Prove $f_n to f$ uniformly on $mathbb{R}$
Denote by $D$ the set of all continuous, increasing functions $f: mathbb{R} to [0, infty)$ such that $lim limits_{x to - infty} f(x) = 0 $ and $lim limits_{x to + infty} f(x) = 1 $. If $f_n,f in D$ for all $n geq 1$ and $f_n to f$ pointwisely on $mathbb{R}$, prove that $f_n to f$ uniformly on $mathbb{R}$.
My take on it:
NTS: $f_nto f$ uniformly on $mathbb{R}$ if $M_n = sup|f_n(x) - f(x)|$ exists for all sufficiently large n, and $limlimits_{n to infty} M_n = 0, x in mathbb{R}$.
$limlimits_{x to infty} f(x) = 1$ $iff$ $forall epsilon > 0$ given $exists M gt0$ such that $|f(x) - 1| lt epsilon$,
$limlimits_{x to - infty}f(x) = 0 iff forall epsilon gt 0$ given $exists M gt 0$ such that $|f(x)| lt epsilon$
$f_n to f$ pointwisely in $mathbb{R} iff limlimits_{ntoinfty}f_n(x)=f(x)$ $forall x in mathbb{R}$.
$forall epsilon gt 0, exists M gt0$ such that $|f_n(x) - f(x)|ltepsilon$ $forall n geq M, forall x in mathbb{R}$
$implies limlimits_{n to infty}|f_n(x)-f(x)|=0$
$implies limlimits_{n to infty}sup{|f_n(x)-f(x)|:xinmathbb{R}} = 0$.
If someone can please help me and let me know if I am going in the right direction and how to proceed forward.
Thanks in advance.
real-analysis metric-spaces uniform-convergence proof-theory pointwise-convergence
add a comment |
Denote by $D$ the set of all continuous, increasing functions $f: mathbb{R} to [0, infty)$ such that $lim limits_{x to - infty} f(x) = 0 $ and $lim limits_{x to + infty} f(x) = 1 $. If $f_n,f in D$ for all $n geq 1$ and $f_n to f$ pointwisely on $mathbb{R}$, prove that $f_n to f$ uniformly on $mathbb{R}$.
My take on it:
NTS: $f_nto f$ uniformly on $mathbb{R}$ if $M_n = sup|f_n(x) - f(x)|$ exists for all sufficiently large n, and $limlimits_{n to infty} M_n = 0, x in mathbb{R}$.
$limlimits_{x to infty} f(x) = 1$ $iff$ $forall epsilon > 0$ given $exists M gt0$ such that $|f(x) - 1| lt epsilon$,
$limlimits_{x to - infty}f(x) = 0 iff forall epsilon gt 0$ given $exists M gt 0$ such that $|f(x)| lt epsilon$
$f_n to f$ pointwisely in $mathbb{R} iff limlimits_{ntoinfty}f_n(x)=f(x)$ $forall x in mathbb{R}$.
$forall epsilon gt 0, exists M gt0$ such that $|f_n(x) - f(x)|ltepsilon$ $forall n geq M, forall x in mathbb{R}$
$implies limlimits_{n to infty}|f_n(x)-f(x)|=0$
$implies limlimits_{n to infty}sup{|f_n(x)-f(x)|:xinmathbb{R}} = 0$.
If someone can please help me and let me know if I am going in the right direction and how to proceed forward.
Thanks in advance.
real-analysis metric-spaces uniform-convergence proof-theory pointwise-convergence
Remark: $D$ is the collection of functions that correspond to the distribution function (CDF) of continuous random variables.
– Sean Roberson
Nov 27 '18 at 19:52
add a comment |
Denote by $D$ the set of all continuous, increasing functions $f: mathbb{R} to [0, infty)$ such that $lim limits_{x to - infty} f(x) = 0 $ and $lim limits_{x to + infty} f(x) = 1 $. If $f_n,f in D$ for all $n geq 1$ and $f_n to f$ pointwisely on $mathbb{R}$, prove that $f_n to f$ uniformly on $mathbb{R}$.
My take on it:
NTS: $f_nto f$ uniformly on $mathbb{R}$ if $M_n = sup|f_n(x) - f(x)|$ exists for all sufficiently large n, and $limlimits_{n to infty} M_n = 0, x in mathbb{R}$.
$limlimits_{x to infty} f(x) = 1$ $iff$ $forall epsilon > 0$ given $exists M gt0$ such that $|f(x) - 1| lt epsilon$,
$limlimits_{x to - infty}f(x) = 0 iff forall epsilon gt 0$ given $exists M gt 0$ such that $|f(x)| lt epsilon$
$f_n to f$ pointwisely in $mathbb{R} iff limlimits_{ntoinfty}f_n(x)=f(x)$ $forall x in mathbb{R}$.
