Proving that $f(x)=0$ in all points of continuity if $f$ is orthogonal to all polynomials












4












$begingroup$


Suppose that the function $f$ is:



1) Riemann integrable (not necessarily continuous) function on $big[a,b big]$;



2) $forall n geq 0$ $int_{a}^{b}{f(x) x^n} = 0$ (in particular, it means that the function is orthogonal to all polynomials).



Prove that $f(x) = 0$ in all points of continuity $f$.






real-analysis functional-analysis riemann-integration







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I'm not sure if it would work, but have you tried using repeated integration by parts?
    $endgroup$
    – Seth
    Nov 25 '18 at 22:54










  • $begingroup$
    For integration by parts $f$ have to be differentiable but it is not.
    $endgroup$
    – ModeGen
    Nov 25 '18 at 23:15










  • $begingroup$
    No, because you are differentiating $x^n$, so you would be integrating $f(x)$, which is okay
    $endgroup$
    – Seth
    Nov 25 '18 at 23:16










  • $begingroup$
    It will not lead to anything.
    $endgroup$
    – ModeGen
    Nov 25 '18 at 23:19










  • $begingroup$
    One way I see is to prove that $int_a^b{f(x)^2} = 0$. Then from here we will be able to easily derive the statement.
    $endgroup$
    – ModeGen
    Nov 25 '18 at 23:22
















4












$begingroup$


Suppose that the function $f$ is:



1) Riemann integrable (not necessarily continuous) function on $big[a,b big]$;



2) $forall n geq 0$ $int_{a}^{b}{f(x) x^n} = 0$ (in particular, it means that the function is orthogonal to all polynomials).



Prove that $f(x) = 0$ in all points of continuity $f$.






real-analysis functional-analysis riemann-integration







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I'm not sure if it would work, but have you tried using repeated integration by parts?
    $endgroup$
    – Seth
    Nov 25 '18 at 22:54










  • $begingroup$
    For integration by parts $f$ have to be differentiable but it is not.
    $endgroup$
    – ModeGen
    Nov 25 '18 at 23:15










  • $begingroup$
    No, because you are differentiating $x^n$, so you would be integrating $f(x)$, which is okay
    $endgroup$
    – Seth
    Nov 25 '18 at 23:16










  • $begingroup$
    It will not lead to anything.
    $endgroup$
    – ModeGen
    Nov 25 '18 at 23:19










  • $begingroup$
    One way I see is to prove that $int_a^b{f(x)^2} = 0$. Then from here we will be able to easily derive the statement.
    $endgroup$
    – ModeGen
    Nov 25 '18 at 23:22














4












4








4





$begingroup$


Suppose that the function $f$ is:



1) Riemann integrable (not necessarily continuous) function on $big[a,b big]$;



2) $forall n geq 0$ $int_{a}^{b}{f(x) x^n} = 0$ (in particular, it means that the function is orthogonal to all polynomials).



Prove that $f(x) = 0$ in all points of continuity $f$.






real-analysis functional-analysis riemann-integration







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




Suppose that the function $f$ is:



1) Riemann integrable (not necessarily continuous) function on $big[a,b big]$;



2) $forall n geq 0$ $int_{a}^{b}{f(x) x^n} = 0$ (in particular, it means that the function is orthogonal to all polynomials).



Prove that $f(x) = 0$ in all points of continuity $f$.






real-analysis functional-analysis riemann-integration




real-analysis functional-analysis riemann-integration






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Nov 25 '18 at 22:51









ModeGenModeGen

333




333












  • $begingroup$
    I'm not sure if it would work, but have you tried using repeated integration by parts?
    $endgroup$
    – Seth
    Nov 25 '18 at 22:54










  • $begingroup$
    For integration by parts $f$ have to be differentiable but it is not.
    $endgroup$
    – ModeGen
    Nov 25 '18 at 23:15










  • $begingroup$
    No, because you are differentiating $x^n$, so you would be integrating $f(x)$, which is okay
    $endgroup$
    – Seth
    Nov 25 '18 at 23:16










  • $begingroup$
    It will not lead to anything.
    $endgroup$
    – ModeGen
    Nov 25 '18 at 23:19










