Proof of Integrability for Bounded and Integrable Function

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the integrability of the function f² given that f is integrable and bounded on the interval [a, b]. The participants explore the implications of f being bounded and integrable, and the challenges posed by f not being continuous or monotonic.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the use of step functions and the implications of the weighted mean value theorem. There is an attempt to clarify the relationship between f and f², particularly regarding monotonicity and continuity. Questions arise about the definition of integrability and the challenges in representing f with step functions.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with some participants expressing uncertainty about the approach to take. There is acknowledgment of the complexity introduced by the lack of monotonicity in f, and while some guidance has been offered, no consensus has been reached on a definitive method for proving integrability.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the function f is bounded and integrable, but its lack of continuity and monotonicity complicates the proof. There is mention of previous work with summation notation and the need for clarity in defining step functions.

brh2113
Messages
18
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Let f be a function that is integrable on [a,b] and bounded by
0 \leq f(x)\leq M for some M. Prove that f^{2} is also integrable on this interval.

Homework Equations


We've done many problems with step functions s(x)\leq f(x) \leq t(x),

where s(x) and t(x) are step functions. Then we've defined a

function's lower integral as the supremum of the set of the values of all \int_a^b s(x)dx

provided that s(x) \leq f(x) and the function's upper integral as the

infimum of the set of all \int_a^bt(x)dx provided that

f(x) \leq t(x) on [a,b].

3. The attempt at a solution

Attached is my work. It's a little sloppy, so I'll explain what I tried here:

I first tried using the weighted mean value theorem, but all that that does is show that f^{2} is bounded.

I then drew a line and tried again. However, I've realized that my definition of the step functions is faulty because the function is not monotonic, so the second attempt is wrong. As a result, I've been unable to represent my step functions more explicitly using summation notation and expanding it, so I haven't been able to work with the equations. There must be something I'm missing.

If the function were continuous, then I'd know that f^{2} is continuous and I'd be done, but unfortunately it is not.

The only thing I know is that \int_a^b f(x)dx is bounded and exists, and so \int_a^b f(x)^{2}dx is also bounded.

Again, if I can show that the lower integral and the upper integral are equal, then by our definition I will have proven that the function is integrable.
 

Attachments

  • Math.jpg
    Math.jpg
    21.2 KB · Views: 519
Physics news on Phys.org
Since f is positive, f2 is monotonic. So s < f < t implies s2 < f2 < t2.
 
Unfortunately f is not monotonic, since it is not continuous. For example, f(a) could equal 5, and f(b) = 3, when a<b, provided that 3 and 5 are less than M. Moreover, f^2 is neither continuous nor monotonic, but I think I can assert that inequality.

Still, it doesn't seem to get me anywhere. Because the function is not monotonic, I cannot write my summation notation explicitly enough that it can be expanded and canceled to show that the difference between the supremum of s and the infimum of t is 0.

I appreciate the help, though. I spent about an hour today working with a T.A. with summation notation, but we ended up getting nowhere. It's possible that that's necessary, but I'm wondering if there's a simpler way to do it.
 
I meant that f^2 is monotonic with respect to f, or "square" operation is a monotone transformation. I did not realize that you couldn't represent f as a step function so I was taking it as a given.

You need to think what the term "integrable" exactly means.
 
Last edited:
Oh monotone transformation. I'm not familiar with that term, but I think I understand what you're saying to mean that each value of f^2 corresponds to one value of f?

Anyways, I do agree with that inequality, and with the help of a TA in one of my classes I managed to work out the problem. Thanks again for the help; it's much appreciated.

It says in the instructions that I should edit the topic using the Thread Tools to say "Solved," but I can't see any option under thread tools to change the name. Can someone tell me through a message how to do this?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
10K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K