Prove that union, intersection and difference of measurable sets is measurable using specific definition of...
$begingroup$
I found a lot of questions with the similar title on the forum, but not all of them are properly answered and those, which are, differ significantly from mine.
I work in the closed interval $[0,1]$. I use the following definition of Lebesgue measurability:
$mathbf{Def. 1}$ The set E is called measurable iff $$lambda^{*}(E)+lambda^{*}([0,1]backslash E)=1,$$ where $lambda^{*}$ is the outer lebesgue measure, i.e. $lambda^{*}(E)=inf_{Usupset E}lambda(U)$, where $U$ is an open set.
I can prove that this definition is equivalent to the following:
$mathbf{Def. 2}$ The set E is called measurable iff $forall epsilon >0 exists U_{epsilon} ,F_{epsilon}$ - open and closed sets respectively, such that $F_{epsilon} subset E subset U_{epsilon} lambda^{*}(U_{epsilon})-lambda^{*}(F_{epsilon})<epsilon$.
$sigma$-additivity for $lambda$ is also proven (for a measurable set $E$: $lambda(E)=lambda^{*}(E))$ :
If ${E_n}$ - a collection of measurable sets and $E_kcap E_l = varnothing$ then $lambda left (bigcup_{n=1}^{infty}E_n right)=sum_{n=1}^infty{lambda(E_n)}$.
And here is my question:
a) If $A$ and $B$ are measurable sets (they may intersect) prove that $Acup B, Acap B, Abackslash B$ are measurable using $mathbf{ Def. 1}$ or $mathbf{ Def. 2}$.
b) Prove that countable intersection and countable union of the measurable sets is measurable.
I'd appreciate your help, guys.
real-analysis measure-theory lebesgue-measure
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I found a lot of questions with the similar title on the forum, but not all of them are properly answered and those, which are, differ significantly from mine.
I work in the closed interval $[0,1]$. I use the following definition of Lebesgue measurability:
$mathbf{Def. 1}$ The set E is called measurable iff $$lambda^{*}(E)+lambda^{*}([0,1]backslash E)=1,$$ where $lambda^{*}$ is the outer lebesgue measure, i.e. $lambda^{*}(E)=inf_{Usupset E}lambda(U)$, where $U$ is an open set.
I can prove that this definition is equivalent to the following:
$mathbf{Def. 2}$ The set E is called measurable iff $forall epsilon >0 exists U_{epsilon} ,F_{epsilon}$ - open and closed sets respectively, such that $F_{epsilon} subset E subset U_{epsilon} lambda^{*}(U_{epsilon})-lambda^{*}(F_{epsilon})<epsilon$.
$sigma$-additivity for $lambda$ is also proven (for a measurable set $E$: $lambda(E)=lambda^{*}(E))$ :
If ${E_n}$ - a collection of measurable sets and $E_kcap E_l = varnothing$ then $lambda left (bigcup_{n=1}^{infty}E_n right)=sum_{n=1}^infty{lambda(E_n)}$.
And here is my question:
a) If $A$ and $B$ are measurable sets (they may intersect) prove that $Acup B, Acap B, Abackslash B$ are measurable using $mathbf{ Def. 1}$ or $mathbf{ Def. 2}$.
b) Prove that countable intersection and countable union of the measurable sets is measurable.
I'd appreciate your help, guys.
real-analysis measure-theory lebesgue-measure
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I found a lot of questions with the similar title on the forum, but not all of them are properly answered and those, which are, differ significantly from mine.
I work in the closed interval $[0,1]$. I use the following definition of Lebesgue measurability:
$mathbf{Def. 1}$ The set E is called measurable iff $$lambda^{*}(E)+lambda^{*}([0,1]backslash E)=1,$$ where $lambda^{*}$ is the outer lebesgue measure, i.e. $lambda^{*}(E)=inf_{Usupset E}lambda(U)$, where $U$ is an open set.
