$underset{nrightarrow infty}{lim}int_{0}^{b_{n}}f_n(x)dx=int_0^1f(x)dx$












2















Let $(f_n)_{ninmathbb{N}}$ ne a sequence of continuous functions on
$[0,1]rightarrowmathbb{R}$ that converges uniformly to
$f:[0,1]rightarrowmathbb{R}$. Let $(b_n)_{ninmathbb{R}}$ be an
increasing sequence of real numbers in $(0,1)$ that converges to 1.
Prove that : $$underset{nrightarrow infty}{lim}int_{0}^{b_{n}}f_n(x)dx=int_0^1f(x)dx$$




As far as I know if we have a sequence of functions converging uniformly to $f$ AND if they are uniformly bounded we can have the following: $$underset{nrightarrow infty}{lim}int_{0}^{1}f_n(x)dx=int_0^1f(x)dx$$.

But here it is not so. Even the uniform boundedness is also not mentioned.






analysis riemann-integration







share|cite|improve this question


















  • 1




    Uniform convergence is sufficient for the interchange of limit with the integral.
    – Math1000
    Jan 5 at 22:12










  • Thank you for correcting
    – DD90
    Jan 5 at 22:36
















2















Let $(f_n)_{ninmathbb{N}}$ ne a sequence of continuous functions on
$[0,1]rightarrowmathbb{R}$ that converges uniformly to
$f:[0,1]rightarrowmathbb{R}$. Let $(b_n)_{ninmathbb{R}}$ be an
increasing sequence of real numbers in $(0,1)$ that converges to 1.
Prove that : $$underset{nrightarrow infty}{lim}int_{0}^{b_{n}}f_n(x)dx=int_0^1f(x)dx$$




As far as I know if we have a sequence of functions converging uniformly to $f$ AND if they are uniformly bounded we can have the following: $$underset{nrightarrow infty}{lim}int_{0}^{1}f_n(x)dx=int_0^1f(x)dx$$.

But here it is not so. Even the uniform boundedness is also not mentioned.






analysis riemann-integration







share|cite|improve this question


















  • 1




    Uniform convergence is sufficient for the interchange of limit with the integral.
    – Math1000
    Jan 5 at 22:12










  • Thank you for correcting
    – DD90
    Jan 5 at 22:36














2












2








2








Let $(f_n)_{ninmathbb{N}}$ ne a sequence of continuous functions on
$[0,1]rightarrowmathbb{R}$ that converges uniformly to
$f:[0,1]rightarrowmathbb{R}$. Let $(b_n)_{ninmathbb{R}}$ be an
increasing sequence of real numbers in $(0,1)$ that converges to 1.
Prove that : $$underset{nrightarrow infty}{lim}int_{0}^{b_{n}}f_n(x)dx=int_0^1f(x)dx$$




As far as I know if we have a sequence of functions converging uniformly to $f$ AND if they are uniformly bounded we can have the following: $$underset{nrightarrow infty}{lim}int_{0}^{1}f_n(x)dx=int_0^1f(x)dx$$.

But here it is not so. Even the uniform boundedness is also not mentioned.






analysis riemann-integration







share|cite|improve this question














Let $(f_n)_{ninmathbb{N}}$ ne a sequence of continuous functions on
$[0,1]rightarrowmathbb{R}$ that converges uniformly to
$f:[0,1]rightarrowmathbb{R}$. Let $(b_n)_{ninmathbb{R}}$ be an
increasing sequence of real numbers in $(0,1)$ that converges to 1.
Prove that : $$underset{nrightarrow infty}{lim}int_{0}^{b_{n}}f_n(x)dx=int_0^1f(x)dx$$




As far as I know if we have a sequence of functions converging uniformly to $f$ AND if they are uniformly bounded we can have the following: $$underset{nrightarrow infty}{lim}int_{0}^{1}f_n(x)dx=int_0^1f(x)dx$$.

But here it is not so. Even the uniform boundedness is also not mentioned.






analysis riemann-integration




analysis riemann-integration






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Jan 5 at 22:01









DD90DD90

2618




2618








  • 1




    Uniform convergence is sufficient for the interchange of limit with the integral.
    – Math1000
    Jan 5 at 22:12










  • Thank you for correcting
    – DD90
    Jan 5 at 22:36














  • 1




    Uniform convergence is sufficient for the interchange of limit with the integral.
    – Math1000
    Jan 5 at 22:12










  • Thank you for correcting
    – DD90
    Jan 5 at 22:36








1




1




Uniform convergence is sufficient for the interchange of limit with the integral.
– Math1000
Jan 5 at 22:12




Uniform convergence is sufficient for the interchange of limit with the integral.
– Math1000
Jan 5 at 22:12












