Show Continuity of F(x) in Lebesgue Integrable f [a,b]

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter math8
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Continuity
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around demonstrating the continuity of the function F(x), defined as the integral of a Lebesgue integrable function f over the interval [a, x]. Participants explore various approaches to prove this continuity, including the use of the Dominated Convergence Theorem (DCT) and the Mean Value Theorem for integrals.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that F(x) can be expressed as the integral from a to x of f, and asks how to show its continuity.
  • Another participant suggests using the expression F(x+h) - F(x) in terms of the indicator function and applying the Dominated Convergence Theorem to show that the difference approaches zero as h approaches zero.
  • A different viewpoint considers the integral from x to x+h of f(t) as a way to express the difference F(x+h) - F(x).
  • Concerns are raised about the application of the DCT, specifically questioning whether the limit of the product of the indicator function and f(t) tends to zero.
  • One participant notes that the limit of the indicator function approaches zero, which would imply the integral also approaches zero.
  • Another participant suggests that in a finite measure space, one can use properties of L^p spaces to show that the difference in F(x) approaches zero.
  • A participant reflects on the Mean Value Theorem for integrals but acknowledges complications when f is not bounded near x.
  • One participant retracts their earlier comment about another approach, indicating a shift in their perspective.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the application of the Dominated Convergence Theorem and the implications of boundedness of f. There is no consensus on the best approach to demonstrate the continuity of F(x), and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the dependence on the properties of the function f, particularly regarding its boundedness and integrability, which may affect the validity of the proposed methods.

math8
Messages
143
Reaction score
0
Let F(x) = Integral from a to x of f dt (a belongs in [a,b])
How do we show that F(x) is continuous? (f is Lebesgue integrable on [a,b] )
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Write

[tex]F(x+h)-F(x)=\int_a^b\chi_{(x,x+h)}f(t)dt[/tex]

for h>0, and

[tex]F(x+h)-F(x)=-\int_a^b\chi_{(x+h,x)}f(t)dt[/tex]

for h>0, and use Lebesgue Dominated Convergence theorem to show that F(x+h)-F(x)-->0.
 
That's an interesting thought. I would have considered

[tex]F(x+h) - F(x) = \int_x^{x+h} f(t) \, dt[/tex]
 
quasar987, thanks but I don't see how the DCT shows that F(x+h)-F(x)-->0. I know that
lim integral =integal lim
but does lim K(x+h,x)*f(t) tends to 0? If yes, why?
 
math8 said:
quasar987, thanks but I don't see how the DCT shows that F(x+h)-F(x)-->0. I know that
lim integral =integal lim
but does lim K(x+h,x)*f(t) tends to 0? If yes, why?

As far as I understand the limit of the indicator function will tend to 0 which in return will make the integral 0.
 
Well, make it an exercice to show that for any x in [a,b],

[tex]\chi_{(x,x+h)}\rightarrow\chi_{\emptyset}[/tex]

([itex]\chi_{\emptyset}[/itex] is just the function that is identically 0).

In a way, Hurkyl's way is swifter if you know that in a finite measure space X (such as [a,b] with the Lebesgue measure), for any [itex]1\leq r\leq s\leq +\infty[/itex], [itex]L^s(X)\subset L^r(X)[/tex]. Because then you can just write<br /> <br /> [tex]|F(x+h)-F(x)|\leq \int_x^{x+h}|f(t)|dt\leq||f||_{\infty}(x+h-x)\rightarrow 0[/tex][/itex]
 
Well, I was just thinking about the mean value theorem for integrals. But either way, things become a little trickier when f isn't bounded near x...
 
Scratch what I said about Hurkyl's idea.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K