How to show that if $int_a^bf(x)p(x)dx=0$ for continuous $f$ and polynomial $p$, $f$ is identically is zero?
Suppose $f$ is continuous on $[a,b]$ and $int_a^bf(x)p(x)dx=0$ for every polynomial $p$ with $p(a)=0=p(b)$.
Show that $f$ is identically is zero?
This question is different than If $f$ is continuous on $[a , b]$ and $int_a^b f(x) p(x)dx = 0$ then $f = 0$
Because we have assumption on the end points of $p$.
real-analysis
add a comment |
Suppose $f$ is continuous on $[a,b]$ and $int_a^bf(x)p(x)dx=0$ for every polynomial $p$ with $p(a)=0=p(b)$.
Show that $f$ is identically is zero?
This question is different than If $f$ is continuous on $[a , b]$ and $int_a^b f(x) p(x)dx = 0$ then $f = 0$
Because we have assumption on the end points of $p$.
real-analysis
What have you tried? If you're stuck, try something easier. Like what if you knew that $f$ was a polynomial?
– Arthur
Dec 9 at 18:23
Moreover, you might want to take a look at the following (almost duplicate) questions linked here
– saz
Dec 9 at 18:28
2
@norfair It's not exactly a duplicate because the OP is imposing that $p(a)=p(b)=0$.
– saz
Dec 9 at 18:28
add a comment |
Suppose $f$ is continuous on $[a,b]$ and $int_a^bf(x)p(x)dx=0$ for every polynomial $p$ with $p(a)=0=p(b)$.
Show that $f$ is identically is zero?
This question is different than If $f$ is continuous on $[a , b]$ and $int_a^b f(x) p(x)dx = 0$ then $f = 0$
Because we have assumption on the end points of $p$.
real-analysis
Suppose $f$ is continuous on $[a,b]$ and $int_a^bf(x)p(x)dx=0$ for every polynomial $p$ with $p(a)=0=p(b)$.
Show that $f$ is identically is zero?
This question is different than If $f$ is continuous on $[a , b]$ and $int_a^b f(x) p(x)dx = 0$ then $f = 0$
Because we have assumption on the end points of $p$.
real-analysis
real-analysis
edited Dec 15 at 21:51
asked Dec 9 at 18:11
Sepide
2918
2918
What have you tried? If you're stuck, try something easier. Like what if you knew that $f$ was a polynomial?
– Arthur
Dec 9 at 18:23
Moreover, you might want to take a look at the following (almost duplicate) questions linked here
– saz
Dec 9 at 18:28
2
@norfair It's not exactly a duplicate because the OP is imposing that $p(a)=p(b)=0$.
– saz
Dec 9 at 18:28
add a comment |
What have you tried? If you're stuck, try something easier. Like what if you knew that $f$ was a polynomial?
– Arthur
Dec 9 at 18:23
Moreover, you might want to take a look at the following (almost duplicate) questions linked here
– saz
Dec 9 at 18:28
2
@norfair It's not exactly a duplicate because the OP is imposing that $p(a)=p(b)=0$.
– saz
Dec 9 at 18:28
What have you tried? If you're stuck, try something easier. Like what if you knew that $f$ was a polynomial?
– Arthur
Dec 9 at 18:23
What have you tried? If you're stuck, try something easier. Like what if you knew that $f$ was a polynomial?
– Arthur
Dec 9 at 18:23
Moreover, you might want to take a look at the following (almost duplicate) questions linked here
– saz
Dec 9 at 18:28
Moreover, you might want to take a look at the following (almost duplicate) questions linked here
– saz
Dec 9 at 18:28
2
2
@norfair It's not exactly a duplicate because the OP is imposing that $p(a)=p(b)=0$.
– saz
Dec 9 at 18:28
@norfair It's not exactly a duplicate because the OP is imposing that $p(a)=p(b)=0$.
