Find function $f$ given $f(x+1) - f(x) = frac{1}{x^2}$












6














I need to find the expression of function $f$, all we know about $f$ is:



$begin{cases} forall x>0, f(x+1)-f(x) = frac{1}{x^2}
\ f text{ is continuous on } ]0, +infty[ text{ and } limlimits_{x to +infty} f(x) = 0 end{cases}$



Any help would be appreciated.










share|cite|improve this question
























  • Are you sure the problem is correct ? The result comes in terms of the first derivative of the digamma function.
    – Rebellos
    Nov 26 at 21:19












  • It is correct, and it has one and only one solution.
    – Euler Pythagoras
    Nov 26 at 21:22






  • 3




    Yes, the solution is $f(x) = c_1 - ψ^{(1)}(x) + frac{pi^2}{6}$. But do you know what the digamma function and its derivative are ?
    – Rebellos
    Nov 26 at 21:23












  • I just googled it, I have to say I am surprised because it seems to go past my calculus course, but since the problem has only one solution, if this one works it has to be the one.
    – Euler Pythagoras
    Nov 26 at 21:26






  • 3




    But maybe all the problem needs you to do is to show that $f(x)=-sumlimits_{n=0}^infty,dfrac{1}{(x+n)^2}$ for all $x>0$, without knowing anything about the digamma function. It is not difficult to see that $f(x)$ is well defined (i.e., converges to a finite limit for all $x>0$).
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 21:32


















6














I need to find the expression of function $f$, all we know about $f$ is:



$begin{cases} forall x>0, f(x+1)-f(x) = frac{1}{x^2}
\ f text{ is continuous on } ]0, +infty[ text{ and } limlimits_{x to +infty} f(x) = 0 end{cases}$



Any help would be appreciated.










share|cite|improve this question
























  • Are you sure the problem is correct ? The result comes in terms of the first derivative of the digamma function.
    – Rebellos
    Nov 26 at 21:19












  • It is correct, and it has one and only one solution.
    – Euler Pythagoras
    Nov 26 at 21:22






  • 3




    Yes, the solution is $f(x) = c_1 - ψ^{(1)}(x) + frac{pi^2}{6}$. But do you know what the digamma function and its derivative are ?
    – Rebellos
    Nov 26 at 21:23












  • I just googled it, I have to say I am surprised because it seems to go past my calculus course, but since the problem has only one solution, if this one works it has to be the one.
    – Euler Pythagoras
    Nov 26 at 21:26






  • 3




    But maybe all the problem needs you to do is to show that $f(x)=-sumlimits_{n=0}^infty,dfrac{1}{(x+n)^2}$ for all $x>0$, without knowing anything about the digamma function. It is not difficult to see that $f(x)$ is well defined (i.e., converges to a finite limit for all $x>0$).
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 21:32
















6












6








6


2





I need to find the expression of function $f$, all we know about $f$ is:



$begin{cases} forall x>0, f(x+1)-f(x) = frac{1}{x^2}
\ f text{ is continuous on } ]0, +infty[ text{ and } limlimits_{x to +infty} f(x) = 0 end{cases}$



Any help would be appreciated.










share|cite|improve this question















I need to find the expression of function $f$, all we know about $f$ is:



$begin{cases} forall x>0, f(x+1)-f(x) = frac{1}{x^2}
\ f text{ is continuous on } ]0, +infty[ text{ and } limlimits_{x to +infty} f(x) = 0 end{cases}$



Any help would be appreciated.







calculus integration limits functional-equations






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Nov 26 at 21:18









Emilio Novati

51.5k43472




51.5k43472










asked Nov 26 at 21:13









Euler Pythagoras

4949




4949












  • Are you sure the problem is correct ? The result comes in terms of the first derivative of the digamma function.
    – Rebellos
    Nov 26 at 21:19












  • It is correct, and it has one and only one solution.
    – Euler Pythagoras
    Nov 26 at 21:22






  • 3




    Yes, the solution is $f(x) = c_1 - ψ^{(1)}(x) + frac{pi^2}{6}$. But do you know what the digamma function and its derivative are ?
    – Rebellos
    Nov 26 at 21:23












  • I just googled it, I have to say I am surprised because it seems to go past my calculus course, but since the problem has only one solution, if this one works it has to be the one.
    – Euler Pythagoras
    Nov 26 at 21:26






  • 3




    But maybe all the problem needs you to do is to show that $f(x)=-sumlimits_{n=0}^infty,dfrac{1}{(x+n)^2}$ for all $x>0$, without knowing anything about the digamma function. It is not difficult to see that $f(x)$ is well defined (i.e., converges to a finite limit for all $x>0$).
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 21:32




















  • Are you sure the problem is correct ? The result comes in terms of the first derivative of the digamma function.
    – Rebellos
    Nov 26 at 21:19












  • It is correct, and it has one and only one solution.
    – Euler Pythagoras
    Nov 26 at 21:22






  • 3




    Yes, the solution is $f(x) = c_1 - ψ^{(1)}(x) + frac{pi^2}{6}$. But do you know what the digamma function and its derivative are ?
    – Rebellos
    Nov 26 at 21:23