  • $begingroup$
    One way I see is to prove that $int_a^b{f(x)^2} = 0$. Then from here we will be able to easily derive the statement.
    $endgroup$
    – ModeGen
    Nov 25 '18 at 23:22


















  • $begingroup$
    I'm not sure if it would work, but have you tried using repeated integration by parts?
    $endgroup$
    – Seth
    Nov 25 '18 at 22:54










  • $begingroup$
    For integration by parts $f$ have to be differentiable but it is not.
    $endgroup$
    – ModeGen
    Nov 25 '18 at 23:15










  • $begingroup$
    No, because you are differentiating $x^n$, so you would be integrating $f(x)$, which is okay
    $endgroup$
    – Seth
    Nov 25 '18 at 23:16










  • $begingroup$
    It will not lead to anything.
    $endgroup$
    – ModeGen
    Nov 25 '18 at 23:19










  • $begingroup$
    One way I see is to prove that $int_a^b{f(x)^2} = 0$. Then from here we will be able to easily derive the statement.
    $endgroup$
    – ModeGen
    Nov 25 '18 at 23:22
















$begingroup$
I'm not sure if it would work, but have you tried using repeated integration by parts?
$endgroup$
– Seth
Nov 25 '18 at 22:54




$begingroup$
I'm not sure if it would work, but have you tried using repeated integration by parts?
$endgroup$
– Seth
Nov 25 '18 at 22:54












$begingroup$
For integration by parts $f$ have to be differentiable but it is not.
$endgroup$
– ModeGen
Nov 25 '18 at 23:15




$begingroup$
For integration by parts $f$ have to be differentiable but it is not.
$endgroup$
– ModeGen
Nov 25 '18 at 23:15












$begingroup$
No, because you are differentiating $x^n$, so you would be integrating $f(x)$, which is okay
$endgroup$
– Seth
Nov 25 '18 at 23:16




$begingroup$
No, because you are differentiating $x^n$, so you would be integrating $f(x)$, which is okay
$endgroup$
– Seth
Nov 25 '18 at 23:16












$begingroup$
It will not lead to anything.
$endgroup$
– ModeGen
Nov 25 '18 at 23:19




$begingroup$
It will not lead to anything.
$endgroup$
– ModeGen
Nov 25 '18 at 23:19












$begingroup$
One way I see is to prove that $int_a^b{f(x)^2} = 0$. Then from here we will be able to easily derive the statement.
$endgroup$
– ModeGen
Nov 25 '18 at 23:22




$begingroup$
One way I see is to prove that $int_a^b{f(x)^2} = 0$. Then from here we will be able to easily derive the statement.
$endgroup$
– ModeGen
Nov 25 '18 at 23:22










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

To keep the notation simple, suppose $f$ is Riemann integrable on $[-1,1],$ $f$ is continuous at $0,$ and $ int_{-1}^1 p(x)f(x), dx =0$ for all polynomials $p.$ We want to show $f(0)=0.$



Suppose, to reach a contradiction, that this fails. Then WLOG $f(0)>0.$ By the continuity of $f$ at $0,$ there exists $0<delta < 1$ such that $f>f(0)/2$ in $[-delta,delta].$



Define $p_n(x) = sqrt n(1-x^2)^n.$ Then



$$|int_{delta}^1 fp_n|le Msqrt n(1-delta^2)^n.$$



The right hand side $to 0$ as $nto infty.$ Same thing for the integral over $[-1,-delta].$



On the other hand, for large $n$ we have



$$int_{-delta}^{delta} fp_n ge (f(0)/2)int_{-delta}^{delta} sqrt n(1-x^2)^n, dx ge (f(0)/2)sqrt nint_{0}^{1/sqrt n} (1-x^2)^n, dx$$ $$ = int_0^1 (1-y^2/n)^n,dy to int_0^1 e^{-y^2},dy >0.$$



This proves that $int_{-1}^1 p_n(x)f(x), dx >0 $ for large $n,$ and we have our contradiction.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    4












    $begingroup$

    Because $f$ is a 2-norm limit of polynomials, you can deduce that $int_a^bf(x)^2=0$.



