Show $lim_{a to 0} a cdot mu ({ x in mathbb{R} : |f(x)| > a }) = 0$ for $f in L^1 (mathbb{R})$, $a>0$












1












$begingroup$



Let $f in L^1 (mathbb{R})$, and $a > 0$. Show



$$
lim_{a to 0} a cdot mu (E_a) = 0
$$



where $E_a = { x in mathbb{R} : |f(x)| > a }$.





Try



Since



$$
int_mathbb{R} |f| dmu = int_{E_a} |f| dmu + int_{mathbb{R}setminus E_a } |f| dmu < infty
$$



we have $int_{E_a} |f| dmu < infty$, $forall a$.



But I'm stuck at how I can relate this to find $mu(E_a)$.



Any help will be appreciated.






real-analysis measure-theory







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$

















    1












    $begingroup$



    Let $f in L^1 (mathbb{R})$, and $a > 0$. Show



    $$
    lim_{a to 0} a cdot mu (E_a) = 0
    $$



    where $E_a = { x in mathbb{R} : |f(x)| > a }$.





    Try



    Since



    $$
    int_mathbb{R} |f| dmu = int_{E_a} |f| dmu + int_{mathbb{R}setminus E_a } |f| dmu < infty
    $$



    we have $int_{E_a} |f| dmu < infty$, $forall a$.



    But I'm stuck at how I can relate this to find $mu(E_a)$.



    Any help will be appreciated.






    real-analysis measure-theory







    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$















      1












      1








      1


      3



      $begingroup$



      Let $f in L^1 (mathbb{R})$, and $a > 0$. Show



      $$
      lim_{a to 0} a cdot mu (E_a) = 0
      $$



      where $E_a = { x in mathbb{R} : |f(x)| > a }$.





      Try



      Since



      $$
      int_mathbb{R} |f| dmu = int_{E_a} |f| dmu + int_{mathbb{R}setminus E_a } |f| dmu < infty
      $$



      we have $int_{E_a} |f| dmu < infty$, $forall a$.



      But I'm stuck at how I can relate this to find $mu(E_a)$.



      Any help will be appreciated.






      real-analysis measure-theory







      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$





      Let $f in L^1 (mathbb{R})$, and $a > 0$. Show



      $$
      lim_{a to 0} a cdot mu (E_a) = 0
      $$



      where $E_a = { x in mathbb{R} : |f(x)| > a }$.





      Try



      Since



      $$
      int_mathbb{R} |f| dmu = int_{E_a} |f| dmu + int_{mathbb{R}setminus E_a } |f| dmu < infty
      $$



      we have $int_{E_a} |f| dmu < infty$, $forall a$.



      But I'm stuck at how I can relate this to find $mu(E_a)$.



      Any help will be appreciated.






      real-analysis measure-theory




      real-analysis measure-theory






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Dec 20 '18 at 4:35









      MoreblueMoreblue

      9101317




      9101317






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          5












          $begingroup$

          It is a consequence of Lebesgue's dominated convergence theorem. Note that
          $$
          acdot 1_{{|f(x)|>a}}leq |f(x)|
          $$           for all $a>0$. Thus for any sequence $a_n$ such that $a_n geq a_{n+1} downarrow 0$, we have
          $$
          lim_{ntoinfty}a_n cdotmu(E_{a_n}) =int lim_{ntoinfty}left(a_ncdot 1_{{|f(x)|>a_n}}right)dmu =int 0dmu = 0.
          $$           This establishes $$lim_{ato 0} acdotmu(E_a) =0.$$



          Note: One can see that $acdot mu(E_a)$ is the area of a rectangle below the graph ${(x,|f(x)|) ;|;xin mathbb{R}}$ of $|f|$ which has finite area by the assumption. This observation is the motivation of this approach.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Can you explain the connection between the note and the solution? (I know what both say, I just don't see the connection)
            $endgroup$
            – mathworker21
            Dec 20 '18 at 4:56












          • $begingroup$
            In fact, it's just heuristics. Consider, for example, $f(x) = frac{1}{1+x^2}$ and a curve $(t,f(t)),tin mathbb{R}$. Then, $acdotmu(|f|>a)= 2acdot sqrt{frac{1-a}{a}}=2sqrt{a(1-a)}$ is the area of the largest rectangle with height $a$ below the curve, and we can see that as $ato 0$, this area converges to $0$. We can generalize this to general $fin L^1$.
            $endgroup$
            – Song
            Dec 20 '18 at 5:02