  • I just googled it, I have to say I am surprised because it seems to go past my calculus course, but since the problem has only one solution, if this one works it has to be the one.
    – Euler Pythagoras
    Nov 26 at 21:26






  • 3




    But maybe all the problem needs you to do is to show that $f(x)=-sumlimits_{n=0}^infty,dfrac{1}{(x+n)^2}$ for all $x>0$, without knowing anything about the digamma function. It is not difficult to see that $f(x)$ is well defined (i.e., converges to a finite limit for all $x>0$).
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 21:32


















Are you sure the problem is correct ? The result comes in terms of the first derivative of the digamma function.
– Rebellos
Nov 26 at 21:19






Are you sure the problem is correct ? The result comes in terms of the first derivative of the digamma function.
– Rebellos
Nov 26 at 21:19














It is correct, and it has one and only one solution.
– Euler Pythagoras
Nov 26 at 21:22




It is correct, and it has one and only one solution.
– Euler Pythagoras
Nov 26 at 21:22




3




3




Yes, the solution is $f(x) = c_1 - ψ^{(1)}(x) + frac{pi^2}{6}$. But do you know what the digamma function and its derivative are ?
– Rebellos
Nov 26 at 21:23






Yes, the solution is $f(x) = c_1 - ψ^{(1)}(x) + frac{pi^2}{6}$. But do you know what the digamma function and its derivative are ?
– Rebellos
Nov 26 at 21:23














I just googled it, I have to say I am surprised because it seems to go past my calculus course, but since the problem has only one solution, if this one works it has to be the one.
– Euler Pythagoras
Nov 26 at 21:26




I just googled it, I have to say I am surprised because it seems to go past my calculus course, but since the problem has only one solution, if this one works it has to be the one.
– Euler Pythagoras
Nov 26 at 21:26




3




3




But maybe all the problem needs you to do is to show that $f(x)=-sumlimits_{n=0}^infty,dfrac{1}{(x+n)^2}$ for all $x>0$, without knowing anything about the digamma function. It is not difficult to see that $f(x)$ is well defined (i.e., converges to a finite limit for all $x>0$).
– Batominovski
Nov 26 at 21:32






But maybe all the problem needs you to do is to show that $f(x)=-sumlimits_{n=0}^infty,dfrac{1}{(x+n)^2}$ for all $x>0$, without knowing anything about the digamma function. It is not difficult to see that $f(x)$ is well defined (i.e., converges to a finite limit for all $x>0$).
– Batominovski
Nov 26 at 21:32












2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















8














Since $f(t)to 0$ as $tto infty$, we see that
$$sum_{n=0}^infty,frac{1}{(x+n)^2}=sum_{n=0}^infty,big(f(x+n+1)-f(x)big)=-f(x),.$$
This shows that the desired function $f:mathbb{R}_{>0}tomathbb{R}$ must satisfy
$$f(x)=-sum_{n=0}^infty,frac{1}{(x+n)^2}tag{*}$$
for all $x>0$. The rest in the hidden portion is the justification that $f$ given by (*) satisfies the continuity requirement, as well as the limit requirement.




Note that the function given by (*) is well defined since the infinite sum converges by the comparison test with the series $sumlimits_{n=1}^infty,dfrac{1}{n^2}=dfrac{pi^2}{6}$. The continuity of $f$ given in (*) follows from the observation that the sequence $left{f_kright}_{kinmathbb{Z}_{>0}}$ of functions $f_k:mathbb{R}_{>0}tomathbb{R}$ defined by $$f_k(x):=-sum_{n=0}^k,frac{1}{(x+n)^2}text{ for all }kinmathbb{Z}_{geq 0}text{ and }x>0$$ uniformly converges to $f$. Clearly, we also have $$0>f(x)>-frac{1}{x^2}-sum_{n=1}^infty,frac{1}{(x+n)(x+n-1)}=-frac{1}{x^2}-frac{1}{x},.$$ Ergo, $f$ indeed satisfies the limit requirement.







share|cite|improve this answer

















  • 1




    Such a nice elaboration ! +1 .. That sum, temptes me to write a functional analysis approach
    – Rebellos
    Nov 26 at 21:50










  • @Rebellos Would you mind adding that approach as an answer here? It sounds very interesting.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 21:51








  • 1




    Adding it right now.
    – Rebellos
    Nov 26 at 22:05



















6














I apologise for the following but couldn't unsee :



Since $f(x+1) - f(x) = 1/x^2$ and $f$ is defined over $mathbb R^+$, then $x>0$ and this means that $x+1 > x$ and also $1/x^2 >0$. Thus $f(x+1) - f(x) > 0 Leftrightarrow f(x+1) > f(x)$ and since that holds for every $x in mathbb R^+$, then $f$ is increasing and also $f$ is bounded, since $lim_{x to + infty} f(x) = 0$.



Now, consider an operator $T$ such that $Tf(x) = f(x+1)$ defined as $T : C^b(0,+infty) to C^b(0,+infty)$ where $C^b(0,+infty)$ is the space of the continuous bounded functions in $(0,+infty)$. In this space the sup norm is well defined and this space is complete (basically since the uniform limit of continuous functions is continuous). This tells us that $C^b(0,+infty)$ is a Banach space.