    Now suppose that $f(x_0)ne0$ for some $x_0$ where $f$ is continuous. Take $varepsilon=|f(x_0)|/2$; by continuity at $x_0$, there exists $delta>0$ such that $|f(x)-f(x_0)|<|f(x_0)|/2$ for all $xin (x_0-delta,x_0+delta)$. From the reverse triangle inequality we have
    $$
    |f(x_0)|-|f(x)|<|f(x_0)|/2,
    $$
    so $|f(x)|>|f(x_0)|/2$. Then
    $$
    int_a^b f(x)^2geqint_{x_0-delta}^{x_0+delta}f(x)^2geqint_{x_0-delta}^{x_0+delta}f(x)^2geqint_{x_0-delta}^{x_0+delta}f(x_0)^2/4=delta f(x_0)^2/2>0,
    $$
    a contradiction. So $f(x_0)=0$.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      We can not use Weierstrass Approximation Theorem because $f(x)$ is not continuous but only Riemann integrable.
      $endgroup$
      – ModeGen
      Nov 26 '18 at 7:47










    • $begingroup$
      Indeed. I was trying to avoid using something more sophisticated, like measure theory or convolutions, to simplify the argument. Do you know any of those two?
      $endgroup$
      – Martin Argerami
      Nov 26 '18 at 14:23












    • $begingroup$
      I know the basics of the measure theory.
      $endgroup$
      – ModeGen
      Nov 26 '18 at 14:39










    • $begingroup$
      In measure theory, one proves that the polynomials are dense in the continuous functions when you when you use the 2-norm.
      $endgroup$
      – Martin Argerami
      Nov 26 '18 at 14:59



















    2












    $begingroup$

    If you know something about Fourier analysis, you can use the Fejer kernel and the following to conclude that $f=0$ at all points of continuity:
    $$
    int_{a}^{b}f(x)e^{-isx}dx = sum_{n=0}^{infty}frac{(-is)^n}{n!}int_{a}^{b} f(x)x^n dx = 0,;;; sinmathbb{R}.
    $$






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













      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',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      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%2f3013529%2fproving-that-fx-0-in-all-points-of-continuity-if-f-is-orthogonal-to-all-po%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes








      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      2












      $begingroup$

      To keep the notation simple, suppose $f$ is Riemann integrable on $[-1,1],$ $f$ is continuous at $0,$ and $ int_{-1}^1 p(x)f(x), dx =0$ for all polynomials $p.$ We want to show $f(0)=0.$



      Suppose, to reach a contradiction, that this fails. Then WLOG $f(0)>0.$ By the continuity of $f$ at $0,$ there exists $0<delta < 1$ such that $f>f(0)/2$ in $[-delta,delta].$



      Define $p_n(x) = sqrt n(1-x^2)^n.$ Then



      $$|int_{delta}^1 fp_n|le Msqrt n(1-delta^2)^n.$$



      The right hand side $to 0$ as $nto infty.$ Same thing for the integral over $[-1,-delta].$



      On the other hand, for large $n$ we have



      $$int_{-delta}^{delta} fp_n ge (f(0)/2)int_{-delta}^{delta} sqrt n(1-x^2)^n, dx ge (f(0)/2)sqrt nint_{0}^{1/sqrt n} (1-x^2)^n, dx$$ $$ = int_0^1 (1-y^2/n)^n,dy to int_0^1 e^{-y^2},dy >0.$$



      This proves that $int_{-1}^1 p_n(x)f(x), dx >0 $ for large $n,$ and we have our contradiction.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$


















        2












        $begingroup$

        To keep the notation simple, suppose $f$ is Riemann integrable on $[-1,1],$ $f$ is continuous at $0,$ and $ int_{-1}^1 p(x)f(x), dx =0$ for all polynomials $p.$ We want to show $f(0)=0.$



        Suppose, to reach a contradiction, that this fails. Then WLOG $f(0)>0.$ By the continuity of $f$ at $0,$ there exists $0<delta < 1$ such that $f>f(0)/2$ in $[-delta,delta].$



        Define $p_n(x) = sqrt n(1-x^2)^n.$ Then



        $$|int_{delta}^1 fp_n|le Msqrt n(1-delta^2)^n.$$



        The right hand side $to 0$ as $nto infty.$ Same thing for the integral over $[-1,-delta].$



