Well, I was trying to prove this, particularly $(2)\Rightarrow (3)$ without using more than the definition of being Riemann integrable (not using density of continuity points or Lebesgue measure 0 for the set of points in which f is not continuous):

Let $f:[a,b]\to\mathbb{R}$ a Riemann integrable function. The following statements are equivalent:

$(1)$ $\int^{b}_{a}|f(x)|dx=0$

$(2)$ If $f$ is continuous at $c \in [a,b]$, then $f(c)=0$

$(3)$ The interior of $X=\{x\in [a,b]: f(x)\neq 0\}$ is empty.

Can someone help me?


(2) $\implies$ (3)

Assume that $(3)$ is false and $X^o$, the interior of $X$, is non-empty. Then there is a non-empty open interval $I \subset X^o$ such that $|f(c)| > 0$ for every $c \in I$. If $f$ is continuous at any $c \in I$ contradicting condition $(2)$. Otherwise, $f$ must be discontinuous everywhere in $I$ which violates the premise that $f$ is Riemann integrable. Thus if condition $(3)$ is false, so too is condition $(2)$, and $(2) \implies (3).$

(1) $\implies$ (3)

Suppose $X^o$, the interior of $X$, is non-empty. Since $X^o$ is an open set it is a countable union of disjoint non-empty open intervals where $|f(x)| > 0$

$$X^o = \bigcup_{k=1}^\infty (a_k,b_k),$$

and for some finite $n$ we get the contradiction

$$\int_a^b |f(x)| \, dx \geqslant \sum_{k=1}^n \int_{a_k}^{b_k}|f(x)| \,dx > 0.$$

(1) $\implies$ (2)

Suppose $f(c) \neq 0$ and $f$ is continuous at $c$. Then there exists an interval $(c - \delta, c+ \delta) \subset [a,b]$ where $|f(x)| > |f(c)|/2 > 0$ and we get the contradiction

$$\int_a^b |f(x)| \, dx \geqslant \int_{c-\delta}^{c + \delta}|f(x)| \, dx > 2 \delta \frac{|f(c)|}{2} > 0.$$

This should help you get started.

  • $\begingroup$ I proved all this, the problem is (2)implies(3), I can't find a simple way to prove it. $\endgroup$ – Ángela Flores Mar 7 '17 at 11:42
  • $\begingroup$ I added (2) $\implies$ (3) proved by contradiction. You need to bring in the premise that $f$ is Riemann integrable since there is no information about $\int_a^b |f| = 0$ as a premise for proving this implication. The minimal requirement is that there is no interval where $f$ is everywhere discontinuous. Otherwise you could have (3) false and (2) vacuously true. for functions that are nowhere continuous. $\endgroup$ – RRL Mar 7 '17 at 21:05
  • $\begingroup$ But the OP says not to use $f$ is continuous a.e. $\endgroup$ – zhw. Mar 7 '17 at 21:12

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.