Now, let $f,g in C^b(0,+infty)$ and $lambda in mathbb R$. Then :



$$T(lambda f + g) = (lambda f + g)(x+1) = (lambda f)(x+1) + g(x+1)$$



$$=$$
$$ lambda f(x+1) + g(x+1) = lambda Tf + Tg$$



This tells us that the operator $T$ is linear.



Now, it also is



$$|Tf(x)|_infty = |f(x+1)|_infty leq |f(x)|_infty$$



and thus $T$ is a bounded linear operator (specifically with $|T| leq 1$) as well as $T in B(C^b(0,+infty))$.



But, since $C^b(0,+infty)$ is Banach and $T in B(C^b(0,+infty))$, the equation



$$f(x) = frac{1}{x^2} + Tf(x) Leftrightarrow f(x) - Tf(x) = frac{1}{x^2}$$



has a unique solution in $C^b(0,+infty)$.



For the resemblance with the answer posted above, notice that



$$f(x) - Tf(x) = -frac{1}{x^2} Leftrightarrow (mathbf{1} - T)f(x) = -frac{1}{x^2} Rightarrow f(x) = (mathbf{1}-T)^{-1}bigg(-frac{1}{x^2}bigg) $$



where $mathbf{1}$ is the identity operator. But :



$$(mathbf{1}-T)^{-1} = sum_{n=1}^infty T^n, quad |T| < 1$$



Note : We defined $frac{1}{x^2} : mathbb R^+ to mathbb R$.



Note 2: Per comment discussion, if any doubts/issues regarding bounds, the space $C^b([varepsilon, + infty))$ could be considered where $varepsilon >0$ and by manipulating $varepsilon$ accordingly we could still yield all results.






share|cite|improve this answer



















  • 1




    Beautiful! Thanks for posting this.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 22:22






  • 1




    I like this a lot but I'm a little confused, since $x^{-2}$ isnt in $C^b$ do you need to use a weighted norm $sup_{x>0} x^2 |f(x)| < infty$? And shouldn't we need $|T| underset{color{red}neq }{<} 1 $ to invert $mathbf 1-T$?
    – Calvin Khor
    Nov 26 at 22:31






  • 3




    The boundedness of $x^{-2}$ can be easily fixed by consider $C^bbig([epsilon,infty)big)$ instead and verify that $f|_{[epsilon,infty)}$ exists and is unique for each $epsilon>0$.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 22:44






  • 3




    Let $V$ be the subspace of functions with limit $0$ at $infty$. Then, $S:=T|_V$ sends $V$ to $V$. Note that, for each $fin V$, $lim_{nto infty},S^nf=0$, so if $sum_{n=0}^infty,S^nf$ exists, then $$(1-S),sum_{n=0}^infty,S^nf=f,.$$ This shows that $sum_{n=0}^infty,S^nf$ is in the preimage of $f$ under $1-S$.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 22:54








  • 3




    In my previous comment, I proved existence, but not yet uniqueness. The uniqueness follows from the fact that the only function $f$ in $V$ such that $f=Sf$ is $fequiv 0$. So, the issues are now resolved.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 23:00













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%2f3014937%2ffind-function-f-given-fx1-fx-frac1x2%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









8














Since $f(t)to 0$ as $tto infty$, we see that
$$sum_{n=0}^infty,frac{1}{(x+n)^2}=sum_{n=0}^infty,big(f(x+n+1)-f(x)big)=-f(x),.$$
This shows that the desired function $f:mathbb{R}_{>0}tomathbb{R}$ must satisfy
$$f(x)=-sum_{n=0}^infty,frac{1}{(x+n)^2}tag{*}$$
for all $x>0$. The rest in the hidden portion is the justification that $f$ given by (*) satisfies the continuity requirement, as well as the limit requirement.




Note that the function given by (*) is well defined since the infinite sum converges by the comparison test with the series $sumlimits_{n=1}^infty,dfrac{1}{n^2}=dfrac{pi^2}{6}$. The continuity of $f$ given in (*) follows from the observation that the sequence $left{f_kright}_{kinmathbb{Z}_{>0}}$ of functions $f_k:mathbb{R}_{>0}tomathbb{R}$ defined by $$f_k(x):=-sum_{n=0}^k,frac{1}{(x+n)^2}text{ for all }kinmathbb{Z}_{geq 0}text{ and }x>0$$ uniformly converges to $f$. Clearly, we also have $$0>f(x)>-frac{1}{x^2}-sum_{n=1}^infty,frac{1}{(x+n)(x+n-1)}=-frac{1}{x^2}-frac{1}{x},.$$ Ergo, $f$ indeed satisfies the limit requirement.







share|cite|improve this answer

















  • 1




    Such a nice elaboration ! +1 .. That sum, temptes me to write a functional analysis approach
    – Rebellos
    Nov 26 at 21:50










  • @Rebellos Would you mind adding that approach as an answer here? It sounds very interesting.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 21:51








  • 1




    Adding it right now.
    – Rebellos
    Nov 26 at 22:05
















8














Since $f(t)to 0$ as $tto infty$, we see that
$$sum_{n=0}^infty,frac{1}{(x+n)^2}=sum_{n=0}^infty,big(f(x+n+1)-f(x)big)=-f(x),.$$
This shows that the desired function $f:mathbb{R}_{>0}tomathbb{R}$ must satisfy
$$f(x)=-sum_{n=0}^infty,frac{1}{(x+n)^2}tag{*}$$
for all $x>0$. The rest in the hidden portion is the justification that $f$ given by (*) satisfies the continuity requirement, as well as the limit requirement.




