Calculating Improper Integral w/ Power Series of r=1

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating an improper integral of a function defined by a power series with a radius of convergence of r=1. The original poster raises a question about the validity of interchanging limits and integrals in the context of this improper integral, specifically from 0 to 1.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of Abel's theorem and uniform convergence in relation to the interchange of limits and integrals. There is a discussion about whether uniform convergence is necessary for the original poster's situation and the conditions under which limits can be switched.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing insights into the relevance of uniform convergence and Abel's theorem. Some participants suggest that simpler reasoning may suffice for the original poster's case, while others emphasize the importance of uniform convergence for justifying the interchange of limits and integrals.

Contextual Notes

There is an acknowledgment of the improper nature of the integral and the specific limits involved. The original poster expresses uncertainty about the application of theorems and the reasoning needed to approach the problem effectively.

aaaa202
Messages
1,144
Reaction score
2
At exam today I was to calculate an improper integral of a function f defined by a power series.
The power series had radius of convergence r=1.
Inside this radius you could of course integrate each term, i.e. symbologically:
∫Ʃ = Ʃ∫
The only problem is that the improper integral went from 0 to 1.
Is it then true that:
limx->1[∫Ʃ ]=limx->1[Ʃ∫]
and what theorem assures this? At the exam I didn't think about this unfortunately, but I would probably not have known what to do anyways. I think there is a theorem called Abels theorem which shows that a power series is continuous also in x=±r, but I'm not sure if that's what I am looking for.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you familiar with uniform convergence?

Abel's theorem basically says that if a series converges at x = R, it converges uniformly over the interval
0 ≤ x ≤ R.

As a consequence, you can also observe uniform convergence over the interval -R ≤ x ≤ 0.

A corollary would be that it converges on -R ≤ x ≤ R.
 
Last edited:
Yes I am familiar with uniform convergence. And you agree that from what I told you I would have had to invoke Abels theorem to give a satisfactory answer?
 
aaaa202 said:
Yes I am familiar with uniform convergence. And you agree that from what I told you I would have had to invoke Abels theorem to give a satisfactory answer?

Uniform convergence would be a sufficient condition for you to be able to switch limits/derivatives/integrals around. So yes, Abel's theorem could be used here as it guarantees the uniform convergence over the whole interval [-R,R].
 
I don't think you need anything fancy at all. Assuming that your variable x is "integrate from 0 to x" then for every x<1, the thing you have written in square brackets [ ] is equal whether the integration or the summation comes first, because you're integrating over [0,x] which is bounded away from 1. You just did algebra inside the limit which is legal for the values of x that you are considering
 
Im switching 2 limits:
limx->1limn->∞[Ʃanxn] = limn->∞limx->1[Ʃanxn]
I only know that the power series converges for lxl<1
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K