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
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
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
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
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
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
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
real-analysis integration
edited Dec 3 at 19:47
asked Dec 3 at 18:07
JOHN
485
485
add a comment |
add a comment |
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 $int_C f(x) dx >0$.
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
add a comment |
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.
add a comment |
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 $int_C f(x) dx >0$.
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
add a comment |
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 $int_C f(x) dx >0$.
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
add a comment |
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 $int_C f(x) dx >0$.
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 $int_C f(x) dx >0$.
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
add a comment |
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
add a comment |
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.
add a comment |
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.
add a comment |
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.
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.
edited Dec 3 at 22:17
answered Dec 3 at 19:49
Masacroso
12.7k41746
12.7k41746
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%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
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