Saturday, June 1, 2019

real analysis - Linearity of indefinite integrals


I am trying to make sense of 'linearity' of indefinite integrals.


Let us restrict to the 1-dimensional case. My point is that 0dx=CR, so I cannot really say that is a linear operator. Indeed, linearity of f:VW (V,W vector spaces) implies f(0)=0.


In order to define :VW in a good way, I should introduce an equivalence relation on W saying that two elements are in the same equivalence class if they coincide up to a constant. So becomes linear as operator :VW/. Assume a primitive of f is F. Then f(x)dx=[F(x)]W/ or, as usual, F(x)+C,CR. So I would say that the result of an indefinite integral is actually a coset in some quotient vector space. This even solves the problem that :VW is not a well defined function.


My question is: is this a good way to think, or is there a better one? I have never seen such a thing, neither in a course of Analysis, nor in the books I have read. I am wondering why. It seems a very natural thing to do when introducing indefinite integrals.


Answer



Of course this is a good way to think. But we need some extra notation. Given an interval JR call two functions F:JR, G:JR equivalent if FG is constant on J. It is then easy to see that the equivalence classes F form a real vector space in the obvious way. Let V be the subspace generated by the C1-functions on J. Then D:VC0(J),FF is a linear isomorphism with inverse the undetermined integral: :ff(t)dt . Thereby each "differentiation rule" generates an "integration rule" as follows: F=ff(t)dt=F(t) . And on and on.



No comments:

Post a Comment

analysis - Injection, making bijection

I have injection f:AB and I want to get bijection. Can I just resting codomain to f(A)? I know that every function i...