– saz
Dec 9 at 18:28
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
A more simple-minded approach might be to say: Consider
$$ frac{1}{B(p,q)} int_0^1 x^{p-1} (1-x)^{q-1} f(x) , dx $$
with $B$ denoting the Beta function. Let $p,q to infty$ with $frac{p}{p+q}=mu$ fixed, and the integral is $f(mu)$ in the limit, which will need to be zero. As this works for any $mu$, we have $f=0$.
I like the probability-inspired solution! I wouldn't really say that's simple-minded though...
– maridia
Dec 9 at 18:56
Well it's like saying that I can make a polynomial look like a delta function, which I dare say would be frowned upon in an Analysis class!
– Richard Martin
Dec 9 at 19:31
Yep, which interpreted probabilistically, is some sort of law of large numbers statement. "Simple-minded" to me is a somewhat self-deprecating statement. Maybe you meant it's simple and elegant, which I definitely agree with. The type of argument p4sch gives is certainly the more standard "analysis" one.
– maridia
Dec 9 at 19:36
add a comment |
The set of all polynomials $p colon mathbb{R} rightarrow mathbb{R}$ with $p(a) = p(b)=0$ form a sub-algebra $mathcal{P}_0$ of the space $C_0((a,b))$, the space of real-valued continuous functions on $(a,b)$ which vanish at $a$ and $b$.
- The polynomial $p(t) := (t-a)(t-b)$ has the property that $p(x) ne 0$ for all $x in (0,1)$, i.e. $mathcal{P}_0$ vanishes nowhere.
$mathcal{P}_0$ seperates points, because for $x neq y$ in $(0,1)$ we can define $p(t) := (t-a)(t-b)(t-y)$. Then $p(x) ne 0 = p(y)$.
By the Stone-Weierstraß theorem in the locally compact version the space $mathcal{P}_0$ is dense in $C_0((a,b))$. Since $f$ is bounded, we can conclude that $int_a^b f(x)p(x) , d x =0$ for all $p in mathcal{P}_0$ already implies that
$$int_a^b f(x) g(x) , dx =0 quad text{ for all } g in C_0((a,b)).$$
Now any indicator function of an interval $[c,d]$ with $a<c<d<b$ can be approximated by a sequence of functions from $C_0((a,b))$. Hence we get
$$tag{1}int_c^d f(x) , dx =0.$$
Now the set $mathcal{A}:={A in mathcal{B}((a,b)) colon int_B f(x), dx =0 }$ is a Dynkin-system, which contains a generator of the Borel-$sigma$-Algebra. Therefore we have already $mathcal{A} = mathcal{B}((a,b))$. As known $int_B f(x) , dx =0$ for all $B in mathcal{B}((a,b))$ implies that $f(x) =0$ almost everywhere. Since $f$ is also continuous and nullsets don't contain any interval, we get already $f(x) =0$ for all $x in [a,b]$.
Isn't there a way not to use sub-algebra? I am taking real analysis and want to solve it with that knowledge.
– Sepide
Dec 16 at 0:03
add a comment |
Lemma: Assume $f$ is continuous on $[a,b]$ and $f(a)=0=f(b).$ Then there exists a sequence of polynomials $p_n$ with $p_n(a)=0=p_n(b)$ such that $p_nto f$ uniformly on $[a,b].$
Proof: By Weierstrass there are polynomials $q_n$ converging uniformly to $f$ on $[a,b].$ Let $l_n$ be the linear function joining $(a,q_n(a)),(b,q_n(b).$ Then $p_n=q_n-l_n$ does the job.
Proof for the given problem: Given $a<a'<b'<b,$ define $g$ this way: on $[a,a']$ $g$ is the line joining $(a,0)$ and $(a',f(a'));$ on $[a',b'],$ $g=f;$ on $[b',b]$ $g$ is the line joining $(b',f(b'))$ and $(b,0).$ Find polynomials $p_n$ converging to $g$ uniformly as in the lemma. Then
$$0= int_a^bfp_n = int_a^{a'}fp_n +int_{a'}^{b'}fp_n + int_{b'}^b fp_n $$ $$to int_a^{a'}fg+int_{a'}^{b'}f^2+ int_{b'}^b fg$$
Now let $a'to a^+, b'to b^-$ to see $0=int_{a}^{b}f^2.$ This proves $fequiv 0.$
We have no assumption on $f$ in the problem statement, except its continuity. How can you assume $f(a)=0=f(b)$?