I can prove that this definition is equivalent to the following:
$mathbf{Def. 2}$ The set E is called measurable iff $forall epsilon >0 exists U_{epsilon} ,F_{epsilon}$ - open and closed sets respectively, such that $F_{epsilon} subset E subset U_{epsilon} lambda^{*}(U_{epsilon})-lambda^{*}(F_{epsilon})<epsilon$.
$sigma$-additivity for $lambda$ is also proven (for a measurable set $E$: $lambda(E)=lambda^{*}(E))$ :
If ${E_n}$ - a collection of measurable sets and $E_kcap E_l = varnothing$ then $lambda left (bigcup_{n=1}^{infty}E_n right)=sum_{n=1}^infty{lambda(E_n)}$.
And here is my question:
a) If $A$ and $B$ are measurable sets (they may intersect) prove that $Acup B, Acap B, Abackslash B$ are measurable using $mathbf{ Def. 1}$ or $mathbf{ Def. 2}$.
b) Prove that countable intersection and countable union of the measurable sets is measurable.
I'd appreciate your help, guys.
real-analysis measure-theory lebesgue-measure
$endgroup$
I found a lot of questions with the similar title on the forum, but not all of them are properly answered and those, which are, differ significantly from mine.
I work in the closed interval $[0,1]$. I use the following definition of Lebesgue measurability:
$mathbf{Def. 1}$ The set E is called measurable iff $$lambda^{*}(E)+lambda^{*}([0,1]backslash E)=1,$$ where $lambda^{*}$ is the outer lebesgue measure, i.e. $lambda^{*}(E)=inf_{Usupset E}lambda(U)$, where $U$ is an open set.
I can prove that this definition is equivalent to the following:
$mathbf{Def. 2}$ The set E is called measurable iff $forall epsilon >0 exists U_{epsilon} ,F_{epsilon}$ - open and closed sets respectively, such that $F_{epsilon} subset E subset U_{epsilon} lambda^{*}(U_{epsilon})-lambda^{*}(F_{epsilon})<epsilon$.
$sigma$-additivity for $lambda$ is also proven (for a measurable set $E$: $lambda(E)=lambda^{*}(E))$ :
If ${E_n}$ - a collection of measurable sets and $E_kcap E_l = varnothing$ then $lambda left (bigcup_{n=1}^{infty}E_n right)=sum_{n=1}^infty{lambda(E_n)}$.
And here is my question:
a) If $A$ and $B$ are measurable sets (they may intersect) prove that $Acup B, Acap B, Abackslash B$ are measurable using $mathbf{ Def. 1}$ or $mathbf{ Def. 2}$.
b) Prove that countable intersection and countable union of the measurable sets is measurable.
I'd appreciate your help, guys.
real-analysis measure-theory lebesgue-measure
real-analysis measure-theory lebesgue-measure
edited Sep 3 '16 at 21:39
Serj.Aristarkhov
asked Sep 3 '16 at 16:20
Serj.AristarkhovSerj.Aristarkhov
113
113
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Usually, a set $E$ is called (Lebesgue) measurable, if for all sets $A$ we have
begin{equation} lambda^*(Ecap A)+lambda^*(E^complementcap A)=lambda^*(A).end{equation} We can show, that Def. 1 is equivalent to this standard definition of Lebesgue measurability. Then a) and b) follow, (you can read their proofs in a book on measure theory, they are a bit long, though).
Proof: If $E$ is Lebesgue measurable (by the standard definition), then it satisfies the equality in Def. 1 (take $A=[0,1]$).
Let $E$ be not Lebesgue measurable. Then there is a set $A$ and an $varepsilon>0$ such that
begin{equation}lambda^*(Ecap A)+lambda^*(E^complementcap A)>lambda^*(A)+4varepsilon.end{equation}
By the definition of $lambda^*$ there is a countable collection of open intervals $(I_n)_n$ where $I_n=(a_n,b_n)$ which together cover $A$ and where
begin{equation}lambda^*(J)leqsum_{n=1}^infty(b_n-a_n)<lambda^*(A)+2varepsilon,end{equation}
for $J=bigcup_nI_n$. Since $Asubseteq J$ also $lambda^*(Ecap J)+lambda^*(E^complementcap J)>lambda^*(A)+2varepsilon$. Since the tail of the above sum goes to $0$, there is an index $N$ such that
begin{equation}sum_{n=N}^infty(b_n-a_n)<varepsilon.end{equation}
Let $J_N=bigcup_{n=1}^NI_n$. Then
begin{equation}lambda^*(Ecap J)leqlambda^*(Ecap J_N)+lambda[Ecap(Jsetminus J_N)]<lambda^*(Ecap J_N)+varepsilonend{equation} and the same for $E^complement$ instead of $E$. The next thing works, because $J_N$ and $J_N^complement$ are finite unions of intervals and disjoint.
