Dominated Convergence Theorem - Discussion of The Assumptions

Discussion of The Assumptions

The assumption that the sequence is dominated by some integrable g can not be dispensed with. This may be seen as follows: define ƒn(x) = n for x in the interval (0, 1/n] and ƒn(x) = 0 otherwise. Any g which dominates the sequence must also dominate the pointwise supremum h = supn ƒn. Observe that

\int_0^1 h(x)\,dx \ge \int_{1/m}^1{h(x)\,dx} = \sum_{n=1}^{m-1} \int_{\left(\frac1{n+1},\frac1n\right]}{n\,dx} = \sum_{n=1}^{m-1} \frac{1}{n+1} \to \infty \quad \text{as }m\to\infty

by the divergence of the harmonic series. Hence, the monotonicity of the Lebesgue integral tells us that there exists no integrable function which dominates the sequence on . A direct calculation shows that integration and pointwise limit do not commute for this sequence:

\int_0^1 \lim_{n\to\infty} f_n(x)\,dx = 0 \neq 1 = \lim_{n\to\infty}\int_0^1 f_n(x)\,dx,

because the pointwise limit of the sequence is the zero function. Note that the sequence {ƒn} is not even uniformly integrable, hence also the Vitali convergence theorem is not applicable.

Read more about this topic:  Dominated Convergence Theorem

Famous quotes containing the words discussion of, discussion and/or assumptions:

    “Americans, unhappily, have the most remarkable ability to alchemize all bitter truths into an innocuous but piquant confection and to transform their moral contradictions, or public discussion of such contradictions, into a proud decoration, such as are given for heroism on the battle field.”
    —James Baldwin (1924–1987)

    “There exist few things more tedious than a discussion of general ideas inflicted by author or reader upon a work of fiction.”
    —Vladimir Nabokov (1899–1977)

    “Unlike Boswell, whose Journals record a long and unrewarded search for a self, Johnson possessed a formidable one. His life in London—he arrived twenty-five years earlier than Boswell—turned out to be a long defense of the values of Augustan humanism against the pressures of other possibilities. In contrast to Boswell, Johnson possesses an identity not because he has gone in search of one, but because of his allegiance to a set of assumptions that he regards as objectively true.”
    —Jeffrey Hart (b. 1930)