          • $begingroup$
            I don't see what that has to do with dominated convergence theorem. your comment just gave an explanation of why the result is true, but it did not shed light on how it was the motivation of your approach, i.e. how it motivated you to use DCT
            $endgroup$
            – mathworker21
            Dec 20 '18 at 7:22










          • $begingroup$
            Yes, you're right. Intuition itself does not tell we should use DCT. I selected DCT as an appropriate tool to rigorously prove my intuition. But it somehow tells us that we need some kind of integral limit theorem.
            $endgroup$
            – Song
            Dec 20 '18 at 7:26












          • $begingroup$
            lol just because you used it doesn't tell us that we need some form of it. Problem 15 on page 321 of Carothers real analysis book says that if $f$ is non-negative and in $L^1$, then $sum_{k in mathbb{Z}} 2^kmu({f > 2^k}) < infty$. This kind of result (which is very easy to prove) will also give a proof
            $endgroup$
            – mathworker21
            Dec 20 '18 at 7:39












          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',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          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%2f3047164%2fshow-lim-a-to-0-a-cdot-mu-x-in-mathbbr-fx-a-0-for%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          5












          $begingroup$

          It is a consequence of Lebesgue's dominated convergence theorem. Note that
          $$
          acdot 1_{{|f(x)|>a}}leq |f(x)|
          $$           for all $a>0$. Thus for any sequence $a_n$ such that $a_n geq a_{n+1} downarrow 0$, we have
          $$
          lim_{ntoinfty}a_n cdotmu(E_{a_n}) =int lim_{ntoinfty}left(a_ncdot 1_{{|f(x)|>a_n}}right)dmu =int 0dmu = 0.
          $$           This establishes $$lim_{ato 0} acdotmu(E_a) =0.$$



          Note: One can see that $acdot mu(E_a)$ is the area of a rectangle below the graph ${(x,|f(x)|) ;|;xin mathbb{R}}$ of $|f|$ which has finite area by the assumption. This observation is the motivation of this approach.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Can you explain the connection between the note and the solution? (I know what both say, I just don't see the connection)
            $endgroup$
            – mathworker21
            Dec 20 '18 at 4:56












          • $begingroup$
            In fact, it's just heuristics. Consider, for example, $f(x) = frac{1}{1+x^2}$ and a curve $(t,f(t)),tin mathbb{R}$. Then, $acdotmu(|f|>a)= 2acdot sqrt{frac{1-a}{a}}=2sqrt{a(1-a)}$ is the area of the largest rectangle with height $a$ below the curve, and we can see that as $ato 0$, this area converges to $0$. We can generalize this to general $fin L^1$.
            $endgroup$
            – Song
            Dec 20 '18 at 5:02












          • $begingroup$
            I don't see what that has to do with dominated convergence theorem. your comment just gave an explanation of why the result is true, but it did not shed light on how it was the motivation of your approach, i.e. how it motivated you to use DCT
            $endgroup$
            – mathworker21
            Dec 20 '18 at 7:22










          • $begingroup$
            Yes, you're right. Intuition itself does not tell we should use DCT. I selected DCT as an appropriate tool to rigorously prove my intuition. But it somehow tells us that we need some kind of integral limit theorem.
            $endgroup$
            – Song
            Dec 20 '18 at 7:26












          • $begingroup$
            lol just because you used it doesn't tell us that we need some form of it. Problem 15 on page 321 of Carothers real analysis book says that if $f$ is non-negative and in $L^1$, then $sum_{k in mathbb{Z}} 2^kmu({f > 2^k}) < infty$. This kind of result (which is very easy to prove) will also give a proof
            $endgroup$
            – mathworker21
            Dec 20 '18 at 7:39
















          5












          $begingroup$

          It is a consequence of Lebesgue's dominated convergence theorem. Note that
          $$
          acdot 1_{{|f(x)|>a}}leq |f(x)|
          $$           for all $a>0$. Thus for any sequence $a_n$ such that $a_n geq a_{n+1} downarrow 0$, we have
          $$
          lim_{ntoinfty}a_n cdotmu(E_{a_n}) =int lim_{ntoinfty}left(a_ncdot 1_{{|f(x)|>a_n}}right)dmu =int 0dmu = 0.
          $$           This establishes $$lim_{ato 0} acdotmu(E_a) =0.$$



