Let $f\in \mathcal{C}^0\big([0,1],\mathbb{R}\big)$ and, for every $h\in(0,1]$, $$I(h)=\int_0^1\dfrac{f(hx)}{x^2+1}dx$$

For $\varepsilon >0$, show there exists $\eta>0$ such that for every $h\in(0,\eta)$,

$$\left|I(h)-f(0)\frac{\pi}{4}\right|\leq \varepsilon$$

Since $\dfrac{\pi}{4} = \displaystyle\int_0^1\dfrac{1}{x^2+1}dx$

$$\left |\int_0^1\dfrac{f(hx)}{x^2+1}dx -\int_0^1\dfrac{f(0)}{x^2+1}dx \right|\leq\varepsilon$$

And now, I have got no idea how to solve this problem. I think, I should show that :

$$|h|\leq \eta \implies \left|I(h)-f(0)\frac{\pi}{4}\right|\leq \varepsilon$$

but I'm not sure.


Note that we can write

$$\begin{align} \left|\int_0^1 \frac{f(hx)}{x^2+1}\,dx-f(0)\frac\pi4\right|&=\left|\int_0^1 \frac{f(hx)-f(0)}{x^2+1}\,dx\right|\\\\ &\le \int_0^1 \frac{|f(hx)-f(0)|}{x^2+1}\,dx\\\\ & \le\frac\pi4 \sup_{x\in [0,1]}|f(hx)-f(0)| \end{align}$$

For any $\epsilon>0$, there exists a number $\eta>0$ such that $|f(hx)-f(0)|<4\epsilon/\pi$ whenever $|hx|<\eta$.

Since $x\in [0,1]$, then whenever $|hx|<|h|<\eta$, we have $|f(hx)-f(0)|<4\epsilon/\pi$.

Hence, $\sup_{x\in [0,1]}|f(hx)-f(0)|<4\epsilon/\pi$ whenever $|h|<\eta$.

Putting it all together, we have for $|h|<\eta$,

$$\left|\int_0^1 \frac{f(hx)}{x^2+1}\,dx-f(0)\frac\pi4\right|<\epsilon$$

  • $\begingroup$ Tanks for this answer but how to show, please $$\int_0^1 \frac{|f(hx)-f(0)|}{x^2+1}\,dx \le \frac\pi4 \sup_{x\in [0,1]}|f(hx)-f(0)|$$ $\endgroup$ – Stu Aug 17 '17 at 19:41
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You're welcome. My pleasure. Well, first $\left|\int_1^1 g(x)\,dx\right|\le \int_0^1 |g(x)|\,dx$. Second, $\int_0^1 \frac{1}{x^2+1}\,dx=\frac\pi 4$. Third, $\int_0^1 |g(x)h(x)|\,dx\le \sup_{x\in [0,1]}|g(x)|\int_0^1 |h(x)|\,dx$. Is that sufficient for you to continue? $\endgroup$ – Mark Viola Aug 17 '17 at 19:43
  • $\begingroup$ Understood and clever!! $\endgroup$ – Stu Aug 17 '17 at 19:48
  • $\begingroup$ Over a scale from 1 to 5, may you evaluate the difficulty of this exercise, please? $\endgroup$ – Stu Aug 17 '17 at 19:53
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @Stu Difficulty is relative. This was relatively easy for me now. But this might be difficult for those less experienced. $\endgroup$ – Mark Viola Aug 17 '17 at 19:55

One way to knock this out is the dominated convergence theorem. Take any sequence $(h_n)$ of non-zero numbers such that $h_n \to 0$ and define $$g_n(x) = \frac{f(h_nx)}{1+x^2}, \,\,\,\, x \in [0,1].$$ Then $$g_n(x) \to g(x) = \frac{f(0)}{1+x^2}$$ pointwise on $[0,1]$ and since $f$ is continuous, it is bounded so $$\lvert g_n(x) \rvert \le \frac{M}{1+x^2} \le M$$ for some constant $M$. Since the range of integration is compact, we can apply the dominated convergence theorem to show that $$\lim_{n\to\infty} \int^1_0 g_n(x) dx = \int^1_0 \lim_{n\to \infty} g_n(x) dx = f(0) \frac \pi 4$$ as desired.

Alternatively, if you need to do it directly, notice that \begin{align*}\left \lvert \int^1_0 \frac{f(hx)}{1+x^2}dx - \int^1_0\frac{f(0)}{1+x^2}dx \right \rvert &= \left \lvert\int^1_0 \frac{f(hx) - f(0)}{1+x^2} dx \right \rvert \\ &\le \int^1_0 \frac{\lvert f(hx) - f(0) \rvert}{1+x^2}dx. \end{align*} Since $f$ is continuous on a compact set, it is uniformly continuous. Hence for any $\epsilon > 0$, there is $\delta > 0$ such that for all $x,y$ with $\lvert x - y \rvert < \delta$, we have $\lvert f(x) - f(y) \rvert < \epsilon$. Then for $0 < h < \delta$, we will also have $0 < hx < \delta$ (for any $x \in (0,1)$) and so $\lvert f(hx) - f(0) \lvert < \epsilon.$ For such $h$, we see \begin{align*}\left \lvert \int^1_0 \frac{f(hx)}{1+x^2}dx - \int^1_0\frac{f(0)}{1+x^2}dx \right \rvert &\le \int^1_0 \frac{\epsilon}{1+x^2}dx = \epsilon\frac \pi 4. \end{align*} which is the same thing you wanted up to rescaling $\epsilon$.

  • $\begingroup$ Uniform continuity is not needed to bound $|f(hx)-f(0)|$ uniformly on $x$ in $(0,1)$, only the (simple) continuity of $f$ at $0$. $\endgroup$ – Did Aug 17 '17 at 19:21
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the note! I noticed this after I posted and actually began to edit in order to change that but it didn't feel necessary since it wasn't really an error; I just used a stronger property to subsume a weaker one. $\endgroup$ – User8128 Aug 17 '17 at 19:32
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You need not invoke a theorem as powerful as the DCT here. $\endgroup$ – Mark Viola Aug 17 '17 at 19:38
  • $\begingroup$ Sure, that's why I gave the "direct proof" as well. $\endgroup$ – User8128 Aug 17 '17 at 19:47

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.