Thank you for correcting
– DD90
Jan 5 at 22:36




Thank you for correcting
– DD90
Jan 5 at 22:36










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















4














Hint:



For any $epsilon > 0$, we have for all sufficiently large $n$
$$left|int_0^{b_n} f_n - int_0^1 f right| leqslant int_0^{b_n}|f_n - f| + int_{b_n}^1 |f| leqslant epsilon b_n + sup_{x in [0,1]} |f(x)| (1 - b_n)$$






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Thanks. It works. But I need a small clarification: is it always true that $|int f dx|leqint|f|dx$? If so can you please point out a website or a book which state this result? Thanks again!
    – DD90
    Jan 5 at 22:35






  • 1




    So $-|f(x)| leqslant f(x) leqslant |f(x)|$. One side gives us $int_0^1f leqslant int_0^1|f|$. The other side gives us $-int_0^1|f| leqslant int_0^1 f$. Thus $|int_0^1 f| leqslant int_0^1 |f|$.
    – RRL
    Jan 5 at 22:38












  • Ah! So it is the proof. Thank you!
    – DD90
    Jan 5 at 22:41






  • 1




    @DD90: You are welcome.
    – RRL
    Jan 5 at 22:42











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%2f3063244%2fundersetn-rightarrow-infty-lim-int-0b-nf-nxdx-int-01fxdx%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









4














Hint:



For any $epsilon > 0$, we have for all sufficiently large $n$
$$left|int_0^{b_n} f_n - int_0^1 f right| leqslant int_0^{b_n}|f_n - f| + int_{b_n}^1 |f| leqslant epsilon b_n + sup_{x in [0,1]} |f(x)| (1 - b_n)$$






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Thanks. It works. But I need a small clarification: is it always true that $|int f dx|leqint|f|dx$? If so can you please point out a website or a book which state this result? Thanks again!
    – DD90
    Jan 5 at 22:35






  • 1




    So $-|f(x)| leqslant f(x) leqslant |f(x)|$. One side gives us $int_0^1f leqslant int_0^1|f|$. The other side gives us $-int_0^1|f| leqslant int_0^1 f$. Thus $|int_0^1 f| leqslant int_0^1 |f|$.
    – RRL
    Jan 5 at 22:38












  • Ah! So it is the proof. Thank you!
    – DD90
    Jan 5 at 22:41






  • 1




    @DD90: You are welcome.
    – RRL
    Jan 5 at 22:42
















4














Hint:



For any $epsilon > 0$, we have for all sufficiently large $n$
$$left|int_0^{b_n} f_n - int_0^1 f right| leqslant int_0^{b_n}|f_n - f| + int_{b_n}^1 |f| leqslant epsilon b_n + sup_{x in [0,1]} |f(x)| (1 - b_n)$$






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Thanks. It works. But I need a small clarification: is it always true that $|int f dx|leqint|f|dx$? If so can you please point out a website or a book which state this result? Thanks again!
    – DD90
    Jan 5 at 22:35






  • 1




    So $-|f(x)| leqslant f(x) leqslant |f(x)|$. One side gives us $int_0^1f leqslant int_0^1|f|$. The other side gives us $-int_0^1|f| leqslant int_0^1 f$. Thus $|int_0^1 f| leqslant int_0^1 |f|$.
    – RRL
    Jan 5 at 22:38












  • Ah! So it is the proof. Thank you!
    – DD90
    Jan 5 at 22:41






  • 1




    @DD90: You are welcome.
    – RRL
    Jan 5 at 22:42














4












4








4






Hint:



For any $epsilon > 0$, we have for all sufficiently large $n$
$$left|int_0^{b_n} f_n - int_0^1 f right| leqslant int_0^{b_n}|f_n - f| + int_{b_n}^1 |f| leqslant epsilon b_n + sup_{x in [0,1]} |f(x)| (1 - b_n)$$






share|cite|improve this answer












Hint:



For any $epsilon > 0$, we have for all sufficiently large $n$
$$left|int_0^{b_n} f_n - int_0^1 f right| leqslant int_0^{b_n}|f_n - f| + int_{b_n}^1 |f| leqslant epsilon b_n + sup_{x in [0,1]} |f(x)| (1 - b_n)$$







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Jan 5 at 22:17









RRLRRL

49.3k42573




49.3k42573












  • Thanks. It works. But I need a small clarification: is it always true that $|int f dx|leqint|f|dx$? If so can you please point out a website or a book which state this result? Thanks again!
    – DD90
    Jan 5 at 22:35






  • 1




    So $-|f(x)| leqslant f(x) leqslant |f(x)|$. One side gives us $int_0^1f leqslant int_0^1|f|$. The other side gives us $-int_0^1|f| leqslant int_0^1 f$. Thus $|int_0^1 f| leqslant int_0^1 |f|$.
    – RRL
    Jan 5 at 22:38












