munkres analysis integration question
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Let $[0,1]^2 = [0,1] times [0,1]$. Let $f: [0,1]^2 to mathbbR$ be defined by setting $f(x,y)=0$ if $y neq x$, and $f(x,y) = 1$ if $y=x$. Show that $f$ is integrable over $[0,1]^2$.
integration analysis measure-theory
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Let $[0,1]^2 = [0,1] times [0,1]$. Let $f: [0,1]^2 to mathbbR$ be defined by setting $f(x,y)=0$ if $y neq x$, and $f(x,y) = 1$ if $y=x$. Show that $f$ is integrable over $[0,1]^2$.
integration analysis measure-theory
what kind of integral are you using? With the Lebesgue integral, the problem is trivial.
â Stefan Smith
Jan 11 '14 at 15:22
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Let $[0,1]^2 = [0,1] times [0,1]$. Let $f: [0,1]^2 to mathbbR$ be defined by setting $f(x,y)=0$ if $y neq x$, and $f(x,y) = 1$ if $y=x$. Show that $f$ is integrable over $[0,1]^2$.
integration analysis measure-theory
Let $[0,1]^2 = [0,1] times [0,1]$. Let $f: [0,1]^2 to mathbbR$ be defined by setting $f(x,y)=0$ if $y neq x$, and $f(x,y) = 1$ if $y=x$. Show that $f$ is integrable over $[0,1]^2$.
integration analysis measure-theory
integration analysis measure-theory
edited Jan 14 '14 at 18:21
asked Jan 11 '14 at 13:38
user115722
257
257
what kind of integral are you using? With the Lebesgue integral, the problem is trivial.
â Stefan Smith
Jan 11 '14 at 15:22
add a comment |Â
what kind of integral are you using? With the Lebesgue integral, the problem is trivial.
â Stefan Smith
Jan 11 '14 at 15:22
what kind of integral are you using? With the Lebesgue integral, the problem is trivial.
â Stefan Smith
Jan 11 '14 at 15:22
what kind of integral are you using? With the Lebesgue integral, the problem is trivial.
â Stefan Smith
Jan 11 '14 at 15:22
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
Given $ varepsilon> 0 $ is $ k in N $ such that $varepsilon >1/k$ consider a 'homogeneous' partition of $ [0,1] times [0,1] $, i.e., all sub- rectangles of partition has area $1/k^2$, we know that $ m_B = 0$ and $ m_B = 1$ if $B$ intection the line $ y = x $ is not empty set, so
$ S (f, P)-s (f, P) = sum_ B in P (m_B-m_B) vol (B) = sum_ B mbox such that intection the line $ y = x $ is not empty set = 1 / k <varepsilon $ hence f is integrable .
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Consider the partition $P$ like the above picture.
$U(f, P) - L(f, P) = frac3 n - 2n^2$.
$frac3 n - 2n^2 to 0 (n to infty)$.
So, for any $epsilon > 0$, there exists a partition $P$ such that $U(f, P) - L(f, P) < epsilon$.
By Theorem 10.3 (p.86), $f$ is integrable over $[0, 1] times [0, 1]$.
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
Given $ varepsilon> 0 $ is $ k in N $ such that $varepsilon >1/k$ consider a 'homogeneous' partition of $ [0,1] times [0,1] $, i.e., all sub- rectangles of partition has area $1/k^2$, we know that $ m_B = 0$ and $ m_B = 1$ if $B$ intection the line $ y = x $ is not empty set, so
$ S (f, P)-s (f, P) = sum_ B in P (m_B-m_B) vol (B) = sum_ B mbox such that intection the line $ y = x $ is not empty set = 1 / k <varepsilon $ hence f is integrable .
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Given $ varepsilon> 0 $ is $ k in N $ such that $varepsilon >1/k$ consider a 'homogeneous' partition of $ [0,1] times [0,1] $, i.e., all sub- rectangles of partition has area $1/k^2$, we know that $ m_B = 0$ and $ m_B = 1$ if $B$ intection the line $ y = x $ is not empty set, so
$ S (f, P)-s (f, P) = sum_ B in P (m_B-m_B) vol (B) = sum_ B mbox such that intection the line $ y = x $ is not empty set = 1 / k <varepsilon $ hence f is integrable .
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Given $ varepsilon> 0 $ is $ k in N $ such that $varepsilon >1/k$ consider a 'homogeneous' partition of $ [0,1] times [0,1] $, i.e., all sub- rectangles of partition has area $1/k^2$, we know that $ m_B = 0$ and $ m_B = 1$ if $B$ intection the line $ y = x $ is not empty set, so
$ S (f, P)-s (f, P) = sum_ B in P (m_B-m_B) vol (B) = sum_ B mbox such that intection the line $ y = x $ is not empty set = 1 / k <varepsilon $ hence f is integrable .
Given $ varepsilon> 0 $ is $ k in N $ such that $varepsilon >1/k$ consider a 'homogeneous' partition of $ [0,1] times [0,1] $, i.e., all sub- rectangles of partition has area $1/k^2$, we know that $ m_B = 0$ and $ m_B = 1$ if $B$ intection the line $ y = x $ is not empty set, so
$ S (f, P)-s (f, P) = sum_ B in P (m_B-m_B) vol (B) = sum_ B mbox such that intection the line $ y = x $ is not empty set = 1 / k <varepsilon $ hence f is integrable .
edited Apr 19 '14 at 4:30
answered Apr 19 '14 at 4:07
Alcides de carvalho jr
11311
11311
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Consider the partition $P$ like the above picture.
$U(f, P) - L(f, P) = frac3 n - 2n^2$.
$frac3 n - 2n^2 to 0 (n to infty)$.
So, for any $epsilon > 0$, there exists a partition $P$ such that $U(f, P) - L(f, P) < epsilon$.
By Theorem 10.3 (p.86), $f$ is integrable over $[0, 1] times [0, 1]$.
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Consider the partition $P$ like the above picture.
$U(f, P) - L(f, P) = frac3 n - 2n^2$.
$frac3 n - 2n^2 to 0 (n to infty)$.
So, for any $epsilon > 0$, there exists a partition $P$ such that $U(f, P) - L(f, P) < epsilon$.
By Theorem 10.3 (p.86), $f$ is integrable over $[0, 1] times [0, 1]$.
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Consider the partition $P$ like the above picture.
$U(f, P) - L(f, P) = frac3 n - 2n^2$.
$frac3 n - 2n^2 to 0 (n to infty)$.
So, for any $epsilon > 0$, there exists a partition $P$ such that $U(f, P) - L(f, P) < epsilon$.
By Theorem 10.3 (p.86), $f$ is integrable over $[0, 1] times [0, 1]$.
Consider the partition $P$ like the above picture.
$U(f, P) - L(f, P) = frac3 n - 2n^2$.
$frac3 n - 2n^2 to 0 (n to infty)$.
So, for any $epsilon > 0$, there exists a partition $P$ such that $U(f, P) - L(f, P) < epsilon$.
By Theorem 10.3 (p.86), $f$ is integrable over $[0, 1] times [0, 1]$.
answered Sep 3 at 9:25
tchappy ha
1938
1938
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f634680%2fmunkres-analysis-integration-question%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
what kind of integral are you using? With the Lebesgue integral, the problem is trivial.
â Stefan Smith
Jan 11 '14 at 15:22