_{k-1}^n)|=[/tex]
[tex]\lim_{n\rightarrow \infty}Sup_{ t_k^n,t_{k-1}^n \in \pi_n }\sum_{k=1}^n| \alpha (f(t_k^n)-f(t_{k-1})+\beta (g(t_k^n)-g(t_{k-1})| \leq[/tex]

(using triangle inequality)

[tex]\lim_{n\rightarrow \infty}Sup_{ t_k^n,t_{k-1}^n \in \pi_n }\sum_{k=1}^n |\alpha (f(t_k^n)-f(t_{k-1})|+|\beta (g(t_k^n)-g(t_{k-1})| =[/tex]
(can I just move the alpha and beta outside of the lim,sup and sum like this?)
[tex]|\alpha| \lim_{n\rightarrow \infty}Sup_{ t_k^n,t_{k-1}^n \in \pi_n }\sum_{k=1}^n |(f(t_k^n)-f(t_{k-1})|+ |\beta|\lim_{n\rightarrow \infty}Sup_{ t_k^n,t_{k-1}^n \in \pi_n }\sum_{k=1}^n |(g(t_k^n)-g(t_{k-1})| =[/tex]

[tex]|\alpha| V_f((0,t))+|\beta| V_f((0,t)) <\infty[/tex] for all t equal to or larger than zero since [tex]V_f((0,t))<\infty[/tex] and [tex]V_g((0,t)) <\infty[/tex] for all t equal to or larger than zero.
 
Last edited:
I hope I haven't made any error that makes the whole thing incomprehensible :(
 
For the first question, the basic idea of the proof seems correct, although I'm not sure how Vf is a function of t, it seems more a function from intervals into the real numbers. And I'm not sure what you're taking the sup of when you write sup Vf(t) or sup |c|(b-a). Besides these details it looks correct. For the second, do they mean "of bounded variation on the set [0,t], for all t in R"? If so, this is just a special case of the last problem. The third proof seems correct as well.
 
yes you are quite correct I just made some errors :)

Thanks a lot for checking, appreciate it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K