Here is Rudin's change of variables Theorem:

enter image description here

My question is this: what are examples where $\varphi$ not being strictly increasing or not mapping the interval $[a,b]$ to $[A,B]$ breaks the theorem? For example, I am considering $\varphi$ a parabola with minimum point in the unit interval. Using Rudin's special case remark ($\alpha(x)=x$ and $\beta(x)=\varphi$) I keep computing $$\int_0^1 f(x)dx=\int_0^1f(\varphi(y))\varphi'(y)dy$$ with various choices of $f$, and I keep getting these integrals are equal. Does this mean $\varphi$ doesn't need such strict conditions?

If we let $a$ be the minimum point this seems surprising since $\varphi$ is only strictly increasing on $[a,1]$.


If you don't mind loosening up the hypotheses a bit:

Theorem: Suppose $\phi:[a,b] \rightarrow I$, where $I$ is an interval, is a $C^1$ function and $f$ is a continuous function on $I$. Then

$$\int_{[\phi(a),\phi(b)]} f=\int_{[a,b]} f \circ \phi \cdot \phi',$$

where $\int_{[\phi(a),\phi(b)]} f:=-\int_{[\phi(b),\phi(a)]} f$ if $\phi(b) < \phi(a)$.

Proof: Since $f$ is continuous, pick a function $F$ such that $F'=f$ (this follows from FTC). Define $H:=F \circ \phi$. We then have that $H'=f\circ \phi \cdot \phi'.$ Therefore,

$$\int_{[a,b]} f \circ \phi \cdot \phi'=\int_{[a,b]} H'=H(b)-H(a)$$

$$=F \circ \phi(b)- F \circ \phi(a)=F(\phi(b))-F(\phi(a))=\int_{[\phi(a),\phi(b)]} f.$$


Note that we did not need $\phi$ to be increasing.

| cite | improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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