If $f$ is continuous integrable on $mathbb{R}$ such that either $f(x)>0$ or $f(x)+f(x+1)>0$, then is...











up vote
4
down vote

favorite
1













Let $f$ be a continuous integrable function on $mathbb{R}$ such that for each $x$, either $f(x)>0$ or $f(x)+f(x+1)>0$. Then is $int_{-infty}^{infty}f(x)dx>0$ ?




Intuitively, I think this is true, because whenever on a set $A$ , $f(x)<0$ , then $int_{Acup A+1} f(x)dx>0$. But I do not know how to write this argument rigorously.










share|cite|improve this question




























    up vote
    4
    down vote

    favorite
    1













    Let $f$ be a continuous integrable function on $mathbb{R}$ such that for each $x$, either $f(x)>0$ or $f(x)+f(x+1)>0$. Then is $int_{-infty}^{infty}f(x)dx>0$ ?




    Intuitively, I think this is true, because whenever on a set $A$ , $f(x)<0$ , then $int_{Acup A+1} f(x)dx>0$. But I do not know how to write this argument rigorously.










    share|cite|improve this question


























      up vote
      4
      down vote

      favorite
      1









      up vote
      4
      down vote

      favorite
      1






      1






      Let $f$ be a continuous integrable function on $mathbb{R}$ such that for each $x$, either $f(x)>0$ or $f(x)+f(x+1)>0$. Then is $int_{-infty}^{infty}f(x)dx>0$ ?




      Intuitively, I think this is true, because whenever on a set $A$ , $f(x)<0$ , then $int_{Acup A+1} f(x)dx>0$. But I do not know how to write this argument rigorously.










      share|cite|improve this question
















      Let $f$ be a continuous integrable function on $mathbb{R}$ such that for each $x$, either $f(x)>0$ or $f(x)+f(x+1)>0$. Then is $int_{-infty}^{infty}f(x)dx>0$ ?




      Intuitively, I think this is true, because whenever on a set $A$ , $f(x)<0$ , then $int_{Acup A+1} f(x)dx>0$. But I do not know how to write this argument rigorously.







      real-analysis integration






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Dec 3 at 19:47

























      asked Dec 3 at 18:07









      JOHN

      485




      485






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          4
          down vote



          accepted










          Here is a sketch, note that the integrals below make sense since $A,B$ are open and $C$ is closed.



          Let $A:={ x : f(x) < 0 }$ and $B= { x +1 :x in A }$. Then, both $A,B$ are open and disjoint*( since $f(x)+f(x+1)>0$).



          Let $C:= mathbb R backslash (A cup B)$. Then $A,B,C$ are pairwise disjoint, $A,B$ open $C$ closed (i.e. they are Borel if you are familiar with Borel sets) and hence
          $$
          int_{mathbb R} f(x) d x = int_A f(x) d x+ int_B f(x) d x +int_C f(x) d x \
          stackrel{t=x-1}{===}int_A f(x) d x+ int_A f(t+1) d t +int_C f(x) d x \
          =int_A left( f(x) +f(x+1) right)d x +int_C f(x) d x \
          $$



          Now, each integral is $geq 0$ thus $int_{mathbb R} f(x) dx geq 0$.



          If $A neq emptyset$ since $A$ is open and $f(x)+f(x+1)>0$ it is easy to argue using continuity that $int_A f(x)+f(x+1) dx >0$.



          If $A =emptyset$ then $C =mathbb R$ and $f(x) geq 0$ for all $x$. Now, it is easy to argue that $f$ cannot be identically zero, and by the same argument $int_C f(x) dx >0$.






          share|cite|improve this answer





















          • we can take $A={x:f(x)leq 0}$. right?
            – JOHN
            Dec 3 at 19:58












          • And, where the continuity is needed here? If $f$ is measurable then that is enough I think...
            – JOHN
            Dec 3 at 20:04






          • 1




            @JOHN Yes you can.. Continuity makes the strict inequality easier to prove, but I think it is not needed (you can look at ${x in A : f(x)+f(x+1) > frac{1}{n} }$, if all these sets have measure $0$, then so has $A$. Same for $C$.).
            – N. S.
            Dec 3 at 20:07










          • Oh yes..thanks.
            – JOHN
            Dec 3 at 20:08


















          up vote
          2
          down vote













          Let $A:={xinBbb R: f(x)>0}$. Because $f$ is continuous then $A$ is open and piecewise-connected (by "piecewise-connected" I mean that it is the union of countable disjoint open intervals).



