arxiv: v1 [math.ca] 7 Mar 2012

Transcription

1 rxiv: v1 [mth.ca] 7 Mr 2012 A simple proof of the Fundmentl Theorem of Clculus for the Lebesgue integrl Mrch, 2012 Rodrigo López Pouso Deprtmento de Análise Mtemátic Fcultde de Mtemátics, Universidde de Sntigo de Compostel, Cmpus Sur Sntigo de Compostel, Spin. Abstrct This pper contins new elementry proof of the Fundmentl Theorem of Clculus for the Lebesgue integrl. The hrdest prt of ourproofsimplyconcernstheconvergenceinl 1 ofcertinsequenceof step functions, nd we prove it using only bsic elements from Lebesgue integrtion theory. 1 Introduction Let f : [,b] R be bsolutely continuous on [,b], i.e., for every ε > 0 there exists δ > 0 such tht if {( j,b j )} n j=1 is fmily of pirwise disjoint subintervls of [, b] stisfying n (b j j ) < δ j=1 then n f(b j ) f( j ) < ε. j=1 1

2 Clssicl results ensure tht f hs finite derivtive lmost everywhere in I = [,b], nd tht f L 1 (I), see [3] or [8, Corollry 6.83]. These results, which we shll use in this pper, re the first steps in the proof of the min connection between bsolute continuity nd Lebesgue integrtion: the Fundmentl Theorem of Clculus for the Lebesgue integrl. Theorem 1.1 If f : I = [,b] R is bsolutely continuous on I then f(b) f() = f (x)dx in Lebesgue s sense. In this note we present new elementry proof to Theorem 1.1 which seems more nturl nd esy thn the existing ones. Indeed, our proof cn be sketched simply s follows: 1. We consider well known sequence of step functions {h n } n N which tends to f lmost everywhere in I nd, moreover, h n (x)dx = f(b) f() for ll n N. 2. We prove, by mens of elementry rguments, tht lim h n (x)dx = f (x)dx. More precise comprison with the literture on Theorem 1.1 nd its severl proofs will be given in Section 3. In the sequel m stnds for the Lebesgue mesure in R. 2 Proof of Theorem 1.1 For ech n N we consider the prtition of the intervl I = [,b] which divides it into 2 n subintervls of length (b )2 n, nmely x n,0 < x n,1 < x n,2 < < x n,2 n, where x n,i = +i(b )2 n for i = 0,1,2,...,2 n. Now we construct step function h n : [,b) R s follows: for ech x [,b) there is unique i {0,1,2,...,2 n 1} such tht x [x n,i,x n,i+1 ), 2

3 nd we define h n (x) = f(x n,i+1) f(x n,i ) x n,i+1 x n,i = 2n b [f(x n,i+1) f(x n,i )]. On the one hnd, the construction of {h n } n N implies tht lim h n(x) = f (x) for ll x [,b)\n, (2.1) where N I is null mesure set such tht f (x) exists for ll x I \N. On the other hnd, for ech n N we compute h n (x)dx = 2 n 1 i=0 xn,i+1 x n,i h n (x)dx = [f(x n,i+1 ) f(x n,i )] = f(b) f(), 2 n 1 i=0 nd therefore it only remins to prove tht lim h n (x)dx = f (x)dx. Let us prove tht, in fct, we hve convergence in L 1 (I), i.e., lim h n (x) f (x) dx = 0. (2.2) Let ε > 0 be fixed nd let δ > 0 be one of the vlues corresponding to ε/4 in the definition of bsolute continuity of f. Since f L 1 (I) we cn find ρ > 0 such tht for ny mesurble set E I we hve f (x) dx < ε whenever m(e) < ρ. (2.3) 4 E The following lemm will give us fine estimtes for the integrls when h n is smll. We postpone its proof for better redbility. Lemm 2.1 For ech ε > 0 there exist k,n k N such tht ({ }) k m x I : sup h n (x) > k < ε. n n k 3

4 Lemm 2.1 gurntees tht there exist k,n k N such tht ({ }) k m x I : sup h n (x) > k < min {δ, ε } n n k 4,ρ. (2.4) Let us denote A = { } x I : sup h n (x) > k, n n k which, by virtue of (2.4) nd (2.3), stisfies the following properties: A m(a) < δ, (2.5) k m(a) < ε 4, (2.6) f (x) dx < ε 4. (2.7) We re now in position to prove tht the integrls in (2.2) re smller thn ε for ll sufficiently lrge vlues of n N. We strt by noticing tht (2.7) gurntees tht for ll n N we hve h n (x) f (x) dx = h n (x) f (x) dx+ h n (x) f (x) dx I < I\A I\A h n (x) f (x) dx+ A A h n (x) dx+ ε 4. (2.8) The definition of the set A implies tht for ll n N, n n k, we hve h n (x) f (x) k+ f (x) for lmost ll x I \A, so the Dominted Convergence Theorem yields h n (x) f (x) dx = 0. (2.9) lim I\A From (2.8) nd (2.9) we deduce tht there exists n ε N, n ε n k, such tht for ll n N, n n ε, we hve h n (x) f (x) dx < ε 2 + h n (x) dx. (2.10) I Finlly, we estimte A h n for ech fixed n N, n n ε. First, we decompose A = B C, where B = {x A : h n (x) k} nd C = A\B. A 4