        On the other hand, for large $n$ we have



        $$int_{-delta}^{delta} fp_n ge (f(0)/2)int_{-delta}^{delta} sqrt n(1-x^2)^n, dx ge (f(0)/2)sqrt nint_{0}^{1/sqrt n} (1-x^2)^n, dx$$ $$ = int_0^1 (1-y^2/n)^n,dy to int_0^1 e^{-y^2},dy >0.$$



        This proves that $int_{-1}^1 p_n(x)f(x), dx >0 $ for large $n,$ and we have our contradiction.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$
















          2












          2








          2





          $begingroup$

          To keep the notation simple, suppose $f$ is Riemann integrable on $[-1,1],$ $f$ is continuous at $0,$ and $ int_{-1}^1 p(x)f(x), dx =0$ for all polynomials $p.$ We want to show $f(0)=0.$



          Suppose, to reach a contradiction, that this fails. Then WLOG $f(0)>0.$ By the continuity of $f$ at $0,$ there exists $0<delta < 1$ such that $f>f(0)/2$ in $[-delta,delta].$



          Define $p_n(x) = sqrt n(1-x^2)^n.$ Then



          $$|int_{delta}^1 fp_n|le Msqrt n(1-delta^2)^n.$$



          The right hand side $to 0$ as $nto infty.$ Same thing for the integral over $[-1,-delta].$



          On the other hand, for large $n$ we have



          $$int_{-delta}^{delta} fp_n ge (f(0)/2)int_{-delta}^{delta} sqrt n(1-x^2)^n, dx ge (f(0)/2)sqrt nint_{0}^{1/sqrt n} (1-x^2)^n, dx$$ $$ = int_0^1 (1-y^2/n)^n,dy to int_0^1 e^{-y^2},dy >0.$$



          This proves that $int_{-1}^1 p_n(x)f(x), dx >0 $ for large $n,$ and we have our contradiction.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          To keep the notation simple, suppose $f$ is Riemann integrable on $[-1,1],$ $f$ is continuous at $0,$ and $ int_{-1}^1 p(x)f(x), dx =0$ for all polynomials $p.$ We want to show $f(0)=0.$



          Suppose, to reach a contradiction, that this fails. Then WLOG $f(0)>0.$ By the continuity of $f$ at $0,$ there exists $0<delta < 1$ such that $f>f(0)/2$ in $[-delta,delta].$



          Define $p_n(x) = sqrt n(1-x^2)^n.$ Then



          $$|int_{delta}^1 fp_n|le Msqrt n(1-delta^2)^n.$$



          The right hand side $to 0$ as $nto infty.$ Same thing for the integral over $[-1,-delta].$



          On the other hand, for large $n$ we have



          $$int_{-delta}^{delta} fp_n ge (f(0)/2)int_{-delta}^{delta} sqrt n(1-x^2)^n, dx ge (f(0)/2)sqrt nint_{0}^{1/sqrt n} (1-x^2)^n, dx$$ $$ = int_0^1 (1-y^2/n)^n,dy to int_0^1 e^{-y^2},dy >0.$$



          This proves that $int_{-1}^1 p_n(x)f(x), dx >0 $ for large $n,$ and we have our contradiction.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Nov 26 '18 at 18:48









          zhw.zhw.

          71.9k43075




          71.9k43075























              4












              $begingroup$

              Because $f$ is a 2-norm limit of polynomials, you can deduce that $int_a^bf(x)^2=0$.