begin{align}
lambda^*(E)+lambda^*(E^complement)&=lambda^*[(Ecap J_N)cup(Ecap J_N^complement)]+lambda^*[(E^complementcap J_N)cup(E^complementcap J_N^complement)]\
&=lambda^*(Ecap J_N)+lambda^*(Ecap J_N^complement)+lambda^*(E^complementcap J_N)+lambda^*(E^complementcap J_N^complement)\
&>[lambda^*(Ecap J)+lambda^*(E^complementcap J)-2varepsilon]+lambda(J_N^complement)\
&>lambda^*(A)+4varepsilon-2varepsilon+[1-lambda(J)]\
&>1,end{align}
which means, that $E$ is neither Lebesgue measurable according to Def. 1.
$endgroup$
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%2f1913281%2fprove-that-union-intersection-and-difference-of-measurable-sets-is-measurable-u%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Usually, a set $E$ is called (Lebesgue) measurable, if for all sets $A$ we have
begin{equation} lambda^*(Ecap A)+lambda^*(E^complementcap A)=lambda^*(A).end{equation} We can show, that Def. 1 is equivalent to this standard definition of Lebesgue measurability. Then a) and b) follow, (you can read their proofs in a book on measure theory, they are a bit long, though).
Proof: If $E$ is Lebesgue measurable (by the standard definition), then it satisfies the equality in Def. 1 (take $A=[0,1]$).
Let $E$ be not Lebesgue measurable. Then there is a set $A$ and an $varepsilon>0$ such that
begin{equation}lambda^*(Ecap A)+lambda^*(E^complementcap A)>lambda^*(A)+4varepsilon.end{equation}
By the definition of $lambda^*$ there is a countable collection of open intervals $(I_n)_n$ where $I_n=(a_n,b_n)$ which together cover $A$ and where
begin{equation}lambda^*(J)leqsum_{n=1}^infty(b_n-a_n)<lambda^*(A)+2varepsilon,end{equation}
for $J=bigcup_nI_n$. Since $Asubseteq J$ also $lambda^*(Ecap J)+lambda^*(E^complementcap J)>lambda^*(A)+2varepsilon$. Since the tail of the above sum goes to $0$, there is an index $N$ such that
begin{equation}sum_{n=N}^infty(b_n-a_n)<varepsilon.end{equation}
Let $J_N=bigcup_{n=1}^NI_n$. Then
begin{equation}lambda^*(Ecap J)leqlambda^*(Ecap J_N)+lambda[Ecap(Jsetminus J_N)]<lambda^*(Ecap J_N)+varepsilonend{equation} and the same for $E^complement$ instead of $E$. The next thing works, because $J_N$ and $J_N^complement$ are finite unions of intervals and disjoint.
begin{align}
lambda^*(E)+lambda^*(E^complement)&=lambda^*[(Ecap J_N)cup(Ecap J_N^complement)]+lambda^*[(E^complementcap J_N)cup(E^complementcap J_N^complement)]\
&=lambda^*(Ecap J_N)+lambda^*(Ecap J_N^complement)+lambda^*(E^complementcap J_N)+lambda^*(E^complementcap J_N^complement)\
&>[lambda^*(Ecap J)+lambda^*(E^complementcap J)-2varepsilon]+lambda(J_N^complement)\
&>lambda^*(A)+4varepsilon-2varepsilon+[1-lambda(J)]\
&>1,end{align}
which means, that $E$ is neither Lebesgue measurable according to Def. 1.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Usually, a set $E$ is called (Lebesgue) measurable, if for all sets $A$ we have
begin{equation} lambda^*(Ecap A)+lambda^*(E^complementcap A)=lambda^*(A).end{equation} We can show, that Def. 1 is equivalent to this standard definition of Lebesgue measurability. Then a) and b) follow, (you can read their proofs in a book on measure theory, they are a bit long, though).
