Limit of integral expression approaches maximum of function
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
So I've been trying to find a solution for this all afternoon, but haven't found a good place to start:
Prove that if $f:[a,b]tomathbf{R}^+$ is a continuous function with maximum value $M$, then
$$
lim_{ntoinfty}left(int_a^b f(x)^n,dxright)^{1/n} = M
$$
Here are some of the paths I've considered, though none have been very successful:
(1) Considering the sequence of functions for all increasing integer $n$ and trying to show that the sequence converges. We've had plenty of work on converging sequences, but with the integral expression, I am not sure how to simplify.
(2) Showing that that sequence is increasing (again, how?) and then showing there to be a supremum at $M$. I'm not sure how the maximum of the function arrives in this problem.
(3) Mean value theorems for integrals
If anyone could give me a solid place to start or perhaps point me to a place where this question has been asked before (I can't seem to find it), I would be very grateful.
real-analysis integration limits proof-writing
|
show 2 more comments
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
So I've been trying to find a solution for this all afternoon, but haven't found a good place to start:
Prove that if $f:[a,b]tomathbf{R}^+$ is a continuous function with maximum value $M$, then
$$
lim_{ntoinfty}left(int_a^b f(x)^n,dxright)^{1/n} = M
$$
Here are some of the paths I've considered, though none have been very successful:
(1) Considering the sequence of functions for all increasing integer $n$ and trying to show that the sequence converges. We've had plenty of work on converging sequences, but with the integral expression, I am not sure how to simplify.
(2) Showing that that sequence is increasing (again, how?) and then showing there to be a supremum at $M$. I'm not sure how the maximum of the function arrives in this problem.
(3) Mean value theorems for integrals
If anyone could give me a solid place to start or perhaps point me to a place where this question has been asked before (I can't seem to find it), I would be very grateful.
real-analysis integration limits proof-writing
Completely believable, but I've never seen this fact in my 30 years in calculus. Interesting.
– Randall
6 hours ago
1
Hint: Try squeezing it: For example, $f(x) leq M$, so $int_a^bf(x)^n , dx leq (b-a)M^n$.
– Anurag A
6 hours ago
1
Note that the expression $left(int_a^bf(x)^nright)^frac{1}{n}$ is the definition of the $L^p$ norm of the function $f$ (since it is positive). For $nrightarrowinfty$ this converges to the max-norm.
– obscurans
5 hours ago
@AnuragA I see how this gives you an upper bound for the limit, but how do you go about squeezing it from below? or show the sequence is increasing?
– user474084
5 hours ago
@obscurans can you point me to a proof of this fact?
– user474084
5 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
So I've been trying to find a solution for this all afternoon, but haven't found a good place to start:
Prove that if $f:[a,b]tomathbf{R}^+$ is a continuous function with maximum value $M$, then
$$
lim_{ntoinfty}left(int_a^b f(x)^n,dxright)^{1/n} = M
$$
Here are some of the paths I've considered, though none have been very successful:
(1) Considering the sequence of functions for all increasing integer $n$ and trying to show that the sequence converges. We've had plenty of work on converging sequences, but with the integral expression, I am not sure how to simplify.
(2) Showing that that sequence is increasing (again, how?) and then showing there to be a supremum at $M$. I'm not sure how the maximum of the function arrives in this problem.
(3) Mean value theorems for integrals
If anyone could give me a solid place to start or perhaps point me to a place where this question has been asked before (I can't seem to find it), I would be very grateful.
real-analysis integration limits proof-writing
So I've been trying to find a solution for this all afternoon, but haven't found a good place to start:
Prove that if $f:[a,b]tomathbf{R}^+$ is a continuous function with maximum value $M$, then
$$
lim_{ntoinfty}left(int_a^b f(x)^n,dxright)^{1/n} = M
$$
Here are some of the paths I've considered, though none have been very successful:
(1) Considering the sequence of functions for all increasing integer $n$ and trying to show that the sequence converges. We've had plenty of work on converging sequences, but with the integral expression, I am not sure how to simplify.
(2) Showing that that sequence is increasing (again, how?) and then showing there to be a supremum at $M$. I'm not sure how the maximum of the function arrives in this problem.
(3) Mean value theorems for integrals
If anyone could give me a solid place to start or perhaps point me to a place where this question has been asked before (I can't seem to find it), I would be very grateful.
real-analysis integration limits proof-writing
real-analysis integration limits proof-writing
asked 6 hours ago
user474084
274
274
Completely believable, but I've never seen this fact in my 30 years in calculus. Interesting.
