Continuity at a point implies integrability around point?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between continuity at a point and integrability over an interval. It argues that if a function f is continuous at a point p, there exists a closed interval [a,b] around p where f is integrable. The proposed proof attempts to show this by constructing a partition based on the continuity definition, but it ultimately recognizes flaws in the reasoning. The conclusion emphasizes that integrability cannot depend on the choice of e and suggests exploring counterexamples of nonintegrable functions. The thread highlights the complexity of proving integrability solely based on continuity at a point.
Site
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
If a function f is continuous at a point p, must there be some closed interval [a,b] including p such that f is integrable on the [a,b]?

As a definition of integrable I'm using the one provided by Spivak: f is integrable on [a,b] if and only if for every e>0 there is a partition P of [a,b] such that U(f,P)-L(f,P)<e, where U denotes an upper sum and L denotes a lower sum.

Here is what I think is a proof, but which probably contains some error:

Since f is continuous at a point p, there is some s'>0 such that for every point x, if |x-p|< s' then | f(x) - f(p) | < e/2 for arbitrary e>0. Denote s=min(s', 1). Choose points a and b such that (p-s) < a < p < b < (p+s) Let a be a point with a<p and and p-a<s. Let b be a point with b>p and b-p<s.

For our partition P, we can use P={a,b}.
Clearly, L(f,P) > s ( f(p) - e/2 ) and U(f,P) < s ( f(p) + e/2 ).
So U(f,P)-L(f,P) < s*e < e.

Thus f is integrable on [a,b].

If this proof works, then it provides an easy way of proving that continuity implies integrability on an interval [a,b]. You just examine
z = sup {x: a≤x≤b and f is continuous on [a,x] }. Since f is also continuous at z, there is some interval around z [p,q] which is integrable. Since [a,p] is integrable and so is [p,q], [a,q] is integrable, which contradicts the fact that z is the least upper bound. Thus z=b.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It doesn't work. To prove integrability on an interval you have to fix the interval. Then show for any e>0 you can find such a partition. The interval can't depend on e. I would look for a counterexample. What kind of examples of nonintegrable functions do you know?
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K