Exercise 2.23 in Folland's real analysis text

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on Exercise 2.23 from Folland's real analysis text, specifically regarding the functions \(H(x)\) and \(h(x)\) defined for a bounded function \(f:[a,b]\to\mathbb{R}\). It is established that \(H(x) = h(x)\) if and only if \(f\) is continuous at \(x\). Furthermore, it is proven that both \(H\) and \(h\) are Lebesgue measurable, and their integrals over the interval \([a,b]\) correspond to the upper and lower Riemann integrals of \(f\), respectively. The domain of \(H\) and \(h\) is confirmed to be \([a,b]\), ensuring their well-defined nature within this interval.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of bounded functions in real analysis
  • Familiarity with the concepts of supremum and infimum
  • Knowledge of Lebesgue measurability
  • Basic principles of Riemann integrability
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of Lebesgue measurable functions
  • Explore the monotonicity principle in real analysis
  • Learn about the relationship between Riemann and Lebesgue integrals
  • Investigate the implications of continuity on integrability
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, particularly those studying real analysis, integration theory, and the properties of measurable functions.

psie
Messages
315
Reaction score
40
TL;DR
I have some elementary doubts about two functions specified in an exercise in Folland's book. This exercise is supposed to establish the Lebesgue criterion for Riemann integrability.
23. Given a bounded function ##f:[a,b]\to\mathbb R##, let $$H(x)=\lim_{\delta\to0}\sup_{|y-x|\leq\delta}f(y),\quad h(x)=\lim_{\delta\to0}\inf_{|y-x|\leq\delta}f(y).$$Prove Theorem 2.28b by establishing the following lemmas:
a) ##H(x)=h(x)## iff ##f## is continuous at ##x##.
b) In the notation of the proof of Theorem 2.28a, ##H=G## a.e. and ##h=g## a.e. Hence ##H## and ##h## are Lebesgue measurable, and ##\int_{[a,b]}H\,dm=\overline{I}_a^b(f)## and ##\int_{[a,b]}h\,dm=\underline{I}_a^b(f)##.

I'm working the above exercise on the Lebesgue criterion for Riemann integrability in Folland's real analysis text, i.e. a function is Riemann integrable on ##[a,b]## iff it is continuous a.e. on ##[a,b]##. I think I know a solution, but I'm more concerned about elementary things. Are ##h,H## both functions from ##[a,b]##? How can I reason that their domains really is ##[a,b]##? Are they well-defined, i.e. how can we know the limits always exist?

Attempt: Note that if ##x\notin[a,b]## one would have to consider taking the supremum or infimum of the empty set at some point, with values ##-\infty## or ##\infty## respectively. Thus if the domain of ##h,H## wasn't ##[a,b]##, both functions would be infinite on a set of nonzero measure, hence not integrable. Let us fix ##x\in [a,b]##. Let us show the functions are well-defined, that is, that the limits exist. But note that e.g. ##\sup_{|y-x|\leq\delta}f(y)## is an increasing function of ##\delta##, i.e. ##\sup_{|y-x|\leq\delta}f(y)## decreases with decreasing ##\delta##. Since ##f## is bounded, we have for any ##\delta## that ##|\sup_{|y-x|\leq\delta}f(y)|\leq |\sup_{y\in[a,b]}f(y)|<\infty##, which shows that ##\sup_{|y-x|\leq\delta}f(y)## is bounded. Hence the limit as ##\delta\to 0^+## exists and this is just the infimum of the range of ##\sup_{|y-x|\leq\delta}f(y)##.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Possibly a simpler way to argue about the domain of ##h,H## would be to simply say that if the ##\sup## or ##\inf## equals ##\pm\infty##, then the limit wouldn't exist.

EDIT: I'm confident that the domain of ##h,H## is ##[a,b]##, see e.g. under the header "Functions from metric spaces" in this Wikipedia article. ##x## is supposed to be a limit point of ##[a,b]##. Since the set of limit points of ##[a,b]## is the set itself, we have ##h,H:[a,b]\to\mathbb R##.
 
Last edited:
We must consider the interval ##[a,b]## as our universe. Meaning for instance, when we calculate ## \sup _{|t-a|\leqslant \delta} f(t) ##, what is really meant here is ## \sup \{ f(t) \mid a\leqslant t \leqslant a+\delta\} ##. We don't go outside in the wild, where things are not defined. By assumption ##f## is bounded, so this finite supremum exists. As we decrease ##\delta##, the supremum decreases. Since ##f## is bounded from below, the limit is calculated by the monotonicity principle.

Since we take limit as ##\delta\to 0##, in principle it could be that delta is big enough to cover some bigger interval than ##[a,b]##, but it does not matter because eventually ##\delta## will be small enough where things are well defined and finite.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: psie

Similar threads

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