– Randall
6 hours ago
1
Hint: Try squeezing it: For example, $f(x) leq M$, so $int_a^bf(x)^n , dx leq (b-a)M^n$.
– Anurag A
6 hours ago
1
Note that the expression $left(int_a^bf(x)^nright)^frac{1}{n}$ is the definition of the $L^p$ norm of the function $f$ (since it is positive). For $nrightarrowinfty$ this converges to the max-norm.
– obscurans
5 hours ago
@AnuragA I see how this gives you an upper bound for the limit, but how do you go about squeezing it from below? or show the sequence is increasing?
– user474084
5 hours ago
@obscurans can you point me to a proof of this fact?
– user474084
5 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
Completely believable, but I've never seen this fact in my 30 years in calculus. Interesting.
– Randall
6 hours ago
1
Hint: Try squeezing it: For example, $f(x) leq M$, so $int_a^bf(x)^n , dx leq (b-a)M^n$.
– Anurag A
6 hours ago
1
Note that the expression $left(int_a^bf(x)^nright)^frac{1}{n}$ is the definition of the $L^p$ norm of the function $f$ (since it is positive). For $nrightarrowinfty$ this converges to the max-norm.
– obscurans
5 hours ago
@AnuragA I see how this gives you an upper bound for the limit, but how do you go about squeezing it from below? or show the sequence is increasing?
– user474084
5 hours ago
@obscurans can you point me to a proof of this fact?
– user474084
5 hours ago
Completely believable, but I've never seen this fact in my 30 years in calculus. Interesting.
– Randall
6 hours ago
Completely believable, but I've never seen this fact in my 30 years in calculus. Interesting.
– Randall
6 hours ago
1
1
Hint: Try squeezing it: For example, $f(x) leq M$, so $int_a^bf(x)^n , dx leq (b-a)M^n$.
– Anurag A
6 hours ago
Hint: Try squeezing it: For example, $f(x) leq M$, so $int_a^bf(x)^n , dx leq (b-a)M^n$.
– Anurag A
6 hours ago
1
1
Note that the expression $left(int_a^bf(x)^nright)^frac{1}{n}$ is the definition of the $L^p$ norm of the function $f$ (since it is positive). For $nrightarrowinfty$ this converges to the max-norm.
– obscurans
5 hours ago
Note that the expression $left(int_a^bf(x)^nright)^frac{1}{n}$ is the definition of the $L^p$ norm of the function $f$ (since it is positive). For $nrightarrowinfty$ this converges to the max-norm.
– obscurans
5 hours ago
@AnuragA I see how this gives you an upper bound for the limit, but how do you go about squeezing it from below? or show the sequence is increasing?
– user474084
5 hours ago
@AnuragA I see how this gives you an upper bound for the limit, but how do you go about squeezing it from below? or show the sequence is increasing?
– user474084
5 hours ago
@obscurans can you point me to a proof of this fact?
– user474084
5 hours ago
@obscurans can you point me to a proof of this fact?
– user474084
5 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
If you have done the following question, then you probably know how to do the one in the post:
Given $m$ positive real numbers $a_1, dots, a_n$, prove that
$$
lim_{nto +infty} (a_1^n + dots + a_m^n)^{1/n} = max_{j} a_j.
$$
Proof
The trick is to use the squeeze theorem, and note that $$ max_j a_j leqslant (a_1^n + dots + a_m^n)^{1/n} leqslant m^{1/n} a_j. $$ Now let $n to +infty$, and note that $lim_n m^{1/n} = 1$.
Using the similar trick, we could do the original one. The problem is $f$ is "continuous". Even $f$ could reach $M$ at some point $x_0$, we cannot directly use it. So we only requires that for each $varepsilon >0$, find those $x$ s.t. $M-varepsilon leqslant f(x) leqslant M$. So we have the following proof.
Proof
Let $x_0 in [a, b]$ be the point where $f(c) =M$ [this is possible, since $fin mathcal C[a,b]$]. For each $epsilon > 0$, by the definition of continuity, there exists an interval $[c,d]$ that contains $x_0$ s.t. $$ xin [c,d] implies M-varepsilon leqslant f(x) leqslant M. $$ Thus $$ (d-c)^{1/n} (M-varepsilon) leqslant left(int_c^d f^nright)^{1/n}leqslant left(int_a^b f^nright)^{1/n} leqslant M, $$ and then $$M-varepsilon leqslant varliminf_n left(int_a^b f^nright)^{1/n} leqslant varlimsup_n left(int_a^b f^nright)^{1/n} leqslant M. $$ Now let $varepsilon to 0^+$, then the upper limit and the lower limit are equal to $M$, hence the limit equation.
