Can a positive integrand oscillate fast enough so that the integral is finite?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the behavior of a continuous positive function and the conditions under which its improper integral converges. Participants explore whether a function can oscillate rapidly enough to yield a finite integral while remaining positive.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants consider examples of functions that oscillate and question the validity of claims regarding their integrals. There is discussion about the implications of oscillation frequency on the convergence of integrals and the behavior of limits.

Discussion Status

Multiple interpretations of the problem are being explored, with some participants suggesting counterexamples and others questioning the assumptions about the behavior of the functions involved. Guidance has been offered regarding the construction of specific functions that meet the criteria of the problem.

Contextual Notes

There are constraints regarding the requirement for the function to remain strictly positive and continuous, as well as the implications of oscillation on the integral's convergence. Some participants reference homework rules and the context of academic preparation.

Charles49
Messages
87
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



If $$f(x)>0$$ is continuous for all $$x\ge0$$ and the improper integral $$\int_0^{\infty}f(x) dx$$ exists, then $$\lim_{x\rightarrow\infty}f(x)=0.$$

2. Relevant

I think this assertion is false. A counterexample can be constructed along the following lines of thought: Suppose a function oscillates between 0 and 2. Then the integral computes a positive area under the curve. However by increasing the frequency, the oscillations can be made so rapid that each peak is too sharp and too close to another peak for the increment in area along the $x$-axis to avoid becoming negligible.


The Attempt at a Solution



An example is the function $$f(x)=1+\sin e^x.$$ Clearly, $$f>0$$ because $$0<1+\sin(x)<2.$$ Also integrating $$f(x)-1$$,
\begin{align*}
\int_0^\infty\sin e^x dx&= \int_1^\infty \frac{\sin t}{t}\,dt \\
&=\frac{\pi}{2} - \text{Si}(1)\\
&<\infty
\end{align*}
where $$\text{Si}(x)$$ is the sine integral function. However,
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{x\rightarrow\infty}\sin(e^x)\ne0.
\end{equation*}

The problem is can such an integrand be constructed?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
[tex]-1 \le \sin e^x \le 1<br /> \\0 \le 1+ \sin e^x \le 2[/tex]I would have suggested using the pinching theorem to find if the middle term converges or diverges, but the latter is not applicable in this case, as the limits of the two boundaries are not equal. In this case, f(x) diverges: [tex]0 \le \lim_{n \to \infty} (1+ \sin e^x) \le 2[/tex]But maybe I'm wrong.
 
Last edited:
Charles49 said:
An example is the function $$f(x)=1+\sin e^x.$$ Clearly, $$f>0$$ because $$0<1+\sin(x)<2.$$

This is false. The function f becomes 0 many times. Not that it is very hard to fix this problem.
 
Your intuition is correct regarding the validity of the claim. The easiest-to-construct counterexamples aren't "nice" functions, though. I like to keep a nice stock of "spiky" functions on hand to disprove these kinds of claims.

For the record, there is a continuous function ##f## defined on ##[0,\infty)## with ##f(x)>0## for all ##x## such that ##\int_0^{\infty}f(x)dx## converges while ##\limsup_{x\rightarrow\infty}f(x)=\infty##.
 
gopher_p said:
Your intuition is correct regarding the validity of the claim. The easiest-to-construct counterexamples aren't "nice" functions, though. I like to keep a nice stock of "spiky" functions on hand to disprove these kinds of claims.

For the record, there is a continuous function ##f## defined on ##[0,\infty)## with ##f(x)>0## for all ##x## such that ##\int_0^{\infty}f(x)dx## converges while ##\limsup_{x\rightarrow\infty}f(x)=\infty##.

For the record, what is this function?

RGV
 
Ray Vickson said:
For the record, what is this function?

RGV

Define ##g## piecewise as follows:

##g(x)=0## for ##x## in any interval of the form ##(n+\frac{1}{n^3},n+1)## for ##n=1, 2, 3, ...## as well as on ##[0,1)##.

Let ##x_n## be the midpoints of intervals of the form ##[n, n+\frac{1}{n^3}]## for ##n=1,2,3,...##. Put ##g(n)=g(n+\frac{1}{n^3})=0##, and ##g(x_n)=n##. Connect the dots with lines on the remainder of ##[n, n+\frac{1}{n^3}]##. So we have a triangular spike of height ##h_n=n## and base ##b_n=\frac{1}{n^3}##.

Then ##g## is (obviously?) continuous and non-negative. ##\int_0^{\infty}g(x)dx=\sum_1^{\infty}\frac{1}{2}b_nh_n=\sum_1^{\infty}\frac{1}{2n^2}=\frac{\pi^2}{12}##. And ##\limsup_{x\rightarrow\infty} g(x)\geq \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}g(x_n)=\infty##.

Let ##h(x)=e^{-x}##, put ##f=g+h##. ##f## has the desired properties.
 
gopher_p:

That was very clever! Thanks a lot!
 
Charles49 said:
gopher_p:

That was very clever! Thanks a lot!

I take no credit for the idea. Like I said before, the spiky functions are pretty useful as counterexamples to naive notions of what we think should happen.

As a follow-up exercise, replace continuity of ##f## with uniform continuity. Now is the statement true?

Or keep the original setup, and ask yourself if it must be true that ##\liminf_{x\rightarrow\infty} f(x)=0##.
 
micromass said:
This is false. The function f becomes 0 many times. Not that it is very hard to fix this problem.

Does that not affect the answer? If every part of the curve must cover some area, my intuition says the total area covered must be infinite. You could make it oscillate fast enough so that the function is effectively equal to some [itex]\epsilon > 0[/itex] for all [itex]x[/itex], but the integral of that constant small number diverges.
 
  • #10
gopher_p, thanks for the suggestions. By the way, this question came up in a proseminar packet which have to master before I can qualify for PhD.

Also Steely_Dan's objection to my previous incorrect example makes sense. Infinite epsilons do add up and the integral diverges. So instead of adding 2, I took the absolute value. Now does this integral diverge:

$$
\int_{0}^\infty\lvert\sin(e^x)\rvert dx?
$$
 
  • #11
That is still problematic, because the sine function will always have zeros at some locations, so it doesn't satisfy the requirement that the function must be strictly positive.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
11K