  • Ah! So it is the proof. Thank you!
    – DD90
    Jan 5 at 22:41






  • 1




    @DD90: You are welcome.
    – RRL
    Jan 5 at 22:42


















  • Thanks. It works. But I need a small clarification: is it always true that $|int f dx|leqint|f|dx$? If so can you please point out a website or a book which state this result? Thanks again!
    – DD90
    Jan 5 at 22:35






  • 1




    So $-|f(x)| leqslant f(x) leqslant |f(x)|$. One side gives us $int_0^1f leqslant int_0^1|f|$. The other side gives us $-int_0^1|f| leqslant int_0^1 f$. Thus $|int_0^1 f| leqslant int_0^1 |f|$.
    – RRL
    Jan 5 at 22:38












  • Ah! So it is the proof. Thank you!
    – DD90
    Jan 5 at 22:41






  • 1




    @DD90: You are welcome.
    – RRL
    Jan 5 at 22:42
















Thanks. It works. But I need a small clarification: is it always true that $|int f dx|leqint|f|dx$? If so can you please point out a website or a book which state this result? Thanks again!
– DD90
Jan 5 at 22:35




Thanks. It works. But I need a small clarification: is it always true that $|int f dx|leqint|f|dx$? If so can you please point out a website or a book which state this result? Thanks again!
– DD90
Jan 5 at 22:35




1




1




So $-|f(x)| leqslant f(x) leqslant |f(x)|$. One side gives us $int_0^1f leqslant int_0^1|f|$. The other side gives us $-int_0^1|f| leqslant int_0^1 f$. Thus $|int_0^1 f| leqslant int_0^1 |f|$.
– RRL
Jan 5 at 22:38






So $-|f(x)| leqslant f(x) leqslant |f(x)|$. One side gives us $int_0^1f leqslant int_0^1|f|$. The other side gives us $-int_0^1|f| leqslant int_0^1 f$. Thus $|int_0^1 f| leqslant int_0^1 |f|$.
– RRL
Jan 5 at 22:38














Ah! So it is the proof. Thank you!
– DD90
Jan 5 at 22:41




Ah! So it is the proof. Thank you!
– DD90
Jan 5 at 22:41




1




1




@DD90: You are welcome.
– RRL
Jan 5 at 22:42




@DD90: You are welcome.
– RRL
Jan 5 at 22:42


















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.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • 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.


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%2f3063244%2fundersetn-rightarrow-infty-lim-int-0b-nf-nxdx-int-01fxdx%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

Mario Kart Wii

Image
Please consider supporting The Cutting Room Floor on Patreon. Thanks for all your support! Mario Kart Wii From The Cutting Room Floor Jump to: navigation, search Mario Kart Wii Developer : Nintendo Publisher : Nintendo Platform : Wii Released in JP : April 10, 2008 Released in US : April 27, 2008 Released in EU : April 11, 2008 Released in AU : April 24, 2008 Released in KR : April 30, 2009 This game has unused animations. This game has unused areas. This game has unused code. This game has unused objects. This game has unused modes / minigames. This game has unused graphics. This game has unused models. This game has unused items. This game has unused music. This game has regional differences. This game has a notes page This game has a prerelease article Mario Kart Wii is the sixth game in the series (not counting Arcade editions), which intro...
Read more

The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth/Afterbirth

Image
Please consider supporting The Cutting Room Floor on Patreon. Thanks for all your support! The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth/Afterbirth From The Cutting Room Floor < The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth Jump to: navigation, search This is a sub-page of The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth . Afterbirth is the first expansion pack for Rebirth and features a variety of improvements. Contents 1 Unused Graphics 1.1 Old Man Keeper 1.2 Skinless Hush 1.3 Miscellaneous Unused Hush Sprites 1.4 Generosity achievement 1.5 Afterbirth+ Room Editor 1.6 Bearded Ultra Greed 1.7 Early Ultra Greed 1.8 Unused Brownie Expression 1.9 Frail's Spinning Head 1.10 Mom's Dead Hand Alt 2 Unused Audio 2.1 Unused Dead Womb Layer 2.2 Unused Hush Battle Outro 2.3 The Stain Grunt Unused Graphics Old Man Keeper Image file: gfxuimain me...
Read more

What does “Dominus providebit” mean?

Image
5 Does "Dominus providebit" mean "The Lord will provide" or "The Lord provides"? I once had a bit of an argument with a guy who studied Latin over that. It's an inscription that appears on the rim of some old Swiss coins that I have. meaning latin-to-english-translation grammar-identification share | improve this question edited Jan 18 at 15:27 V2Blast 105 4 asked Jan 17 at 22:49 Donald K. Donald K. 26 1 ...
Read more