Remark
Technically, this is actually not an application of the squeezing theorem [the end of the inequality chains are not the same], but the idea is similar. If no tools of upper/lower limits are allowed, then the whole proof could be completed in $varepsilon$-$N$ format.
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
If you have done the following question, then you probably know how to do the one in the post:
Given $m$ positive real numbers $a_1, dots, a_n$, prove that
$$
lim_{nto +infty} (a_1^n + dots + a_m^n)^{1/n} = max_{j} a_j.
$$
Proof
The trick is to use the squeeze theorem, and note that $$ max_j a_j leqslant (a_1^n + dots + a_m^n)^{1/n} leqslant m^{1/n} a_j. $$ Now let $n to +infty$, and note that $lim_n m^{1/n} = 1$.
Using the similar trick, we could do the original one. The problem is $f$ is "continuous". Even $f$ could reach $M$ at some point $x_0$, we cannot directly use it. So we only requires that for each $varepsilon >0$, find those $x$ s.t. $M-varepsilon leqslant f(x) leqslant M$. So we have the following proof.
Proof
Let $x_0 in [a, b]$ be the point where $f(c) =M$ [this is possible, since $fin mathcal C[a,b]$]. For each $epsilon > 0$, by the definition of continuity, there exists an interval $[c,d]$ that contains $x_0$ s.t. $$ xin [c,d] implies M-varepsilon leqslant f(x) leqslant M. $$ Thus $$ (d-c)^{1/n} (M-varepsilon) leqslant left(int_c^d f^nright)^{1/n}leqslant left(int_a^b f^nright)^{1/n} leqslant M, $$ and then $$M-varepsilon leqslant varliminf_n left(int_a^b f^nright)^{1/n} leqslant varlimsup_n left(int_a^b f^nright)^{1/n} leqslant M. $$ Now let $varepsilon to 0^+$, then the upper limit and the lower limit are equal to $M$, hence the limit equation.
Remark
Technically, this is actually not an application of the squeezing theorem [the end of the inequality chains are not the same], but the idea is similar. If no tools of upper/lower limits are allowed, then the whole proof could be completed in $varepsilon$-$N$ format.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
If you have done the following question, then you probably know how to do the one in the post:
Given $m$ positive real numbers $a_1, dots, a_n$, prove that
$$
lim_{nto +infty} (a_1^n + dots + a_m^n)^{1/n} = max_{j} a_j.
$$
Proof
The trick is to use the squeeze theorem, and note that $$ max_j a_j leqslant (a_1^n + dots + a_m^n)^{1/n} leqslant m^{1/n} a_j. $$ Now let $n to +infty$, and note that $lim_n m^{1/n} = 1$.
Using the similar trick, we could do the original one. The problem is $f$ is "continuous". Even $f$ could reach $M$ at some point $x_0$, we cannot directly use it. So we only requires that for each $varepsilon >0$, find those $x$ s.t. $M-varepsilon leqslant f(x) leqslant M$. So we have the following proof.
Proof
Let $x_0 in [a, b]$ be the point where $f(c) =M$ [this is possible, since $fin mathcal C[a,b]$]. For each $epsilon > 0$, by the definition of continuity, there exists an interval $[c,d]$ that contains $x_0$ s.t. $$ xin [c,d] implies M-varepsilon leqslant f(x) leqslant M. $$ Thus $$ (d-c)^{1/n} (M-varepsilon) leqslant left(int_c^d f^nright)^{1/n}leqslant left(int_a^b f^nright)^{1/n} leqslant M, $$ and then $$M-varepsilon leqslant varliminf_n left(int_a^b f^nright)^{1/n} leqslant varlimsup_n left(int_a^b f^nright)^{1/n} leqslant M. $$ Now let $varepsilon to 0^+$, then the upper limit and the lower limit are equal to $M$, hence the limit equation.
Remark
Technically, this is actually not an application of the squeezing theorem [the end of the inequality chains are not the same], but the idea is similar. If no tools of upper/lower limits are allowed, then the whole proof could be completed in $varepsilon$-$N$ format.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
If you have done the following question, then you probably know how to do the one in the post:
Given $m$ positive real numbers $a_1, dots, a_n$, prove that
$$
lim_{nto +infty} (a_1^n + dots + a_m^n)^{1/n} = max_{j} a_j.
$$
Proof
The trick is to use the squeeze theorem, and note that $$ max_j a_j leqslant (a_1^n + dots + a_m^n)^{1/n} leqslant m^{1/n} a_j. $$ Now let $n to +infty$, and note that $lim_n m^{1/n} = 1$.