5 We immeditely hve h n (x) dx k m(b) k m(a) < ε 4 B by (2.6). (2.11) Obviously, C h n < ε/4 when C =. Let us see tht this inequlity holds true when C. For every x C = {x A : h n (x) > k} there is unique index i {0,1,2,...,2 n 1} such tht x [x n,i,x n,i+1 ). Since h n is constnt on [x n,i,x n,i+1 ) we deduce tht [x n,i,x n,i+1 ) C. Thus there exist indexes i l {0,1,2,...,2 n 1}, with l = 1,2,...,p nd i l i l if l l, such tht p C = [x n,il,x n,il +1). Therefore l=1 p (x n,il +1 x n,il ) = m(c) m(a) < δ by (2.5), l=1 nd then the bsolute continuity of f finlly comes into ction: C h n (x) dx = = p l=1 xn,il +1 x n,il h n (x) dx p f(x n,il +1) f(x n,il ) < ε 4. l=1 This inequlity, long with (2.10) nd (2.11), gurntee tht for ll n N, n n ε, we hve I h n (x) f (x) dx < ε, thus proving (2.2) becuse ε ws rbitrry. Proof of Lemm 2.1. Let ε > 0 be fixed nd let ρ > 0 be such tht for every mesurble set E I with m(e) < ρ we hve f (x) dx < ε 2. E Let N I be s in (2.1) nd let k N be sufficiently lrge so tht m ({ x I \N : f (x) k }) < ρ, 5

6 which implies tht k m ({ x I \N : f (x) k }) {x I\N : f (x) k} f (x) dx < ε 2. (2.12) Let us define { } E j = x I \N : sup h n (x) > k n j (j N). Notice tht E j+1 E j for every j N, nd m(e 1 ) <, hence lim m(e j) = m E j. (2.13) j Clerly, j=1 E j {x I \N : f (x) k}, so we deduce from (2.13) tht we cn find some n k N such tht j=1 m(e nk ) m ({ x I \N : f (x) k }) + ε 2k, nd then (2.12) yields k m(e nk ) < ε. 3 Finl remrks The sequence {h n } n N is used in other proofs of Theorem 1.1, see [1] or [10]. The novelty in this pper is our elementry nd self contined proof of (2.2). Incidentlly, revision of the proof of our Lemm 2.1 shows tht it holds true for ny sequence of mesurble functions h n : E R R which converges pointwise lmost everywhere to some h L 1 (E) nd m(e) <. Our proof voids somewht technicl results often invoked to prove Theorem 1.1. For instnce, we do not use ny sophisticted estimte for the mesure of imge sets such s [4, Theorem 7.20], [8, Lemm 6.88] or [10, Proposition 1.2], see lso [6]. We do not use the following stndrd lemm either: n bsolutely continuous function hving zero derivtive lmost everywhere is constnt, see [4, Theorem 7.16] or [8, Lemm 6.89]. It is worth hving look t [5] for proof of tht lemm using tgged prtitions; see lso [2] for proof bsed on full covers [9]. Concise proofs of Theorem 1.1 follow from the Rdon Nikodym Theorem, see [1], [4] or [7], but this is fr from being elementry. 6

7 Finlly, it is interesting to note tht (2.2) esily follows from the Dominted Convergence Theorem when f is Lipschitz continuous on I. This fct mde the uthor think bout the following project for students in n introductory course to Lebesgue integrtion. Project: Two importnt results for the price of one. 1. Let f : I = [,b] R be Lispchitz continuous on I. A deep result (worth to know without proof) gurntees tht f (x) exists for lmost ll x I, see [4, Theorem 7.8]. Consider the sequence {h n } n N s defined in Section 2 nd prove () {h n (x)} n N tends to f (x) for lmost ll x I; (b) I h n(x)dx = f(b) f() for ll n N; (c) (Use the Dominted Convergence Theorem) f L 1 (I) nd f(b) f() = f (x)dx in Lebesgue s sense. 2. Let g : I = [,b] R be Riemnn integrble on I nd define f(x) = (R) x g(s)ds (x I), where (R) stnds for the Riemnn integrl. Use the informtion in Exercise 1 to deduce tht g L 1 (I) nd References (R) g(x)dx = g(x) dx in Lebesgue s sense. [1] D. Bárcens, The Fundmentl Theorem of Clculus for Lebesgue Integrl, Divulg. Mt. 8 (2000), [2] M. W. Botsko, The use of full covers in rel nlysis, Amer. Mth. Monthly 96 (1989), [3] M. W. Botsko, An elementry proof of Lebesgue s Differentition Theorem, Amer. Mth. Monthly 110 (2003),

8 [4] A. M. Bruckner, J. B. Bruckner nd B. S. Thomson, Rel Anlysis, 2nd Edition, 2008, [5] R. A. Gordon, The use of tgged prtitions in elementry rel nlysis, Amer. Mth. Monthly 105 (1998), [6] J. J. Kolih, Men, Mener nd the Menest Men Vlue Theorem, Amer. Mth. Monthly 116 (2009), [7] W. Rudin, Rel nd Complex Anlysis, 3rd Edition, McGrw Hill, [8] K. R. Stromberg, An Introduction to Clssicl Rel Anlysis, Wdsworth Inc., Belmont, Cliforni, [9] B. S. Thomson, On full covering properties, Rel Anl. Exchnge 6 (1980/1981), [10] C. Volintiru, A proof of the fundmentl theorem of clculus using Husdorff mesures, Rel Anl. Exchnge 26 (2000/01),