          Note: One can see that $acdot mu(E_a)$ is the area of a rectangle below the graph ${(x,|f(x)|) ;|;xin mathbb{R}}$ of $|f|$ which has finite area by the assumption. This observation is the motivation of this approach.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Can you explain the connection between the note and the solution? (I know what both say, I just don't see the connection)
            $endgroup$
            – mathworker21
            Dec 20 '18 at 4:56












          • $begingroup$
            In fact, it's just heuristics. Consider, for example, $f(x) = frac{1}{1+x^2}$ and a curve $(t,f(t)),tin mathbb{R}$. Then, $acdotmu(|f|>a)= 2acdot sqrt{frac{1-a}{a}}=2sqrt{a(1-a)}$ is the area of the largest rectangle with height $a$ below the curve, and we can see that as $ato 0$, this area converges to $0$. We can generalize this to general $fin L^1$.
            $endgroup$
            – Song
            Dec 20 '18 at 5:02












          • $begingroup$
            I don't see what that has to do with dominated convergence theorem. your comment just gave an explanation of why the result is true, but it did not shed light on how it was the motivation of your approach, i.e. how it motivated you to use DCT
            $endgroup$
            – mathworker21
            Dec 20 '18 at 7:22










          • $begingroup$
            Yes, you're right. Intuition itself does not tell we should use DCT. I selected DCT as an appropriate tool to rigorously prove my intuition. But it somehow tells us that we need some kind of integral limit theorem.
            $endgroup$
            – Song
            Dec 20 '18 at 7:26












          • $begingroup$
            lol just because you used it doesn't tell us that we need some form of it. Problem 15 on page 321 of Carothers real analysis book says that if $f$ is non-negative and in $L^1$, then $sum_{k in mathbb{Z}} 2^kmu({f > 2^k}) < infty$. This kind of result (which is very easy to prove) will also give a proof
            $endgroup$
            – mathworker21
            Dec 20 '18 at 7:39














          5












          5








          5





          $begingroup$

          It is a consequence of Lebesgue's dominated convergence theorem. Note that
          $$
          acdot 1_{{|f(x)|>a}}leq |f(x)|
          $$           for all $a>0$. Thus for any sequence $a_n$ such that $a_n geq a_{n+1} downarrow 0$, we have
          $$
          lim_{ntoinfty}a_n cdotmu(E_{a_n}) =int lim_{ntoinfty}left(a_ncdot 1_{{|f(x)|>a_n}}right)dmu =int 0dmu = 0.
          $$           This establishes $$lim_{ato 0} acdotmu(E_a) =0.$$



          Note: One can see that $acdot mu(E_a)$ is the area of a rectangle below the graph ${(x,|f(x)|) ;|;xin mathbb{R}}$ of $|f|$ which has finite area by the assumption. This observation is the motivation of this approach.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          It is a consequence of Lebesgue's dominated convergence theorem. Note that
          $$
          acdot 1_{{|f(x)|>a}}leq |f(x)|
          $$           for all $a>0$. Thus for any sequence $a_n$ such that $a_n geq a_{n+1} downarrow 0$, we have
          $$
          lim_{ntoinfty}a_n cdotmu(E_{a_n}) =int lim_{ntoinfty}left(a_ncdot 1_{{|f(x)|>a_n}}right)dmu =int 0dmu = 0.
          $$           This establishes $$lim_{ato 0} acdotmu(E_a) =0.$$



          Note: One can see that $acdot mu(E_a)$ is the area of a rectangle below the graph ${(x,|f(x)|) ;|;xin mathbb{R}}$ of $|f|$ which has finite area by the assumption. This observation is the motivation of this approach.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Dec 20 '18 at 4:54

























          answered Dec 20 '18 at 4:49









          SongSong

          18.6k21651




          18.6k21651












          • $begingroup$
            Can you explain the connection between the note and the solution? (I know what both say, I just don't see the connection)
            $endgroup$
            – mathworker21
            Dec 20 '18 at 4:56












          • $begingroup$
            In fact, it's just heuristics. Consider, for example, $f(x) = frac{1}{1+x^2}$ and a curve $(t,f(t)),tin mathbb{R}$. Then, $acdotmu(|f|>a)= 2acdot sqrt{frac{1-a}{a}}=2sqrt{a(1-a)}$ is the area of the largest rectangle with height $a$ below the curve, and we can see that as $ato 0$, this area converges to $0$. We can generalize this to general $fin L^1$.
            $endgroup$
            – Song
            Dec 20 '18 at 5:02