Using the similar trick, we could do the original one. The problem is $f$ is "continuous". Even $f$ could reach $M$ at some point $x_0$, we cannot directly use it. So we only requires that for each $varepsilon >0$, find those $x$ s.t. $M-varepsilon leqslant f(x) leqslant M$. So we have the following proof.
Proof
Let $x_0 in [a, b]$ be the point where $f(c) =M$ [this is possible, since $fin mathcal C[a,b]$]. For each $epsilon > 0$, by the definition of continuity, there exists an interval $[c,d]$ that contains $x_0$ s.t. $$ xin [c,d] implies M-varepsilon leqslant f(x) leqslant M. $$ Thus $$ (d-c)^{1/n} (M-varepsilon) leqslant left(int_c^d f^nright)^{1/n}leqslant left(int_a^b f^nright)^{1/n} leqslant M, $$ and then $$M-varepsilon leqslant varliminf_n left(int_a^b f^nright)^{1/n} leqslant varlimsup_n left(int_a^b f^nright)^{1/n} leqslant M. $$ Now let $varepsilon to 0^+$, then the upper limit and the lower limit are equal to $M$, hence the limit equation.
Remark
Technically, this is actually not an application of the squeezing theorem [the end of the inequality chains are not the same], but the idea is similar. If no tools of upper/lower limits are allowed, then the whole proof could be completed in $varepsilon$-$N$ format.
If you have done the following question, then you probably know how to do the one in the post:
Given $m$ positive real numbers $a_1, dots, a_n$, prove that
$$
lim_{nto +infty} (a_1^n + dots + a_m^n)^{1/n} = max_{j} a_j.
$$
Proof
The trick is to use the squeeze theorem, and note that $$ max_j a_j leqslant (a_1^n + dots + a_m^n)^{1/n} leqslant m^{1/n} a_j. $$ Now let $n to +infty$, and note that $lim_n m^{1/n} = 1$.
Using the similar trick, we could do the original one. The problem is $f$ is "continuous". Even $f$ could reach $M$ at some point $x_0$, we cannot directly use it. So we only requires that for each $varepsilon >0$, find those $x$ s.t. $M-varepsilon leqslant f(x) leqslant M$. So we have the following proof.
Proof
Let $x_0 in [a, b]$ be the point where $f(c) =M$ [this is possible, since $fin mathcal C[a,b]$]. For each $epsilon > 0$, by the definition of continuity, there exists an interval $[c,d]$ that contains $x_0$ s.t. $$ xin [c,d] implies M-varepsilon leqslant f(x) leqslant M. $$ Thus $$ (d-c)^{1/n} (M-varepsilon) leqslant left(int_c^d f^nright)^{1/n}leqslant left(int_a^b f^nright)^{1/n} leqslant M, $$ and then $$M-varepsilon leqslant varliminf_n left(int_a^b f^nright)^{1/n} leqslant varlimsup_n left(int_a^b f^nright)^{1/n} leqslant M. $$ Now let $varepsilon to 0^+$, then the upper limit and the lower limit are equal to $M$, hence the limit equation.
Remark
Technically, this is actually not an application of the squeezing theorem [the end of the inequality chains are not the same], but the idea is similar. If no tools of upper/lower limits are allowed, then the whole proof could be completed in $varepsilon$-$N$ format.
edited 49 mins ago
answered 1 hour ago
xbh
5,1091421
5,1091421
add a comment |
add a comment |
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.
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
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3019605%2flimit-of-integral-expression-approaches-maximum-of-function%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
Required, but never shown
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
Required, but never shown
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
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
Completely believable, but I've never seen this fact in my 30 years in calculus. Interesting.
– Randall
6 hours ago
1
Hint: Try squeezing it: For example, $f(x) leq M$, so $int_a^bf(x)^n , dx leq (b-a)M^n$.
– Anurag A
6 hours ago
1
Note that the expression $left(int_a^bf(x)^nright)^frac{1}{n}$ is the definition of the $L^p$ norm of the function $f$ (since it is positive). For $nrightarrowinfty$ this converges to the max-norm.
– obscurans
5 hours ago
@AnuragA I see how this gives you an upper bound for the limit, but how do you go about squeezing it from below? or show the sequence is increasing?
– user474084
5 hours ago
@obscurans can you point me to a proof of this fact?
– user474084
5 hours ago