              Now suppose that $f(x_0)ne0$ for some $x_0$ where $f$ is continuous. Take $varepsilon=|f(x_0)|/2$; by continuity at $x_0$, there exists $delta>0$ such that $|f(x)-f(x_0)|<|f(x_0)|/2$ for all $xin (x_0-delta,x_0+delta)$. From the reverse triangle inequality we have
              $$
              |f(x_0)|-|f(x)|<|f(x_0)|/2,
              $$
              so $|f(x)|>|f(x_0)|/2$. Then
              $$
              int_a^b f(x)^2geqint_{x_0-delta}^{x_0+delta}f(x)^2geqint_{x_0-delta}^{x_0+delta}f(x)^2geqint_{x_0-delta}^{x_0+delta}f(x_0)^2/4=delta f(x_0)^2/2>0,
              $$
              a contradiction. So $f(x_0)=0$.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$













              • $begingroup$
                We can not use Weierstrass Approximation Theorem because $f(x)$ is not continuous but only Riemann integrable.
                $endgroup$
                – ModeGen
                Nov 26 '18 at 7:47










              • $begingroup$
                Indeed. I was trying to avoid using something more sophisticated, like measure theory or convolutions, to simplify the argument. Do you know any of those two?
                $endgroup$
                – Martin Argerami
                Nov 26 '18 at 14:23












              • $begingroup$
                I know the basics of the measure theory.
                $endgroup$
                – ModeGen
                Nov 26 '18 at 14:39










              • $begingroup$
                In measure theory, one proves that the polynomials are dense in the continuous functions when you when you use the 2-norm.
                $endgroup$
                – Martin Argerami
                Nov 26 '18 at 14:59
















              4












              $begingroup$

              Because $f$ is a 2-norm limit of polynomials, you can deduce that $int_a^bf(x)^2=0$.



              Now suppose that $f(x_0)ne0$ for some $x_0$ where $f$ is continuous. Take $varepsilon=|f(x_0)|/2$; by continuity at $x_0$, there exists $delta>0$ such that $|f(x)-f(x_0)|<|f(x_0)|/2$ for all $xin (x_0-delta,x_0+delta)$. From the reverse triangle inequality we have
              $$
              |f(x_0)|-|f(x)|<|f(x_0)|/2,
              $$
              so $|f(x)|>|f(x_0)|/2$. Then
              $$
              int_a^b f(x)^2geqint_{x_0-delta}^{x_0+delta}f(x)^2geqint_{x_0-delta}^{x_0+delta}f(x)^2geqint_{x_0-delta}^{x_0+delta}f(x_0)^2/4=delta f(x_0)^2/2>0,
              $$
              a contradiction. So $f(x_0)=0$.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$













              • $begingroup$
                We can not use Weierstrass Approximation Theorem because $f(x)$ is not continuous but only Riemann integrable.
                $endgroup$
                – ModeGen
                Nov 26 '18 at 7:47










              • $begingroup$
                Indeed. I was trying to avoid using something more sophisticated, like measure theory or convolutions, to simplify the argument. Do you know any of those two?
                $endgroup$
                – Martin Argerami
                Nov 26 '18 at 14:23












              • $begingroup$
                I know the basics of the measure theory.
                $endgroup$
                – ModeGen
                Nov 26 '18 at 14:39










              • $begingroup$
                In measure theory, one proves that the polynomials are dense in the continuous functions when you when you use the 2-norm.
                $endgroup$
                – Martin Argerami
                Nov 26 '18 at 14:59














              4












              4








              4





              $begingroup$

              Because $f$ is a 2-norm limit of polynomials, you can deduce that $int_a^bf(x)^2=0$.



              Now suppose that $f(x_0)ne0$ for some $x_0$ where $f$ is continuous. Take $varepsilon=|f(x_0)|/2$; by continuity at $x_0$, there exists $delta>0$ such that $|f(x)-f(x_0)|<|f(x_0)|/2$ for all $xin (x_0-delta,x_0+delta)$. From the reverse triangle inequality we have
              $$
              |f(x_0)|-|f(x)|<|f(x_0)|/2,
              $$
              so $|f(x)|>|f(x_0)|/2$. Then
              $$
              int_a^b f(x)^2geqint_{x_0-delta}^{x_0+delta}f(x)^2geqint_{x_0-delta}^{x_0+delta}f(x)^2geqint_{x_0-delta}^{x_0+delta}f(x_0)^2/4=delta f(x_0)^2/2>0,
              $$
              a contradiction. So $f(x_0)=0$.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$



              Because $f$ is a 2-norm limit of polynomials, you can deduce that $int_a^bf(x)^2=0$.



