Generalization of Mean Value Theorem for Integrals Needed

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a conjecture regarding a generalization of the mean value theorem for integrals, specifically in the context of continuous functions defined in higher dimensions. Participants explore the validity of the conjecture and its implications for the behavior of component functions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes a conjecture that for a continuous function F: U ⊂ ℝⁿ⁺¹ → W ⊂ ℝⁿ and a continuous function x: I ⊂ ℝ → V ⊂ ℝⁿ, there exists a t* in [t₁, t₂] such that the integral of F over the interval equals F evaluated at some point multiplied by the interval length.
  • Another participant expresses doubt about the conjecture, suggesting it may be false.
  • A later reply elaborates on the conjecture, stating that while the mean value theorem holds for each component of the function g(t) = F(x(t), t), the point where g attains its average value may not be unique across all components, leading to potential discrepancies.
  • An example is provided where the components of g are strictly increasing, demonstrating that the average values are attained at different points, thus questioning the validity of the original conjecture.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the validity of the conjecture, with some expressing belief in its potential truth while others raise doubts and provide counterexamples.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the complexity of applying the mean value theorem in higher dimensions and the challenges in ensuring that all component functions attain their average values simultaneously.

Only a Mirage
Messages
57
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

I'm having trouble finding a certain generalization of the mean value theorem for integrals. I think my conjecture is true, but I haven't been able to prove it - so maybe it isn't.


Is the following true?

If [itex]F: U \subset \mathbb{R}^{n+1} \rightarrow W \subset \mathbb{R}^{n}[/itex] is a continuous function

and [itex]x: I \subset \mathbb{R} \rightarrow V \subset \mathbb{R}^{n}[/itex] is a continuous function

then [itex]\exists t^* \in [t_1,t_2][/itex] such that

[itex]\int_{t_1}^{t_2} F(x(t),t)\,dt = F(x(t^*),t^*)(t_2-t_1)[/itex]

I can see that it holds for each of the component functions of ##F##, but I'm not sure about the whole thing.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm actually fairly certain now that my conjecture is false...
 
Only a Mirage said:
Hi all,

I'm having trouble finding a certain generalization of the mean value theorem for integrals. I think my conjecture is true, but I haven't been able to prove it - so maybe it isn't.


Is the following true?

If [itex]F: U \subset \mathbb{R}^{n+1} \rightarrow W \subset \mathbb{R}^{n}[/itex] is a continuous function

and [itex]x: I \subset \mathbb{R} \rightarrow V \subset \mathbb{R}^{n}[/itex] is a continuous function

then [itex]\exists t^* \in [t_1,t_2][/itex] such that

[itex]\int_{t_1}^{t_2} F(x(t),t)\,dt = F(x(t^*),t^*)(t_2-t_1)[/itex]

I can see that it holds for each of the component functions of ##F##, but I'm not sure about the whole thing.

[itex]g(t) = F(x(t),t)[/itex] is a function from [itex][t_1,t_2] \subset \mathbb{R}[/itex] to [itex]\mathbb{R}^n[/itex], so by definition one integrates it component by component with respect to the standard basis.

For each component [itex]g_k[/itex], there exists [itex]t^*_k \in [t_1,t_2][/itex] such that [itex](t_2 - t_1) g_k(t^*_k) = \int_{t_1}^{t_2} g_k(t)\,\mathrm{d}t[/itex] by the mean value theorem applied to [itex]G_k(t) = \int_{t_1}^t g_k(s)\,\mathrm{d}s[/itex].

The value of [itex]t[/itex] where [itex]g_k[/itex] attains its average value is not necessarily unique, so for [itex]g[/itex] to attain its average there must be at least one [itex]t[/itex] where every component attains its average, which is not necessarily the case.

For example, consider [itex]g : [0,1] \to \mathbb{R}^2 : t \mapsto (t,t)[/itex]. Then
[tex] \int_0^1 g(t)\,\mathrm{d}t = \int_0^1 (t,t^2)\,\mathrm{d}t = (\frac12, \frac13)[/tex]
Since each component is strictly increasing on [itex][0,1][/itex], that component attains its average at exactly one point, and we have [itex]t_1^{*} = \frac 12[/itex] and [itex]t_2^{*} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}[/itex]. These are not equal, so [itex]g[/itex] does not attain its average on [itex][0,1][/itex].

One can obtain [itex]g[/itex] by taking [itex]F(x,y,z) = (x,y^2)[/itex] and [itex](x(t),y(t)) = (t,t)[/itex].
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
That makes sense. Thanks a lot for the help.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
546
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K