Why Does Monotone Convergence Theorem Confirm Integral Bounds?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter tjkubo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bounded Integrals
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
5 replies · 2K views
tjkubo
Messages
41
Reaction score
0
Say f is a non-negative, integrable function over a measurable set E. Suppose
[tex] \int_{E_k} f\; dm \leq \epsilon[/tex]
for each positive integer [itex]k[/itex], where
[tex] E_k = E \cap [-k,k][/tex]
Then, why is it true that
[tex] \int_E f\; dm \leq \epsilon \quad ?[/tex]

I know that
[tex] \bigcup_k E_k = E[/tex]
and intuitively it seems reasonable, but I don't know how to prove it.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Proceed by indirect method : if the integral over E is strictly > e ,then the integral over E_k should also exceed e for sufficiently large k.
 
Why is that so? Are you using some property of integrable functions I'm not seeing?
 
I think you could also prove it this way. Given [itex]\epsilon > 0[/itex], for each [itex]k \in \mathbb{Z}^+[/itex] [itex]\int_{E_k} f \; dm \leq \epsilon/2^k[/itex]. Then
[tex] \int_E f \; dm = \int_{\bigcup_k E_k} f \; dm \leq \sum_{k=1}^\infty \int_{E_k} f \; dm \leq \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{\epsilon}{2^k} = \epsilon \frac{1}{2} \frac{1}{1 - \frac{1}{2}} = \epsilon \; .[/tex]

The only question I have is if it's legal to have an epsilon that depends on k, but I think it is since I think your given information held for all [itex]\epsilon > 0[/itex] and all positive integers k.
 
Actually, the epsilon is a fixed number. That is why it's stumbling me. Sorry I wasn't clear.
 
define [itex]f_k(x)=\textbf{1}_{E_k}(x)f(x)[/itex] where [itex]\textbf{1}[/itex] is the characteristic function.
From the monotone convergence theorem you have
[tex]\epsilon \ge \lim_{k\to\infty} \int_{E_k} f \; dm = \lim_{k\to\infty} \int_E f_k \; dm = \int_E f \; dm[/tex]