              Now suppose that $f(x_0)ne0$ for some $x_0$ where $f$ is continuous. Take $varepsilon=|f(x_0)|/2$; by continuity at $x_0$, there exists $delta>0$ such that $|f(x)-f(x_0)|<|f(x_0)|/2$ for all $xin (x_0-delta,x_0+delta)$. From the reverse triangle inequality we have
              $$
              |f(x_0)|-|f(x)|<|f(x_0)|/2,
              $$
              so $|f(x)|>|f(x_0)|/2$. Then
              $$
              int_a^b f(x)^2geqint_{x_0-delta}^{x_0+delta}f(x)^2geqint_{x_0-delta}^{x_0+delta}f(x)^2geqint_{x_0-delta}^{x_0+delta}f(x_0)^2/4=delta f(x_0)^2/2>0,
              $$
              a contradiction. So $f(x_0)=0$.







              share|cite|improve this answer














              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer








              edited Nov 26 '18 at 22:29

























              answered Nov 26 '18 at 2:42









              Martin ArgeramiMartin Argerami

              125k1178178




              125k1178178












              • $begingroup$
                We can not use Weierstrass Approximation Theorem because $f(x)$ is not continuous but only Riemann integrable.
                $endgroup$
                – ModeGen
                Nov 26 '18 at 7:47










              • $begingroup$
                Indeed. I was trying to avoid using something more sophisticated, like measure theory or convolutions, to simplify the argument. Do you know any of those two?
                $endgroup$
                – Martin Argerami
                Nov 26 '18 at 14:23












              • $begingroup$
                I know the basics of the measure theory.
                $endgroup$
                – ModeGen
                Nov 26 '18 at 14:39










              • $begingroup$
                In measure theory, one proves that the polynomials are dense in the continuous functions when you when you use the 2-norm.
                $endgroup$
                – Martin Argerami
                Nov 26 '18 at 14:59


















              • $begingroup$
                We can not use Weierstrass Approximation Theorem because $f(x)$ is not continuous but only Riemann integrable.
                $endgroup$
                – ModeGen
                Nov 26 '18 at 7:47










              • $begingroup$
                Indeed. I was trying to avoid using something more sophisticated, like measure theory or convolutions, to simplify the argument. Do you know any of those two?
                $endgroup$
                – Martin Argerami
                Nov 26 '18 at 14:23












              • $begingroup$
                I know the basics of the measure theory.
                $endgroup$
                – ModeGen
                Nov 26 '18 at 14:39










              • $begingroup$
                In measure theory, one proves that the polynomials are dense in the continuous functions when you when you use the 2-norm.
                $endgroup$
                – Martin Argerami
                Nov 26 '18 at 14:59
















              $begingroup$
              We can not use Weierstrass Approximation Theorem because $f(x)$ is not continuous but only Riemann integrable.
              $endgroup$
              – ModeGen
              Nov 26 '18 at 7:47




              $begingroup$
              We can not use Weierstrass Approximation Theorem because $f(x)$ is not continuous but only Riemann integrable.
              $endgroup$
              – ModeGen
              Nov 26 '18 at 7:47












              $begingroup$
              Indeed. I was trying to avoid using something more sophisticated, like measure theory or convolutions, to simplify the argument. Do you know any of those two?
              $endgroup$
              – Martin Argerami
              Nov 26 '18 at 14:23






              $begingroup$
              Indeed. I was trying to avoid using something more sophisticated, like measure theory or convolutions, to simplify the argument. Do you know any of those two?
              $endgroup$
              – Martin Argerami
              Nov 26 '18 at 14:23














              $begingroup$
              I know the basics of the measure theory.
              $endgroup$
              – ModeGen
              Nov 26 '18 at 14:39




              $begingroup$
              I know the basics of the measure theory.
              $endgroup$
              – ModeGen
              Nov 26 '18 at 14:39












              $begingroup$
              In measure theory, one proves that the polynomials are dense in the continuous functions when you when you use the 2-norm.
              $endgroup$
              – Martin Argerami
              Nov 26 '18 at 14:59




              $begingroup$
              In measure theory, one proves that the polynomials are dense in the continuous functions when you when you use the 2-norm.
              $endgroup$
              – Martin Argerami
              Nov 26 '18 at 14:59