Note that the function given by (*) is well defined since the infinite sum converges by the comparison test with the series $sumlimits_{n=1}^infty,dfrac{1}{n^2}=dfrac{pi^2}{6}$. The continuity of $f$ given in (*) follows from the observation that the sequence $left{f_kright}_{kinmathbb{Z}_{>0}}$ of functions $f_k:mathbb{R}_{>0}tomathbb{R}$ defined by $$f_k(x):=-sum_{n=0}^k,frac{1}{(x+n)^2}text{ for all }kinmathbb{Z}_{geq 0}text{ and }x>0$$ uniformly converges to $f$. Clearly, we also have $$0>f(x)>-frac{1}{x^2}-sum_{n=1}^infty,frac{1}{(x+n)(x+n-1)}=-frac{1}{x^2}-frac{1}{x},.$$ Ergo, $f$ indeed satisfies the limit requirement.







share|cite|improve this answer

















  • 1




    Such a nice elaboration ! +1 .. That sum, temptes me to write a functional analysis approach
    – Rebellos
    Nov 26 at 21:50










  • @Rebellos Would you mind adding that approach as an answer here? It sounds very interesting.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 21:51








  • 1




    Adding it right now.
    – Rebellos
    Nov 26 at 22:05














8












8








8






Since $f(t)to 0$ as $tto infty$, we see that
$$sum_{n=0}^infty,frac{1}{(x+n)^2}=sum_{n=0}^infty,big(f(x+n+1)-f(x)big)=-f(x),.$$
This shows that the desired function $f:mathbb{R}_{>0}tomathbb{R}$ must satisfy
$$f(x)=-sum_{n=0}^infty,frac{1}{(x+n)^2}tag{*}$$
for all $x>0$. The rest in the hidden portion is the justification that $f$ given by (*) satisfies the continuity requirement, as well as the limit requirement.




Note that the function given by (*) is well defined since the infinite sum converges by the comparison test with the series $sumlimits_{n=1}^infty,dfrac{1}{n^2}=dfrac{pi^2}{6}$. The continuity of $f$ given in (*) follows from the observation that the sequence $left{f_kright}_{kinmathbb{Z}_{>0}}$ of functions $f_k:mathbb{R}_{>0}tomathbb{R}$ defined by $$f_k(x):=-sum_{n=0}^k,frac{1}{(x+n)^2}text{ for all }kinmathbb{Z}_{geq 0}text{ and }x>0$$ uniformly converges to $f$. Clearly, we also have $$0>f(x)>-frac{1}{x^2}-sum_{n=1}^infty,frac{1}{(x+n)(x+n-1)}=-frac{1}{x^2}-frac{1}{x},.$$ Ergo, $f$ indeed satisfies the limit requirement.







share|cite|improve this answer












Since $f(t)to 0$ as $tto infty$, we see that
$$sum_{n=0}^infty,frac{1}{(x+n)^2}=sum_{n=0}^infty,big(f(x+n+1)-f(x)big)=-f(x),.$$
This shows that the desired function $f:mathbb{R}_{>0}tomathbb{R}$ must satisfy
$$f(x)=-sum_{n=0}^infty,frac{1}{(x+n)^2}tag{*}$$
for all $x>0$. The rest in the hidden portion is the justification that $f$ given by (*) satisfies the continuity requirement, as well as the limit requirement.




Note that the function given by (*) is well defined since the infinite sum converges by the comparison test with the series $sumlimits_{n=1}^infty,dfrac{1}{n^2}=dfrac{pi^2}{6}$. The continuity of $f$ given in (*) follows from the observation that the sequence $left{f_kright}_{kinmathbb{Z}_{>0}}$ of functions $f_k:mathbb{R}_{>0}tomathbb{R}$ defined by $$f_k(x):=-sum_{n=0}^k,frac{1}{(x+n)^2}text{ for all }kinmathbb{Z}_{geq 0}text{ and }x>0$$ uniformly converges to $f$. Clearly, we also have $$0>f(x)>-frac{1}{x^2}-sum_{n=1}^infty,frac{1}{(x+n)(x+n-1)}=-frac{1}{x^2}-frac{1}{x},.$$ Ergo, $f$ indeed satisfies the limit requirement.








share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Nov 26 at 21:45









Batominovski

33.7k33292




33.7k33292








  • 1




    Such a nice elaboration ! +1 .. That sum, temptes me to write a functional analysis approach
    – Rebellos
    Nov 26 at 21:50