– Sepide
Dec 15 at 23:47
Also, could you tell me what you mean by the line joining $(a,q_n(a))$ and $(b,q_n(b))$? Is it $l_n=t(a,q_n(a))-(1-t)(b,q_n(b))$ for all $t geq 0$?
– Sepide
Dec 16 at 0:00
I did not assume $f(a)= f(b)=0.$ However, g(a)= g(b)=0,$ so the lemma applies to $g.$ Your second question: What is the equation of the line joining two given points? You know the answer to that.
– zhw.
Dec 16 at 4:55
add a comment |
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',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
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
});
}
});
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%2f3032715%2fhow-to-show-that-if-int-abfxpxdx-0-for-continuous-f-and-polynomial-p%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
A more simple-minded approach might be to say: Consider
$$ frac{1}{B(p,q)} int_0^1 x^{p-1} (1-x)^{q-1} f(x) , dx $$
with $B$ denoting the Beta function. Let $p,q to infty$ with $frac{p}{p+q}=mu$ fixed, and the integral is $f(mu)$ in the limit, which will need to be zero. As this works for any $mu$, we have $f=0$.
I like the probability-inspired solution! I wouldn't really say that's simple-minded though...
– maridia
Dec 9 at 18:56
Well it's like saying that I can make a polynomial look like a delta function, which I dare say would be frowned upon in an Analysis class!
– Richard Martin
Dec 9 at 19:31
Yep, which interpreted probabilistically, is some sort of law of large numbers statement. "Simple-minded" to me is a somewhat self-deprecating statement. Maybe you meant it's simple and elegant, which I definitely agree with. The type of argument p4sch gives is certainly the more standard "analysis" one.
– maridia
Dec 9 at 19:36
add a comment |
A more simple-minded approach might be to say: Consider
$$ frac{1}{B(p,q)} int_0^1 x^{p-1} (1-x)^{q-1} f(x) , dx $$
with $B$ denoting the Beta function. Let $p,q to infty$ with $frac{p}{p+q}=mu$ fixed, and the integral is $f(mu)$ in the limit, which will need to be zero. As this works for any $mu$, we have $f=0$.
I like the probability-inspired solution! I wouldn't really say that's simple-minded though...
– maridia
Dec 9 at 18:56
Well it's like saying that I can make a polynomial look like a delta function, which I dare say would be frowned upon in an Analysis class!
– Richard Martin
Dec 9 at 19:31
Yep, which interpreted probabilistically, is some sort of law of large numbers statement. "Simple-minded" to me is a somewhat self-deprecating statement. Maybe you meant it's simple and elegant, which I definitely agree with. The type of argument p4sch gives is certainly the more standard "analysis" one.
– maridia
Dec 9 at 19:36
add a comment |
A more simple-minded approach might be to say: Consider
$$ frac{1}{B(p,q)} int_0^1 x^{p-1} (1-x)^{q-1} f(x) , dx $$
with $B$ denoting the Beta function. Let $p,q to infty$ with $frac{p}{p+q}=mu$ fixed, and the integral is $f(mu)$ in the limit, which will need to be zero. As this works for any $mu$, we have $f=0$.
A more simple-minded approach might be to say: Consider
$$ frac{1}{B(p,q)} int_0^1 x^{p-1} (1-x)^{q-1} f(x) , dx $$
with $B$ denoting the Beta function. Let $p,q to infty$ with $frac{p}{p+q}=mu$ fixed, and the integral is $f(mu)$ in the limit, which will need to be zero. As this works for any $mu$, we have $f=0$.
answered Dec 9 at 18:40
Richard Martin
1,63618
1,63618
I like the probability-inspired solution! I wouldn't really say that's simple-minded though...
– maridia
Dec 9 at 18:56
Well it's like saying that I can make a polynomial look like a delta function, which I dare say would be frowned upon in an Analysis class!
