Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Let $m,n\in \mathbb{N}$ such that $m<n$. Define the function $\phi$ on $(0,\pi/2)$ as follow:

$$\phi(x)=\frac{\int_{0}^{x} \sin^{m}{t}\,dt}{\int_{0}^{x} \sin^{n}{t}\,dt}$$

Is $\phi$ increasing?

share|cite|improve this question
You can differentiate this with the fundamental theorem of calculus. Then it is not too difficult to study the sign. You'll have to factor out $\sin^mx\sin^nx$. – 1015 Feb 25 '13 at 17:55
@julien I think the last sentence of your hint is misleading. I'm trying not to give too big a hint, but maybe "You can differentiate this using the fundamental theorem of calculus. Combine the resulting numerator into one big integral and it's not too difficult to study its sign." – David Speyer Feb 25 '13 at 18:29
@DavidSpeyer Yes, with your comment added to mine, I think the OP should be able to do it. Once the numerator is written as a single big integral, the sign of the integrand can be determined, for instance, by factoring out $\sin^nx\sin^mx$. – 1015 Feb 25 '13 at 18:35
@julien Fair enough. After walking away from the keyboard, I figured out why you phrased it that way. I'll leave it alone now. – David Speyer Feb 25 '13 at 18:41

This problem is related to the following discrete property:

Let $a_i,b_i$ be positive real numbers for $i=1,2\dots$, such that the sequence $\dfrac{a_i}{b_i}$ is increasing. Then the sequence $\dfrac{\sum_{i=1}^k a_i}{\sum_{i=1}^k b_i}$ is also increasing. Furthermore, for any $r<k$ we have that: $$\frac{\sum_{i=1}^ra_i}{\sum_{i=1}^rb_i} < \frac{\sum_{i=1}^ka_i}{\sum_{i=1}^kb_i}$$

Now let $0<x<y<\dfrac{\pi}{2}$. For each $k$ we consider a partition of $[0,y]$ consisting of $k$ subintervals, such that $x$ is an endpoint of one of these subintervals, and in each subinterval we choose some $t_i$. As usual $\Delta t_i$ denotes the length of the subinterval in which $t_i$ is. Then we have Riemann sums for this partition of $[0,y]$: $$R_1(k;y)=\sum_{i=1}^k(\sin^m{t_i})\Delta t_i$$ $$R_2(k;y)=\sum_{i=1}^k(\sin^n{t_i})\Delta t_i$$

Assume that $r$ of this same subintervals form a partition of the interval $[0,x]$. Then we have Riemann sums for this partition of $[0,x]$: $$R_1(r;x)=\sum_{i=1}^r(\sin^m{t_i})\Delta t_i$$ $$R_2(r;x)=\sum_{i=1}^r(\sin^n{t_i})\Delta t_i$$

In the interval $[0,\frac{\pi}{2}]$ we have that $\dfrac{\sin^mt}{\sin^nt}=\sin^{m-n}t$ is an increasing function if $m>n$ (so this assumption must be the other way round). By the property mentioned above we have that for any $k$ and $r$ defined as above:

$$\frac{R_1(r;x)}{R_2(r;x)}<\frac{R_1(k;y)}{R_2(k;y)}$$ Taking limit for the Riemann sums as the $\Delta t_i\to 0$ on both sides of the inequality we conclude that $\phi(x)<\phi(y)$.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.