  • @Rebellos Would you mind adding that approach as an answer here? It sounds very interesting.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 21:51








  • 1




    Adding it right now.
    – Rebellos
    Nov 26 at 22:05














  • 1




    Such a nice elaboration ! +1 .. That sum, temptes me to write a functional analysis approach
    – Rebellos
    Nov 26 at 21:50










  • @Rebellos Would you mind adding that approach as an answer here? It sounds very interesting.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 21:51








  • 1




    Adding it right now.
    – Rebellos
    Nov 26 at 22:05








1




1




Such a nice elaboration ! +1 .. That sum, temptes me to write a functional analysis approach
– Rebellos
Nov 26 at 21:50




Such a nice elaboration ! +1 .. That sum, temptes me to write a functional analysis approach
– Rebellos
Nov 26 at 21:50












@Rebellos Would you mind adding that approach as an answer here? It sounds very interesting.
– Batominovski
Nov 26 at 21:51






@Rebellos Would you mind adding that approach as an answer here? It sounds very interesting.
– Batominovski
Nov 26 at 21:51






1




1




Adding it right now.
– Rebellos
Nov 26 at 22:05




Adding it right now.
– Rebellos
Nov 26 at 22:05











6














I apologise for the following but couldn't unsee :



Since $f(x+1) - f(x) = 1/x^2$ and $f$ is defined over $mathbb R^+$, then $x>0$ and this means that $x+1 > x$ and also $1/x^2 >0$. Thus $f(x+1) - f(x) > 0 Leftrightarrow f(x+1) > f(x)$ and since that holds for every $x in mathbb R^+$, then $f$ is increasing and also $f$ is bounded, since $lim_{x to + infty} f(x) = 0$.



Now, consider an operator $T$ such that $Tf(x) = f(x+1)$ defined as $T : C^b(0,+infty) to C^b(0,+infty)$ where $C^b(0,+infty)$ is the space of the continuous bounded functions in $(0,+infty)$. In this space the sup norm is well defined and this space is complete (basically since the uniform limit of continuous functions is continuous). This tells us that $C^b(0,+infty)$ is a Banach space.



Now, let $f,g in C^b(0,+infty)$ and $lambda in mathbb R$. Then :



$$T(lambda f + g) = (lambda f + g)(x+1) = (lambda f)(x+1) + g(x+1)$$



$$=$$
$$ lambda f(x+1) + g(x+1) = lambda Tf + Tg$$



This tells us that the operator $T$ is linear.



Now, it also is



$$|Tf(x)|_infty = |f(x+1)|_infty leq |f(x)|_infty$$



and thus $T$ is a bounded linear operator (specifically with $|T| leq 1$) as well as $T in B(C^b(0,+infty))$.



But, since $C^b(0,+infty)$ is Banach and $T in B(C^b(0,+infty))$, the equation



$$f(x) = frac{1}{x^2} + Tf(x) Leftrightarrow f(x) - Tf(x) = frac{1}{x^2}$$



has a unique solution in $C^b(0,+infty)$.



For the resemblance with the answer posted above, notice that



$$f(x) - Tf(x) = -frac{1}{x^2} Leftrightarrow (mathbf{1} - T)f(x) = -frac{1}{x^2} Rightarrow f(x) = (mathbf{1}-T)^{-1}bigg(-frac{1}{x^2}bigg) $$



where $mathbf{1}$ is the identity operator. But :



$$(mathbf{1}-T)^{-1} = sum_{n=1}^infty T^n, quad |T| < 1$$



Note : We defined $frac{1}{x^2} : mathbb R^+ to mathbb R$.



Note 2: Per comment discussion, if any doubts/issues regarding bounds, the space $C^b([varepsilon, + infty))$ could be considered where $varepsilon >0$ and by manipulating $varepsilon$ accordingly we could still yield all results.






share|cite|improve this answer



















  • 1




    Beautiful! Thanks for posting this.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 22:22






  • 1




    I like this a lot but I'm a little confused, since $x^{-2}$ isnt in $C^b$ do you need to use a weighted norm $sup_{x>0} x^2 |f(x)| < infty$? And shouldn't we need $|T| underset{color{red}neq }{<} 1 $ to invert $mathbf 1-T$?
    – Calvin Khor
    Nov 26 at 22:31






  • 3




    The boundedness of $x^{-2}$ can be easily fixed by consider $C^bbig([epsilon,infty)big)$ instead and verify that $f|_{[epsilon,infty)}$ exists and is unique for each $epsilon>0$.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 22:44






  • 3




    Let $V$ be the subspace of functions with limit $0$ at $infty$. Then, $S:=T|_V$ sends $V$ to $V$. Note that, for each $fin V$, $lim_{nto infty},S^nf=0$, so if $sum_{n=0}^infty,S^nf$ exists, then $$(1-S),sum_{n=0}^infty,S^nf=f,.$$ This shows that $sum_{n=0}^infty,S^nf$ is in the preimage of $f$ under $1-S$.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 22:54








  • 3




    In my previous comment, I proved existence, but not yet uniqueness. The uniqueness follows from the fact that the only function $f$ in $V$ such that $f=Sf$ is $fequiv 0$. So, the issues are now resolved.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 23:00


















6














I apologise for the following but couldn't unsee :



Since $f(x+1) - f(x) = 1/x^2$ and $f$ is defined over $mathbb R^+$, then $x>0$ and this means that $x+1 > x$ and also $1/x^2 >0$. Thus $f(x+1) - f(x) > 0 Leftrightarrow f(x+1) > f(x)$ and since that holds for every $x in mathbb R^+$, then $f$ is increasing and also $f$ is bounded, since $lim_{x to + infty} f(x) = 0$.



