Uniform convergence of integrable functions

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the question of whether the uniform convergence of a sequence of integrable functions \( f_n \) to a function \( f \) on an interval \( (a, b) \) implies that \( f \) is also integrable on that interval. The scope includes considerations of different types of integrals, specifically Riemann and Lebesgue integrability, and the implications of uniform convergence on the properties of the limit function.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether uniform convergence of integrable functions \( f_n \) guarantees the integrability of the limit function \( f \), noting that the type of integral (Riemann, Lebesgue, or "Newton") may affect the answer.
  • Another participant argues that if \( f_n \) is continuous at a point \( x \) for all \( n \), then \( f \) must also be continuous at \( x \), leading to the conclusion that \( f \) is Riemann integrable due to the nature of the set of discontinuities.
  • A different participant expresses confusion over the term "Newton integrable," seeking clarification on its meaning and providing their own definition related to antiderivatives and limits.
  • The same participant further inquires whether the uniform limit \( f \) of discontinuous functions \( f_n \) that have antiderivatives also possesses an antiderivative.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of uniform convergence for integrability, with some supporting the idea that Riemann and Lebesgue integrability are preserved, while others raise questions about the definitions and implications of "Newton" integrability. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the general case and the specific implications of different types of integrals.

Contextual Notes

There is uncertainty regarding the definitions of integrability types, particularly "Newton" integrability, and how these definitions may influence the conclusions drawn about the integrability of the limit function. Additionally, the discussion does not resolve the conditions under which integrability is preserved across different types of integrals.

hooker27
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
This question arised in my last math class:

If a sequence of functions [tex]f_n[/tex] uniformly converges to some [tex]f[/tex] on [tex](a, b)[/tex] (bounded) and all [tex]f_n[/tex] are integrable on [tex](a, b)[/tex], does this imply that [tex]f[/tex] is also integrable on [tex](a, b)[/tex] ??
([tex]f_n[/tex] do not necessarily have to be continous, if they were, the answer would be obvious)

Note: It is not certain, which type of integral is meant, it can be Newton, Riemann or Lebesgue. Let me please know if the answer depends on which type of integral is used.

- If it is true, could you please tell me where (on www) I might find a proof??
- If it is not true, could you please show me a sequence for which it is not true??

Thanks a lot, H.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
An easy way to see Riemann integrability is to note that if fn is continuous at x for all n, then f is continuous at x. Therefore, a discontinuity point of f must be a discontinuity point of some fn (the converse need not be true). Thus, the set of discontinuity points of f is contained in the union of the discontinuity points of the fn. For each fn, the set of discontinuity points is a zero set (assuming Riemann integrability), so the set of discontinuity points of f is contained in the countable union of zero sets, hence is contained in a zero set, hence is a zero set, so f is Riemann integrable.

Lebesgue integrability is preserved as well, I believe. Try looking up the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem.
 
What, precisely, do you mean by "Newton" integrable? I don't recognise that term.
 
HallsofIvy said:
What, precisely, do you mean by "Newton" integrable? I don't recognise that term.
Maybe there is s different name for that in english. What I know as Newton's integral is this:
if a function f is defined on (a,b) and there exists some F such that [tex]F'(x) = f(x)[/tex] for all x from (a,b) (in other words - the function F is an antiderivative of f on (a,b) ) then Newton's integral of f over (a,b), denoted as
[tex]\int_{a}^{b}f(x)dx[/tex]
is defined as
[tex]\lim_{x\to b-}F(x)-\lim_{x\to a+}F(x)[/tex].

So what I call "Newton integrable" is:
- function must have an antiderivative
- the limits (above) of the antiderivative must exist
- the expression with the limits (above) must be well defined (not [tex]\infty -\infty[/tex] etc.)

As for my previous question: of all discontinous functions [tex]f_n[/tex] have antiderivatives, does their uniform limit [tex]f[/tex] also have an antiderivative?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K