          WLOG suppose that $AneqBbb R$. This imply that $A^complement$ is the union of countable and closed intervals. Then $A^complement=bigcup_{jin I} R_j$, for $|I|lealeph_0$, where $R_jcap R_k=emptyset$ for $jneq k$ and each $R_j$ is a closed interval.



          Now note that because $f(x)le 0$ for each $xin A^complement$ then we knows that for each $R_j$ there is some (non-empty) open interval $I_j$ such that $lambda(I_j)gelambda(R_j)$, $sup R_j=inf I_j$ and $f|_{I_j}>0$. From here its easy to see that



          $$Bbb R=I_0cupleft(bigcup_{jin I}(R_jcup I_j)right)$$



          is a disjoint partition of $Bbb R$ where $I_0$ could be empty, that is, each interval $I_j$ or $R_j$ is disjoint of any other interval $I_k$ or $R_k$. Hence



          $$int_{Bbb R} f(x),lambda(dx)=\=int_{I_0} f(x),lambda(dx)+sum_{jin I}int_{R_j}(f(x)+f(x+1)),lambda (dx)+sum_{jin I}int_{H_j}f(x),lambda(dx)$$



          where $H_j:=I_jsetminus(R_j+1)$.



          Then clearly $int_{R_j} (f(x)+f(x+1)),lambda(dx)ge 0$ for each $jin I$ because $f(x)+f(x+1)>0$ and $lambda(R_j)ge 0$. Also $int_{H_j} f(x)lambda(dx)ge 0$ because $lambda(H_j)ge 0$ and $H_jsubset A$. By last, if $I_0neqemptyset$ then $lambda(I_0)>0$ and $I_0subset A$.



          Then adding all we find that the integral is necessarily positive, because if some $lambda(R_j)=0$ (that is, if $R_j$ is a singleton) then $lambda(H_j)>0$, and viceversa.






          share|cite|improve this answer























            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',
            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%2f3024453%2fif-f-is-continuous-integrable-on-mathbbr-such-that-either-fx0-or-f%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            4
            down vote



            accepted










            Here is a sketch, note that the integrals below make sense since $A,B$ are open and $C$ is closed.



            Let $A:={ x : f(x) < 0 }$ and $B= { x +1 :x in A }$. Then, both $A,B$ are open and disjoint*( since $f(x)+f(x+1)>0$).



            Let $C:= mathbb R backslash (A cup B)$. Then $A,B,C$ are pairwise disjoint, $A,B$ open $C$ closed (i.e. they are Borel if you are familiar with Borel sets) and hence
            $$
            int_{mathbb R} f(x) d x = int_A f(x) d x+ int_B f(x) d x +int_C f(x) d x \
            stackrel{t=x-1}{===}int_A f(x) d x+ int_A f(t+1) d t +int_C f(x) d x \
            =int_A left( f(x) +f(x+1) right)d x +int_C f(x) d x \
            $$



            Now, each integral is $geq 0$ thus $int_{mathbb R} f(x) dx geq 0$.



            If $A neq emptyset$ since $A$ is open and $f(x)+f(x+1)>0$ it is easy to argue using continuity that $int_A f(x)+f(x+1) dx >0$.



            If $A =emptyset$ then $C =mathbb R$ and $f(x) geq 0$ for all $x$. Now, it is easy to argue that $f$ cannot be identically zero, and by the same argument $int_C f(x) dx >0$.






            share|cite|improve this answer





















            • we can take $A={x:f(x)leq 0}$. right?
              – JOHN
              Dec 3 at 19:58












            • And, where the continuity is needed here? If $f$ is measurable then that is enough I think...
              – JOHN
              Dec 3 at 20:04






            • 1




              @JOHN Yes you can.. Continuity makes the strict inequality easier to prove, but I think it is not needed (you can look at ${x in A : f(x)+f(x+1) > frac{1}{n} }$, if all these sets have measure $0$, then so has $A$. Same for $C$.).
              – N. S.
              Dec 3 at 20:07










            • Oh yes..thanks.
              – JOHN
              Dec 3 at 20:08















            up vote
            4
            down vote



            accepted










            Here is a sketch, note that the integrals below make sense since $A,B$ are open and $C$ is closed.



