If supremum=infimum, is f Riemann integrable?

  • Thread starter GVAR717
  • Start date
  • #1
6
0
This is my first time posting & I am not familiar with how to get all the correct math symbols or how to use Latex, so I did the best I could.

Homework Statement



Suppose f is bounded on [a,b] and there is a partition P* of [a,b] for which S(f,P*)=S(f,P*). Is f Riemann integrable on [a,b]?


Homework Equations



S(f)=sup{S(f,P*): P* is partition of [a,b]}
S(f)=inf{S(f,P*); P* is partition of [a,b]}

The Attempt at a Solution



I know, by a theorem, that S(f)>S(f). I am trying to figure out how to show S(f)<S(f) so that I can say S(f)=S(f). I thought about choosing another partition Pe such that S(f,Pe)-S(f,Pe) would equal some epsilon value, but I don't know what value I should use or where to go next.

If this is the wrong process for this proof, I would love a hint on where to start.

Homework Statement





Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
Last edited:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
133
0
Did you mean "for which S(f, P*)=S(f)"? If so, hint: consider characteristic function of rationals on [0,1].
 
  • #3
6
0
Did you mean "for which S(f, P*)=S(f)"? If so, hint: consider characteristic function of rationals on [0,1].

No, I am trying to use a theorem that says a function is Riemann integrable if the supremum equals the infimimum: S(f)=S(f)
 
  • #4
133
0
Are you using Darboux definition of Riemann integral, I mean:
[tex]\underline{S}(f, P^*)=\sum m_i \Delta x_i[/tex]
[tex]\overline{S}(f, P^*)=\sum M_i \Delta x_i[/tex]
where
[tex]m_i = \inf \{f(x): x_{i-1}\leq x \leq x_i\}[/tex]
[tex]M_i = \sup \{f(x): x_{i-1}\leq x \leq x_i\}[/tex]
or the other popular one, where
[tex]S(f, P^*)=\sum f(t_i)\Delta x_i[/tex]
for [tex]x_{i-1}\leq t_i \leq x_i[/tex]
?
Sorry for such question, but I'm confused. Statement like "S(f, P*)=S(f, P*)" suggests the first (Darboux) definition, while "Relevant Equations" section suggests the second (at least for me). Or maybe it's yet another definition? Again, sorry to ask, but when I find out which definition you are using, I think I will be able to help.
 
  • #5
6
0
Are you using Darboux definition of Riemann integral, I mean:
[tex]\underline{S}(f, P^*)=\sum m_i \Delta x_i[/tex]
[tex]\overline{S}(f, P^*)=\sum M_i \Delta x_i[/tex]
where
[tex]m_i = \inf \{f(x): x_{i-1}\leq x \leq x_i\}[/tex]
[tex]M_i = \sup \{f(x): x_{i-1}\leq x \leq x_i\}[/tex]
or the other popular one, where
[tex]S(f, P^*)=\sum f(t_i)\Delta x_i[/tex]
for [tex]x_{i-1}\leq t_i \leq x_i[/tex]
?
Sorry for such question, but I'm confused. Statement like "S(f, P*)=S(f, P*)" suggests the first (Darboux) definition, while "Relevant Equations" section suggests the second (at least for me). Or maybe it's yet another definition? Again, sorry to ask, but when I find out which definition you are using, I think I will be able to help.

It's the first one with the m's.

By the way, how do you get the math symbols? I don't have Latex.
 
  • #6
6
0
OMG. I just realized that I was making this problem harder than it is.

I can just say that [tex]\underline{S}(f, P^*)-[tex]\overline{S}(f, P^*)=0, which is less than epsilon.
 
  • #7
133
0
Yes, precisely. Well done :ok: As for the math symbols, Latex is an inbuild board feature, you don't need to have it on your computer. Just use [ tex ] [ /tex ] tags around your Latex input. If you're unsure about that, ask or quote my post to see the raw input of my previous messages.
 

Related Threads on If supremum=infimum, is f Riemann integrable?

  • Last Post
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
13
Views
8K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
816
Replies
6
Views
468
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
16K
  • Last Post
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Top