Proof: If $E$ is Lebesgue measurable (by the standard definition), then it satisfies the equality in Def. 1 (take $A=[0,1]$).
Let $E$ be not Lebesgue measurable. Then there is a set $A$ and an $varepsilon>0$ such that
begin{equation}lambda^*(Ecap A)+lambda^*(E^complementcap A)>lambda^*(A)+4varepsilon.end{equation}
By the definition of $lambda^*$ there is a countable collection of open intervals $(I_n)_n$ where $I_n=(a_n,b_n)$ which together cover $A$ and where
begin{equation}lambda^*(J)leqsum_{n=1}^infty(b_n-a_n)<lambda^*(A)+2varepsilon,end{equation}
for $J=bigcup_nI_n$. Since $Asubseteq J$ also $lambda^*(Ecap J)+lambda^*(E^complementcap J)>lambda^*(A)+2varepsilon$. Since the tail of the above sum goes to $0$, there is an index $N$ such that
begin{equation}sum_{n=N}^infty(b_n-a_n)<varepsilon.end{equation}
Let $J_N=bigcup_{n=1}^NI_n$. Then
begin{equation}lambda^*(Ecap J)leqlambda^*(Ecap J_N)+lambda[Ecap(Jsetminus J_N)]<lambda^*(Ecap J_N)+varepsilonend{equation} and the same for $E^complement$ instead of $E$. The next thing works, because $J_N$ and $J_N^complement$ are finite unions of intervals and disjoint.
begin{align}
lambda^*(E)+lambda^*(E^complement)&=lambda^*[(Ecap J_N)cup(Ecap J_N^complement)]+lambda^*[(E^complementcap J_N)cup(E^complementcap J_N^complement)]\
&=lambda^*(Ecap J_N)+lambda^*(Ecap J_N^complement)+lambda^*(E^complementcap J_N)+lambda^*(E^complementcap J_N^complement)\
&>[lambda^*(Ecap J)+lambda^*(E^complementcap J)-2varepsilon]+lambda(J_N^complement)\
&>lambda^*(A)+4varepsilon-2varepsilon+[1-lambda(J)]\
&>1,end{align}
which means, that $E$ is neither Lebesgue measurable according to Def. 1.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Usually, a set $E$ is called (Lebesgue) measurable, if for all sets $A$ we have
begin{equation} lambda^*(Ecap A)+lambda^*(E^complementcap A)=lambda^*(A).end{equation} We can show, that Def. 1 is equivalent to this standard definition of Lebesgue measurability. Then a) and b) follow, (you can read their proofs in a book on measure theory, they are a bit long, though).
Proof: If $E$ is Lebesgue measurable (by the standard definition), then it satisfies the equality in Def. 1 (take $A=[0,1]$).
Let $E$ be not Lebesgue measurable. Then there is a set $A$ and an $varepsilon>0$ such that
begin{equation}lambda^*(Ecap A)+lambda^*(E^complementcap A)>lambda^*(A)+4varepsilon.end{equation}
By the definition of $lambda^*$ there is a countable collection of open intervals $(I_n)_n$ where $I_n=(a_n,b_n)$ which together cover $A$ and where
begin{equation}lambda^*(J)leqsum_{n=1}^infty(b_n-a_n)<lambda^*(A)+2varepsilon,end{equation}
for $J=bigcup_nI_n$. Since $Asubseteq J$ also $lambda^*(Ecap J)+lambda^*(E^complementcap J)>lambda^*(A)+2varepsilon$. Since the tail of the above sum goes to $0$, there is an index $N$ such that
begin{equation}sum_{n=N}^infty(b_n-a_n)<varepsilon.end{equation}
Let $J_N=bigcup_{n=1}^NI_n$. Then
begin{equation}lambda^*(Ecap J)leqlambda^*(Ecap J_N)+lambda[Ecap(Jsetminus J_N)]<lambda^*(Ecap J_N)+varepsilonend{equation} and the same for $E^complement$ instead of $E$. The next thing works, because $J_N$ and $J_N^complement$ are finite unions of intervals and disjoint.
