Continuity from below of outer measure extending an algebrea
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Consider the following problem:
Let $mathcal{A}$ be an Algebra with an additive function $mu$ and let $mu^*$ be the outer measure corresponding to $mu$. Show that if $A_nuparrow A$ then $mu^*(A_n)rightarrow mu^*(A)$.
After much effort I've crafted this attempt at a solution:
For every $n$ we have a cover by sets from
$mathcal{A}:space{P_{n,i}}^{infty}_{i=1}$ such that
$sum_{i}mu(P_{n,i})<mu^*(A_n)+epsilon$. We then also have a $k_n$
such that:
$$sum_{i=k_n+1}^{infty}mu(P_{n,i})<frac{epsilon}{2^n}$$ We will
also define $$R_n:=bigcup_{i=1}^{k_n} P_{n,i}inmathcal{A}$$ We then
have:
$$Asubseteqbigcup_{n=1}^{infty}(R_nsetminusbigcup_{j=1}^{n-1}R_j)cupbigcup_{n=1}^{infty}bigcup_{i=k_n+1}^{infty}P_{n,i}$$
And so by additivity of $mu$:
$$mu^*(A)leqsum_{n=1}^{infty}mu(R_nsetminusbigcup_{j=1}^{n-1}R_j)+sum_{n=1}^{infty}sum_{i=k_n+1}^{infty}mu(P_{n.i})leq
epsilon +
lim_msum_{n=1}^{m}mu(R_nsetminusbigcup_{j=1}^{n-1}R_j)=\
epsilon+lim_mmu(bigcup_{n=1}^{m}R_n)$$
This is where I'm stuck. Essentially I want to say that the union above isn't much larger than $R_m$ because $R_m$ covers most of $A_n$ for $nlt m$, and $R_n$ isn't much larger than $A_n$, but I'm not sure this can actually be done.
Is this solution salvageable? Or is there another approach that might work better?
real-analysis measure-theory outer-measure
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Consider the following problem:
Let $mathcal{A}$ be an Algebra with an additive function $mu$ and let $mu^*$ be the outer measure corresponding to $mu$. Show that if $A_nuparrow A$ then $mu^*(A_n)rightarrow mu^*(A)$.
After much effort I've crafted this attempt at a solution:
For every $n$ we have a cover by sets from
$mathcal{A}:space{P_{n,i}}^{infty}_{i=1}$ such that
$sum_{i}mu(P_{n,i})<mu^*(A_n)+epsilon$. We then also have a $k_n$
such that:
$$sum_{i=k_n+1}^{infty}mu(P_{n,i})<frac{epsilon}{2^n}$$ We will
also define $$R_n:=bigcup_{i=1}^{k_n} P_{n,i}inmathcal{A}$$ We then
have:
$$Asubseteqbigcup_{n=1}^{infty}(R_nsetminusbigcup_{j=1}^{n-1}R_j)cupbigcup_{n=1}^{infty}bigcup_{i=k_n+1}^{infty}P_{n,i}$$
And so by additivity of $mu$:
$$mu^*(A)leqsum_{n=1}^{infty}mu(R_nsetminusbigcup_{j=1}^{n-1}R_j)+sum_{n=1}^{infty}sum_{i=k_n+1}^{infty}mu(P_{n.i})leq
epsilon +
lim_msum_{n=1}^{m}mu(R_nsetminusbigcup_{j=1}^{n-1}R_j)=\
epsilon+lim_mmu(bigcup_{n=1}^{m}R_n)$$
This is where I'm stuck. Essentially I want to say that the union above isn't much larger than $R_m$ because $R_m$ covers most of $A_n$ for $nlt m$, and $R_n$ isn't much larger than $A_n$, but I'm not sure this can actually be done.
Is this solution salvageable? Or is there another approach that might work better?
real-analysis measure-theory outer-measure
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Consider the following problem:
Let $mathcal{A}$ be an Algebra with an additive function $mu$ and let $mu^*$ be the outer measure corresponding to $mu$. Show that if $A_nuparrow A$ then $mu^*(A_n)rightarrow mu^*(A)$.