$forall epsilon gt 0, exists M gt0$ such that $|f_n(x) - f(x)|ltepsilon$ $forall n geq M, forall x in mathbb{R}$
$implies limlimits_{n to infty}|f_n(x)-f(x)|=0$
$implies limlimits_{n to infty}sup{|f_n(x)-f(x)|:xinmathbb{R}} = 0$.
If someone can please help me and let me know if I am going in the right direction and how to proceed forward.
Thanks in advance.
real-analysis metric-spaces uniform-convergence proof-theory pointwise-convergence
Denote by $D$ the set of all continuous, increasing functions $f: mathbb{R} to [0, infty)$ such that $lim limits_{x to - infty} f(x) = 0 $ and $lim limits_{x to + infty} f(x) = 1 $. If $f_n,f in D$ for all $n geq 1$ and $f_n to f$ pointwisely on $mathbb{R}$, prove that $f_n to f$ uniformly on $mathbb{R}$.
My take on it:
NTS: $f_nto f$ uniformly on $mathbb{R}$ if $M_n = sup|f_n(x) - f(x)|$ exists for all sufficiently large n, and $limlimits_{n to infty} M_n = 0, x in mathbb{R}$.
$limlimits_{x to infty} f(x) = 1$ $iff$ $forall epsilon > 0$ given $exists M gt0$ such that $|f(x) - 1| lt epsilon$,
$limlimits_{x to - infty}f(x) = 0 iff forall epsilon gt 0$ given $exists M gt 0$ such that $|f(x)| lt epsilon$
$f_n to f$ pointwisely in $mathbb{R} iff limlimits_{ntoinfty}f_n(x)=f(x)$ $forall x in mathbb{R}$.
$forall epsilon gt 0, exists M gt0$ such that $|f_n(x) - f(x)|ltepsilon$ $forall n geq M, forall x in mathbb{R}$
$implies limlimits_{n to infty}|f_n(x)-f(x)|=0$
$implies limlimits_{n to infty}sup{|f_n(x)-f(x)|:xinmathbb{R}} = 0$.
If someone can please help me and let me know if I am going in the right direction and how to proceed forward.
Thanks in advance.
real-analysis metric-spaces uniform-convergence proof-theory pointwise-convergence
real-analysis metric-spaces uniform-convergence proof-theory pointwise-convergence
edited Nov 27 '18 at 19:42
Robert Z
93.4k1061132
93.4k1061132
asked Nov 27 '18 at 19:29
ISuckAtMathPleaseHELPME
1549
1549
Remark: $D$ is the collection of functions that correspond to the distribution function (CDF) of continuous random variables.
– Sean Roberson
Nov 27 '18 at 19:52
add a comment |
Remark: $D$ is the collection of functions that correspond to the distribution function (CDF) of continuous random variables.
– Sean Roberson
Nov 27 '18 at 19:52
Remark: $D$ is the collection of functions that correspond to the distribution function (CDF) of continuous random variables.
– Sean Roberson
Nov 27 '18 at 19:52
Remark: $D$ is the collection of functions that correspond to the distribution function (CDF) of continuous random variables.
– Sean Roberson
Nov 27 '18 at 19:52
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Since $fto 1$ and $fto 0$ as $xto infty$ and $xto -infty$ respectively, for fixed $epsilon>0$ there exists $M$ s.t. $|x|ge M$ implies either $f(x)>1-epsilon$ or $f(x)<epsilon$. By the convergence of $f_n$, there exists $N$ s.t. $nge N$ implies $f_n(M)>1-epsilon$ and $f_n(-M)<epsilon$. But each $f_n$ is increasing, so $|x|>M$ implies either $f_n(x)>1-epsilon$ or $f_n(x)<epsilon$. Therefore, for $x$ outside $[-M,M]$, $|f_n(x)-f(x)|<2epsilon$ by the Triangle Inequality.
