Note we are assuming is Riemann integrable. This means that given we can find an such that if is a tagged partition of and , then

Recall that a tagged partition consists of a partition of , represented by a finite sequence of points

,

and a sequence of representatives of the intervals defined by this partition, i.e., a collection of points for

We denote by the number and by the norm of ,

The Riemann sum associated to and is the sum

Pick any partition of with . We want to define a particular tagged partition with underlying partition by appealing to the fact that has an antiderivative . Specifically, by the mean value theorem, we have that for all , there is some such that

Define in terms of the points and the partition . Then

By our choice of , we know that , so

But the left hand side is independent of , and was arbitrary. It follows that , as we wanted.

The same argument, but restricting ourselves to the interval , shows that

,

where for latex $x\in[a,b]$, so in particular . It follows that and differ by a constant, and therefore, if is Riemann integrable and has an antiderivative at all, then is such an antiderivative.

The question remains of what Riemann integrable functions (with the intermediate value property) have antiderivatives. Another natural question has to do with the fact that our definition of antiderivative is very restrictive; it also makes sense to simply ask whether the equality must hold for some , assuming only that is integrable. It turns out that both questions require the introduction of the Lebesgue integral to be answered in a satisfactory way.

43.614000-116.202000

Advertisements

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

This entry was posted on Monday, February 6th, 2012 at 12:50 pm and is filed under 515: Analysis II. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

The only reference I know for precisely these matters is the handbook chapter MR2768702. Koellner, Peter; Woodin, W. Hugh. Large cardinals from determinacy. In Handbook of set theory. Vols. 1, 2, 3, 1951–2119, Springer, Dordrecht, 2010. (Particularly, section 7.) For closely related topics, see also the work of Yong Cheng (and of Cheng and Schindler) on Harr […]

As other answers point out, yes, one needs choice. The popular/natural examples of models of ZF+DC where all sets of reals are measurable are models of determinacy, and Solovay's model. They are related in deep ways, actually, through large cardinals. (Under enough large cardinals, $L({\mathbb R})$ of $V$ is a model of determinacy and (something stronge […]

Throughout the question, we only consider primes of the form $3k+1$. A reference for cubic reciprocity is Ireland & Rosen's A Classical Introduction to Modern Number Theory. How can I count the relative density of those $p$ (of the form $3k+1$) such that the equation $2=3x^3$ has no solutions modulo $p$? Really, even pointers on how to say anything […]

(1) Patrick Dehornoy gave a nice talk at the Séminaire Bourbaki explaining Hugh Woodin's approach. It omits many technical details, so you may want to look at it before looking again at the Notices papers. I think looking at those slides and then at the Notices articles gives a reasonable picture of what the approach is and what kind of problems remain […]

It is not possible to provide an explicit expression for a non-linear solution. The reason is that (it is a folklore result that) an additive $f:{\mathbb R}\to{\mathbb R}$ is linear iff it is measurable. (This result can be found in a variety of places, it is a standard exercise in measure theory books. As of this writing, there is a short proof here (Intern […]

Let $s$ be the supremum of the $\mu$-measures of members of $\mathcal G$. By definition of supremum, for each $n$, there is $G_n\in\mathcal G$ with $\mu(G_n)>s-1/n$. Letting $G=\bigcup_n G_n$, then $G\in \mathcal G$ since $\mathcal G$ is closed under countable unions, and $\mu(G)=s$, since it is at least $\sup_n\mu(G_n)$ but it is at most $s$ (by definiti […]

The result you are trying to prove is false. For example, if $a=\omega+1$ and $b=\omega+\omega$, then $a+b=\omega\cdot 3>b$. Here is what is true: first, the key result you should establish (by induction) is that An ordinal $\alpha>0$ has the property that for all $\beta

Very briefly: Yes, there are several programs being developed that can be understood as pursuing new axioms for set theory. For the question itself of whether pursuing new axioms is a reasonably line of inquiry, see the following (in particular, the paper by John Steel): MR1814122 (2002a:03007). Feferman, Solomon; Friedman, Harvey M.; Maddy, Penelope; Steel, […]

This is a very interesting question and the subject of current research in set theory. There are, however, some caveats. Say that a set of reals is $\aleph_1$-dense if and only if it meets each interval in exactly $\aleph_1$-many points. It is easy to see that such sets exist, have size $\aleph_1$, and in fact, if $A$ is $\aleph_1$-dense, then between any tw […]