Skip to main content

calculus and analysis - How to express continuity assumption for Integrate?


I am wondering if it is possible, and how if so, to express function continuity in the assumptions for the definite form of Integrate.


First of all, while


Integrate[g'[x], x]

yields g[x],


Integrate[g'[x], {x, a, b}]

does not result in g[b] - g[a], since this may not hold if g'[x] has discontinuities in the interval. Is it possible to add an assumption about the continuity of g'[x] everywhere in $\mathbb{R}$ so that this integral computes as g[b] - g[a]? I tried multiple expressions, but MMA keeps returning the expression unevaluated. This does not work:


ClearAll[g, x, a, b];

Assuming[{
{x, a, b} \[Element] Reals,
ForAll[x, {g[x], g'[x], g''[x]} \[Element] Reals],
ForAll[x, -\[Infinity] < g[x] < \[Infinity] &&
-\[Infinity] < g'[x] < \[Infinity] &&
-\[Infinity] < g''[x] < \[Infinity]]
},
Integrate[g'[x], {x, a, b}] == (g[b] - g[a]) // FullSimplify
]


The last ForAll seems even weaker that the first, but I tried it alone, and both together, and threw in a boundedness condition for the g[x] itself into the pot, but all to no avail. Am I forgetting something else about the integral in general, or simply not expressing the assumptions sensibly to the MMA solver?




This is stemming from my futile attempt to figure out an answer to another question. It seems to me that of the 3 assumptions given there, any 2 are sufficient, provided $\int_{0}^{\infty} g'(x) dx = \lim_{x\to\infty}g(x) - g(0)$ holds (and both g and g' are continuous in this case). While taking any one of the three out prevents the (reproducible) kernel crash that the OP experienced, it does nothing to arrive at the solution.




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - Filling between two spheres in SphericalPlot3D

Manipulate[ SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, Mesh -> None, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], {n, 0, 1}] I cant' seem to be able to make a filling between two spheres. I've already tried the obvious Filling -> {1 -> {2}} but Mathematica doesn't seem to like that option. Is there any easy way around this or ... Answer There is no built-in filling in SphericalPlot3D . One option is to use ParametricPlot3D to draw the surfaces between the two shells: Manipulate[ Show[SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], ParametricPlot3D[{ r {Sin[t] Cos[1.5 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[1.5 Pi], Cos[t]}, r {Sin[t] Cos[0 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[0 Pi], Cos[t]}}, {r, 1, 2 - n}, {t, 0, Pi}, PlotStyle -> Yellow, Mesh -> {2, 15}]], {n, 0, 1}]

plotting - Plot 4D data with color as 4th dimension

I have a list of 4D data (x position, y position, amplitude, wavelength). I want to plot x, y, and amplitude on a 3D plot and have the color of the points correspond to the wavelength. I have seen many examples using functions to define color but my wavelength cannot be expressed by an analytic function. Is there a simple way to do this? Answer Here a another possible way to visualize 4D data: data = Flatten[Table[{x, y, x^2 + y^2, Sin[x - y]}, {x, -Pi, Pi,Pi/10}, {y,-Pi,Pi, Pi/10}], 1]; You can use the function Point along with VertexColors . Now the points are places using the first three elements and the color is determined by the fourth. In this case I used Hue, but you can use whatever you prefer. Graphics3D[ Point[data[[All, 1 ;; 3]], VertexColors -> Hue /@ data[[All, 4]]], Axes -> True, BoxRatios -> {1, 1, 1/GoldenRatio}]

plotting - Mathematica: 3D plot based on combined 2D graphs

I have several sigmoidal fits to 3 different datasets, with mean fit predictions plus the 95% confidence limits (not symmetrical around the mean) and the actual data. I would now like to show these different 2D plots projected in 3D as in but then using proper perspective. In the link here they give some solutions to combine the plots using isometric perspective, but I would like to use proper 3 point perspective. Any thoughts? Also any way to show the mean points per time point for each series plus or minus the standard error on the mean would be cool too, either using points+vertical bars, or using spheres plus tubes. Below are some test data and the fit function I am using. Note that I am working on a logit(proportion) scale and that the final vertical scale is Log10(percentage). (* some test data *) data = Table[Null, {i, 4}]; data[[1]] = {{1, -5.8}, {2, -5.4}, {3, -0.8}, {4, -0.2}, {5, 4.6}, {1, -6.4}, {2, -5.6}, {3, -0.7}, {4, 0.04}, {5, 1.0}, {1, -6.8}, {2, -4.7}, {3, -1.