            Let $A:={ x : f(x) < 0 }$ and $B= { x +1 :x in A }$. Then, both $A,B$ are open and disjoint*( since $f(x)+f(x+1)>0$).



            Let $C:= mathbb R backslash (A cup B)$. Then $A,B,C$ are pairwise disjoint, $A,B$ open $C$ closed (i.e. they are Borel if you are familiar with Borel sets) and hence
            $$
            int_{mathbb R} f(x) d x = int_A f(x) d x+ int_B f(x) d x +int_C f(x) d x \
            stackrel{t=x-1}{===}int_A f(x) d x+ int_A f(t+1) d t +int_C f(x) d x \
            =int_A left( f(x) +f(x+1) right)d x +int_C f(x) d x \
            $$



            Now, each integral is $geq 0$ thus $int_{mathbb R} f(x) dx geq 0$.



            If $A neq emptyset$ since $A$ is open and $f(x)+f(x+1)>0$ it is easy to argue using continuity that $int_A f(x)+f(x+1) dx >0$.



            If $A =emptyset$ then $C =mathbb R$ and $f(x) geq 0$ for all $x$. Now, it is easy to argue that $f$ cannot be identically zero, and by the same argument $int_C f(x) dx >0$.






            share|cite|improve this answer





















            • we can take $A={x:f(x)leq 0}$. right?
              – JOHN
              Dec 3 at 19:58












            • And, where the continuity is needed here? If $f$ is measurable then that is enough I think...
              – JOHN
              Dec 3 at 20:04






            • 1




              @JOHN Yes you can.. Continuity makes the strict inequality easier to prove, but I think it is not needed (you can look at ${x in A : f(x)+f(x+1) > frac{1}{n} }$, if all these sets have measure $0$, then so has $A$. Same for $C$.).
              – N. S.
              Dec 3 at 20:07










            • Oh yes..thanks.
              – JOHN
              Dec 3 at 20:08













            up vote
            4
            down vote



            accepted







            up vote
            4
            down vote



            accepted






            Here is a sketch, note that the integrals below make sense since $A,B$ are open and $C$ is closed.



            Let $A:={ x : f(x) < 0 }$ and $B= { x +1 :x in A }$. Then, both $A,B$ are open and disjoint*( since $f(x)+f(x+1)>0$).



            Let $C:= mathbb R backslash (A cup B)$. Then $A,B,C$ are pairwise disjoint, $A,B$ open $C$ closed (i.e. they are Borel if you are familiar with Borel sets) and hence
            $$
            int_{mathbb R} f(x) d x = int_A f(x) d x+ int_B f(x) d x +int_C f(x) d x \
            stackrel{t=x-1}{===}int_A f(x) d x+ int_A f(t+1) d t +int_C f(x) d x \
            =int_A left( f(x) +f(x+1) right)d x +int_C f(x) d x \
            $$



            Now, each integral is $geq 0$ thus $int_{mathbb R} f(x) dx geq 0$.



            If $A neq emptyset$ since $A$ is open and $f(x)+f(x+1)>0$ it is easy to argue using continuity that $int_A f(x)+f(x+1) dx >0$.



            If $A =emptyset$ then $C =mathbb R$ and $f(x) geq 0$ for all $x$. Now, it is easy to argue that $f$ cannot be identically zero, and by the same argument $int_C f(x) dx >0$.






            share|cite|improve this answer












            Here is a sketch, note that the integrals below make sense since $A,B$ are open and $C$ is closed.



            Let $A:={ x : f(x) < 0 }$ and $B= { x +1 :x in A }$. Then, both $A,B$ are open and disjoint*( since $f(x)+f(x+1)>0$).



