$G'(0) = int_{[0,1] backslash Z(g)} h(x) cdot text{sign}(g(x)) mathrm{d}x$











up vote
2
down vote

favorite












Today during an exam I got the following exercise :




Let $h, g in C^0([0,1], | cdot |_1)$ such that the set : $Z(g) = {x in [0,1] mid g(x) = 0}$ is a finite union of intervals. Then let's defined :
$$ G : t mapsto | g + th |_1$$



If the function $G$ has a derivative at $0$ prove that :
$$G'(0) = int_{[0,1] backslash Z(g)} h(x) cdot sign(g(x)) mathrm{d}x$$




First of all I don't understand how $G$ is defined because do we consider that :
$$G(t) = int_{[0,1]} mid g(x) + th(x) mid mathrm{d}x$$



Or we consider that :



$$G(t) = int_{[0,1]} mid g(t) + th(t) mid mathrm{d}t$$
?



Then I tried considering :
$$frac{G(h) - G(0)}{h}$$
In order to find the derivative. Yet the $mid cdot mid$ make the task not so easy.



So I tried the to split the integrand and study the part : $int_{Z(g)}$
I get (using the second interpretation of $G$) :



$$frac{int_{Z(g)} mid th(t) mid mathrm{d}t}{t} $$



But it doesn't seem to help...










share|cite|improve this question




























    up vote
    2
    down vote

    favorite












    Today during an exam I got the following exercise :




    Let $h, g in C^0([0,1], | cdot |_1)$ such that the set : $Z(g) = {x in [0,1] mid g(x) = 0}$ is a finite union of intervals. Then let's defined :
    $$ G : t mapsto | g + th |_1$$



    If the function $G$ has a derivative at $0$ prove that :
    $$G'(0) = int_{[0,1] backslash Z(g)} h(x) cdot sign(g(x)) mathrm{d}x$$




    First of all I don't understand how $G$ is defined because do we consider that :
    $$G(t) = int_{[0,1]} mid g(x) + th(x) mid mathrm{d}x$$



    Or we consider that :



    $$G(t) = int_{[0,1]} mid g(t) + th(t) mid mathrm{d}t$$
    ?



    Then I tried considering :
    $$frac{G(h) - G(0)}{h}$$
    In order to find the derivative. Yet the $mid cdot mid$ make the task not so easy.



    So I tried the to split the integrand and study the part : $int_{Z(g)}$
    I get (using the second interpretation of $G$) :



    $$frac{int_{Z(g)} mid th(t) mid mathrm{d}t}{t} $$



    But it doesn't seem to help...










    share|cite|improve this question


























      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite











      Today during an exam I got the following exercise :




      Let $h, g in C^0([0,1], | cdot |_1)$ such that the set : $Z(g) = {x in [0,1] mid g(x) = 0}$ is a finite union of intervals. Then let's defined :
      $$ G : t mapsto | g + th |_1$$



      If the function $G$ has a derivative at $0$ prove that :
      $$G'(0) = int_{[0,1] backslash Z(g)} h(x) cdot sign(g(x)) mathrm{d}x$$




      First of all I don't understand how $G$ is defined because do we consider that :
      $$G(t) = int_{[0,1]} mid g(x) + th(x) mid mathrm{d}x$$



      Or we consider that :



      $$G(t) = int_{[0,1]} mid g(t) + th(t) mid mathrm{d}t$$
      ?



      Then I tried considering :
      $$frac{G(h) - G(0)}{h}$$
      In order to find the derivative. Yet the $mid cdot mid$ make the task not so easy.



      So I tried the to split the integrand and study the part : $int_{Z(g)}$
      I get (using the second interpretation of $G$) :



      $$frac{int_{Z(g)} mid th(t) mid mathrm{d}t}{t} $$



      But it doesn't seem to help...










      share|cite|improve this question















      Today during an exam I got the following exercise :




      Let $h, g in C^0([0,1], | cdot |_1)$ such that the set : $Z(g) = {x in [0,1] mid g(x) = 0}$ is a finite union of intervals. Then let's defined :
      $$ G : t mapsto | g + th |_1$$



      If the function $G$ has a derivative at $0$ prove that :
      $$G'(0) = int_{[0,1] backslash Z(g)} h(x) cdot sign(g(x)) mathrm{d}x$$




      First of all I don't understand how $G$ is defined because do we consider that :
      $$G(t) = int_{[0,1]} mid g(x) + th(x) mid mathrm{d}x$$



      Or we consider that :



      $$G(t) = int_{[0,1]} mid g(t) + th(t) mid mathrm{d}t$$
      ?