– Richard Martin
Dec 9 at 19:31
Yep, which interpreted probabilistically, is some sort of law of large numbers statement. "Simple-minded" to me is a somewhat self-deprecating statement. Maybe you meant it's simple and elegant, which I definitely agree with. The type of argument p4sch gives is certainly the more standard "analysis" one.
– maridia
Dec 9 at 19:36
add a comment |
I like the probability-inspired solution! I wouldn't really say that's simple-minded though...
– maridia
Dec 9 at 18:56
Well it's like saying that I can make a polynomial look like a delta function, which I dare say would be frowned upon in an Analysis class!
– Richard Martin
Dec 9 at 19:31
Yep, which interpreted probabilistically, is some sort of law of large numbers statement. "Simple-minded" to me is a somewhat self-deprecating statement. Maybe you meant it's simple and elegant, which I definitely agree with. The type of argument p4sch gives is certainly the more standard "analysis" one.
– maridia
Dec 9 at 19:36
I like the probability-inspired solution! I wouldn't really say that's simple-minded though...
– maridia
Dec 9 at 18:56
I like the probability-inspired solution! I wouldn't really say that's simple-minded though...
– maridia
Dec 9 at 18:56
Well it's like saying that I can make a polynomial look like a delta function, which I dare say would be frowned upon in an Analysis class!
– Richard Martin
Dec 9 at 19:31
Well it's like saying that I can make a polynomial look like a delta function, which I dare say would be frowned upon in an Analysis class!
– Richard Martin
Dec 9 at 19:31
Yep, which interpreted probabilistically, is some sort of law of large numbers statement. "Simple-minded" to me is a somewhat self-deprecating statement. Maybe you meant it's simple and elegant, which I definitely agree with. The type of argument p4sch gives is certainly the more standard "analysis" one.
– maridia
Dec 9 at 19:36
Yep, which interpreted probabilistically, is some sort of law of large numbers statement. "Simple-minded" to me is a somewhat self-deprecating statement. Maybe you meant it's simple and elegant, which I definitely agree with. The type of argument p4sch gives is certainly the more standard "analysis" one.
– maridia
Dec 9 at 19:36
add a comment |
The set of all polynomials $p colon mathbb{R} rightarrow mathbb{R}$ with $p(a) = p(b)=0$ form a sub-algebra $mathcal{P}_0$ of the space $C_0((a,b))$, the space of real-valued continuous functions on $(a,b)$ which vanish at $a$ and $b$.
- The polynomial $p(t) := (t-a)(t-b)$ has the property that $p(x) ne 0$ for all $x in (0,1)$, i.e. $mathcal{P}_0$ vanishes nowhere.
$mathcal{P}_0$ seperates points, because for $x neq y$ in $(0,1)$ we can define $p(t) := (t-a)(t-b)(t-y)$. Then $p(x) ne 0 = p(y)$.
By the Stone-Weierstraß theorem in the locally compact version the space $mathcal{P}_0$ is dense in $C_0((a,b))$. Since $f$ is bounded, we can conclude that $int_a^b f(x)p(x) , d x =0$ for all $p in mathcal{P}_0$ already implies that
$$int_a^b f(x) g(x) , dx =0 quad text{ for all } g in C_0((a,b)).$$
Now any indicator function of an interval $[c,d]$ with $a<c<d<b$ can be approximated by a sequence of functions from $C_0((a,b))$. Hence we get
$$tag{1}int_c^d f(x) , dx =0.$$
Now the set $mathcal{A}:={A in mathcal{B}((a,b)) colon int_B f(x), dx =0 }$ is a Dynkin-system, which contains a generator of the Borel-$sigma$-Algebra. Therefore we have already $mathcal{A} = mathcal{B}((a,b))$. As known $int_B f(x) , dx =0$ for all $B in mathcal{B}((a,b))$ implies that $f(x) =0$ almost everywhere. Since $f$ is also continuous and nullsets don't contain any interval, we get already $f(x) =0$ for all $x in [a,b]$.
Isn't there a way not to use sub-algebra? I am taking real analysis and want to solve it with that knowledge.
