Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

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

Can you solve Problem 19 from Chapter 8 of Rudin's Principles of Mathematical Analysis, I'm having a lot of difficulty with it

I've proven the first part, namely $$\lim_{N\to\infty}\frac{1}{N}\sum_{n=1}^N \exp(ik(x+n\alpha))=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^\pi(\cdots) = \begin{cases} 1\text{ if }k=0\\0\text{ otherwise}\end{cases}$$

Now I want to prove that if $f$ is continuous in $\mathbb{R}$ and $f(x+2\pi)=f(x)$ for all $x$ then

$$\lim_{N\to\infty} \sum_{n=1}^{N} \frac{1}{N} f(x+n\alpha)=\frac{1}{2\pi} \int\limits_{-\pi}^{\pi}f(t)\mathrm dt$$

for any $x$, where $\alpha/\pi$ is irrational.

I've tried writing it as

$$\lim_{N\to\infty}\frac{1}{N}\sum_{n=1}^N \sum_{k=0}^N\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^\pi e^{ikt}f(x+n\alpha) $$ but that was not helpful.

share|cite|improve this question
    
@stephen: What is the exercise no. – anonymous Oct 22 '10 at 8:05
11  
@Stephen: Rudin wrote multiple books, what book do you mean? – Jonas Teuwen Oct 22 '10 at 8:54
2  
Given what you have proved in the first part, have you tried to apply it to the second part? – Matt E Oct 22 '10 at 15:16
3  
Hint: Can you prove the relation you are asking about for trigonometric polynomials? – Akhil Mathew Oct 22 '10 at 16:22
1  
@Stephen. Which Rudin's book (and which edition) is this problem from? I looked thru two of my Rudin's books and couldn't find this problem. – TCL Nov 28 '10 at 15:59

For the sake of completeness, here's a solution. First I'll prove the lemma that the asker already could do. $$\lim_{N\to \infty}\frac{1}{N}\sum_{n=1}^N \exp(ik(x+n\alpha)) = \lim_{N\to \infty} \exp(ikx)\frac{1}{N}\sum_{n=1}^N \exp(ikn\alpha)$$ If $k=0$, the right hand side evaluates to $1\frac{1}{N}N = 1$. If $k\neq 0$, the sum is geometric, so we know how to evaluate it. $$ \exp(ikx)\lim_{N\to \infty}\frac{1}{N} \frac{\exp((N+1)ik\alpha)-1}{\exp(ik\alpha)-1} = \frac{\exp(ikx)}{\exp(ik\alpha)-1}\lim_{N\to\infty}\frac{1}{N}(\exp((N+1)ik\alpha) -1)$$ Because $\alpha$ is an irrational multiple of $\pi$, $k\alpha$ is never an integer multiple of $2\pi$, so the denominator is nonzero. $\exp((N+1)ik\alpha)-1$ is bounded, so the limit evaluates to zero. This means that $$\lim_{N\to \infty} \frac{1}{N}\sum_{n=1}^N \exp(ik(x+n\alpha)) = \delta_{k0} = \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^\pi \exp(ikt)dt$$ Where $\delta$ is the Kronecker delta.

Now the main problem asks us to show that $$\lim_{N\to \infty} \frac{1}{N}\sum_{n=1}^N f(x+n\alpha) = \frac{1}{2\pi} \int_{-\pi}^\pi f(t)dt$$ for any continuous $2\pi$-periodic function $f$ on the reals. If $f$ is a trigonometric polynomial, it follows easily from the result for $\exp(ikx)$. But we know that every continuous $2\pi$-periodic function is a uniform limit of trigonometric polynomials. If $f_1, f_2, \ldots$ is a sequence of trigonometric polynomials that converges uniformly to $f$, we know that for each $i$, $$\lim_{N\to \infty}\frac{1}{N}\sum_{n=1}^N f_i(x+n\alpha) = \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^\pi f_i(t)dt$$ Standard theorems about uniform convergence then tell us that $$\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^\pi f(t)dt = \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^\pi \lim_{i\to \infty}f_i(t)dt = \lim_{i\to \infty} \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^\pi f_i(t)dt$$ $$= \lim_{i\to \infty} \lim_{N\to \infty} \frac{1}{N}\sum_{n=1}^N f_i(x+n\alpha) = \lim_{N\to \infty} \frac{1}{N}\sum_{n=1}^N \lim_{i\to\infty}f_i(x+n\alpha) = \lim_{N\to\infty} \frac{1}{N}\sum_{n=1}^N f(x+n\alpha)$$

share|cite|improve this answer

I'm looking at this about a year after it was submitted.

Not sure how much this would help but if we write

$\lim_{N->\infty} \sum\limits_{n=1}^{N} f(x+n\alpha) = \lim_{N->\infty} \sum\limits_{n=1}^{N} f(x+n\alpha - 2\pi \lfloor \frac{x+n\alpha}{2 \pi} \rfloor) $. If you can show the values of $x+n\alpha - 2\pi \lfloor \frac{x+n\alpha}{2 \pi} \rfloor $ are uniformly distributed in $[0, 2 \pi]$, then I think you are done.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

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.