      Then I tried considering :
      $$frac{G(h) - G(0)}{h}$$
      In order to find the derivative. Yet the $mid cdot mid$ make the task not so easy.



      So I tried the to split the integrand and study the part : $int_{Z(g)}$
      I get (using the second interpretation of $G$) :



      $$frac{int_{Z(g)} mid th(t) mid mathrm{d}t}{t} $$



      But it doesn't seem to help...







      calculus real-analysis integration sequences-and-series derivatives






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Nov 25 at 21:36









      Henry Lee

      1,704218




      1,704218










      asked Nov 25 at 19:27









      DP_q

      856




      856






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          2
          down vote



          accepted










          It has to be
          $$G(t)=int_0^1|g(x)+th(x)|,dx $$
          otherwise $G(t)$ does not depend on $t$. We have
          $$frac{G(t)-G(0)}{t}=int_0^1frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t},dx= $$
          By triangle inequality,
          $$frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t}leq |h(x)|in L^1(0,1) $$
          Thus by dominated convergence, if $G'(0)$ exists, then
          $$G'(0)=int_0^1lim_{tto 0} frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t},dx$$
          Now we distinsguish three cases.




          • If $g(x)=0$, i.e. $xin Z_g$, then $$ lim_{tto 0} frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t}=lim_{tto 0}frac{|t|h(x)}{t}$$


          Notice that the above limit exists if and only if $h(x)=0$, and in this case, it is equal to $0$. Recall that we are assuming that $G'(0)$ exists. Now suppose by contradiction that there existed an $x_0in [0,1]$ such that $g(x_0)=0$ but $h(x_0)neq 0$. Since $Z_g$ is a finite union of intervals, we have $x_0in [a,b]$ with $g(x)=0$ on $[a,b]$. Moreover, since $h(x_0)neq 0$ and $h$ is continuous, we have $h(x)neq 0$ on $(x_0-varepsilon,x_0+varepsilon)subset [a,b]$. Thus the above limit does not exist on a whole interval $(x_0-varepsilon,x_0+varepsilon)$ (not just on $x_0$!). This implies that $G'(0)$ is not defined, contradicting our assumption. Therefore the above limit always exists and is equal to $0$.





          • If $g(x)>0$, then for $t$ small enough we have $g(x)+th(x)>0$. Thus



            $$lim_{tto 0} frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t}=lim_{tto 0} frac{g(x)+th(x)-g(x)}{t}=h(x)=h(x)cdotoperatorname{sign}(g(x))$$




          • Similarly, if $g(x)<0$ then



            $$lim_{tto 0} frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t}=lim_{tto 0} frac{-g(x)-th(x)+g(x)}{t}=-h(x)=h(x)cdotoperatorname{sign}(g(x))$$




          Hence
          $$G'(0)=int_{[0,1]setminus Z_g}h(x)cdot operatorname{sign}(g(x)),dx $$






          share|cite|improve this answer























          • This is very clear, thank you very much for your answer.
            – DP_q
            Nov 25 at 20:31











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3013273%2fg0-int-0-1-backslash-zg-hx-cdot-textsigngx-mathrmdx%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          up vote
          2
          down vote



          accepted










          It has to be
          $$G(t)=int_0^1|g(x)+th(x)|,dx $$
          otherwise $G(t)$ does not depend on $t$. We have
          $$frac{G(t)-G(0)}{t}=int_0^1frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t},dx= $$
          By triangle inequality,
          $$frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t}leq |h(x)|in L^1(0,1) $$
          Thus by dominated convergence, if $G'(0)$ exists, then
          $$G'(0)=int_0^1lim_{tto 0} frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t},dx$$
          Now we distinsguish three cases.




          • If $g(x)=0$, i.e. $xin Z_g$, then $$ lim_{tto 0} frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t}=lim_{tto 0}frac{|t|h(x)}{t}$$


          Notice that the above limit exists if and only if $h(x)=0$, and in this case, it is equal to $0$. Recall that we are assuming that $G'(0)$ exists. Now suppose by contradiction that there existed an $x_0in [0,1]$ such that $g(x_0)=0$ but $h(x_0)neq 0$. Since $Z_g$ is a finite union of intervals, we have $x_0in [a,b]$ with $g(x)=0$ on $[a,b]$. Moreover, since $h(x_0)neq 0$ and $h$ is continuous, we have $h(x)neq 0$ on $(x_0-varepsilon,x_0+varepsilon)subset [a,b]$. Thus the above limit does not exist on a whole interval $(x_0-varepsilon,x_0+varepsilon)$ (not just on $x_0$!). This implies that $G'(0)$ is not defined, contradicting our assumption. Therefore the above limit always exists and is equal to $0$.