          • $begingroup$
            I don't see what that has to do with dominated convergence theorem. your comment just gave an explanation of why the result is true, but it did not shed light on how it was the motivation of your approach, i.e. how it motivated you to use DCT
            $endgroup$
            – mathworker21
            Dec 20 '18 at 7:22










          • $begingroup$
            Yes, you're right. Intuition itself does not tell we should use DCT. I selected DCT as an appropriate tool to rigorously prove my intuition. But it somehow tells us that we need some kind of integral limit theorem.
            $endgroup$
            – Song
            Dec 20 '18 at 7:26












          • $begingroup$
            lol just because you used it doesn't tell us that we need some form of it. Problem 15 on page 321 of Carothers real analysis book says that if $f$ is non-negative and in $L^1$, then $sum_{k in mathbb{Z}} 2^kmu({f > 2^k}) < infty$. This kind of result (which is very easy to prove) will also give a proof
            $endgroup$
            – mathworker21
            Dec 20 '18 at 7:39


















          • $begingroup$
            Can you explain the connection between the note and the solution? (I know what both say, I just don't see the connection)
            $endgroup$
            – mathworker21
            Dec 20 '18 at 4:56












          • $begingroup$
            In fact, it's just heuristics. Consider, for example, $f(x) = frac{1}{1+x^2}$ and a curve $(t,f(t)),tin mathbb{R}$. Then, $acdotmu(|f|>a)= 2acdot sqrt{frac{1-a}{a}}=2sqrt{a(1-a)}$ is the area of the largest rectangle with height $a$ below the curve, and we can see that as $ato 0$, this area converges to $0$. We can generalize this to general $fin L^1$.
            $endgroup$
            – Song
            Dec 20 '18 at 5:02












          • $begingroup$
            I don't see what that has to do with dominated convergence theorem. your comment just gave an explanation of why the result is true, but it did not shed light on how it was the motivation of your approach, i.e. how it motivated you to use DCT
            $endgroup$
            – mathworker21
            Dec 20 '18 at 7:22










          • $begingroup$
            Yes, you're right. Intuition itself does not tell we should use DCT. I selected DCT as an appropriate tool to rigorously prove my intuition. But it somehow tells us that we need some kind of integral limit theorem.
            $endgroup$
            – Song
            Dec 20 '18 at 7:26












          • $begingroup$
            lol just because you used it doesn't tell us that we need some form of it. Problem 15 on page 321 of Carothers real analysis book says that if $f$ is non-negative and in $L^1$, then $sum_{k in mathbb{Z}} 2^kmu({f > 2^k}) < infty$. This kind of result (which is very easy to prove) will also give a proof
            $endgroup$
            – mathworker21
            Dec 20 '18 at 7:39
















          $begingroup$
          Can you explain the connection between the note and the solution? (I know what both say, I just don't see the connection)
          $endgroup$
          – mathworker21
          Dec 20 '18 at 4:56






          $begingroup$
          Can you explain the connection between the note and the solution? (I know what both say, I just don't see the connection)
          $endgroup$
          – mathworker21
          Dec 20 '18 at 4:56














          $begingroup$
          In fact, it's just heuristics. Consider, for example, $f(x) = frac{1}{1+x^2}$ and a curve $(t,f(t)),tin mathbb{R}$. Then, $acdotmu(|f|>a)= 2acdot sqrt{frac{1-a}{a}}=2sqrt{a(1-a)}$ is the area of the largest rectangle with height $a$ below the curve, and we can see that as $ato 0$, this area converges to $0$. We can generalize this to general $fin L^1$.
          $endgroup$
          – Song
          Dec 20 '18 at 5:02






          $begingroup$
          In fact, it's just heuristics. Consider, for example, $f(x) = frac{1}{1+x^2}$ and a curve $(t,f(t)),tin mathbb{R}$. Then, $acdotmu(|f|>a)= 2acdot sqrt{frac{1-a}{a}}=2sqrt{a(1-a)}$ is the area of the largest rectangle with height $a$ below the curve, and we can see that as $ato 0$, this area converges to $0$. We can generalize this to general $fin L^1$.
          $endgroup$
          – Song
          Dec 20 '18 at 5:02














          $begingroup$
          I don't see what that has to do with dominated convergence theorem. your comment just gave an explanation of why the result is true, but it did not shed light on how it was the motivation of your approach, i.e. how it motivated you to use DCT
          $endgroup$
          – mathworker21
          Dec 20 '18 at 7:22




