Proof using Riemann Integral definition

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on evaluating the Riemann integral of a function f defined on the interval [a, b], which is zero except at a finite set of points x_1, x_2, ..., x_k. The integral ∫[a b](f(x)dx) is determined to be zero, as the Riemann sum approaches zero when the partition is chosen appropriately. The key insight is that the set of discontinuities has measure zero, allowing the integral to be evaluated despite the non-zero values at specific points. The challenge lies in selecting the partition and tags effectively to utilize the properties of the function.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Riemann integrable functions
  • Familiarity with the concept of measure zero sets
  • Knowledge of partitioning intervals in calculus
  • Basic principles of real analysis
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of Riemann integrable functions in detail
  • Learn about measure theory and its implications for integrals
  • Explore examples of Riemann sums with discontinuous functions
  • Review the definitions and applications of partitions in calculus
USEFUL FOR

Students of real analysis, particularly those struggling with Riemann integrals and the handling of discontinuous functions, as well as educators seeking to provide clearer examples and explanations in their teaching.

KPutsch
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Suppose that f:[a, b] → ℝ is a function that is zero for all x ∈ [a, b] except for the values x_1,x_2,…,x_k. Find ∫[a b](f(x)dx) and prove your result.

Homework Equations



Definition of a Riemann integrable function: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_integral#Riemann_integral

The Attempt at a Solution



I'm simply not sure how to define the tags of the partition. If I let t1 be in [a, x1), t2 in (x1, x2), ..., tn in (xk, b], then the Riemann sum will be zero, but I'm not making use of the fact that f(xi) != 0. This is where I'm stuck, how do I make use of the fact that there is a finite set of discontinuities in setting up this proof?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Select your partition to be really small so that the non zero points can be made smaller than epsilon. Alternatively, you could just say your set of discontinous points have measure 0.
 
I simply don't know how to do that. I'll let the norm of the partition be less than delta=epsilon, but when working with the Riemann sum, and when t_i = x_i, I'll be left with f(x_i)(x_i - x_i-1) < f(x_i)*epsilon.

Since I don't know what f(x_i) is, I can't put a bound on it. I don't know what else I could let delta be, because what if there are two tags that fall on an x_i and x_i+1, the the Riemann sum will be f(x_i)(x_i - x_i-1) + f(x_i+1)(x_i+1 - x_i) < [f(x_i)+f(x_i+1)]*epsilon.

I really don't like the way this this real analysis class is taught. I'm given definitions with no examples, and then asked to solve problems like this, with no idea of what I'm doing.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K