Help with qual problem on Riemann-Stieltjes Integration

  • Thread starter Thread starter TopCat
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integration
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on proving that if f is a decreasing function and the integral of f from 0 to infinity is finite, then the limit of x*f(x) as x approaches infinity must be zero. The initial attempts involved considering integrability and using partitions, but the participants realized that integration by parts was not applicable due to the lack of differentiability of f. A key insight was recognizing that if the limit of x*f(x) were not zero, it would contradict the finiteness of the integral of f. Ultimately, the conclusion is that the decreasing nature of f leads to the result that x*f(x) is bounded by the integral of f, confirming that the limit is indeed zero.
TopCat
Messages
55
Reaction score
0
Let f:[0, ∞) → ℝ be a decreasing function. Assume that

|\int^{\infty}_{0}f(x)dx| < ∞

Show that

lim_{x→∞}xf(x) = 0.


Attempt:
By hypothesis f is integrable for every b>0, as is the function x, so that for every such b, xf(x) is integrable on [0,b]. From here I tried passing to sums by considering a partition P such that U(P,xf(x)) - L(P,xf(x)) < ε, but I'm probably barking up the wrong tree there. I also can't see a way to use integration by parts to generate an xf(x) term since I don't have differentiability or continuity of f.

I'm pretty much just lost and need a slight nudge in the right direction.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, integration by parts can't help, for just the reason you mention. lim f(x) as x->infinity has to be zero, right? That should be easy to see. So you can assume lim f(x)>0. Prove it by contradiction. So suppose lim x->infinity x*f(x) is NOT zero. That means there is an e>0 such that for any N>0 there is c such that c*f(c)>e. That should be enough of a slight nudge to get you started.
 
Thanks! that was just what I needed.
 
I thought I was good, but I'm having trouble seeing where the contradiction lies. I expected that maybe I could choose N large so that f(x)<ε, yet x*f(x)>ε, but I can't see how will work. I know that ∫x*f(x) need not converge so there's nothing there. I also looked at the same N large under the same conditions to see if choosing a partition P such that U(P,x*f(x))-L(P,x*f(x))<ε might imply x*f(x)<ε, but that didn't work either. I must be making dunce move and missing something super obvious here. :(
 
Ok, pick a c such that c*f(c)>e. That means the integral of f(x) from 0 to c is greater than e, right? Now pick a c'>2c such that c'*f(c')>e. Can you get a lower bound for the integral from c to c' of f(x)?
 
Ah! Got it! I was completely missing out on the fact that f decreasing implies x*f(x) < ∫f dx. Kept focusing too hard on other irrelevant things. Thanks!
 
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
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K