Let $f,g:A\to\mathbb{R}$ bounded in the set $A$. Prove that


$$\underline{\int_A}{f(x) \ dx} + \underline{\int_A}{g(x) \ dx} \le \underline{\int_A}{[f(x) + g(x)] \ dx}\\\le \overline{\int_A}{[f(x) + g(x)] \ dx} \le \overline{\int_A}{f(x) \ dx} + \overline{\int_A}{g(x) \ dx}$$

b) Give an example where all inequalities above are explicit


Remember that

$$\underline{\int_A}{f(x) \ dx} = \sup_{P} s(f,P) = \sup_{P} \sum_{B\in P} m_b\cdot vol B$$ $$\overline{\int_A}{f(x) \ dx} = \inf_{P} S(f,P) = \sup_{P} \sum_{B\in P} M_b\cdot vol B$$

where $m_b = \inf \{f(x); x\in B\}$ and $M_b = \sup \{f(x); x \in B\}$

The part $ \underline{\int_A}{[f(x) + g(x)] \ dx}\le \overline{\int_A}{[f(x)+g(x)] \ dx}$ is obvious and comes from the fact that $m\cdot vol A \le s(f,P) \le S(f,P)\le M\cdot vol A$

Now for $\underline{\int_A}{f(x) \ dx} + \underline{\int_A}{g(x) \ dx} \le \underline{\int_A}{[f(x) + g(x)] \ dx}$, lets think:


$$\sup s(f,P) + \sup s(g,P) \le \sup s(f+g, P) = \\ \sup \sum_{B\in P} m_B \cdot vol B + \sup \sum_{B\in P} m_B' \cdot vol B \le \sup \sum_{B\in P} m_B'' \cdot vol B$$

where $m_B = \inf \{f(x), x\in B\}$, $m_B' = \inf \{g(x), x\in B\}$, $m_B'' = \inf \{f(x)+g(x), x\in B\}$. How to proceed here?

For b), I can only find examples for the first or last inequality, not all at the same time. Somebody has an idea?

  • $\begingroup$ What are your examples? Can't they be simply concatenated to get an example all the same time? $\endgroup$ – Berci Oct 7 '17 at 21:50

Assume that

$$\underline{\int}_A [f(x)+g(x)] \, dx < \underline{\int}_A f(x) \, dx + \underline{\int}_A g(x) \,dx ,$$

and show this leads to a contradiction.

Making this assumption we have $$\underline{\int}_A [f(x)+g(x)] \, dx - \underline{\int}_A g(x) \,dx < \underline{\int}_A f(x) \, dx,$$ and there exists a partition $P$ and lower sum $L(P,f)$ such that $$\underline{\int}_A [f(x)+g(x)] \, dx - \underline{\int}_A g(x) \,dx < L(P,f) \leqslant \underline{\int}_A f(x) \, dx.$$


$$\underline{\int}_A [f(x)+g(x)] \, dx - L(P,f) < \underline{\int}_A g(x) \, dx,$$ and there exists a partition $P’$ such that $$\underline{\int}_A [f(x)+g(x)] \, dx - L(P,f) < L(P’,g) \leqslant \underline{\int}_A g(x) \, dx \\ \implies \underline{\int}_A [f(x)+g(x)] \, dx < L(P,f) + L(P’,g) $$

Take a common refinement of the partitions $Q = P \cup P'$. Lower sums increase as partitions are refined and we have $L(Q,f) \geqslant L(P,f)$ and $L(Q,g) \geqslant L(P’,g).$

It follows that

$$\tag{*}L(Q,f+g) \leqslant \underline{\int}_A [f(x)+g(x)] \, dx < L(P,f) + L(P’,g) \leqslant L(Q,f) + L(Q,g).$$

However, $\inf f + \inf g \leqslant \inf (f+g)$ and, therefore, $L(Q,f) + L(Q,g)\leqslant L(Q,f+g)$ which is contradicted by (*).

A similar argument applies to the upper sum inequality. We have strict equality if $f$ and $g$ are Riemann integrable. We have strict inequality by choosing $A = [0,1]$ and $f = \chi_{\mathbb{Q} \cap [0,1]}$ and $g = -f$.

Problem with your reasoning for (a).

Since for any partition $P$ and lower sums we have $L(P,f) + L(P,g) \leqslant L(P,f+g)$ we can argue that

$$\tag{1}\sup_P (L(P,f) + L(P,g)) \leqslant \sup_P L(P,f+g) \leqslant \underline{\int}_A [f(x)+g(x)] \, dx $$

We also have that

$$\tag{2} \sup_P (L(P,f) + L(P,g)) \leqslant \sup_P L(P,f) + \sup_P L(P,g) \leqslant \underline{\int}_A f(x) \, dx + \underline{\int}_A g(x) \,dx $$

However from these results we cannot directly conclude anything about the relative ordering of the right-hand sides of (1) and (2).


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.