4
$\begingroup$

I've looked at Nigel Overmars's answer here: https://math.stackexchange.com/a/630429/349828

His proof is essentially identical to the one I wrote myself and to the one given by my analysis professor in class. However, I'm driven out of an abundance of caution to ask the following question:

Are we really allowed to apply the Intermediate Value Theorem once we have: $$ m \leq \frac{\int_a^b f(x)g(x)dx}{\int_a^b g(x)dx} \leq M$$

I was under the impression that we need strict inequality for the hypotheses of the IVT to be satisfied, i.e., we need the following: $$ m \lt \frac{\int_a^b f(x)g(x)dx}{\int_a^b g(x)dx} \lt M$$

Am I crazy?

Edited to add: Here's the full question I'm trying to answer. I'm fairly sure I did part (a) without any trouble. The subtle snag I'm worried about is in part (b), which led to my original question above.

Suppose that $a \lt b$, $f$ and $g$ are continuous real-valued functions on the interval $[a, b]$, and $0 \lt g(x)$ for each $x$ in $[a, b]$. Prove each of the following:

a. If $m \leq f(x) \leq M$ on $[a, b]$ for some real numbers $m$ and $M$, then $ m \leq \frac{\int_a^b f(x)g(x)dx}{\int_a^b g(x)dx} \leq M .$

b. There exists $c \in (a, b)$ such that $\int_a^b f(x)g(x)dx = f(c)\int_a^b g(x)dx .$

Does that make my concern any clearer, or am I still crazy?

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Normally the statement of IVT is given with strict inequalities, but the result is true with weak inequalities also but then the conclusion of IVT also deals with weaker inequality. $\endgroup$ – Paramanand Singh Jun 26 '16 at 8:38
  • $\begingroup$ That makes sense. Thank you! $\endgroup$ – MMASRP63 Jun 26 '16 at 19:48
1
$\begingroup$

From OP's question and answer it is clear that he is interested in ensuring that $c \in (a, b)$ instead of $c \in [a, b]$ in the statement of mean value theorem for integrals. The result is true but somewhat difficult to establish. A much simpler approach is to use the Cauchy's Mean Value theorem with $$F(x) = \int_{a}^{x}f(t)g(t)\,dt, G(x) = \int_{a}^{x}g(t)\,dt$$ Since $f, g$ are continuous on $[a, b]$ and $g$ is positive, the functions $F, G$ satisfy all the conditions of Cauchy's Mean Value Theorem and therefore $$\frac{F(b) - F(a)}{G(b) - G(a)} = \frac{F'(c)}{G'(c)}$$ for some $c \in (a, b)$. This means that $$\int_{a}^{b}f(x)g(x)\,dx = f(c)\int_{a}^{b}g(x)\,dx$$ for some $c \in (a, b)$.

This is one of the reasons that the mean value theorem for derivatives is a much more powerful result than the mean value theorem for integrals. See this answer also in this regard.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ That is brilliant, and very elegant! Thank you so much. I'm studying for a comprehensive exam in real analysis, and this will be very helpful. I've selected your response as the accepted answer to the question instead of mine since it is spot-on. $\endgroup$ – MMASRP63 Jun 26 '16 at 19:54
  • $\begingroup$ @MMASRP63: wish you best of luck for your exam. $\endgroup$ – Paramanand Singh Jun 27 '16 at 3:30
  • $\begingroup$ @MMASRP63: also note that this answer uses the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. If you are not allowed to use this theorem then I think your answer is the only option. This shows the power of FTC also. $\endgroup$ – Paramanand Singh Jun 27 '16 at 3:39
2
$\begingroup$

The relevant function to consider here is $$ F(c) = \frac{f(c) \int_a^b g(x) dx}{\int_a^b g(x) dx}.$$ Then $F$ is continuous and so it maps the interval $[a,b]$ to the interval $[m, M]$.

What this means is that there is some $c \in [a,b]$ such that $$ F(c) = \frac{\int_a^b f(x) g(x) dx}{\int_a^b g(x)dx}.$$ This is what the problem you link to asked to show.

It is conceivable that $c = a$ or $c = b$, so one can only guarantee $c \in [a,b]$ instead of $c \in (a,b)$.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you. I see you edited the linked solution to conclude that $c \in [a, b]$ rather than $c \in (a, b)$. This makes sense to me, and I believe it answers the original question in the post to which I linked. However, the question I am trying to answer actually does require showing that $c \in (a, b)$. That's why I'm stuck. I will update my question to make this clearer. Thanks again! $\endgroup$ – MMASRP63 Jun 23 '16 at 23:18
1
$\begingroup$

I believe I have come up with an adequate answer to this question. Here it is:

$f$ and $g$ are given to be continuous on $[a, b]$, so they are both integrable on $[a, b]$. Also, $g(x)$ is given to be positive for all $x \in [a, b]$.

Part (a):

Assume that $m \leq f(x) \leq M$ for some $m, M \in \Bbb R$ and for all $x \in [a, b]$.

Remark: the problem gives this to us by assumption, but in fact, we are guaranteed to have such $m$ and $M$ by the Extreme Value Theorem.

