Composition of Integrable functions - An attempt -

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the composition of functions, specifically focusing on the Modified Dirichlet Function and the search for an integrable function g(x) such that the composition g(f(x)) is not integrable. The original poster seeks clarification on their proposed function and its properties.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to define g(x) as nx for natural numbers n, leading to a composition h(x) that is questioned for its integrability. Some participants seek clarification on the definition of g(x) and its implications for h(x). Others challenge the integrability of h(x) based on its behavior at rational and irrational points.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring the definitions and properties of the functions involved. Clarifications about the nature of g(x) and its relationship to h(x) are being sought, and there is a recognition of the differences between Lebesgue and Riemann integrability. No consensus has been reached regarding the correctness of the original poster's function.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity of defining g(x) as a family of functions rather than a single function, which impacts the composition with f(x). There is also mention of the implications of differentiability and integrability in the context of different integral definitions.

michonamona
Messages
120
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Consider the following functions:

Modified Dirichlet Function
f(x) = 1/n if x=m/n of lowest forms, and f(x) = 0 if x is irrational

find an integrable function g(x) such that the composition of g and f is NOT integrable

The Attempt at a Solution



Let g(x) = nx for all n in N (natural numbers)

then
h(x) = g(f(x)) = n(1/n) = 1 if x is rational, and h(x) = g(f(x))= n(0) = 0 if x is irrationalMy g(x) is apparently incorrect. Can anyone tell me why?

I appreciate your help,

M

note: I already know the correct answer, I just need to confirm that the g(x) I came up with is incorrect.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
michonamona said:
Let g(x) = nx for all n in N (natural numbers)

I don't understand the function definition. Is it a function of both n and x, or what?

The other problem is that h(x) = 1 for x rational and 0 for x irrational IS integrable. The integral is zero.
 
jbunniii said:
I don't understand the function definition. Is it a function of both n and x, or what?

The other problem is that h(x) = 1 for x rational and 0 for x irrational IS integrable. The integral is zero.

Thank you for your reply, excuse me for being unclear. The function I meant to have is:

[tex]g_{n}(x)=nx \;\forall \; n \in N[/tex]

So this is a linear function that's a ray from the origin. It is also getting steeper as [tex]n\rightarrow\infty[/tex]


To address your other question, h(x) IS NOT differentiable. The upper sums and lower sums will never meet for any partition P.

Thank you,

M
 
michonamona said:
Thank you for your reply, excuse me for being unclear. The function I meant to have is:

[tex]g_{n}(x)=nx \;\forall \; n \in N[/tex]

So this is a linear function that's a ray from the origin. It is also getting steeper as [tex]n\rightarrow\infty[/tex]

OK, but that's a family of functions, not a single function. How are you composing it with f to obtain h?

To address your other question, h(x) IS NOT differentiable. The upper sums and lower sums will never meet for any partition P.

I assume you mean integrable, not differentiable. (Though it's certainly not differentiable.) Sorry, I assumed we were talking about Lebesgue integrals, not Riemann integrals. That function is a great example of one that is Lebesgue integrable, but not Riemann integrable.

So good, that removes my 2nd objection. If you can come up with a single function g such that h(x) = g(f(x)) then that will indeed solve the problem. But I don't see how your g (or rather, family of g's) works.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K