Questions about definite integrals

In summary, if a definite integral diverges, we cannot conclude that it does not exist. If a definite integral does not exist, we cannot conclude that it diverges. If a function is not defined but its limit is, we cannot conclude that the integral does not exist. Lipschitz continuity does not have any bearing on the existence of a definite integral.
  • #1
Bipolarity
776
2
While reading my calc book, I have developed a few questions about the situations in which definite integrals can exist. I've thought about these questions, and I feel that if I am able to answer some of them, I can make some other problems much easier, such as testing for convergence of a definite integral.

1) If a definite integral diverges, can we conclude that it does not exist?
2) If a definite integral does not exist, can we conclude that it diverges?
3) If [itex] f(a) [/itex] is not defined, does [itex]\int^{b}_{a}f(x)dx [/itex] necessarily not exist?
3) If [itex] f(a) [/itex] is not defined, but but [itex]\lim_{x→a+}f(x) [/itex] is, does [itex]\int^{b}_{a}f(x)dx [/itex] necessarily not exist?
5) If [itex] f(a) [/itex] is defined, but [itex]\lim_{x→a+}f(x) [/itex] does not, does [itex]\int^{b}_{a}f(x)dx [/itex] necessarily not exist?

I assume all these questions can be answered using the definition of the definite integral, along with the definition of continuity, but how exactly?

Thanks!

Note: Assume that b>a for the above integrals

BiP
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
An integral is just a fancy way of doing a sum.
So.

1. yes and no - depends what you mean by "exist".
2. no.
Can you think of where diverging integrals may come from - say - in Nature?

3. no.
f(x) only needs only to exist in (a,b) not [a,b] to be integrable.

4. Also answered by 3.

5. Can you come up with an example to illustrate this? I think you are describing a situation where f is not a function or is not peicewise continuous within (a,b).

Generally, in order to be integrable, f has to be a piecewise-continuous function in the range of the integration. Look these up.
 
  • #3
Simon Bridge said:
3. no.
f(x) only needs only to exist in (a,b) not [a,b] to be integrable.

Generally, in order to be integrable, f has to be a piecewise-continuous function in the range of the integration. Look these up.

Those statements depend on how you define "integration", and you can define it so nether of them is required. But I guess the OP is thinking about the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_integral (even if the calc textbook doesn't mention the name).
 
  • #4
Simon Bridge said:
An integral is just a fancy way of doing a sum.
So.

1. yes and no - depends what you mean by "exist".
2. no.
Can you think of where diverging integrals may come from - say - in Nature?

3. no.
f(x) only needs only to exist in (a,b) not [a,b] to be integrable.

4. Also answered by 3.

5. Can you come up with an example to illustrate this? I think you are describing a situation where f is not a function or is not peicewise continuous within (a,b).

Generally, in order to be integrable, f has to be a piecewise-continuous function in the range of the integration. Look these up.

I see, thank you for all your help. If time permits, could you please offer an example of functions for the questions 3, 4, and 5?

Also, I have heard of something called Lipschitz continuity, does that have any bearing on this problem?

Also, for a Riemann integral, does the function have to be continuous in (a,b) or in [a,b] ? wikipedia proves the FTC assuming continuity in [a,b] but I assume that is superfluous condition and that continuity in (a,b) suffices to determine the existence of a riemann integral?
Thanks!

BiP
 
Last edited:
  • #5
The simplest way to create an undefined value is to divide by zero.

If I define a function u(x): u=0 for x≤0 and u=1 for x>0 then f(x)=1/u(x-a) would be undefined for x≤a ... but I can still do the integral from a to b if b>a. (It's b-a).

I'm pretty sure you can do the rest.
 
  • #6
AlephZero said:
Those statements depend on how you define "integration", and you can define it so nether of them is required. But I guess the OP is thinking about the Riemann Integral.
Yah. I kinda figured a definition something like:
$$\int_a^bf(x)dx = \lim_{N\rightarrow \infty} \frac{b-a}{N} \sum_{n=0}^N f(\frac{b-a}{N}n + a)$$... but if I just bring the sum in each end by one unit ... in the limit N → ∞ it's the same.

$$\int_a^bf(x)dx = \lim_{N\rightarrow \infty} \frac{b-a}{N} \sum_{n=1}^{N-1} f(\frac{b-a}{N}n + a)$$

... though there is danger in that kind of argument of shaving a bit of each end until there's nothing left.

I can also take the sum to within a small distance ##\epsilon << (b-a)/N## of the limits
... so I do the sum in range ##[a+\epsilon, b-\epsilon]##, instead of ##[a,b]##, and see what happens in the limit ##\epsilon \rightarrow 0##.
$$\int_a^bf(x)dx = \lim_{N\rightarrow \infty}_{\epsilon \rightarrow 0}\frac{b-a-2\epsilon}{N} \sum_{n=0}^N f(\frac{b-a-2\epsilon}{N}n + a + \epsilon)$$
I'm sure AlephZero can refine this argument.

Few beginning courses are even this explicit anyway.
 
Last edited:

1. What is a definite integral?

A definite integral is a mathematical concept used to find the area under a curve on a specific interval. It is represented by ∫ (f(x))dx and is often used in calculus to solve problems related to motion, area, and volume.

2. How is a definite integral different from an indefinite integral?

A definite integral has specific limits of integration, while an indefinite integral does not. This means that a definite integral will give a specific numerical value, while an indefinite integral will result in a function with a constant of integration.

3. What is the process for solving a definite integral?

The process for solving a definite integral involves evaluating the integral using the fundamental theorem of calculus. This involves finding the antiderivative of the function, plugging in the limits of integration, and subtracting the results.

4. Can definite integrals be used for other shapes besides curves?

Yes, definite integrals can be used to find the area under any continuous function, not just curves. This includes shapes such as triangles, rectangles, and even irregular shapes.

5. What is the significance of the area under a curve in relation to definite integrals?

The area under a curve represents the accumulation of a quantity over a specific interval. In terms of definite integrals, it is the numerical value that is found by evaluating the integral and has various real-world applications in fields such as physics, economics, and engineering.

Similar threads

Replies
31
Views
919
  • Calculus
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • Calculus
Replies
25
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
968
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
303
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
932
Back
Top