The integrals in Fubini's theorem are all Lebesgue integrals. I was wondering if there is a theorem with conclusions similar to Fubini's but only involving Riemann integrals? Thanks and regards!
-
5The Lebesgue integral of a Riemann-integrable function (bounded, defined on an interval) is its Riemann integral. – Qiaochu Yuan Feb 22 '13 at 03:01
-
2@QiaochuYuan: Thanks! If a function is Rieman integrable on the product space, will it be Rieman integrable on each component space, and its Rieman integral over each component space is again Riemann integrable over the other component space(s)? – Tim Feb 22 '13 at 03:11
2 Answers
Yes. Both Calculus on Manifolds and Analysis on Manifolds have proofs of this without any reference to measures. The "almost everywhere" conditions turn into something slightly different. This is from Analysis on Manifolds:
Let $Q=A \times B$, where $A$ is a rectangle in $\mathbb{R}^k$ and $B$ is a rectangle in $\mathbb{R}^n$. Let $f:Q\to\mathbb{R}$ be a bounded function; write $f$ in the form $f(x,y)$ for $x\in A$ and $y\in B$. For each $x\in A$, consider the lower and upper integrals $$ \underline\int_{y\in B} f(x,y) \quad\mathrm{and}\quad \overline\int_{y\in B} f(x,y). $$ If $f$ is integrable over $Q$, then these two functions of $x$ are integrable over $A$, and $$ \int_Q f = \int_{x\in A}\underline\int_{y\in B} f(x,y) = \int_{x\in A}\overline\int_{y\in B} f(x,y). $$
I'm not sure what happens to the other part that says under certain conditions, the integrability of $f_x(y) = f(x,y)$ and the existence of $\int |f_x|<\infty$ implies that $f$ is integrable.

- 4,236
-
-
1@Tim: OK, strictly speaking, this isn't the Riemann integral - it's the Darboux integral. So they're just the limits of the ordinary lower and upper sums in single variable calculus. – wj32 Feb 22 '13 at 03:14
To see the difficulties of Fubini with Riemann integrals, study two functions $f$ and $g$ on the rectangle $[0,1]\times[0,1]$ defined by:
(1) $\forall$integer $i\ge0$, $\forall$odd integer $j\in[0,2^i]$, $\forall$integer $k\ge0$, $\forall$odd integer $\ell\in[0,2^k]$, define $f(j/2^i,\ell/2^k)=\delta_{ik}$ (here, $\delta_{ik}$ is the Kronecker delta, equal to one if $i=k$ and $0$ if not) and $g(j/2^i,\ell/2^k)=1/2^i$; and
(2) $\forall x,y\in[0,1]$, if either $x$ or $y$ is not a dyadic rational, define $f(x,y)=0$ and $g(x,y)=0$.
Then both iterated Riemann integrals of $f$ are zero, i.e., $\int_0^1\int_0^1 f(x,y)\,dx\,dy=\int_0^1\int_0^1 f(x,y)\,dy\,dx=0$. However, the Riemann integral, over $[0,1]\times[0,1]$, of $f$ does not exist.
Also, the Riemann integral, over $[0,1]\times[0,1]$, of $g$ is zero. However, $\forall$dyadic rational $x\in[0,1]$, the Riemann integral $\int_0^1 g(x,y)\,dy$ does not exist. Consequently, $\int_0^1\int_0^1 g(x,y)\,dy\,dx$ does not exist, in the Riemann sense.

- 136
-
I have the example of the indicator function for rational numbers in mind, which is not Riemann integrable. Therefore, $\forall$dyadic rational $x\in[0,1]$, the Riemann integral $\int_0^1 g(x,y),dy$ should not exist. But what is the point, that $\int_0^1\int_0^1 f(x,y) dy ,dx = 0$ then holds? Dyadic rationals are also dense in $\mathbb{R}$. Any hint or reference is appreciated. – Christoph May 06 '22 at 09:24