          • If $g(x)>0$, then for $t$ small enough we have $g(x)+th(x)>0$. Thus



            $$lim_{tto 0} frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t}=lim_{tto 0} frac{g(x)+th(x)-g(x)}{t}=h(x)=h(x)cdotoperatorname{sign}(g(x))$$




          • Similarly, if $g(x)<0$ then



            $$lim_{tto 0} frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t}=lim_{tto 0} frac{-g(x)-th(x)+g(x)}{t}=-h(x)=h(x)cdotoperatorname{sign}(g(x))$$




          Hence
          $$G'(0)=int_{[0,1]setminus Z_g}h(x)cdot operatorname{sign}(g(x)),dx $$






          share|cite|improve this answer























          • This is very clear, thank you very much for your answer.
            – DP_q
            Nov 25 at 20:31















          up vote
          2
          down vote



          accepted










          It has to be
          $$G(t)=int_0^1|g(x)+th(x)|,dx $$
          otherwise $G(t)$ does not depend on $t$. We have
          $$frac{G(t)-G(0)}{t}=int_0^1frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t},dx= $$
          By triangle inequality,
          $$frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t}leq |h(x)|in L^1(0,1) $$
          Thus by dominated convergence, if $G'(0)$ exists, then
          $$G'(0)=int_0^1lim_{tto 0} frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t},dx$$
          Now we distinsguish three cases.




          • If $g(x)=0$, i.e. $xin Z_g$, then $$ lim_{tto 0} frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t}=lim_{tto 0}frac{|t|h(x)}{t}$$


          Notice that the above limit exists if and only if $h(x)=0$, and in this case, it is equal to $0$. Recall that we are assuming that $G'(0)$ exists. Now suppose by contradiction that there existed an $x_0in [0,1]$ such that $g(x_0)=0$ but $h(x_0)neq 0$. Since $Z_g$ is a finite union of intervals, we have $x_0in [a,b]$ with $g(x)=0$ on $[a,b]$. Moreover, since $h(x_0)neq 0$ and $h$ is continuous, we have $h(x)neq 0$ on $(x_0-varepsilon,x_0+varepsilon)subset [a,b]$. Thus the above limit does not exist on a whole interval $(x_0-varepsilon,x_0+varepsilon)$ (not just on $x_0$!). This implies that $G'(0)$ is not defined, contradicting our assumption. Therefore the above limit always exists and is equal to $0$.





          • If $g(x)>0$, then for $t$ small enough we have $g(x)+th(x)>0$. Thus



            $$lim_{tto 0} frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t}=lim_{tto 0} frac{g(x)+th(x)-g(x)}{t}=h(x)=h(x)cdotoperatorname{sign}(g(x))$$




          • Similarly, if $g(x)<0$ then



            $$lim_{tto 0} frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t}=lim_{tto 0} frac{-g(x)-th(x)+g(x)}{t}=-h(x)=h(x)cdotoperatorname{sign}(g(x))$$




          Hence
          $$G'(0)=int_{[0,1]setminus Z_g}h(x)cdot operatorname{sign}(g(x)),dx $$






          share|cite|improve this answer























          • This is very clear, thank you very much for your answer.
            – DP_q
            Nov 25 at 20:31













          up vote
          2
          down vote



          accepted







          up vote
          2
          down vote



          accepted






          It has to be
          $$G(t)=int_0^1|g(x)+th(x)|,dx $$
          otherwise $G(t)$ does not depend on $t$. We have
          $$frac{G(t)-G(0)}{t}=int_0^1frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t},dx= $$
          By triangle inequality,
          $$frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t}leq |h(x)|in L^1(0,1) $$
          Thus by dominated convergence, if $G'(0)$ exists, then
          $$G'(0)=int_0^1lim_{tto 0} frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t},dx$$
          Now we distinsguish three cases.




