show that if "f" is integrable then

f(x) < or equal to 0 on [a,b]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/1/8...fb77870925.png is greater than or = to zero

Printable View

- Mar 7th 2010, 12:16 PM10tomlinsonbintegrals of nonpositive functions
show that if "f" is integrable then

f(x) < or equal to 0 on [a,b]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/1/8...fb77870925.png is greater than or = to zero - Mar 7th 2010, 12:29 PMPlato
- Mar 7th 2010, 12:36 PM10tomlinsonb
sorry that is what i meant to write. can you show me why that is true?

- Mar 7th 2010, 12:44 PMPlato
- Mar 7th 2010, 01:03 PM10tomlinsonb
it is a problem in definite integrals

- Mar 7th 2010, 01:16 PMPlato
I am not sure what that implies.

In most basic calculus textbooks there is a theorem that states:

If $\displaystyle \left( {\forall x \in \left[ {a,b} \right]} \right)\left[ {f(x) \leqslant g(x)} \right]$ then it is true that $\displaystyle \int_a^b {f(x)dx} \leqslant \int_a^b {g(x)dx} $.

if your text has that theorem then let $\displaystyle g(x)=0$ and use the theorem.

Otherwise, you need to use upper sums. - Mar 7th 2010, 01:29 PM10tomlinsonb
can you show me how you would prove this using upper sums

- Mar 7th 2010, 02:08 PM10tomlinsonb
please help me prove this because i am so confused and i need it for a homework problem

- Mar 7th 2010, 02:30 PMHallsofIvy
The reason Plato asked if you knew about Riemann sums is that how you prove such a basic property of integrals depends upon how you

**define**integrals in the first place! And "Riemann sums" is a common method of defining integrals. You mention of "upper sums" indicates that's what you have learned, although "upper sums" is only a very small part of that.

Given that f(x) is integrable on [a, b], then for any partition of [a, b] (dividing it into smaller subintervals), choosing any $\displaystyle x_i$ in the $\displaystyle i^{th}$ interval, with width $\displaystyle \Delta x_i$, the Riemann sum is $\displaystyle \sum f(x_i)\Delta x_i$ and, as we take "finer and finer" partitions, meaning that the largest $\displaystyle \Delta x_i$ goes to 0 as we take more and more intervals in the partition, and that sum goes to some fixed value, I, whic**is**the integral, $\displaystyle \int_a^b f(x)dx$.

Now, if $\displaystyle f(x)\le 0$ for all x in [a, b], in particular, $\displaystyle f(x_i)\le 0$ for every partition and for every $\displaystyle x_i$ in a partition. That, in turn, means that $\displaystyle f(x_i)\Delta x_i\le 0$ for every partition and every i in a partition, and so $\displaystyle \sum f(x_i)\Delta x_i\le 0$ for every partition. The integral, the limit of negative numbers can't be positive: $\displaystyle \int_a^b f(x)dx\le 0$. - Mar 7th 2010, 02:57 PM10tomlinsonb
my teacher also told that

(b-a) is max of f(x) therefore,

http://www.mathhelpforum.com/math-he...8b16c3ed-1.gif ≤ (b-a) ≤ 0

can you expain why this is - Mar 8th 2010, 04:41 AMCaptainBlack