– Sepide
Dec 16 at 0:03
add a comment |
The set of all polynomials $p colon mathbb{R} rightarrow mathbb{R}$ with $p(a) = p(b)=0$ form a sub-algebra $mathcal{P}_0$ of the space $C_0((a,b))$, the space of real-valued continuous functions on $(a,b)$ which vanish at $a$ and $b$.
- The polynomial $p(t) := (t-a)(t-b)$ has the property that $p(x) ne 0$ for all $x in (0,1)$, i.e. $mathcal{P}_0$ vanishes nowhere.
$mathcal{P}_0$ seperates points, because for $x neq y$ in $(0,1)$ we can define $p(t) := (t-a)(t-b)(t-y)$. Then $p(x) ne 0 = p(y)$.
By the Stone-Weierstraß theorem in the locally compact version the space $mathcal{P}_0$ is dense in $C_0((a,b))$. Since $f$ is bounded, we can conclude that $int_a^b f(x)p(x) , d x =0$ for all $p in mathcal{P}_0$ already implies that
$$int_a^b f(x) g(x) , dx =0 quad text{ for all } g in C_0((a,b)).$$
Now any indicator function of an interval $[c,d]$ with $a<c<d<b$ can be approximated by a sequence of functions from $C_0((a,b))$. Hence we get
$$tag{1}int_c^d f(x) , dx =0.$$
Now the set $mathcal{A}:={A in mathcal{B}((a,b)) colon int_B f(x), dx =0 }$ is a Dynkin-system, which contains a generator of the Borel-$sigma$-Algebra. Therefore we have already $mathcal{A} = mathcal{B}((a,b))$. As known $int_B f(x) , dx =0$ for all $B in mathcal{B}((a,b))$ implies that $f(x) =0$ almost everywhere. Since $f$ is also continuous and nullsets don't contain any interval, we get already $f(x) =0$ for all $x in [a,b]$.
Isn't there a way not to use sub-algebra? I am taking real analysis and want to solve it with that knowledge.
– Sepide
Dec 16 at 0:03
add a comment |
The set of all polynomials $p colon mathbb{R} rightarrow mathbb{R}$ with $p(a) = p(b)=0$ form a sub-algebra $mathcal{P}_0$ of the space $C_0((a,b))$, the space of real-valued continuous functions on $(a,b)$ which vanish at $a$ and $b$.
- The polynomial $p(t) := (t-a)(t-b)$ has the property that $p(x) ne 0$ for all $x in (0,1)$, i.e. $mathcal{P}_0$ vanishes nowhere.
$mathcal{P}_0$ seperates points, because for $x neq y$ in $(0,1)$ we can define $p(t) := (t-a)(t-b)(t-y)$. Then $p(x) ne 0 = p(y)$.
By the Stone-Weierstraß theorem in the locally compact version the space $mathcal{P}_0$ is dense in $C_0((a,b))$. Since $f$ is bounded, we can conclude that $int_a^b f(x)p(x) , d x =0$ for all $p in mathcal{P}_0$ already implies that
$$int_a^b f(x) g(x) , dx =0 quad text{ for all } g in C_0((a,b)).$$
Now any indicator function of an interval $[c,d]$ with $a<c<d<b$ can be approximated by a sequence of functions from $C_0((a,b))$. Hence we get
$$tag{1}int_c^d f(x) , dx =0.$$
Now the set $mathcal{A}:={A in mathcal{B}((a,b)) colon int_B f(x), dx =0 }$ is a Dynkin-system, which contains a generator of the Borel-$sigma$-Algebra. Therefore we have already $mathcal{A} = mathcal{B}((a,b))$. As known $int_B f(x) , dx =0$ for all $B in mathcal{B}((a,b))$ implies that $f(x) =0$ almost everywhere. Since $f$ is also continuous and nullsets don't contain any interval, we get already $f(x) =0$ for all $x in [a,b]$.
The set of all polynomials $p colon mathbb{R} rightarrow mathbb{R}$ with $p(a) = p(b)=0$ form a sub-algebra $mathcal{P}_0$ of the space $C_0((a,b))$, the space of real-valued continuous functions on $(a,b)$ which vanish at $a$ and $b$.