Since $g(x) \gt 0$ for all $x \in [a, b]$, we have: $$mg(x) \leq f(x)g(x) \leq Mg(x) \qquad \text{for all } x \in [a, b]$$ $$\int_a^bmg(x)dx \leq \int_a^bf(x)g(x)dx \leq \int_a^bMg(x)dx$$ $$m\int_a^bg(x)dx \leq \int_a^bf(x)g(x)dx \leq M\int_a^bg(x)dx$$ Since $g(x) \gt 0$ for all $x \in [a, b]$, we know $\int_a^bg(x)dx \gt 0$. Thus, we have: $$m \leq \frac{\int_a^bf(x)g(x)dx}{\int_a^bg(x)dx} \leq M$$as desired. QED.

Part (b):

Let $m = \inf\{f(x)\,\lvert\, x \in [a, b]\}$ and $M = \sup\{f(x)\,\lvert\, x \in [a, b]\}$.

Since $f$ is continuous and $[a, b]$ is compact (by the Heine-Borel Theorem), we are guaranteed by the Extreme Value Theorem that:

(1) $m \in \Bbb R$ and $M \in \Bbb R$

(2) $f(s) = m$ and $f(t) = M$ for some $s, t \in [a, b]$

We must have $m \leq M$, so we will consider two cases: $m = M$ or $m \lt M$.

Case One: Assume that $m = M$. Then $f$ is a constant function on $[a, b]$. Hence, for any $c \in (a, b)$ it is trivially true that $\int_a^bf(x)g(x)dx = f(c)\int_a^bg(x)dx$.

Case Two: Assume that $m \lt M$. Let $I \subseteq \Bbb R$ be the image of $[a, b]$ under $f$, i.e., $I = f([a, b])$. Since $f$ is continuous and $[a, b]$ is connected, $I$ is connected. The only connected subsets of $\Bbb R$ are intervals. Since $m = \inf I$; $M = \sup I$; $m, M \in I$; and $m \neq M$, we must have $I = [m, M]$.

Now, let $J \subseteq \Bbb R$ be the inverse image of $(m, M)$ under $f$, i.e., $J = f^{-1}[(m, M)]$. By the preceding argument, $J$ is non-empty. Since $f$ is continuous and $(m, M)$ is open, $J$ is open. Every non-empty open subset of $\Bbb R$ is a countable union of disjoint open intervals, so this is true of $J$. Let $K \subseteq J$ be one such open interval. Then $m \lt f(x) \lt M$ for all $x \in K$.

We now proceed in a manner similar to part (a) above, but with an important variation.

Since $g(x) \gt 0$ for all $x \in [a, b]$, we have: $$mg(x) \leq f(x)g(x) \leq Mg(x) \qquad \text{for all } x \in [a, b]$$

Now, since $m \lt f(x) \lt M$ for all $x \in K$ and $K \subseteq [a, b]$, we may change to strict inequalities upon integration:

$$\int_a^bmg(x)dx \lt \int_a^bf(x)g(x)dx \lt \int_a^bMg(x)dx$$ $$m\int_a^bg(x)dx \lt \int_a^bf(x)g(x)dx \lt M\int_a^bg(x)dx$$ Since $g(x) \gt 0$ for all $x \in [a, b]$, we know $\int_a^bg(x)dx \gt 0$. Thus, we have: $$m \lt \frac{\int_a^bf(x)g(x)dx}{\int_a^bg(x)dx} \lt M$$ $$f(s) \lt \frac{\int_a^bf(x)g(x)dx}{\int_a^bg(x)dx} \lt f(t)$$

Finally, since $f$ is continuous and $[a, b]$ is connected, we are guaranteed by the Intermediate Value Theorem that there is some $c$ between $s$ and $t$ such that: $$f(c) = \frac{\int_a^bf(x)g(x)dx}{\int_a^bg(x)dx}$$

Therefore, there is indeed a $c \in (a, b)$ such that $\int_a^bf(x)g(x)dx = f(c)\int_a^bg(x)dx$.

In both cases, we were able to supply the desired $c$. QED.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ I think you have done over-complication in part (b). Note that if $f$ is continuous on $[a, b]$ then image of $[a, b]$ under $f$ is a closed interval $[c, d]$ where $c = \inf\, f(x), d = \sup\,f(x)$. And there is no need to go for strict inequalities. It does not give you anything extra. $\endgroup$ – Paramanand Singh Jun 26 '16 at 8:20
  • $\begingroup$ I agree; I felt I was beating that part of the question to death, but I also think that writing everything out in excessive detail helped me to better understand the mechanics of what was going on. However, I don't understand why you say strict inequalities aren't required. Don't we need strict inequalities if we want to ensure that $c \in (a, b)$ rather than just $c \in [a, b]\,$? Thanks again for all your help and feedback. $\endgroup$ – MMASRP63 Jun 26 '16 at 20:00
  • $\begingroup$ I read your answer again and it is correct. You do need strict inequality. +1 from my end. $\endgroup$ – Paramanand Singh Jun 27 '16 at 3:27

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.