The Unapologetic Mathematician

Mathematics for the interested outsider

Not today again…

XKCD did it at the top of today’s post. The first reference to the day. I’m not going to get all ranty. I’ll just refer to my rant from last year.

Actually, I did go to an event today, but despite rather than because of the day. Jeffrey Bub was talking up at UMBC, and it gave me the chance to clothesline him and ask about convex sets and ordered linear spaces, which Howard Barnum had said he (Dr. Bub) knew something about the interpretation of as state- and measurement-spaces.


March 14, 2008 Posted by | Uncategorized | 4 Comments

Riemann’s Condition

If we want our Riemann-Stieltjes sums to converge to some value, we’d better have our upper and lower sums converge to that value in particular. On the other hand, since the upper and lower sums sandwich in all the others, their convergence is enough for the rest. And their convergence is entirely captured by their lower and upper bounds, respectively — the upper and lower Stieltjes integrals. So we want to know when \underline{I}_{\alpha,\left[a,b\right]}(f)=\overline{I}_{\alpha,\left[a,b\right]}(f).

We’ll prove this equality in general by showing that the difference has to be arbitrarily small. That is, for any partition x of \left[a,b\right] we have the inequalities

\overline{I}_{\alpha,\left[a,b\right]}(f)\leq U_{\alpha,x}(f)
\underline{I}_{\alpha,\left[a,b\right]}(f)\geq L_{\alpha,x}(f)

by definition. Subtracting the one from the other we find

\overline{I}_{\alpha,\left[a,b\right]}(f)-\underline{I}_{\alpha,\left[a,b\right]}(f)\leq U_{\alpha,x}(f)-L_{\alpha,x}(f)

So if given an \epsilon>0 we can find a partition x for which the upper and lower sums differ by less than \epsilon then the difference between the upper and lower integrals must be even less. If we can do this for any \epsilon>0, we say that the function f satisfies Riemann’s condition with respect to \alpha on \left[a,b\right].

The lead-up to the definition of Riemann’s condition shows us that if f satisfies this condition then the lower and upper integrals are equal. Then just like we saw happen with Darboux sums we can squeeze any Riemann-Stieltjes sum between and upper and a lower sum. So if the upper and lower integrals are both equal to some value, then the limit of the Riemann-Stieltjes sums over tagged partitions must exist and equal that value, and thus f is Riemann-Stieltjes integrable with respect to \alpha on \left[a,b\right].

Now what if the f is Riemann-Stieltjes integrable with respect to \alpha on \left[a,b\right]? We would hope that f then satisfies Riemann’s condition with respect to \alpha on \left[a,b\right], and so these three conditions are equivalent. So given \epsilon>0 we need to find an actual partition x of \left[a,b\right] so that 0\leq U_{\alpha,x}(f)-L_{\alpha(x)}<\epsilon.

Since we’re assuming that f is Riemann-Stieltjes integrable, we’ll call the value of the integral A. Then we can find a tagged partition x_\epsilon so that for any finer tagged partitions x=((x_0,...,x_n),(t_1,...,t_n)) and x'=((x_0,...,x_n),(t_1',...,t_n')) we have


Combining these we find that


Now as we pick different t and t' we can make the difference in values of f get as large as that between M_i=\max\limits_{x_{i-1}\leq t\leq c}f(t) and m_i=\min\limits_{x_{i-1}\leq t\leq c}f(t). So for any h>0 we can choose tags so that f(t_i)-f(t_i')>M_i-m_i-h. In particular, we can consider h=\frac{\epsilon}{3(\alpha(b)-\alpha(a))}, which is positive because \alpha is increasing.

The difference between the upper and lower sums is


which is then less than


which is then less than \epsilon.

Thus we establish the equivalence of Riemann’s condition and Riemann-Stieltjes integrability, as long as the integrator \alpha is increasing.

March 14, 2008 Posted by | Analysis, Calculus | 1 Comment