- The polynomial $p(t) := (t-a)(t-b)$ has the property that $p(x) ne 0$ for all $x in (0,1)$, i.e. $mathcal{P}_0$ vanishes nowhere.
$mathcal{P}_0$ seperates points, because for $x neq y$ in $(0,1)$ we can define $p(t) := (t-a)(t-b)(t-y)$. Then $p(x) ne 0 = p(y)$.
By the Stone-Weierstraß theorem in the locally compact version the space $mathcal{P}_0$ is dense in $C_0((a,b))$. Since $f$ is bounded, we can conclude that $int_a^b f(x)p(x) , d x =0$ for all $p in mathcal{P}_0$ already implies that
$$int_a^b f(x) g(x) , dx =0 quad text{ for all } g in C_0((a,b)).$$
Now any indicator function of an interval $[c,d]$ with $a<c<d<b$ can be approximated by a sequence of functions from $C_0((a,b))$. Hence we get
$$tag{1}int_c^d f(x) , dx =0.$$
Now the set $mathcal{A}:={A in mathcal{B}((a,b)) colon int_B f(x), dx =0 }$ is a Dynkin-system, which contains a generator of the Borel-$sigma$-Algebra. Therefore we have already $mathcal{A} = mathcal{B}((a,b))$. As known $int_B f(x) , dx =0$ for all $B in mathcal{B}((a,b))$ implies that $f(x) =0$ almost everywhere. Since $f$ is also continuous and nullsets don't contain any interval, we get already $f(x) =0$ for all $x in [a,b]$.
answered Dec 9 at 18:35
p4sch
4,760217
4,760217
Isn't there a way not to use sub-algebra? I am taking real analysis and want to solve it with that knowledge.
– Sepide
Dec 16 at 0:03
add a comment |
Isn't there a way not to use sub-algebra? I am taking real analysis and want to solve it with that knowledge.
– Sepide
Dec 16 at 0:03
Isn't there a way not to use sub-algebra? I am taking real analysis and want to solve it with that knowledge.
– Sepide
Dec 16 at 0:03
Isn't there a way not to use sub-algebra? I am taking real analysis and want to solve it with that knowledge.
– Sepide
Dec 16 at 0:03
add a comment |
Lemma: Assume $f$ is continuous on $[a,b]$ and $f(a)=0=f(b).$ Then there exists a sequence of polynomials $p_n$ with $p_n(a)=0=p_n(b)$ such that $p_nto f$ uniformly on $[a,b].$
Proof: By Weierstrass there are polynomials $q_n$ converging uniformly to $f$ on $[a,b].$ Let $l_n$ be the linear function joining $(a,q_n(a)),(b,q_n(b).$ Then $p_n=q_n-l_n$ does the job.
Proof for the given problem: Given $a<a'<b'<b,$ define $g$ this way: on $[a,a']$ $g$ is the line joining $(a,0)$ and $(a',f(a'));$ on $[a',b'],$ $g=f;$ on $[b',b]$ $g$ is the line joining $(b',f(b'))$ and $(b,0).$ Find polynomials $p_n$ converging to $g$ uniformly as in the lemma. Then
$$0= int_a^bfp_n = int_a^{a'}fp_n +int_{a'}^{b'}fp_n + int_{b'}^b fp_n $$ $$to int_a^{a'}fg+int_{a'}^{b'}f^2+ int_{b'}^b fg$$
Now let $a'to a^+, b'to b^-$ to see $0=int_{a}^{b}f^2.$ This proves $fequiv 0.$
We have no assumption on $f$ in the problem statement, except its continuity. How can you assume $f(a)=0=f(b)$?
– Sepide
Dec 15 at 23:47
Also, could you tell me what you mean by the line joining $(a,q_n(a))$ and $(b,q_n(b))$? Is it $l_n=t(a,q_n(a))-(1-t)(b,q_n(b))$ for all $t geq 0$?