            Let $C:= mathbb R backslash (A cup B)$. Then $A,B,C$ are pairwise disjoint, $A,B$ open $C$ closed (i.e. they are Borel if you are familiar with Borel sets) and hence
            $$
            int_{mathbb R} f(x) d x = int_A f(x) d x+ int_B f(x) d x +int_C f(x) d x \
            stackrel{t=x-1}{===}int_A f(x) d x+ int_A f(t+1) d t +int_C f(x) d x \
            =int_A left( f(x) +f(x+1) right)d x +int_C f(x) d x \
            $$



            Now, each integral is $geq 0$ thus $int_{mathbb R} f(x) dx geq 0$.



            If $A neq emptyset$ since $A$ is open and $f(x)+f(x+1)>0$ it is easy to argue using continuity that $int_A f(x)+f(x+1) dx >0$.



            If $A =emptyset$ then $C =mathbb R$ and $f(x) geq 0$ for all $x$. Now, it is easy to argue that $f$ cannot be identically zero, and by the same argument $int_C f(x) dx >0$.







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered Dec 3 at 19:48









            N. S.

            101k5108203




            101k5108203












            • we can take $A={x:f(x)leq 0}$. right?
              – JOHN
              Dec 3 at 19:58












            • And, where the continuity is needed here? If $f$ is measurable then that is enough I think...
              – JOHN
              Dec 3 at 20:04






            • 1




              @JOHN Yes you can.. Continuity makes the strict inequality easier to prove, but I think it is not needed (you can look at ${x in A : f(x)+f(x+1) > frac{1}{n} }$, if all these sets have measure $0$, then so has $A$. Same for $C$.).
              – N. S.
              Dec 3 at 20:07










            • Oh yes..thanks.
              – JOHN
              Dec 3 at 20:08


















            • we can take $A={x:f(x)leq 0}$. right?
              – JOHN
              Dec 3 at 19:58












            • And, where the continuity is needed here? If $f$ is measurable then that is enough I think...
              – JOHN
              Dec 3 at 20:04






            • 1




              @JOHN Yes you can.. Continuity makes the strict inequality easier to prove, but I think it is not needed (you can look at ${x in A : f(x)+f(x+1) > frac{1}{n} }$, if all these sets have measure $0$, then so has $A$. Same for $C$.).
              – N. S.
              Dec 3 at 20:07










            • Oh yes..thanks.
              – JOHN
              Dec 3 at 20:08
















            we can take $A={x:f(x)leq 0}$. right?
            – JOHN
            Dec 3 at 19:58






            we can take $A={x:f(x)leq 0}$. right?
            – JOHN
            Dec 3 at 19:58














            And, where the continuity is needed here? If $f$ is measurable then that is enough I think...
            – JOHN
            Dec 3 at 20:04




            And, where the continuity is needed here? If $f$ is measurable then that is enough I think...
            – JOHN
            Dec 3 at 20:04




            1




            1




            @JOHN Yes you can.. Continuity makes the strict inequality easier to prove, but I think it is not needed (you can look at ${x in A : f(x)+f(x+1) > frac{1}{n} }$, if all these sets have measure $0$, then so has $A$. Same for $C$.).
            – N. S.
            Dec 3 at 20:07




            @JOHN Yes you can.. Continuity makes the strict inequality easier to prove, but I think it is not needed (you can look at ${x in A : f(x)+f(x+1) > frac{1}{n} }$, if all these sets have measure $0$, then so has $A$. Same for $C$.).
            – N. S.
            Dec 3 at 20:07












            Oh yes..thanks.
            – JOHN
            Dec 3 at 20:08




            Oh yes..thanks.
            – JOHN
            Dec 3 at 20:08










            up vote
            2
            down vote













            Let $A:={xinBbb R: f(x)>0}$. Because $f$ is continuous then $A$ is open and piecewise-connected (by "piecewise-connected" I mean that it is the union of countable disjoint open intervals).



            WLOG suppose that $AneqBbb R$. This imply that $A^complement$ is the union of countable and closed intervals. Then $A^complement=bigcup_{jin I} R_j$, for $|I|lealeph_0$, where $R_jcap R_k=emptyset$ for $jneq k$ and each $R_j$ is a closed interval.



