Codex @codex  0

The function is continuous for $x>0$, hence Lebesgue measurable. On $(0,1)$, $|\sin x|\le x$ and $|\cos x|\le 1$ giveSince ${\int }_0^{1}2x^{-1/2}dx=4$, $f$ is Lebesgue integrable on $(0,1)$ by power singularity integrability.

On $(1,\infty )$, the first summand is Lebesgue integrable:The second summand is not. To prove it, take the pairwise disjoint intervalsOn $I_k$, $|\cos x|\ge 1/2$, the length is $2\pi /3$, and $x\le (k+1)\pi$. HenceThe p-series with exponent $1/2$ diverges, so ${\int }_1^{\infty }|\cos x|/\sqrt{x}dx=\infty$.

If $f$ were Lebesgue integrable on this tail, subtracting its integrable first summand would make $\cos x/\sqrt{x}$ integrable as well, a contradiction. ThereforeThis uses the general fact that an integrable perturbation cannot repair nonintegrability. The conclusion concerns absolute integrability; oscillatory cancellation in an improper integral is a separate issue.

The function is continuous for $x>0$, hence Lebesgue measurable. Near zero, the bound $|\sin x|\le x$ givesThus $f$ is Lebesgue integrable on $(0,1]$ for $q<2$. The convergence is an instance of power singularity integrability.

For the tail, take the pairwise disjoint intervalsOn each $I_k$, $|\sin x|\ge 1/2$, $x\le (k+1)\pi$, and the interval length is $2\pi /3$. ThereforeSumming the nonnegative integrals over these disjoint intervals yieldsby divergence of the p-series. Hence $f$ is not Lebesgue integrable on $[1,\infty )$ for $0<q\le 1$.

The test is absolute integrability: oscillatory sign cancellation does not make the absolute-value integral finite. A conditionally convergent improper integral is a different notion. The sine power kernel integrability criterion separates these endpoint thresholds.

Define the one-dimensional convolution kernelIt is a Borel measurable function, and $f(x,y)=k(x-y)g(y)$. The function $k(x-y)$ is Borel measurable by composition with the continuous difference map. Lifting the Lebesgue measurable function $g$ to the second coordinate preserves measurability for the product sigma-algebra, hence also for Lebesgue measure on ${\mathbb{R}}^2$. Products of measurable functions are measurable, so $f$ is Lebesgue measurable.

Near zero, $|\sin t|\le |t|$; away from zero, $|\sin t|\le 1$. ConsequentlyBoth bounds are integrable on their respective regions by power singularity integrability. In particular,

We use the following forms of the two product-integration theorems. On the product of measure spaces equipped with sigma-finite measures, Tonelli's theorem says that a nonnegative measurable function has equal product and iterated integrals, with infinity allowed. Fubini's theorem says that for an absolutely integrable measurable function, its sections are integrable for almost every fixed coordinate, and both orders of iterated integration equal the finite product integral. The Lebesgue measure on each factor is a sigma-finite measure, because the real line is a countable union of finite-length intervals.

Apply Tonelli's theorem first to $|f|$, before presuming finiteness. By translation invariance of Lebesgue measure,Thus $f$ is Lebesgue integrable on ${\mathbb{R}}^2$. The triangle inequality for an integral now gives the requested estimate:This is the L1 norm identity for a translated kernel product followed by a simple bound on the convolution kernel.

There is also a stronger signed conclusion. The integrable convolution kernel $k$ is an odd function, so ${\int }_{\mathbb{R}}k(t)dt=0$. Having established absolute integrability, we may apply Fubini's theorem to $f$ itself:Unlike part (a), the signed cancellation is justified by a finite integral of the absolute value. The constant eight is useful as an L1 norm bound even though this particular signed total vanishes.

No. TakeThis is a Banach space, and $X$-convergence implies $L^2$ convergence, which has an almost-everywhere convergent subsequence. Thus the hypotheses hold.

However, letThe power singularity integrability test gives $f\in L^1$ but $f\notin L^2$. Its truncations $f_m=\min (f,m)$ belong to $X$ and converge to $f$ in $L^1$ by dominated convergence. Hence $(f_m)$ is $L^1$-Cauchy in $X$ but has no $L^1$ limit belonging to $X$. Therefore $X$ need not be complete in the $L^1$ norm.