Integrating an inequality for two functions of the same variable

  • Thread starter Thread starter member 731016
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on a true or false problem regarding the integration of inequalities for two functions. A participant initially believes that integrating both sides of the inequality leads to a contradiction, as their calculations suggest the opposite of the provided answer. A counterexample is presented, demonstrating that even if the derivatives satisfy the inequality, the original functions may not, thus invalidating the assumption. The importance of considering constants when integrating is emphasized, as they can affect the relationship between the functions. Ultimately, the conversation highlights the necessity of understanding initial conditions and the implications of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus in such inequalities.
member 731016
Homework Statement
Please see below
Relevant Equations
Please see below
For this true or false problem,
1717372927804.png

The answer if false, however, I am confused by this result as my working shows that the is true.

My working is, integrating both sides of the inequality we get ##\int f'(x) dx> \int g'(x) dx## for all ##x \in (a,b)## which is the equivalent to ##f(x) > g(x)## for all ##x \in (a,b)##.

Does someone please know what I have done wrong?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ChiralSuperfields said:
For this true or false problem,
View attachment 346371
The answer if false, however, I am confused by this result as my working shows that the is true.
Counterexample: ##f(x)=-e^{-x}## and ##g(x)=1##. Then for all ##x##: ##f'(x)>g'(x)## but ##f(x)<g(x)##.
 
  • Love
Likes member 731016
renormalize said:
Counterexample: ##f(x)=-e^{-x}## and ##g(x)=1##. Then for all ##x##: ##f'(x)>g'(x)## but ##f(x)<g(x)##.
Thank you for your reply @renormalize!

Sorry I am tying to generalize this without considering specific counter examples. I am trying to consider the most general case, this is why I integrate.

Thanks!
 
ChiralSuperfields said:
Sorry I am tying to generalize this without considering specific counter examples. I am trying to consider the most general case, this is why I integrate.
But this single counterexample is sufficient to show that your "general case" cannot be proven. Hence statement 6 is False, with no further work needed.
 
  • Love
Likes member 731016
renormalize said:
But this single counterexample is sufficient to show that your "general case" cannot be proven. Hence statement 6 is False, with no further work needed.
Thank you for your reply @renormalize !

Sorry I am still confused. I integrated the inequality and obeyed the laws of algebra and my integration still worked. I'm not sure what is going on, I think maybe the question is wrong.

Thanks!
 
ChiralSuperfields said:
Thank you for your reply @renormalize!

Sorry I am tying to generalize this without considering specific counter examples. I am trying to consider the most general case, this is why I integrate.

Thanks!
You can take the counterexample and put it in your chain of arguments to see at which step it fails. You can also use - which is what I do first - the fundamental theorem of calculus, either for the entire interval ##(a,b)## or for ##(a,x).##
 
  • Love
Likes member 731016
ChiralSuperfields said:
I'm not sure what is going on, I think maybe the question is wrong.
Don't forget about that sneaky constant that you should add when you evaluate an antiderivative.
If ##f' > g'## on (a,b), then what can you say about comparing ##\int {f'} + c_1## to ##\int {g'} + c_2##?
In other words, does the slope of ##f## being larger mean that the value of ##f## will be larger? Compare f(x)=2x with g(x)=x+1000 on (0,1).
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes Mark44, member 731016 and fresh_42
FactChecker said:
Don't forget about that sneaky constant that you should add when you evaluate an antiderivative.
If ##f' > g'## on (a,b), then what can you say about comparing ##\int {f'} + c_1## to ##\int {g'} + c_2##?
In other words, does the slope of ##f## being larger mean that the value of ##f## will be larger? Compare f(x)=2x with g(x)=x+1000 on (0,1).
That's why I like FTC as a first test. It forces you to use the constants and can help to see where a general argument might fail.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes member 731016 and FactChecker
##\int (f-g)'>c> 0 ##
It would work if we had ##\int f'-g' =0 ##, with an equality at some value ##x,## so that ##f(x)=g(x)##, i.e., if they're equal at some point and grow at the same rate . Like Fact Checker mentioned, said, one just grows faster than the other, but you don't have additional knowledge of initial conditions. This is a sort of PDE without additional conditions and an inequality.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Likes member 731016 and FactChecker
  • #10
The following inequality is true: if f(x) \leq g(x) on [a,b] then <br /> \int_a^b f(x)\,dx \leq \int_a^b g(x)\,dx. (We can replace the upper limits with an aarbitrary t \in [a,b].) Replacing f and g by derivatives and using the fundamental theorem, this implies <br /> \forall x \in [a,b] : f&#039;(x) \leq g&#039;(x) \quad \Rightarrow \quad \forall x \in [a,b] : f(x) - f(a) \leq g(x) - g(a). What this is saying is that if f increases more slowly than g and they start in the same place, then f will be less than g.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes member 731016 and FactChecker