Prove increasing function defines everywhere is Rinemann-integrable

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that an increasing function defined on the real numbers is Riemann integrable over any interval. The original poster expresses uncertainty about how to approach the proof, despite being aware of its validity based on references from other texts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the relationship between Riemann integrability and the continuity of functions, particularly focusing on the implications of countable discontinuities. There is a suggestion to derive a contradiction based on the assumption of discontinuities on a non-null set.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with some participants providing guidance on how to approach the proof. There is an acknowledgment of previous knowledge regarding the theorem, but no consensus has been reached on the specific steps to take.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference the concept of functions being continuous almost everywhere and the measure of countable sets, indicating that these ideas are central to the discussion. The original poster's uncertainty suggests that they may be grappling with the application of these concepts in their proof.

quasar987
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Messages
4,796
Reaction score
32

Homework Statement


This is probably easy but i can't seem to see how to make it work right now.

I am trying to show that if we have a function f:R-->R that is increasing, then for any interval [a,b], it is riemann-integrable.

I know it's true because a book I saw refers to another book for the proof that an increasing fct as a countable number of discontinuities.


The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you know the proof of the fact that f is Riemann integrable iff it is continuous (lambda) almost everywhere then try to work it in...countable sets have 0 measure, of course.

Ie, suppose f is discontinuous on some non-null set and derive a contradiction.
 
Is this just an idea you're throwing at me, or do you know for a fact that it works?

(As a matter of fact, I have proven that very theorem in an earlier homework sheet for this course)
 
It will work. Try it :smile:
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
8K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K