Lebesgue integral question











up vote
0
down vote

favorite












Let $f:mathbb{R}rightarrowmathbb{R}$ be a measurable function. Show that if $f$ is continuous and fix $x_0in mathbb{R}$, then $lim_{nrightarrowinfty}nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}fdm=f(x_0)$.



Hint: Use the max-min theorem which says: For any continuous function $f$ on a compact set $[a,b]$, there are points $x_{max},x_{min}in[a,b]$ such that $f(x_{max})geq f(x)geq f(x_{min})$ for all $xin[a,b]$.










share|cite|improve this question
























  • Try something more elementary. No Theorem from measure theory used to interchange limits and integrals is required.
    – Kavi Rama Murthy
    yesterday












  • I suggest you look at the definition of a Riemann integral. Try showing this result for a very simple partition.
    – Jabbath
    yesterday










  • Think of applying mean value theorem on the function given by the indefinite integral of $f$, which is differentiable with derivative $f$.
    – астон вілла олоф мэллбэрг
    yesterday















up vote
0
down vote

favorite












Let $f:mathbb{R}rightarrowmathbb{R}$ be a measurable function. Show that if $f$ is continuous and fix $x_0in mathbb{R}$, then $lim_{nrightarrowinfty}nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}fdm=f(x_0)$.



Hint: Use the max-min theorem which says: For any continuous function $f$ on a compact set $[a,b]$, there are points $x_{max},x_{min}in[a,b]$ such that $f(x_{max})geq f(x)geq f(x_{min})$ for all $xin[a,b]$.










share|cite|improve this question
























  • Try something more elementary. No Theorem from measure theory used to interchange limits and integrals is required.
    – Kavi Rama Murthy
    yesterday












  • I suggest you look at the definition of a Riemann integral. Try showing this result for a very simple partition.
    – Jabbath
    yesterday










  • Think of applying mean value theorem on the function given by the indefinite integral of $f$, which is differentiable with derivative $f$.
    – астон вілла олоф мэллбэрг
    yesterday













up vote
0
down vote

favorite









up vote
0
down vote

favorite











Let $f:mathbb{R}rightarrowmathbb{R}$ be a measurable function. Show that if $f$ is continuous and fix $x_0in mathbb{R}$, then $lim_{nrightarrowinfty}nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}fdm=f(x_0)$.



Hint: Use the max-min theorem which says: For any continuous function $f$ on a compact set $[a,b]$, there are points $x_{max},x_{min}in[a,b]$ such that $f(x_{max})geq f(x)geq f(x_{min})$ for all $xin[a,b]$.










share|cite|improve this question















Let $f:mathbb{R}rightarrowmathbb{R}$ be a measurable function. Show that if $f$ is continuous and fix $x_0in mathbb{R}$, then $lim_{nrightarrowinfty}nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}fdm=f(x_0)$.



Hint: Use the max-min theorem which says: For any continuous function $f$ on a compact set $[a,b]$, there are points $x_{max},x_{min}in[a,b]$ such that $f(x_{max})geq f(x)geq f(x_{min})$ for all $xin[a,b]$.







real-analysis






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited yesterday









KCd

16.5k3873




16.5k3873










asked yesterday









TNT

293




293












  • Try something more elementary. No Theorem from measure theory used to interchange limits and integrals is required.
    – Kavi Rama Murthy
    yesterday












  • I suggest you look at the definition of a Riemann integral. Try showing this result for a very simple partition.
    – Jabbath
    yesterday










  • Think of applying mean value theorem on the function given by the indefinite integral of $f$, which is differentiable with derivative $f$.
    – астон вілла олоф мэллбэрг
    yesterday


















  • Try something more elementary. No Theorem from measure theory used to interchange limits and integrals is required.
    – Kavi Rama Murthy
    yesterday












  • I suggest you look at the definition of a Riemann integral. Try showing this result for a very simple partition.
    – Jabbath
    yesterday










  • Think of applying mean value theorem on the function given by the indefinite integral of $f$, which is differentiable with derivative $f$.
    – астон вілла олоф мэллбэрг
    yesterday
















Try something more elementary. No Theorem from measure theory used to interchange limits and integrals is required.
– Kavi Rama Murthy
yesterday