Now, consider an operator $T$ such that $Tf(x) = f(x+1)$ defined as $T : C^b(0,+infty) to C^b(0,+infty)$ where $C^b(0,+infty)$ is the space of the continuous bounded functions in $(0,+infty)$. In this space the sup norm is well defined and this space is complete (basically since the uniform limit of continuous functions is continuous). This tells us that $C^b(0,+infty)$ is a Banach space.



Now, let $f,g in C^b(0,+infty)$ and $lambda in mathbb R$. Then :



$$T(lambda f + g) = (lambda f + g)(x+1) = (lambda f)(x+1) + g(x+1)$$



$$=$$
$$ lambda f(x+1) + g(x+1) = lambda Tf + Tg$$



This tells us that the operator $T$ is linear.



Now, it also is



$$|Tf(x)|_infty = |f(x+1)|_infty leq |f(x)|_infty$$



and thus $T$ is a bounded linear operator (specifically with $|T| leq 1$) as well as $T in B(C^b(0,+infty))$.



But, since $C^b(0,+infty)$ is Banach and $T in B(C^b(0,+infty))$, the equation



$$f(x) = frac{1}{x^2} + Tf(x) Leftrightarrow f(x) - Tf(x) = frac{1}{x^2}$$



has a unique solution in $C^b(0,+infty)$.



For the resemblance with the answer posted above, notice that



$$f(x) - Tf(x) = -frac{1}{x^2} Leftrightarrow (mathbf{1} - T)f(x) = -frac{1}{x^2} Rightarrow f(x) = (mathbf{1}-T)^{-1}bigg(-frac{1}{x^2}bigg) $$



where $mathbf{1}$ is the identity operator. But :



$$(mathbf{1}-T)^{-1} = sum_{n=1}^infty T^n, quad |T| < 1$$



Note : We defined $frac{1}{x^2} : mathbb R^+ to mathbb R$.



Note 2: Per comment discussion, if any doubts/issues regarding bounds, the space $C^b([varepsilon, + infty))$ could be considered where $varepsilon >0$ and by manipulating $varepsilon$ accordingly we could still yield all results.






share|cite|improve this answer



















  • 1




    Beautiful! Thanks for posting this.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 22:22






  • 1




    I like this a lot but I'm a little confused, since $x^{-2}$ isnt in $C^b$ do you need to use a weighted norm $sup_{x>0} x^2 |f(x)| < infty$? And shouldn't we need $|T| underset{color{red}neq }{<} 1 $ to invert $mathbf 1-T$?
    – Calvin Khor
    Nov 26 at 22:31






  • 3




    The boundedness of $x^{-2}$ can be easily fixed by consider $C^bbig([epsilon,infty)big)$ instead and verify that $f|_{[epsilon,infty)}$ exists and is unique for each $epsilon>0$.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 22:44






  • 3




    Let $V$ be the subspace of functions with limit $0$ at $infty$. Then, $S:=T|_V$ sends $V$ to $V$. Note that, for each $fin V$, $lim_{nto infty},S^nf=0$, so if $sum_{n=0}^infty,S^nf$ exists, then $$(1-S),sum_{n=0}^infty,S^nf=f,.$$ This shows that $sum_{n=0}^infty,S^nf$ is in the preimage of $f$ under $1-S$.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 22:54








  • 3




    In my previous comment, I proved existence, but not yet uniqueness. The uniqueness follows from the fact that the only function $f$ in $V$ such that $f=Sf$ is $fequiv 0$. So, the issues are now resolved.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 23:00
















6












6








6






I apologise for the following but couldn't unsee :



Since $f(x+1) - f(x) = 1/x^2$ and $f$ is defined over $mathbb R^+$, then $x>0$ and this means that $x+1 > x$ and also $1/x^2 >0$. Thus $f(x+1) - f(x) > 0 Leftrightarrow f(x+1) > f(x)$ and since that holds for every $x in mathbb R^+$, then $f$ is increasing and also $f$ is bounded, since $lim_{x to + infty} f(x) = 0$.



Now, consider an operator $T$ such that $Tf(x) = f(x+1)$ defined as $T : C^b(0,+infty) to C^b(0,+infty)$ where $C^b(0,+infty)$ is the space of the continuous bounded functions in $(0,+infty)$. In this space the sup norm is well defined and this space is complete (basically since the uniform limit of continuous functions is continuous). This tells us that $C^b(0,+infty)$ is a Banach space.



