Mean value theorem for integrals

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around finding a 2π periodic function that is integrable on the interval [-π, π] but does not satisfy the mean value theorem for integrals. Participants explore the relationship between the properties of functions and the conditions required for the mean value theorem to hold.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a function g(x) = sin(1/x) for x ≠ 0 and g(0) = 0, questioning how it relates to the mean value theorem for integrals.
  • Another participant asks for clarification on the mean value theorem's conditions and suggests substituting g(x) into the theorem's equation.
  • A participant summarizes the mean value theorem, stating that if f is continuous on [a, b], then there exists a c in [a, b] such that the average value of f equals f(c).
  • One participant emphasizes that to find a function that fails the mean value theorem, it must not meet the theorem's hypotheses, suggesting discontinuity as a key factor.
  • There is a discussion about the difficulty of finding a function that fails the mean value theorem on any subinterval, with one participant expressing confusion about this point.
  • Another participant clarifies that for a function to fail on every subinterval, it must have a point of discontinuity in every interval [a, b] within its domain.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that a function must fail to meet the mean value theorem's hypotheses to not satisfy it, particularly regarding continuity. However, there is uncertainty about the implications of discontinuity on subintervals, indicating a lack of consensus on that aspect.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the need for clarity on the conditions of the mean value theorem and the implications of discontinuity in relation to integrability and periodicity. Specific mathematical steps or examples are not fully resolved.

titaniumx3
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I have this question which asks for a 2*pi periodic function on the reals, that is integrable on [-pi, pi] but fails to satisfy the mean value theorem for integrals.

The question also says to help answer the above question, you may wish to show that the function:

g: [0,1] -> reals given by,

g(x) = sin(1/x) if x is non-zero
g(x) = 0 if x=0Now I've shown that the above function is true, but I have no idea how to show that it fails to satisfy the mean value theorem or how it relates to a function that is 2*pi periodic and integrable on the given interval.

Please help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What does the theorem say, and what conditions are required for it? there's a certain equation related to the theorem, substitute g(x) into that equation.
 
The theorem says if f:[a,b] -> Reals is a continious function, then there exists a "c" in [a,b] such that:

[tex]{\frac {\int _{a}^{b}\!f \left( x \right) {dx}}{b-a}}=f \left( c<br /> \right)[/tex]

I'm not sure what this other theorem is you speak of. How would I go about finding a function that meets the criteria in my original post but fails to satisfy the MVT above? Any ideas?
 
Last edited:
He didn't mention any "other" theorem! But look at the hypotheses. If you are seeking an integrable function that FAILS to satisfy the mean value theorem, they you will need a function that FAILS to satisfy its hypotheses. I would recommend looking for a function that is NOT continuous at one or two points in [-pi, pi].

Now, if you want a function that fails to satisfy the mean value theorem on ANY SUBINTERVAL that's harder- but your problem doesn't say that does it?
 
HallsofIvy said:
He didn't mention any "other" theorem! But look at the hypotheses. If you are seeking an integrable function that FAILS to satisfy the mean value theorem, they you will need a function that FAILS to satisfy its hypotheses. I would recommend looking for a function that is NOT continuous at one or two points in [-pi, pi].

Now, if you want a function that fails to satisfy the mean value theorem on ANY SUBINTERVAL that's harder- but your problem doesn't say that does it?

I see what you mean, but why would it be harder for any subinterval?

(sorry, I am just incredibly confused. :confused:)
 
titaniumx3 said:
I see what you mean, but why would it be harder for any subinterval?

(sorry, I am just incredibly confused. :confused:)

Because in that case there would have to be at least one point of discontinuity in every interval [a,b] for all a and b such that a<b.EDIT: Every interval that is a subset of the function's domain.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K