begin{align}
lambda^*(E)+lambda^*(E^complement)&=lambda^*[(Ecap J_N)cup(Ecap J_N^complement)]+lambda^*[(E^complementcap J_N)cup(E^complementcap J_N^complement)]\
&=lambda^*(Ecap J_N)+lambda^*(Ecap J_N^complement)+lambda^*(E^complementcap J_N)+lambda^*(E^complementcap J_N^complement)\
&>[lambda^*(Ecap J)+lambda^*(E^complementcap J)-2varepsilon]+lambda(J_N^complement)\
&>lambda^*(A)+4varepsilon-2varepsilon+[1-lambda(J)]\
&>1,end{align}
which means, that $E$ is neither Lebesgue measurable according to Def. 1.
$endgroup$
Usually, a set $E$ is called (Lebesgue) measurable, if for all sets $A$ we have
begin{equation} lambda^*(Ecap A)+lambda^*(E^complementcap A)=lambda^*(A).end{equation} We can show, that Def. 1 is equivalent to this standard definition of Lebesgue measurability. Then a) and b) follow, (you can read their proofs in a book on measure theory, they are a bit long, though).
Proof: If $E$ is Lebesgue measurable (by the standard definition), then it satisfies the equality in Def. 1 (take $A=[0,1]$).
Let $E$ be not Lebesgue measurable. Then there is a set $A$ and an $varepsilon>0$ such that
begin{equation}lambda^*(Ecap A)+lambda^*(E^complementcap A)>lambda^*(A)+4varepsilon.end{equation}
By the definition of $lambda^*$ there is a countable collection of open intervals $(I_n)_n$ where $I_n=(a_n,b_n)$ which together cover $A$ and where
begin{equation}lambda^*(J)leqsum_{n=1}^infty(b_n-a_n)<lambda^*(A)+2varepsilon,end{equation}
for $J=bigcup_nI_n$. Since $Asubseteq J$ also $lambda^*(Ecap J)+lambda^*(E^complementcap J)>lambda^*(A)+2varepsilon$. Since the tail of the above sum goes to $0$, there is an index $N$ such that
begin{equation}sum_{n=N}^infty(b_n-a_n)<varepsilon.end{equation}
Let $J_N=bigcup_{n=1}^NI_n$. Then
begin{equation}lambda^*(Ecap J)leqlambda^*(Ecap J_N)+lambda[Ecap(Jsetminus J_N)]<lambda^*(Ecap J_N)+varepsilonend{equation} and the same for $E^complement$ instead of $E$. The next thing works, because $J_N$ and $J_N^complement$ are finite unions of intervals and disjoint.
begin{align}
lambda^*(E)+lambda^*(E^complement)&=lambda^*[(Ecap J_N)cup(Ecap J_N^complement)]+lambda^*[(E^complementcap J_N)cup(E^complementcap J_N^complement)]\
&=lambda^*(Ecap J_N)+lambda^*(Ecap J_N^complement)+lambda^*(E^complementcap J_N)+lambda^*(E^complementcap J_N^complement)\
&>[lambda^*(Ecap J)+lambda^*(E^complementcap J)-2varepsilon]+lambda(J_N^complement)\
&>lambda^*(A)+4varepsilon-2varepsilon+[1-lambda(J)]\
&>1,end{align}
which means, that $E$ is neither Lebesgue measurable according to Def. 1.
edited Sep 4 '16 at 15:36
answered Sep 4 '16 at 15:28
aiw7aiw7
183
183
add a comment |
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.
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%2f1913281%2fprove-that-union-intersection-and-difference-of-measurable-sets-is-measurable-u%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