            Now note that because $f(x)le 0$ for each $xin A^complement$ then we knows that for each $R_j$ there is some (non-empty) open interval $I_j$ such that $lambda(I_j)gelambda(R_j)$, $sup R_j=inf I_j$ and $f|_{I_j}>0$. From here its easy to see that



            $$Bbb R=I_0cupleft(bigcup_{jin I}(R_jcup I_j)right)$$



            is a disjoint partition of $Bbb R$ where $I_0$ could be empty, that is, each interval $I_j$ or $R_j$ is disjoint of any other interval $I_k$ or $R_k$. Hence



            $$int_{Bbb R} f(x),lambda(dx)=\=int_{I_0} f(x),lambda(dx)+sum_{jin I}int_{R_j}(f(x)+f(x+1)),lambda (dx)+sum_{jin I}int_{H_j}f(x),lambda(dx)$$



            where $H_j:=I_jsetminus(R_j+1)$.



            Then clearly $int_{R_j} (f(x)+f(x+1)),lambda(dx)ge 0$ for each $jin I$ because $f(x)+f(x+1)>0$ and $lambda(R_j)ge 0$. Also $int_{H_j} f(x)lambda(dx)ge 0$ because $lambda(H_j)ge 0$ and $H_jsubset A$. By last, if $I_0neqemptyset$ then $lambda(I_0)>0$ and $I_0subset A$.



            Then adding all we find that the integral is necessarily positive, because if some $lambda(R_j)=0$ (that is, if $R_j$ is a singleton) then $lambda(H_j)>0$, and viceversa.






            share|cite|improve this answer



























              up vote
              2
              down vote













              Let $A:={xinBbb R: f(x)>0}$. Because $f$ is continuous then $A$ is open and piecewise-connected (by "piecewise-connected" I mean that it is the union of countable disjoint open intervals).



              WLOG suppose that $AneqBbb R$. This imply that $A^complement$ is the union of countable and closed intervals. Then $A^complement=bigcup_{jin I} R_j$, for $|I|lealeph_0$, where $R_jcap R_k=emptyset$ for $jneq k$ and each $R_j$ is a closed interval.



              Now note that because $f(x)le 0$ for each $xin A^complement$ then we knows that for each $R_j$ there is some (non-empty) open interval $I_j$ such that $lambda(I_j)gelambda(R_j)$, $sup R_j=inf I_j$ and $f|_{I_j}>0$. From here its easy to see that



              $$Bbb R=I_0cupleft(bigcup_{jin I}(R_jcup I_j)right)$$



              is a disjoint partition of $Bbb R$ where $I_0$ could be empty, that is, each interval $I_j$ or $R_j$ is disjoint of any other interval $I_k$ or $R_k$. Hence



              $$int_{Bbb R} f(x),lambda(dx)=\=int_{I_0} f(x),lambda(dx)+sum_{jin I}int_{R_j}(f(x)+f(x+1)),lambda (dx)+sum_{jin I}int_{H_j}f(x),lambda(dx)$$



              where $H_j:=I_jsetminus(R_j+1)$.



              Then clearly $int_{R_j} (f(x)+f(x+1)),lambda(dx)ge 0$ for each $jin I$ because $f(x)+f(x+1)>0$ and $lambda(R_j)ge 0$. Also $int_{H_j} f(x)lambda(dx)ge 0$ because $lambda(H_j)ge 0$ and $H_jsubset A$. By last, if $I_0neqemptyset$ then $lambda(I_0)>0$ and $I_0subset A$.



              Then adding all we find that the integral is necessarily positive, because if some $lambda(R_j)=0$ (that is, if $R_j$ is a singleton) then $lambda(H_j)>0$, and viceversa.






              share|cite|improve this answer

























                up vote
                2
                down vote










                up vote
                2
                down vote









                Let $A:={xinBbb R: f(x)>0}$. Because $f$ is continuous then $A$ is open and piecewise-connected (by "piecewise-connected" I mean that it is the union of countable disjoint open intervals).



                WLOG suppose that $AneqBbb R$. This imply that $A^complement$ is the union of countable and closed intervals. Then $A^complement=bigcup_{jin I} R_j$, for $|I|lealeph_0$, where $R_jcap R_k=emptyset$ for $jneq k$ and each $R_j$ is a closed interval.