– Sepide
Dec 16 at 0:00
I did not assume $f(a)= f(b)=0.$ However, g(a)= g(b)=0,$ so the lemma applies to $g.$ Your second question: What is the equation of the line joining two given points? You know the answer to that.
– zhw.
Dec 16 at 4:55
add a comment |
Lemma: Assume $f$ is continuous on $[a,b]$ and $f(a)=0=f(b).$ Then there exists a sequence of polynomials $p_n$ with $p_n(a)=0=p_n(b)$ such that $p_nto f$ uniformly on $[a,b].$
Proof: By Weierstrass there are polynomials $q_n$ converging uniformly to $f$ on $[a,b].$ Let $l_n$ be the linear function joining $(a,q_n(a)),(b,q_n(b).$ Then $p_n=q_n-l_n$ does the job.
Proof for the given problem: Given $a<a'<b'<b,$ define $g$ this way: on $[a,a']$ $g$ is the line joining $(a,0)$ and $(a',f(a'));$ on $[a',b'],$ $g=f;$ on $[b',b]$ $g$ is the line joining $(b',f(b'))$ and $(b,0).$ Find polynomials $p_n$ converging to $g$ uniformly as in the lemma. Then
$$0= int_a^bfp_n = int_a^{a'}fp_n +int_{a'}^{b'}fp_n + int_{b'}^b fp_n $$ $$to int_a^{a'}fg+int_{a'}^{b'}f^2+ int_{b'}^b fg$$
Now let $a'to a^+, b'to b^-$ to see $0=int_{a}^{b}f^2.$ This proves $fequiv 0.$
We have no assumption on $f$ in the problem statement, except its continuity. How can you assume $f(a)=0=f(b)$?
– Sepide
Dec 15 at 23:47
Also, could you tell me what you mean by the line joining $(a,q_n(a))$ and $(b,q_n(b))$? Is it $l_n=t(a,q_n(a))-(1-t)(b,q_n(b))$ for all $t geq 0$?
– Sepide
Dec 16 at 0:00
I did not assume $f(a)= f(b)=0.$ However, g(a)= g(b)=0,$ so the lemma applies to $g.$ Your second question: What is the equation of the line joining two given points? You know the answer to that.
– zhw.
Dec 16 at 4:55
add a comment |
Lemma: Assume $f$ is continuous on $[a,b]$ and $f(a)=0=f(b).$ Then there exists a sequence of polynomials $p_n$ with $p_n(a)=0=p_n(b)$ such that $p_nto f$ uniformly on $[a,b].$
Proof: By Weierstrass there are polynomials $q_n$ converging uniformly to $f$ on $[a,b].$ Let $l_n$ be the linear function joining $(a,q_n(a)),(b,q_n(b).$ Then $p_n=q_n-l_n$ does the job.
Proof for the given problem: Given $a<a'<b'<b,$ define $g$ this way: on $[a,a']$ $g$ is the line joining $(a,0)$ and $(a',f(a'));$ on $[a',b'],$ $g=f;$ on $[b',b]$ $g$ is the line joining $(b',f(b'))$ and $(b,0).$ Find polynomials $p_n$ converging to $g$ uniformly as in the lemma. Then
$$0= int_a^bfp_n = int_a^{a'}fp_n +int_{a'}^{b'}fp_n + int_{b'}^b fp_n $$ $$to int_a^{a'}fg+int_{a'}^{b'}f^2+ int_{b'}^b fg$$
Now let $a'to a^+, b'to b^-$ to see $0=int_{a}^{b}f^2.$ This proves $fequiv 0.$
Lemma: Assume $f$ is continuous on $[a,b]$ and $f(a)=0=f(b).$ Then there exists a sequence of polynomials $p_n$ with $p_n(a)=0=p_n(b)$ such that $p_nto f$ uniformly on $[a,b].$
Proof: By Weierstrass there are polynomials $q_n$ converging uniformly to $f$ on $[a,b].$ Let $l_n$ be the linear function joining $(a,q_n(a)),(b,q_n(b).$ Then $p_n=q_n-l_n$ does the job.
