Is This Piecewise Function Riemann Integrable?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lizzie11
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Riemann
Lizzie11
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
let f(x) = 1 when x in in [0,1)
f(x) = -1/2 when x is in [1,2)
f(x) = 1/3 when x is in [2, 3)

and so on, in othe words its the sequence (1/n)(-1)^n, whose series obviously converges to log 2. However is f(x) Riemann integrable and equal to this series?
If so, how to give an upper sum lower sum proof?, just choose a good partion?

thanks,

Lizzie
 
Physics news on Phys.org
that function is riemann integrable but I'm not sure what it has to do with that sequence/series?
 
Ok, but how to prove it?

It has to do with that sequence because on each interval [n, n+1) it is equal to (1/n+1)(-1)^n.
 
Lizzie11 said:
Ok, but how to prove it?
It has to do with that sequence because on each interval [n, n+1) it is equal to (1/n+1)(-1)^n.


Perhaps it would help if you clarified what your function is. In your original post you had
"let f(x) = 1 when x in in [0,1)
f(x) = -1/2 when x is in [1,2)
f(x) = 1/3 when x is in [2, 3)"

Which is a piecewise constant function that has trivially integrable. Yes, it is equal to (-1)^n/(n+1) on the interval [n,n+1) but what does that have to do with the series 1- 1/2+ 1/3+...

Ah, wait- you aren't asking whether the function is Riemann integrable- you are asking whether the definite integral from 0 to infinity exists! I think you've answered your own question. The improper integral \int_0^\infty f(x)dx exists if and only if the limit lim_{A->0}\int_0^A f(x) dx exists.

With f as you give it, \int_0^A f(x)dx= \Sigma_{i=1}^{N}\frac{(-1)^i}{i+1} where N is the largest integer less than or equal to A and, as you say, that series converges to log 2.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...

Similar threads

Back
Top