By the continuity of $f$ on the compact $[-M,M]$, there exists $delta>0$ s.t. $|x-y|<delta$ implies $|f(x)-f(y)|<epsilon$. Partition $[-M,M]$ into intervals $A_i=[t_i,t_{i+1})$ of length shorter than $delta$. For each $t_i$ there exists $N_i$ where $nge N_i$ implies $|f_n(t_i)-f(t_i)|<epsilon$. Fix $T = max{N_i, N}$ and pick $xin A_i$ and $nge T$. It follows that $f_n(t_{i+1})-f_n(x)le f_n(t_{i+1})-f_n(t_i)le (f(t_{i+1})+epsilon)-(f(t_i)-epsilon)le 3epsilon$. By the Triangle Ineq.
$$begin{align}|f_n(x)-f(x)|&le |f_n(x)-f_n(t_{i+1})|+|f_n(t_{i+1})-f(t_{i+1})| + |f(t_{i+1})-f(t_i)| \ &le 5epsilon end{align}$$
But $A_i$ cover $[-M,M]$, so this holds for all $x in [-M,M]$. Thus, $nge T$ forces $|f_n(x)-f(x)|le 5epsilon$ and the convergence is uniform.
Nice (full) answer (+1)
– Robert Z
Nov 28 '18 at 6:44
add a comment |
No, the last step does not work: pointwise convergence does not imply uniform convergence. You are not using the increasing property of such functions.
Hint. Use the second theorem given HERE on the compact set $[-R,R]$ (it is a variant of Dini's Theorem) and use the assumption about the limits at $pminfty$ in order to have the uniform convergence also on the complement of $[-R,R]$.
1
The version of Dini's Theorem you link to requires $f_n$ to converge monotonically to $f$ but in this problem, that need not be the case. Is there a more general version of the theorem?
– Guacho Perez
Nov 27 '18 at 21:41
@GuachoPerez Thanks for pointing out. I edited my answer.
– Robert Z
Nov 28 '18 at 6:42
add a comment |
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
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3016207%2fprove-f-n-to-f-uniformly-on-mathbbr%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
Since $fto 1$ and $fto 0$ as $xto infty$ and $xto -infty$ respectively, for fixed $epsilon>0$ there exists $M$ s.t. $|x|ge M$ implies either $f(x)>1-epsilon$ or $f(x)<epsilon$. By the convergence of $f_n$, there exists $N$ s.t. $nge N$ implies $f_n(M)>1-epsilon$ and $f_n(-M)<epsilon$. But each $f_n$ is increasing, so $|x|>M$ implies either $f_n(x)>1-epsilon$ or $f_n(x)<epsilon$. Therefore, for $x$ outside $[-M,M]$, $|f_n(x)-f(x)|<2epsilon$ by the Triangle Inequality.
By the continuity of $f$ on the compact $[-M,M]$, there exists $delta>0$ s.t. $|x-y|<delta$ implies $|f(x)-f(y)|<epsilon$. Partition $[-M,M]$ into intervals $A_i=[t_i,t_{i+1})$ of length shorter than $delta$. For each $t_i$ there exists $N_i$ where $nge N_i$ implies $|f_n(t_i)-f(t_i)|<epsilon$. Fix $T = max{N_i, N}$ and pick $xin A_i$ and $nge T$. It follows that $f_n(t_{i+1})-f_n(x)le f_n(t_{i+1})-f_n(t_i)le (f(t_{i+1})+epsilon)-(f(t_i)-epsilon)le 3epsilon$. By the Triangle Ineq.
$$begin{align}|f_n(x)-f(x)|&le |f_n(x)-f_n(t_{i+1})|+|f_n(t_{i+1})-f(t_{i+1})| + |f(t_{i+1})-f(t_i)| \ &le 5epsilon end{align}$$
But $A_i$ cover $[-M,M]$, so this holds for all $x in [-M,M]$. Thus, $nge T$ forces $|f_n(x)-f(x)|le 5epsilon$ and the convergence is uniform.
Nice (full) answer (+1)
– Robert Z
Nov 28 '18 at 6:44
add a comment |
Since $fto 1$ and $fto 0$ as $xto infty$ and $xto -infty$ respectively, for fixed $epsilon>0$ there exists $M$ s.t. $|x|ge M$ implies either $f(x)>1-epsilon$ or $f(x)<epsilon$. By the convergence of $f_n$, there exists $N$ s.t. $nge N$ implies $f_n(M)>1-epsilon$ and $f_n(-M)<epsilon$. But each $f_n$ is increasing, so $|x|>M$ implies either $f_n(x)>1-epsilon$ or $f_n(x)<epsilon$. Therefore, for $x$ outside $[-M,M]$, $|f_n(x)-f(x)|<2epsilon$ by the Triangle Inequality.
