I can use the following definitions:

-A partition P of [a,b] is a set of finite points of [a,b] that includes a and b themselves.

-The set of all partitions of [a,b] is depicted as $P_{[a,b]}$

-$M_i=sup\{f(x) : x\in [t_i -t_{i-1}]\}$

-$m_i=inf\{f(x) : x\in [t_i -t_{i-1}]\}$

-An upper sum of a bounded function in regards to a partition $P=\{a=t_0,t_1,...,t_n=b\}\in $ is $$\sum_{i=1}^n M_i(t_i-t_{i-1}) = \overline S(f,P)$$

-The upper integral of a bounded function $f$ = $inf\{ \overline S(f,P):P\in P_{[a,b]} \}$

-Let $P,Q \in P_{[a,b]}, if P \subset Q$ then Q is a refinement of P

-Analogous definitions for the lower integral

-A bounded function f is integrable if the upper and lower integrals are the same, and this value is called the integral of f

Now, my problem is: If I have an integrable function f, how can I prove that

$$\lim_{x\to\infty} \underline S(f,P_n)=\int_a^bf=\lim_{x\to\infty} \overline S(f,P_n)$$with $P =\{t_0,t_1,...,t_n\}$ a partition with n subintervales of the same length.

I'm not sure how to approach this problem. My guess is that I have to prove that the limit of the upper sum as the amout of points in P grows is the infimum of the set of upper sums. I know how to prove that a finitely bigger partition creates a smaller upper sum, and I can imagine how an infinitely big one would create the smallest upper sum, but I can't seem to find a path to prove it formally.

Another option I thought about was using some kind of version of the squeeze theorem, but again, I can't find a formal path.

Any help or hints would be greatly appreciated.


Your Answer

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

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.