              2












              $begingroup$

              If you know something about Fourier analysis, you can use the Fejer kernel and the following to conclude that $f=0$ at all points of continuity:
              $$
              int_{a}^{b}f(x)e^{-isx}dx = sum_{n=0}^{infty}frac{(-is)^n}{n!}int_{a}^{b} f(x)x^n dx = 0,;;; sinmathbb{R}.
              $$






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$


















                2












                $begingroup$

                If you know something about Fourier analysis, you can use the Fejer kernel and the following to conclude that $f=0$ at all points of continuity:
                $$
                int_{a}^{b}f(x)e^{-isx}dx = sum_{n=0}^{infty}frac{(-is)^n}{n!}int_{a}^{b} f(x)x^n dx = 0,;;; sinmathbb{R}.
                $$






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$
















                  2












                  2








                  2





                  $begingroup$

                  If you know something about Fourier analysis, you can use the Fejer kernel and the following to conclude that $f=0$ at all points of continuity:
                  $$
                  int_{a}^{b}f(x)e^{-isx}dx = sum_{n=0}^{infty}frac{(-is)^n}{n!}int_{a}^{b} f(x)x^n dx = 0,;;; sinmathbb{R}.
                  $$






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  If you know something about Fourier analysis, you can use the Fejer kernel and the following to conclude that $f=0$ at all points of continuity:
                  $$
                  int_{a}^{b}f(x)e^{-isx}dx = sum_{n=0}^{infty}frac{(-is)^n}{n!}int_{a}^{b} f(x)x^n dx = 0,;;; sinmathbb{R}.
                  $$







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Nov 26 '18 at 15:16









                  DisintegratingByPartsDisintegratingByParts

                  58.9k42580




                  58.9k42580






























                      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.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3013529%2fproving-that-fx-0-in-all-points-of-continuity-if-f-is-orthogonal-to-all-po%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

                      How to change which sound is reproduced for terminal bell?

                      Image
                      3 Recently upgrade to 18.10 from 18.04, and using the terminal is becoming annoying: the new alert sound is a drip ( /usr/share/sounds/gnome/default/alerts/drip.ogg ), and the previous one is still located at ( /usr/share/sounds/ubuntu/stereo/bell.ogg ). My issue is that at the gnome-terminal, when autocompleting or pressing left BOTH sounds are reproduced, at the same time. I want to just have ubuntu/stereo/bell.ogg active, not both . At the moment I have been only able to reduce the volume of the alerts (but still both are played), or turn the alerts down (but I dislike both "solutions"). gnome-terminal 18.10 teminal-bell share | improve this question ...
                      Read more

                      Can I use Tabulator js library in my java Spring + Thymeleaf project?

                      Image
                      0 I want to add Tabulator js to my java project. I added tabulator.min.js, tabulator.min.css to resources folder. After that added to my html page these dependencies as recommending in readme.md. <link rel="stylesheet" th:href="@{/css/tabulator.min.css}"> <script type="text/javascript" th:src="@{/js/tabulator.min.js}"></script> Now my tables view all elements, that I have in the html page, but not correct. In the documentation of Tabulator is example how to create header and table, var table = new Tabulator("#example-table", { columns:[ {title:"Name", field:"name", sorter:"string", width:200, editor:true}, {title:"Age", field:"age", sorter:"...
                      Read more

                      Title Spacing in Bjornstrup Chapter, Removing Chapter Number From Contents

                      Image
                      up vote 5 down vote favorite 2 I would like to make it so that the vertical space below the title of each chapter is the same when using the Bjornstrup package (i.e. so that the descenders do not affect the spacing - as shown by the red arrow in the picture below). I think I'm fairly happy with the spacing around "A chapter", so I'd really like titles without descenders (e.g. "Contents") to have the same vertical spacing as "A chapter" below the title. I would also like to remove the large "0" in the contents title. Any help appreciated, as always. documentclass[11pt,a4paper]{book} % Packages[![enter image description here][1]][1] usepackage[left=3.5cm, right=3.5cm, top=4.3cm, bottom=4.25cm]{geometry} usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} usepackage{libertine} usepackage[libertine]{newtx...
                      Read more