By the continuity of $f$ on the compact $[-M,M]$, there exists $delta>0$ s.t. $|x-y|<delta$ implies $|f(x)-f(y)|<epsilon$. Partition $[-M,M]$ into intervals $A_i=[t_i,t_{i+1})$ of length shorter than $delta$. For each $t_i$ there exists $N_i$ where $nge N_i$ implies $|f_n(t_i)-f(t_i)|<epsilon$. Fix $T = max{N_i, N}$ and pick $xin A_i$ and $nge T$. It follows that $f_n(t_{i+1})-f_n(x)le f_n(t_{i+1})-f_n(t_i)le (f(t_{i+1})+epsilon)-(f(t_i)-epsilon)le 3epsilon$. By the Triangle Ineq.
$$begin{align}|f_n(x)-f(x)|&le |f_n(x)-f_n(t_{i+1})|+|f_n(t_{i+1})-f(t_{i+1})| + |f(t_{i+1})-f(t_i)| \ &le 5epsilon end{align}$$
But $A_i$ cover $[-M,M]$, so this holds for all $x in [-M,M]$. Thus, $nge T$ forces $|f_n(x)-f(x)|le 5epsilon$ and the convergence is uniform.
Nice (full) answer (+1)
– Robert Z
Nov 28 '18 at 6:44
add a comment |
Since $fto 1$ and $fto 0$ as $xto infty$ and $xto -infty$ respectively, for fixed $epsilon>0$ there exists $M$ s.t. $|x|ge M$ implies either $f(x)>1-epsilon$ or $f(x)<epsilon$. By the convergence of $f_n$, there exists $N$ s.t. $nge N$ implies $f_n(M)>1-epsilon$ and $f_n(-M)<epsilon$. But each $f_n$ is increasing, so $|x|>M$ implies either $f_n(x)>1-epsilon$ or $f_n(x)<epsilon$. Therefore, for $x$ outside $[-M,M]$, $|f_n(x)-f(x)|<2epsilon$ by the Triangle Inequality.
By the continuity of $f$ on the compact $[-M,M]$, there exists $delta>0$ s.t. $|x-y|<delta$ implies $|f(x)-f(y)|<epsilon$. Partition $[-M,M]$ into intervals $A_i=[t_i,t_{i+1})$ of length shorter than $delta$. For each $t_i$ there exists $N_i$ where $nge N_i$ implies $|f_n(t_i)-f(t_i)|<epsilon$. Fix $T = max{N_i, N}$ and pick $xin A_i$ and $nge T$. It follows that $f_n(t_{i+1})-f_n(x)le f_n(t_{i+1})-f_n(t_i)le (f(t_{i+1})+epsilon)-(f(t_i)-epsilon)le 3epsilon$. By the Triangle Ineq.
$$begin{align}|f_n(x)-f(x)|&le |f_n(x)-f_n(t_{i+1})|+|f_n(t_{i+1})-f(t_{i+1})| + |f(t_{i+1})-f(t_i)| \ &le 5epsilon end{align}$$
But $A_i$ cover $[-M,M]$, so this holds for all $x in [-M,M]$. Thus, $nge T$ forces $|f_n(x)-f(x)|le 5epsilon$ and the convergence is uniform.
Since $fto 1$ and $fto 0$ as $xto infty$ and $xto -infty$ respectively, for fixed $epsilon>0$ there exists $M$ s.t. $|x|ge M$ implies either $f(x)>1-epsilon$ or $f(x)<epsilon$. By the convergence of $f_n$, there exists $N$ s.t. $nge N$ implies $f_n(M)>1-epsilon$ and $f_n(-M)<epsilon$. But each $f_n$ is increasing, so $|x|>M$ implies either $f_n(x)>1-epsilon$ or $f_n(x)<epsilon$. Therefore, for $x$ outside $[-M,M]$, $|f_n(x)-f(x)|<2epsilon$ by the Triangle Inequality.
By the continuity of $f$ on the compact $[-M,M]$, there exists $delta>0$ s.t. $|x-y|<delta$ implies $|f(x)-f(y)|<epsilon$. Partition $[-M,M]$ into intervals $A_i=[t_i,t_{i+1})$ of length shorter than $delta$. For each $t_i$ there exists $N_i$ where $nge N_i$ implies $|f_n(t_i)-f(t_i)|<epsilon$. Fix $T = max{N_i, N}$ and pick $xin A_i$ and $nge T$. It follows that $f_n(t_{i+1})-f_n(x)le f_n(t_{i+1})-f_n(t_i)le (f(t_{i+1})+epsilon)-(f(t_i)-epsilon)le 3epsilon$. By the Triangle Ineq.