Proof for the given problem: Given $a<a'<b'<b,$ define $g$ this way: on $[a,a']$ $g$ is the line joining $(a,0)$ and $(a',f(a'));$ on $[a',b'],$ $g=f;$ on $[b',b]$ $g$ is the line joining $(b',f(b'))$ and $(b,0).$ Find polynomials $p_n$ converging to $g$ uniformly as in the lemma. Then
$$0= int_a^bfp_n = int_a^{a'}fp_n +int_{a'}^{b'}fp_n + int_{b'}^b fp_n $$ $$to int_a^{a'}fg+int_{a'}^{b'}f^2+ int_{b'}^b fg$$
Now let $a'to a^+, b'to b^-$ to see $0=int_{a}^{b}f^2.$ This proves $fequiv 0.$
answered Dec 9 at 20:00
zhw.
71.6k43075
71.6k43075
We have no assumption on $f$ in the problem statement, except its continuity. How can you assume $f(a)=0=f(b)$?
– Sepide
Dec 15 at 23:47
Also, could you tell me what you mean by the line joining $(a,q_n(a))$ and $(b,q_n(b))$? Is it $l_n=t(a,q_n(a))-(1-t)(b,q_n(b))$ for all $t geq 0$?
– Sepide
Dec 16 at 0:00
I did not assume $f(a)= f(b)=0.$ However, g(a)= g(b)=0,$ so the lemma applies to $g.$ Your second question: What is the equation of the line joining two given points? You know the answer to that.
– zhw.
Dec 16 at 4:55
add a comment |
We have no assumption on $f$ in the problem statement, except its continuity. How can you assume $f(a)=0=f(b)$?
– Sepide
Dec 15 at 23:47
Also, could you tell me what you mean by the line joining $(a,q_n(a))$ and $(b,q_n(b))$? Is it $l_n=t(a,q_n(a))-(1-t)(b,q_n(b))$ for all $t geq 0$?
– Sepide
Dec 16 at 0:00
I did not assume $f(a)= f(b)=0.$ However, g(a)= g(b)=0,$ so the lemma applies to $g.$ Your second question: What is the equation of the line joining two given points? You know the answer to that.
– zhw.
Dec 16 at 4:55
We have no assumption on $f$ in the problem statement, except its continuity. How can you assume $f(a)=0=f(b)$?
– Sepide
Dec 15 at 23:47
We have no assumption on $f$ in the problem statement, except its continuity. How can you assume $f(a)=0=f(b)$?
– Sepide
Dec 15 at 23:47
Also, could you tell me what you mean by the line joining $(a,q_n(a))$ and $(b,q_n(b))$? Is it $l_n=t(a,q_n(a))-(1-t)(b,q_n(b))$ for all $t geq 0$?
– Sepide
Dec 16 at 0:00
Also, could you tell me what you mean by the line joining $(a,q_n(a))$ and $(b,q_n(b))$? Is it $l_n=t(a,q_n(a))-(1-t)(b,q_n(b))$ for all $t geq 0$?
– Sepide
Dec 16 at 0:00
I did not assume $f(a)= f(b)=0.$ However, g(a)= g(b)=0,$ so the lemma applies to $g.$ Your second question: What is the equation of the line joining two given points? You know the answer to that.
– zhw.
Dec 16 at 4:55
I did not assume $f(a)= f(b)=0.$ However, g(a)= g(b)=0,$ so the lemma applies to $g.$ Your second question: What is the equation of the line joining two given points? You know the answer to that.
– zhw.
Dec 16 at 4:55
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%2f3032715%2fhow-to-show-that-if-int-abfxpxdx-0-for-continuous-f-and-polynomial-p%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
What have you tried? If you're stuck, try something easier. Like what if you knew that $f$ was a polynomial?
– Arthur
Dec 9 at 18:23
Moreover, you might want to take a look at the following (almost duplicate) questions linked here
– saz
Dec 9 at 18:28
2
@norfair It's not exactly a duplicate because the OP is imposing that $p(a)=p(b)=0$.
– saz
Dec 9 at 18:28