Now, let $f,g in C^b(0,+infty)$ and $lambda in mathbb R$. Then :



$$T(lambda f + g) = (lambda f + g)(x+1) = (lambda f)(x+1) + g(x+1)$$



$$=$$
$$ lambda f(x+1) + g(x+1) = lambda Tf + Tg$$



This tells us that the operator $T$ is linear.



Now, it also is



$$|Tf(x)|_infty = |f(x+1)|_infty leq |f(x)|_infty$$



and thus $T$ is a bounded linear operator (specifically with $|T| leq 1$) as well as $T in B(C^b(0,+infty))$.



But, since $C^b(0,+infty)$ is Banach and $T in B(C^b(0,+infty))$, the equation



$$f(x) = frac{1}{x^2} + Tf(x) Leftrightarrow f(x) - Tf(x) = frac{1}{x^2}$$



has a unique solution in $C^b(0,+infty)$.



For the resemblance with the answer posted above, notice that



$$f(x) - Tf(x) = -frac{1}{x^2} Leftrightarrow (mathbf{1} - T)f(x) = -frac{1}{x^2} Rightarrow f(x) = (mathbf{1}-T)^{-1}bigg(-frac{1}{x^2}bigg) $$



where $mathbf{1}$ is the identity operator. But :



$$(mathbf{1}-T)^{-1} = sum_{n=1}^infty T^n, quad |T| < 1$$



Note : We defined $frac{1}{x^2} : mathbb R^+ to mathbb R$.



Note 2: Per comment discussion, if any doubts/issues regarding bounds, the space $C^b([varepsilon, + infty))$ could be considered where $varepsilon >0$ and by manipulating $varepsilon$ accordingly we could still yield all results.






share|cite|improve this answer














I apologise for the following but couldn't unsee :



Since $f(x+1) - f(x) = 1/x^2$ and $f$ is defined over $mathbb R^+$, then $x>0$ and this means that $x+1 > x$ and also $1/x^2 >0$. Thus $f(x+1) - f(x) > 0 Leftrightarrow f(x+1) > f(x)$ and since that holds for every $x in mathbb R^+$, then $f$ is increasing and also $f$ is bounded, since $lim_{x to + infty} f(x) = 0$.



Now, consider an operator $T$ such that $Tf(x) = f(x+1)$ defined as $T : C^b(0,+infty) to C^b(0,+infty)$ where $C^b(0,+infty)$ is the space of the continuous bounded functions in $(0,+infty)$. In this space the sup norm is well defined and this space is complete (basically since the uniform limit of continuous functions is continuous). This tells us that $C^b(0,+infty)$ is a Banach space.



Now, let $f,g in C^b(0,+infty)$ and $lambda in mathbb R$. Then :



$$T(lambda f + g) = (lambda f + g)(x+1) = (lambda f)(x+1) + g(x+1)$$



$$=$$
$$ lambda f(x+1) + g(x+1) = lambda Tf + Tg$$



This tells us that the operator $T$ is linear.



Now, it also is



$$|Tf(x)|_infty = |f(x+1)|_infty leq |f(x)|_infty$$



and thus $T$ is a bounded linear operator (specifically with $|T| leq 1$) as well as $T in B(C^b(0,+infty))$.



But, since $C^b(0,+infty)$ is Banach and $T in B(C^b(0,+infty))$, the equation



$$f(x) = frac{1}{x^2} + Tf(x) Leftrightarrow f(x) - Tf(x) = frac{1}{x^2}$$



has a unique solution in $C^b(0,+infty)$.



For the resemblance with the answer posted above, notice that



$$f(x) - Tf(x) = -frac{1}{x^2} Leftrightarrow (mathbf{1} - T)f(x) = -frac{1}{x^2} Rightarrow f(x) = (mathbf{1}-T)^{-1}bigg(-frac{1}{x^2}bigg) $$



where $mathbf{1}$ is the identity operator. But :



$$(mathbf{1}-T)^{-1} = sum_{n=1}^infty T^n, quad |T| < 1$$



Note : We defined $frac{1}{x^2} : mathbb R^+ to mathbb R$.



Note 2: Per comment discussion, if any doubts/issues regarding bounds, the space $C^b([varepsilon, + infty))$ could be considered where $varepsilon >0$ and by manipulating $varepsilon$ accordingly we could still yield all results.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited Nov 26 at 22:52

























answered Nov 26 at 22:12









Rebellos

14.4k31245




14.4k31245








  • 1




    Beautiful! Thanks for posting this.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 22:22






  • 1




    I like this a lot but I'm a little confused, since $x^{-2}$ isnt in $C^b$ do you need to use a weighted norm $sup_{x>0} x^2 |f(x)| < infty$? And shouldn't we need $|T| underset{color{red}neq }{<} 1 $ to invert $mathbf 1-T$?
    – Calvin Khor
    Nov 26 at 22:31






  • 3




    The boundedness of $x^{-2}$ can be easily fixed by consider $C^bbig([epsilon,infty)big)$ instead and verify that $f|_{[epsilon,infty)}$ exists and is unique for each $epsilon>0$.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 22:44