$$begin{align}|f_n(x)-f(x)|&le |f_n(x)-f_n(t_{i+1})|+|f_n(t_{i+1})-f(t_{i+1})| + |f(t_{i+1})-f(t_i)| \ &le 5epsilon end{align}$$
But $A_i$ cover $[-M,M]$, so this holds for all $x in [-M,M]$. Thus, $nge T$ forces $|f_n(x)-f(x)|le 5epsilon$ and the convergence is uniform.
edited Nov 28 '18 at 1:26
answered Nov 28 '18 at 1:19
Guacho Perez
3,88911131
3,88911131
Nice (full) answer (+1)
– Robert Z
Nov 28 '18 at 6:44
add a comment |
Nice (full) answer (+1)
– Robert Z
Nov 28 '18 at 6:44
Nice (full) answer (+1)
– Robert Z
Nov 28 '18 at 6:44
Nice (full) answer (+1)
– Robert Z
Nov 28 '18 at 6:44
add a comment |
No, the last step does not work: pointwise convergence does not imply uniform convergence. You are not using the increasing property of such functions.
Hint. Use the second theorem given HERE on the compact set $[-R,R]$ (it is a variant of Dini's Theorem) and use the assumption about the limits at $pminfty$ in order to have the uniform convergence also on the complement of $[-R,R]$.
1
The version of Dini's Theorem you link to requires $f_n$ to converge monotonically to $f$ but in this problem, that need not be the case. Is there a more general version of the theorem?
– Guacho Perez
Nov 27 '18 at 21:41
@GuachoPerez Thanks for pointing out. I edited my answer.
– Robert Z
Nov 28 '18 at 6:42
add a comment |
No, the last step does not work: pointwise convergence does not imply uniform convergence. You are not using the increasing property of such functions.
Hint. Use the second theorem given HERE on the compact set $[-R,R]$ (it is a variant of Dini's Theorem) and use the assumption about the limits at $pminfty$ in order to have the uniform convergence also on the complement of $[-R,R]$.
1
The version of Dini's Theorem you link to requires $f_n$ to converge monotonically to $f$ but in this problem, that need not be the case. Is there a more general version of the theorem?
– Guacho Perez
Nov 27 '18 at 21:41
@GuachoPerez Thanks for pointing out. I edited my answer.
– Robert Z
Nov 28 '18 at 6:42
add a comment |
No, the last step does not work: pointwise convergence does not imply uniform convergence. You are not using the increasing property of such functions.
Hint. Use the second theorem given HERE on the compact set $[-R,R]$ (it is a variant of Dini's Theorem) and use the assumption about the limits at $pminfty$ in order to have the uniform convergence also on the complement of $[-R,R]$.
No, the last step does not work: pointwise convergence does not imply uniform convergence. You are not using the increasing property of such functions.
Hint. Use the second theorem given HERE on the compact set $[-R,R]$ (it is a variant of Dini's Theorem) and use the assumption about the limits at $pminfty$ in order to have the uniform convergence also on the complement of $[-R,R]$.
edited Nov 28 '18 at 6:41
answered Nov 27 '18 at 19:37
Robert Z
93.4k1061132
93.4k1061132
1
The version of Dini's Theorem you link to requires $f_n$ to converge monotonically to $f$ but in this problem, that need not be the case. Is there a more general version of the theorem?
– Guacho Perez
Nov 27 '18 at 21:41
@GuachoPerez Thanks for pointing out. I edited my answer.
– Robert Z
Nov 28 '18 at 6:42
add a comment |
1
The version of Dini's Theorem you link to requires $f_n$ to converge monotonically to $f$ but in this problem, that need not be the case. Is there a more general version of the theorem?
– Guacho Perez
Nov 27 '18 at 21:41
@GuachoPerez Thanks for pointing out. I edited my answer.
– Robert Z
Nov 28 '18 at 6:42
1
1
The version of Dini's Theorem you link to requires $f_n$ to converge monotonically to $f$ but in this problem, that need not be the case. Is there a more general version of the theorem?
– Guacho Perez
Nov 27 '18 at 21:41
The version of Dini's Theorem you link to requires $f_n$ to converge monotonically to $f$ but in this problem, that need not be the case. Is there a more general version of the theorem?
– Guacho Perez
Nov 27 '18 at 21:41
@GuachoPerez Thanks for pointing out. I edited my answer.
– Robert Z
Nov 28 '18 at 6:42
@GuachoPerez Thanks for pointing out. I edited my answer.
– Robert Z
Nov 28 '18 at 6:42
add a comment |
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3016207%2fprove-f-n-to-f-uniformly-on-mathbbr%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
Remark: $D$ is the collection of functions that correspond to the distribution function (CDF) of continuous random variables.
– Sean Roberson
Nov 27 '18 at 19:52