Try something more elementary. No Theorem from measure theory used to interchange limits and integrals is required.
– Kavi Rama Murthy
yesterday














I suggest you look at the definition of a Riemann integral. Try showing this result for a very simple partition.
– Jabbath
yesterday




I suggest you look at the definition of a Riemann integral. Try showing this result for a very simple partition.
– Jabbath
yesterday












Think of applying mean value theorem on the function given by the indefinite integral of $f$, which is differentiable with derivative $f$.
– астон вілла олоф мэллбэрг
yesterday




Think of applying mean value theorem on the function given by the indefinite integral of $f$, which is differentiable with derivative $f$.
– астон вілла олоф мэллбэрг
yesterday










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
1
down vote













The function is continuous, so we may just use the fundamental theorem of calculus for the Riemann integral, which of course agrees with the Lebesgue one.



By the FTC,
$$
lim_{hto 0}frac{1}{h}int_{x_0}^{x_0+h}f(x)mathrm dx=f(x_0)
$$

This will certainly hold along your particular sequence $h=1/n$.



If you want to work harder, for a given $epsilon>0$, find $delta>0$ with
$$
x_0-delta<x<x_0+deltaimplies f(x_0)-epsilon<f(x)<f(x_0)+epsilon
$$

then for $n>1/delta$, and with monotonicity of integration
$$
nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x_0)-epsilon<nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x)dx<nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x_0)+epsilon\
implies f(x_0)-epsilon<nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x)dx<f(x_0)+epsilon
$$






share|cite|improve this answer




























    up vote
    1
    down vote













    Unnecessarily sophisticated proof: start with the change of variable $x = x_0 + s/n$,
    $$nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x),dx = int_0^1 f(x_0 + s/n),ds$$
    and apply the dominated convergence theorem (the continuity of $f$ in $x_0$ implies that the functions $smapsto f(x_0 + s/n)$ are uniformly bounded for $n$ large enough).



    Less sophisticated variant: the functions $smapsto f(x_0 + s/n)$ converge uniformly to the constant $f(x_0)$






    share|cite|improve this answer





















      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
      });
      });
      }, "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "69"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      convertImagesToLinks: true,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: 10,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














       

      draft saved


      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2997859%2flebesgue-integral-question%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest
































      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes








      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes








      up vote
      1
      down vote













      The function is continuous, so we may just use the fundamental theorem of calculus for the Riemann integral, which of course agrees with the Lebesgue one.



      By the FTC,
      $$
      lim_{hto 0}frac{1}{h}int_{x_0}^{x_0+h}f(x)mathrm dx=f(x_0)
      $$

      This will certainly hold along your particular sequence $h=1/n$.



      If you want to work harder, for a given $epsilon>0$, find $delta>0$ with
      $$
      x_0-delta<x<x_0+deltaimplies f(x_0)-epsilon<f(x)<f(x_0)+epsilon
      $$

      then for $n>1/delta$, and with monotonicity of integration
      $$
      nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x_0)-epsilon<nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x)dx<nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x_0)+epsilon\
      implies f(x_0)-epsilon<nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x)dx<f(x_0)+epsilon
      $$






      share|cite|improve this answer

























        up vote
        1
        down vote













        The function is continuous, so we may just use the fundamental theorem of calculus for the Riemann integral, which of course agrees with the Lebesgue one.



        By the FTC,
        $$
        lim_{hto 0}frac{1}{h}int_{x_0}^{x_0+h}f(x)mathrm dx=f(x_0)
        $$

        This will certainly hold along your particular sequence $h=1/n$.



        If you want to work harder, for a given $epsilon>0$, find $delta>0$ with
        $$
        x_0-delta<x<x_0+deltaimplies f(x_0)-epsilon<f(x)<f(x_0)+epsilon
        $$

        then for $n>1/delta$, and with monotonicity of integration
        $$
        nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x_0)-epsilon<nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x)dx<nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x_0)+epsilon\
        implies f(x_0)-epsilon<nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x)dx<f(x_0)+epsilon
        $$






        share|cite|improve this answer























          up vote
          1
          down vote










          up vote
          1
          down vote









          The function is continuous, so we may just use the fundamental theorem of calculus for the Riemann integral, which of course agrees with the Lebesgue one.