                Now note that because $f(x)le 0$ for each $xin A^complement$ then we knows that for each $R_j$ there is some (non-empty) open interval $I_j$ such that $lambda(I_j)gelambda(R_j)$, $sup R_j=inf I_j$ and $f|_{I_j}>0$. From here its easy to see that



                $$Bbb R=I_0cupleft(bigcup_{jin I}(R_jcup I_j)right)$$



                is a disjoint partition of $Bbb R$ where $I_0$ could be empty, that is, each interval $I_j$ or $R_j$ is disjoint of any other interval $I_k$ or $R_k$. Hence



                $$int_{Bbb R} f(x),lambda(dx)=\=int_{I_0} f(x),lambda(dx)+sum_{jin I}int_{R_j}(f(x)+f(x+1)),lambda (dx)+sum_{jin I}int_{H_j}f(x),lambda(dx)$$



                where $H_j:=I_jsetminus(R_j+1)$.



                Then clearly $int_{R_j} (f(x)+f(x+1)),lambda(dx)ge 0$ for each $jin I$ because $f(x)+f(x+1)>0$ and $lambda(R_j)ge 0$. Also $int_{H_j} f(x)lambda(dx)ge 0$ because $lambda(H_j)ge 0$ and $H_jsubset A$. By last, if $I_0neqemptyset$ then $lambda(I_0)>0$ and $I_0subset A$.



                Then adding all we find that the integral is necessarily positive, because if some $lambda(R_j)=0$ (that is, if $R_j$ is a singleton) then $lambda(H_j)>0$, and viceversa.






                share|cite|improve this answer














                Let $A:={xinBbb R: f(x)>0}$. Because $f$ is continuous then $A$ is open and piecewise-connected (by "piecewise-connected" I mean that it is the union of countable disjoint open intervals).



                WLOG suppose that $AneqBbb R$. This imply that $A^complement$ is the union of countable and closed intervals. Then $A^complement=bigcup_{jin I} R_j$, for $|I|lealeph_0$, where $R_jcap R_k=emptyset$ for $jneq k$ and each $R_j$ is a closed interval.



                Now note that because $f(x)le 0$ for each $xin A^complement$ then we knows that for each $R_j$ there is some (non-empty) open interval $I_j$ such that $lambda(I_j)gelambda(R_j)$, $sup R_j=inf I_j$ and $f|_{I_j}>0$. From here its easy to see that



                $$Bbb R=I_0cupleft(bigcup_{jin I}(R_jcup I_j)right)$$



                is a disjoint partition of $Bbb R$ where $I_0$ could be empty, that is, each interval $I_j$ or $R_j$ is disjoint of any other interval $I_k$ or $R_k$. Hence



                $$int_{Bbb R} f(x),lambda(dx)=\=int_{I_0} f(x),lambda(dx)+sum_{jin I}int_{R_j}(f(x)+f(x+1)),lambda (dx)+sum_{jin I}int_{H_j}f(x),lambda(dx)$$



                where $H_j:=I_jsetminus(R_j+1)$.



                Then clearly $int_{R_j} (f(x)+f(x+1)),lambda(dx)ge 0$ for each $jin I$ because $f(x)+f(x+1)>0$ and $lambda(R_j)ge 0$. Also $int_{H_j} f(x)lambda(dx)ge 0$ because $lambda(H_j)ge 0$ and $H_jsubset A$. By last, if $I_0neqemptyset$ then $lambda(I_0)>0$ and $I_0subset A$.



                Then adding all we find that the integral is necessarily positive, because if some $lambda(R_j)=0$ (that is, if $R_j$ is a singleton) then $lambda(H_j)>0$, and viceversa.







                share|cite|improve this answer














                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer








                edited Dec 3 at 22:17

























                answered Dec 3 at 19:49









                Masacroso

                12.7k41746




                12.7k41746






























                    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%2f3024453%2fif-f-is-continuous-integrable-on-mathbbr-such-that-either-fx0-or-f%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

                    Bressuire

                    Cabo Verde

                    Gyllenstierna