I don't understand why Limit of a Riemann sum suddenly turns into a integral. It makes no sense both intuitively and geometrically to me. In case, differentiation it is easy understand though.
Limit of Riemann Sum equal to integral
1.4k Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail AtThere are 2 best solutions below
On
the Reimann sum is the definition of the integral.
I think what you are really saying is that you don't understand why the integral equals the anti-derivative.
And that is the "Fundamental Theorem of Calculus."
suppose $F(x) = \int_0^t f(t) dt$
That is, we have a curve $f(t)$ and we color everyting above the interval (0,x) on the $x$-axis to the bottom of the cuve. That area equals $F(x).$ Now we want to make that area just a tiny bit larger. So we make a very thin stripe just to the right of $x.$ How much has $F(x)$ changed? The area has changed by the length of the stripe $\times$ the thickness of the stripe. Lets call the thickness h.
$F(x+h) = F(x) + f(x)h$
Now what is the derivative of $F(x)$?
$\lim_\limits{h\to 0} \dfrac{F(x+h) - F(x)}{h} = \dfrac{f(x) h}{h} = f(x)$
Perhaps not rigorous, but it might help with the intuition.
For a more formal proof, I am sure your calculus book has one, and it should be easy enough to google it.
There is no reason why the limit of a Riemann sum turns into an integral: the (Riemann) integral of a function over an interval $[a,b]$ is by definition the limit of a Riemann sum. However, if you are aware of the geometric definition of the integral, as the area under a curve, we can see why this definition makes sense.
Say we want to compute the area under the curve described by the equation $y=f(x)$ on some interval $[a,b]$. One way to do this is to cut up our interval into small sub-intervals, and add up the area of rectangles with these sub-intervals as their base, and whose heights are approximately that of the graph of $f$. More formally, we can define a subdivision of $[a,b]$ by specifying $N+1$ points $a=x_0<x_1<x_2<..<x_{N-1}<x_N=b$. Under the right conditions, the value of $f$ on each of the $[x_i,x_{i+1}]$ will be sufficiently close to some $f(a_i)$ with $a_i\in [x_i,x_{i+1}]$, so that the area under the graph of $f$ on $[x_i,x_{i+1}]$ will be close to $f(a_i)\cdot(x_{i+1}-x_i)$. Then we may sum up all these approximate areas to get a total approximate area under the graph of $f$ on $[a,b]$ , that is, let $$S_N=\sum_{i=1}^{N}f(a_{i-1})\cdot(x_{i}-x_{i-1})$$ $S_N$ is precisely a Riemann sum associated with the subdivision $\sigma=(x_0,..,x_N)$. We may take our subdivision and choice of $a_i$'s in some convenient way, for instance make the $x_i$'s evenly spaced, take $f(a_i)$ to be the sup or the inf of $f$ on $[x_i,x_{i+1}]$, or any other choice we find useful, but under the right conditions, we find that the value of $S_N$ converges as the subdivision gets finer (that is, $\sup\{x_{i+1}-x_i,0\leq i\leq N\}$ gets small enough), regardless of the particular subdivisions or choice of $a_i$'s. If this is indeed the case, we say $f$ is (Riemann) integrable on $[a,b]$, and define $$\int_a^bf(x)dx=\lim_{n\mapsto \infty}S_n$$ Where $(S_n)$ is any sequence of Riemann sums whose corresponding subdivisions get finer and finer. In other words, if $\sigma=(x_0,..,x_N)$, let $\delta(\sigma)=\sup\{x_{i+1}-x_i,0\leq i\leq N\}$, and let $(S_n)$ have corresponding subdivisions $(\sigma_n)$. Then we require that $\lim_{n\mapsto \infty}\delta(\sigma_n))=0$.
Notice, the very notation of the integral informally reflects this idea of discrete summation. the $\int$ sign is an elongated S for "sum", and the $dx$ stands for an infinitesimal variation in $x$, that is, $x_{i+1}-x_i$ if the subdivision is "infinitely fine"