3

In Michael Spivak's Calculus (fourth edition), he proves that if $f$ is continuous on $[a,b]$, then it is integrable on $[a,b]$. Here is an extract from the proof (page 266, chapter 13). (See the screenshot below for an explanation of the notation.)

Notice, first, that $f$ is bounded on $[a,b]$, because it is continuous on $[a,b]$. To prove that $f$ is integrable on $[a,b]$, we want to show that for every $\varepsilon>0$ there is a partition $P$ of $[a,b]$ such that $$ U(f,P)-L(f,P)<\varepsilon \, . $$ Since $f$ is continuous on $[a,b]$, it is uniformly continuous on $[a,b]$, and so there is some $\delta>0$ such that for all $x$ and $y$ in $[a,b]$, $$ |x-y|<\delta\implies|f(x)-f(y)|<\frac{\varepsilon}{2(b-a)} \tag{1}\label{1} \, . $$ The trick is simply to choose a partition $P=\{t_0,\dots,t_n\}$ such that each $|t_i-t_{I-1}|<\delta$. Then for each $i$ we have $$ \forall x,y\in[t_{i-1},t_i]:|f(x)-f(y)|<\frac{\varepsilon}{2(b-a)} \, , $$ and it follows easily that $$ M_i-m_i\le\frac{\varepsilon}{2(b-a)}<\frac{\varepsilon}{b-a} \tag{2}\label{2}\, . $$

So far, I think I understand the proof: if $x,y\in[t_{i-1},t_i]$, then $|x-y|\le|t_i-t_{i-1}|<\delta$, and so $|f(x)-f(y)|<\frac{\varepsilon}{2(b-a)}$. However, why does the first inequality on line $\eqref{2}$ have to be non-strict? Since $f$ is continuous on $[a,b]$, shouldn't there be numbers $x,y\in[t_{i-1},t_i]$ such that $f(x)=M_i$ and $f(y)=m_i$? Then, using $\eqref{1}$, $$ |f(x)-f(y)|=|M_i-m_i|=M_i-m_i\color{red}{<}\frac{\varepsilon}{2(b-a)} \, . $$ If my line of reasoning is correct, then we could simplify the proof a little by noting that $$ |x-y|<\delta\implies|f(x)-f(y)|<\frac{\varepsilon}{b-a} \, , $$ and so $$ M_i-m_i<\frac{\varepsilon}{b-a} \, . $$


Notation explanation:

Definitions

Joe
  • 19,636
  • 3
    I think that you are right – but does it really matter? – Martin R Aug 31 '21 at 19:12
  • 1
    @MartinR: Not really. If I was wrong, then that might have been because I had misunderstood the proof in a more fundamental way. That's the reason I asked this question. – Joe Aug 31 '21 at 19:14
  • Has he already introduced the fact that continuous functions achieve a maximum and a minimum on a compact set/interval? If he doesn't have the extreme value theorem proved yet, that would be why – Alan Aug 31 '21 at 19:15
  • 1
    @Alan: Yes, he proved it in Chapter $8$, "Least Upper Bounds". – Joe Aug 31 '21 at 19:18
  • Here is your “simplified” proof: https://math.stackexchange.com/q/253447/42969, https://math.stackexchange.com/a/2825793/42969. – Martin R Aug 31 '21 at 19:18
  • Then yeah, looks like he was just being lazy and went with the extra over 2 factor to take into account that max/min might not be achieved rather than noting they will be. – Alan Aug 31 '21 at 19:20
  • 1
    @Alan: you call it "lazy", but I'd call it economical and kind. Why give the reader more work to do to check a tight bound when you can you can give a looser bound that does the job? In engineering terms, with $\epsilon$-$\delta$ arguments, we are looking for hammers not spanners. – Rob Arthan Aug 31 '21 at 23:41

0 Answers0