          $begingroup$
          I don't see what that has to do with dominated convergence theorem. your comment just gave an explanation of why the result is true, but it did not shed light on how it was the motivation of your approach, i.e. how it motivated you to use DCT
          $endgroup$
          – mathworker21
          Dec 20 '18 at 7:22












          $begingroup$
          Yes, you're right. Intuition itself does not tell we should use DCT. I selected DCT as an appropriate tool to rigorously prove my intuition. But it somehow tells us that we need some kind of integral limit theorem.
          $endgroup$
          – Song
          Dec 20 '18 at 7:26






          $begingroup$
          Yes, you're right. Intuition itself does not tell we should use DCT. I selected DCT as an appropriate tool to rigorously prove my intuition. But it somehow tells us that we need some kind of integral limit theorem.
          $endgroup$
          – Song
          Dec 20 '18 at 7:26














          $begingroup$
          lol just because you used it doesn't tell us that we need some form of it. Problem 15 on page 321 of Carothers real analysis book says that if $f$ is non-negative and in $L^1$, then $sum_{k in mathbb{Z}} 2^kmu({f > 2^k}) < infty$. This kind of result (which is very easy to prove) will also give a proof
          $endgroup$
          – mathworker21
          Dec 20 '18 at 7:39




          $begingroup$
          lol just because you used it doesn't tell us that we need some form of it. Problem 15 on page 321 of Carothers real analysis book says that if $f$ is non-negative and in $L^1$, then $sum_{k in mathbb{Z}} 2^kmu({f > 2^k}) < infty$. This kind of result (which is very easy to prove) will also give a proof
          $endgroup$
          – mathworker21
          Dec 20 '18 at 7:39


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid …



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3047164%2fshow-lim-a-to-0-a-cdot-mu-x-in-mathbbr-fx-a-0-for%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          -

          Popular posts from this blog

          Plaza Victoria

          Image
          Plaza Victoria Plaza Victoria en 2017 Otros nombres Plaza de La Victoria Localización El Almendral, Valparaíso, Chile Vías adyacentes Chacabuco, Molina, Plaza Victoria y Edwards Creación 1841 Metro Bellavista Ubicación 33°02′46″S 71°37′11″O  /  -33.04624167, -71.61980833 Coordenadas: 33°02′46″S 71°37′11″O  /  -33.04624167, -71.61980833 [editar datos en Wikidata] La Plaza Victoria , también llamada Plaza de la Victoria , [ 1 ] ​ es una plaza ubicada en el sector El Almendral del plan de la ciudad de Valparaíso, Chile, de importancia patrimonial, que incluye valiosas estatuas y especies vegetales. [ 2 ] ​ La plaza se creó como tal en la primera mitad del siglo XIX, tomando previamente los nombres de Plaza Nueva y Plaza de Orrego . Si bien desde sus inicios tuvo relevancia histórica, no fue sino a partir de fines de los años 1860 cuando comenzó a cobrar mayor importancia y se convirtió en uno de los principales centros sociales de l
          Read more

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

          Image
          .everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box; } 2 OneNote has two useful keyboard shortcuts for bulleted and numbered lists, namely Ctrl + . and Ctrl + - . Is there something similar for PowerPoint where the work with lists is also very common? Haven't found anything here: Use keyboard shortcuts in PowerPoint. keyboard-shortcuts microsoft-powerpoint share | improve this question edited Aug 14 '14 at 14:49 Linger 2,826 10 28 40
          Read more

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

          Image
          1 0 I want to put 3 images in LateX such as 2 figures are side by side horizotally and 3rd figure below these 2 side by side figures but in middle. I have following code: begin{figure}[H] centering begin{minipage}{.5textwidth} centering includegraphics[width=.50linewidth]{Text/Images/Genelec_8010_AP.jpg} captionof{figure}{Genelec 8010 AP} label{fig:Genelec 8010} end{minipage}% begin{minipage}{.5textwidth} centering includegraphics[width=.69linewidth]{Text/Images/Genelec_8020_CPM.jpg} captionof{figure}{Genelec 8020 CPM} label{fig:Genelec 8020} end{minipage}% end{figure} %%Here is my 3rd picture code begin{figure} centering includegraphics[width=5cm]{Text/Images/Genelec_8030_BPM.jpg} caption{Genelec 8030 BPM} label{fig:Genelec 8030} end{figure} I want to ask ho
          Read more