After much effort I've crafted this attempt at a solution:
For every $n$ we have a cover by sets from
$mathcal{A}:space{P_{n,i}}^{infty}_{i=1}$ such that
$sum_{i}mu(P_{n,i})<mu^*(A_n)+epsilon$. We then also have a $k_n$
such that:
$$sum_{i=k_n+1}^{infty}mu(P_{n,i})<frac{epsilon}{2^n}$$ We will
also define $$R_n:=bigcup_{i=1}^{k_n} P_{n,i}inmathcal{A}$$ We then
have:
$$Asubseteqbigcup_{n=1}^{infty}(R_nsetminusbigcup_{j=1}^{n-1}R_j)cupbigcup_{n=1}^{infty}bigcup_{i=k_n+1}^{infty}P_{n,i}$$
And so by additivity of $mu$:
$$mu^*(A)leqsum_{n=1}^{infty}mu(R_nsetminusbigcup_{j=1}^{n-1}R_j)+sum_{n=1}^{infty}sum_{i=k_n+1}^{infty}mu(P_{n.i})leq
epsilon +
lim_msum_{n=1}^{m}mu(R_nsetminusbigcup_{j=1}^{n-1}R_j)=\
epsilon+lim_mmu(bigcup_{n=1}^{m}R_n)$$
This is where I'm stuck. Essentially I want to say that the union above isn't much larger than $R_m$ because $R_m$ covers most of $A_n$ for $nlt m$, and $R_n$ isn't much larger than $A_n$, but I'm not sure this can actually be done.
Is this solution salvageable? Or is there another approach that might work better?
real-analysis measure-theory outer-measure
Consider the following problem:
Let $mathcal{A}$ be an Algebra with an additive function $mu$ and let $mu^*$ be the outer measure corresponding to $mu$. Show that if $A_nuparrow A$ then $mu^*(A_n)rightarrow mu^*(A)$.
After much effort I've crafted this attempt at a solution:
For every $n$ we have a cover by sets from
$mathcal{A}:space{P_{n,i}}^{infty}_{i=1}$ such that
$sum_{i}mu(P_{n,i})<mu^*(A_n)+epsilon$. We then also have a $k_n$
such that:
$$sum_{i=k_n+1}^{infty}mu(P_{n,i})<frac{epsilon}{2^n}$$ We will
also define $$R_n:=bigcup_{i=1}^{k_n} P_{n,i}inmathcal{A}$$ We then
have:
$$Asubseteqbigcup_{n=1}^{infty}(R_nsetminusbigcup_{j=1}^{n-1}R_j)cupbigcup_{n=1}^{infty}bigcup_{i=k_n+1}^{infty}P_{n,i}$$
And so by additivity of $mu$:
$$mu^*(A)leqsum_{n=1}^{infty}mu(R_nsetminusbigcup_{j=1}^{n-1}R_j)+sum_{n=1}^{infty}sum_{i=k_n+1}^{infty}mu(P_{n.i})leq
epsilon +
lim_msum_{n=1}^{m}mu(R_nsetminusbigcup_{j=1}^{n-1}R_j)=\
epsilon+lim_mmu(bigcup_{n=1}^{m}R_n)$$
This is where I'm stuck. Essentially I want to say that the union above isn't much larger than $R_m$ because $R_m$ covers most of $A_n$ for $nlt m$, and $R_n$ isn't much larger than $A_n$, but I'm not sure this can actually be done.
Is this solution salvageable? Or is there another approach that might work better?
real-analysis measure-theory outer-measure
real-analysis measure-theory outer-measure
asked Nov 14 at 17:26
Bar Alon
465114
465114
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
This is only a partial answer. I am not sure, if the statement is in general true!
If the additive measure $mu$ on $mathcal{A}$ has the property that it extends to a measure $widetilde{mu}$ on a $sigma$-algebra $mathcal{F} supset mathcal{A}$ with the property that for any $A subset X$ there exists a $B in mathcal{F}$ with $A subset B$ and
$$mu^*(A) = widetilde{mu}(B),$$
then the statement is true. For example, this is the case if $mu$ is the Lebesgue-measure on $mathbb{R}$ and $mathcal{A}$ is the $sigma$-algebra of all Borel-sets.