  • 3




    Let $V$ be the subspace of functions with limit $0$ at $infty$. Then, $S:=T|_V$ sends $V$ to $V$. Note that, for each $fin V$, $lim_{nto infty},S^nf=0$, so if $sum_{n=0}^infty,S^nf$ exists, then $$(1-S),sum_{n=0}^infty,S^nf=f,.$$ This shows that $sum_{n=0}^infty,S^nf$ is in the preimage of $f$ under $1-S$.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 22:54








  • 3




    In my previous comment, I proved existence, but not yet uniqueness. The uniqueness follows from the fact that the only function $f$ in $V$ such that $f=Sf$ is $fequiv 0$. So, the issues are now resolved.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 23:00
















  • 1




    Beautiful! Thanks for posting this.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 22:22






  • 1




    I like this a lot but I'm a little confused, since $x^{-2}$ isnt in $C^b$ do you need to use a weighted norm $sup_{x>0} x^2 |f(x)| < infty$? And shouldn't we need $|T| underset{color{red}neq }{<} 1 $ to invert $mathbf 1-T$?
    – Calvin Khor
    Nov 26 at 22:31






  • 3




    The boundedness of $x^{-2}$ can be easily fixed by consider $C^bbig([epsilon,infty)big)$ instead and verify that $f|_{[epsilon,infty)}$ exists and is unique for each $epsilon>0$.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 22:44






  • 3




    Let $V$ be the subspace of functions with limit $0$ at $infty$. Then, $S:=T|_V$ sends $V$ to $V$. Note that, for each $fin V$, $lim_{nto infty},S^nf=0$, so if $sum_{n=0}^infty,S^nf$ exists, then $$(1-S),sum_{n=0}^infty,S^nf=f,.$$ This shows that $sum_{n=0}^infty,S^nf$ is in the preimage of $f$ under $1-S$.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 22:54








  • 3




    In my previous comment, I proved existence, but not yet uniqueness. The uniqueness follows from the fact that the only function $f$ in $V$ such that $f=Sf$ is $fequiv 0$. So, the issues are now resolved.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 26 at 23:00










1




1




Beautiful! Thanks for posting this.
– Batominovski
Nov 26 at 22:22




Beautiful! Thanks for posting this.
– Batominovski
Nov 26 at 22:22




1




1




I like this a lot but I'm a little confused, since $x^{-2}$ isnt in $C^b$ do you need to use a weighted norm $sup_{x>0} x^2 |f(x)| < infty$? And shouldn't we need $|T| underset{color{red}neq }{<} 1 $ to invert $mathbf 1-T$?
– Calvin Khor
Nov 26 at 22:31




I like this a lot but I'm a little confused, since $x^{-2}$ isnt in $C^b$ do you need to use a weighted norm $sup_{x>0} x^2 |f(x)| < infty$? And shouldn't we need $|T| underset{color{red}neq }{<} 1 $ to invert $mathbf 1-T$?
– Calvin Khor
Nov 26 at 22:31




3




3




The boundedness of $x^{-2}$ can be easily fixed by consider $C^bbig([epsilon,infty)big)$ instead and verify that $f|_{[epsilon,infty)}$ exists and is unique for each $epsilon>0$.
– Batominovski
Nov 26 at 22:44




The boundedness of $x^{-2}$ can be easily fixed by consider $C^bbig([epsilon,infty)big)$ instead and verify that $f|_{[epsilon,infty)}$ exists and is unique for each $epsilon>0$.
– Batominovski
Nov 26 at 22:44




3




3




Let $V$ be the subspace of functions with limit $0$ at $infty$. Then, $S:=T|_V$ sends $V$ to $V$. Note that, for each $fin V$, $lim_{nto infty},S^nf=0$, so if $sum_{n=0}^infty,S^nf$ exists, then $$(1-S),sum_{n=0}^infty,S^nf=f,.$$ This shows that $sum_{n=0}^infty,S^nf$ is in the preimage of $f$ under $1-S$.
– Batominovski
Nov 26 at 22:54






Let $V$ be the subspace of functions with limit $0$ at $infty$. Then, $S:=T|_V$ sends $V$ to $V$. Note that, for each $fin V$, $lim_{nto infty},S^nf=0$, so if $sum_{n=0}^infty,S^nf$ exists, then $$(1-S),sum_{n=0}^infty,S^nf=f,.$$ This shows that $sum_{n=0}^infty,S^nf$ is in the preimage of $f$ under $1-S$.
– Batominovski
Nov 26 at 22:54






3




3




In my previous comment, I proved existence, but not yet uniqueness. The uniqueness follows from the fact that the only function $f$ in $V$ such that $f=Sf$ is $fequiv 0$. So, the issues are now resolved.
– Batominovski
Nov 26 at 23:00






In my previous comment, I proved existence, but not yet uniqueness. The uniqueness follows from the fact that the only function $f$ in $V$ such that $f=Sf$ is $fequiv 0$. So, the issues are now resolved.
– Batominovski
Nov 26 at 23:00




















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%2f3014937%2ffind-function-f-given-fx1-fx-frac1x2%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

Aardman Animations

Are they similar matrix

“minimization” problem in Euclidean space related to orthonormal basis