          By the FTC,
          $$
          lim_{hto 0}frac{1}{h}int_{x_0}^{x_0+h}f(x)mathrm dx=f(x_0)
          $$

          This will certainly hold along your particular sequence $h=1/n$.



          If you want to work harder, for a given $epsilon>0$, find $delta>0$ with
          $$
          x_0-delta<x<x_0+deltaimplies f(x_0)-epsilon<f(x)<f(x_0)+epsilon
          $$

          then for $n>1/delta$, and with monotonicity of integration
          $$
          nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x_0)-epsilon<nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x)dx<nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x_0)+epsilon\
          implies f(x_0)-epsilon<nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x)dx<f(x_0)+epsilon
          $$






          share|cite|improve this answer












          The function is continuous, so we may just use the fundamental theorem of calculus for the Riemann integral, which of course agrees with the Lebesgue one.



          By the FTC,
          $$
          lim_{hto 0}frac{1}{h}int_{x_0}^{x_0+h}f(x)mathrm dx=f(x_0)
          $$

          This will certainly hold along your particular sequence $h=1/n$.



          If you want to work harder, for a given $epsilon>0$, find $delta>0$ with
          $$
          x_0-delta<x<x_0+deltaimplies f(x_0)-epsilon<f(x)<f(x_0)+epsilon
          $$

          then for $n>1/delta$, and with monotonicity of integration
          $$
          nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x_0)-epsilon<nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x)dx<nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x_0)+epsilon\
          implies f(x_0)-epsilon<nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x)dx<f(x_0)+epsilon
          $$







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered yesterday









          qbert

          21.4k32357




          21.4k32357






















              up vote
              1
              down vote













              Unnecessarily sophisticated proof: start with the change of variable $x = x_0 + s/n$,
              $$nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x),dx = int_0^1 f(x_0 + s/n),ds$$
              and apply the dominated convergence theorem (the continuity of $f$ in $x_0$ implies that the functions $smapsto f(x_0 + s/n)$ are uniformly bounded for $n$ large enough).



              Less sophisticated variant: the functions $smapsto f(x_0 + s/n)$ converge uniformly to the constant $f(x_0)$






              share|cite|improve this answer

























                up vote
                1
                down vote













                Unnecessarily sophisticated proof: start with the change of variable $x = x_0 + s/n$,
                $$nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x),dx = int_0^1 f(x_0 + s/n),ds$$
                and apply the dominated convergence theorem (the continuity of $f$ in $x_0$ implies that the functions $smapsto f(x_0 + s/n)$ are uniformly bounded for $n$ large enough).



                Less sophisticated variant: the functions $smapsto f(x_0 + s/n)$ converge uniformly to the constant $f(x_0)$






                share|cite|improve this answer























                  up vote
                  1
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  1
                  down vote









                  Unnecessarily sophisticated proof: start with the change of variable $x = x_0 + s/n$,
                  $$nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x),dx = int_0^1 f(x_0 + s/n),ds$$
                  and apply the dominated convergence theorem (the continuity of $f$ in $x_0$ implies that the functions $smapsto f(x_0 + s/n)$ are uniformly bounded for $n$ large enough).



                  Less sophisticated variant: the functions $smapsto f(x_0 + s/n)$ converge uniformly to the constant $f(x_0)$






                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  Unnecessarily sophisticated proof: start with the change of variable $x = x_0 + s/n$,
                  $$nint_{x_0}^{x_0+1/n}f(x),dx = int_0^1 f(x_0 + s/n),ds$$
                  and apply the dominated convergence theorem (the continuity of $f$ in $x_0$ implies that the functions $smapsto f(x_0 + s/n)$ are uniformly bounded for $n$ large enough).



                  Less sophisticated variant: the functions $smapsto f(x_0 + s/n)$ converge uniformly to the constant $f(x_0)$







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered 22 hours ago









                  Martín-Blas Pérez Pinilla

                  33.7k42770




                  33.7k42770






























                       

                      draft saved


                      draft discarded



















































                       


                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2997859%2flebesgue-integral-question%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest




















































































                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Plaza Victoria

                      In PowerPoint, is there a keyboard shortcut for bulleted / numbered list?

                      How to put 3 figures in Latex with 2 figures side by side and 1 below these side by side images but in...