Can integration and summation be considered equivalent concepts?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Damidami
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integral Series
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion establishes that integration and summation can be considered equivalent concepts, particularly through the lens of measure theory. Specifically, it highlights that an infinite sum can be interpreted as a Lebesgue integral over the natural numbers with respect to the counting measure. The relationship between a series and an integral can be expressed using functions defined on specific intervals, such as f(x)=∑_{k=1}^∞ k(k+1)a_kχ_{(1/(k+1), 1/k]} and g(x)=∑_{k=1}^∞ k a_kχ_{(0, 1/k]}. Understanding this equivalence requires familiarity with measure theory and the Lebesgue integral.

PREREQUISITES
  • Measure theory fundamentals
  • Lebesgue integral concepts
  • Characteristic functions and their applications
  • Basic properties of infinite series and summation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Lebesgue integral in detail
  • Explore measure theory and its implications in analysis
  • Learn about Holder's and Minkowski's inequalities
  • Investigate the criteria for interchanging sums and limits
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of advanced calculus, and anyone interested in the theoretical foundations of analysis and the relationship between integration and summation.

Damidami
Messages
93
Reaction score
0
Hi!

Sorry if this is a bit trivial, I was wondering if there is a way of converting a series

\Sum_{n=1}^{+\infty} a_n
[tex]\Sum_{n=1}^{+\infty} a_n[/tex]

into an integral

\int_0^1 f(x) dx
[tex]\int_0^1 f(x) dx[/tex]

such that both are equal (give the same result). In that case, what is the relation between a_n and f(x) (are they some kind of reciproques?)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes there is. It's easier to do if you integrate over the interval [tex][0,\infty][/tex], but if you want to do it over [0,1] you can define [tex]f(x)=\sum_{ k = 1 }^\infty k ( k + 1 ) a_k \chi_{ ( \frac{1}{k+1}, \frac{1}{k} ] }[/tex], where [tex]\chi_A[/tex] is the characteristic function of the set A. Note that such a function is not unique, because the function [tex]g(x)=\sum_{k=1}^\infty k a_k \chi_{ (0,\frac{1}{k}] }[/tex] would also work.

You hit upon a somewhat deep result of analysis, which is that integration and summation are essentially the same thing. This is intuitively clear from the first time you learn about the Riemann integral as a limit of Riemann sums, but to really make it precise you need measure theory. If you're interested in this stuff, you should read about the Lebesgue integral. As it turns out, an infinite sum is just the Lebesgue integral over the natural numbers with respect to the counting measure. If you take this approach to summation, a whole slew of results such as Holder's and Minkowski's inequalities (of which the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality is a special case) and the criteria for interchanging double sums or limits with sums etc, follow quite simply as a result of the corresponding measure-theoretic facts.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K