          • If $g(x)=0$, i.e. $xin Z_g$, then $$ lim_{tto 0} frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t}=lim_{tto 0}frac{|t|h(x)}{t}$$


          Notice that the above limit exists if and only if $h(x)=0$, and in this case, it is equal to $0$. Recall that we are assuming that $G'(0)$ exists. Now suppose by contradiction that there existed an $x_0in [0,1]$ such that $g(x_0)=0$ but $h(x_0)neq 0$. Since $Z_g$ is a finite union of intervals, we have $x_0in [a,b]$ with $g(x)=0$ on $[a,b]$. Moreover, since $h(x_0)neq 0$ and $h$ is continuous, we have $h(x)neq 0$ on $(x_0-varepsilon,x_0+varepsilon)subset [a,b]$. Thus the above limit does not exist on a whole interval $(x_0-varepsilon,x_0+varepsilon)$ (not just on $x_0$!). This implies that $G'(0)$ is not defined, contradicting our assumption. Therefore the above limit always exists and is equal to $0$.





          • If $g(x)>0$, then for $t$ small enough we have $g(x)+th(x)>0$. Thus



            $$lim_{tto 0} frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t}=lim_{tto 0} frac{g(x)+th(x)-g(x)}{t}=h(x)=h(x)cdotoperatorname{sign}(g(x))$$




          • Similarly, if $g(x)<0$ then



            $$lim_{tto 0} frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t}=lim_{tto 0} frac{-g(x)-th(x)+g(x)}{t}=-h(x)=h(x)cdotoperatorname{sign}(g(x))$$




          Hence
          $$G'(0)=int_{[0,1]setminus Z_g}h(x)cdot operatorname{sign}(g(x)),dx $$






          share|cite|improve this answer














          It has to be
          $$G(t)=int_0^1|g(x)+th(x)|,dx $$
          otherwise $G(t)$ does not depend on $t$. We have
          $$frac{G(t)-G(0)}{t}=int_0^1frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t},dx= $$
          By triangle inequality,
          $$frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t}leq |h(x)|in L^1(0,1) $$
          Thus by dominated convergence, if $G'(0)$ exists, then
          $$G'(0)=int_0^1lim_{tto 0} frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t},dx$$
          Now we distinsguish three cases.




          • If $g(x)=0$, i.e. $xin Z_g$, then $$ lim_{tto 0} frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t}=lim_{tto 0}frac{|t|h(x)}{t}$$


          Notice that the above limit exists if and only if $h(x)=0$, and in this case, it is equal to $0$. Recall that we are assuming that $G'(0)$ exists. Now suppose by contradiction that there existed an $x_0in [0,1]$ such that $g(x_0)=0$ but $h(x_0)neq 0$. Since $Z_g$ is a finite union of intervals, we have $x_0in [a,b]$ with $g(x)=0$ on $[a,b]$. Moreover, since $h(x_0)neq 0$ and $h$ is continuous, we have $h(x)neq 0$ on $(x_0-varepsilon,x_0+varepsilon)subset [a,b]$. Thus the above limit does not exist on a whole interval $(x_0-varepsilon,x_0+varepsilon)$ (not just on $x_0$!). This implies that $G'(0)$ is not defined, contradicting our assumption. Therefore the above limit always exists and is equal to $0$.





          • If $g(x)>0$, then for $t$ small enough we have $g(x)+th(x)>0$. Thus



            $$lim_{tto 0} frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t}=lim_{tto 0} frac{g(x)+th(x)-g(x)}{t}=h(x)=h(x)cdotoperatorname{sign}(g(x))$$




          • Similarly, if $g(x)<0$ then



            $$lim_{tto 0} frac{|g(x)+th(x)|-|g(x)|}{t}=lim_{tto 0} frac{-g(x)-th(x)+g(x)}{t}=-h(x)=h(x)cdotoperatorname{sign}(g(x))$$




          Hence
          $$G'(0)=int_{[0,1]setminus Z_g}h(x)cdot operatorname{sign}(g(x)),dx $$







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Nov 25 at 20:03

























          answered Nov 25 at 19:54









          Lorenzo Quarisa

          3,146316




          3,146316












          • This is very clear, thank you very much for your answer.
            – DP_q
            Nov 25 at 20:31


















          • This is very clear, thank you very much for your answer.
            – DP_q
            Nov 25 at 20:31
















          This is very clear, thank you very much for your answer.
          – DP_q
          Nov 25 at 20:31




          This is very clear, thank you very much for your answer.
          – DP_q
          Nov 25 at 20:31


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





          Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


          Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3013273%2fg0-int-0-1-backslash-zg-hx-cdot-textsigngx-mathrmdx%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Wiesbaden

          Marschland

          Dieringhausen