Proof: Take for $A_n$ the corresponding $B_n in mathcal{F}$ with $mu^*(A_n) = widetilde{mu}(B_n)$. Then $x in A$ implies that $x in A_m$ for all $m ge n$, starting at some $n in mathbb{N}$. Thus $x in liminf_{n rightarrow infty} B_n$, because $A_n subset B_n$, and
$$ mu^*(E) le widetilde{mu}(liminf_{n rightarrow infty} B_n) le liminf_{n rightarrow infty} , widetilde{mu}(B_n) = lim_{n rightarrow infty} mu^*(A_n).$$
Can you clarify your notation a bit? What are $G_n$? and what is $E$?
– Bar Alon
Nov 16 at 8:38
Sorry, I have corrected the typos: $G_n$ should be $B_n$.
– p4sch
Nov 16 at 8:55
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
This is only a partial answer. I am not sure, if the statement is in general true!
If the additive measure $mu$ on $mathcal{A}$ has the property that it extends to a measure $widetilde{mu}$ on a $sigma$-algebra $mathcal{F} supset mathcal{A}$ with the property that for any $A subset X$ there exists a $B in mathcal{F}$ with $A subset B$ and
$$mu^*(A) = widetilde{mu}(B),$$
then the statement is true. For example, this is the case if $mu$ is the Lebesgue-measure on $mathbb{R}$ and $mathcal{A}$ is the $sigma$-algebra of all Borel-sets.
Proof: Take for $A_n$ the corresponding $B_n in mathcal{F}$ with $mu^*(A_n) = widetilde{mu}(B_n)$. Then $x in A$ implies that $x in A_m$ for all $m ge n$, starting at some $n in mathbb{N}$. Thus $x in liminf_{n rightarrow infty} B_n$, because $A_n subset B_n$, and
$$ mu^*(E) le widetilde{mu}(liminf_{n rightarrow infty} B_n) le liminf_{n rightarrow infty} , widetilde{mu}(B_n) = lim_{n rightarrow infty} mu^*(A_n).$$
Can you clarify your notation a bit? What are $G_n$? and what is $E$?
– Bar Alon
Nov 16 at 8:38
Sorry, I have corrected the typos: $G_n$ should be $B_n$.
– p4sch
Nov 16 at 8:55
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
This is only a partial answer. I am not sure, if the statement is in general true!
If the additive measure $mu$ on $mathcal{A}$ has the property that it extends to a measure $widetilde{mu}$ on a $sigma$-algebra $mathcal{F} supset mathcal{A}$ with the property that for any $A subset X$ there exists a $B in mathcal{F}$ with $A subset B$ and
$$mu^*(A) = widetilde{mu}(B),$$
then the statement is true. For example, this is the case if $mu$ is the Lebesgue-measure on $mathbb{R}$ and $mathcal{A}$ is the $sigma$-algebra of all Borel-sets.
Proof: Take for $A_n$ the corresponding $B_n in mathcal{F}$ with $mu^*(A_n) = widetilde{mu}(B_n)$. Then $x in A$ implies that $x in A_m$ for all $m ge n$, starting at some $n in mathbb{N}$. Thus $x in liminf_{n rightarrow infty} B_n$, because $A_n subset B_n$, and
$$ mu^*(E) le widetilde{mu}(liminf_{n rightarrow infty} B_n) le liminf_{n rightarrow infty} , widetilde{mu}(B_n) = lim_{n rightarrow infty} mu^*(A_n).$$
Can you clarify your notation a bit? What are $G_n$? and what is $E$?
– Bar Alon
Nov 16 at 8:38
Sorry, I have corrected the typos: $G_n$ should be $B_n$.
– p4sch
Nov 16 at 8:55
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
This is only a partial answer. I am not sure, if the statement is in general true!
If the additive measure $mu$ on $mathcal{A}$ has the property that it extends to a measure $widetilde{mu}$ on a $sigma$-algebra $mathcal{F} supset mathcal{A}$ with the property that for any $A subset X$ there exists a $B in mathcal{F}$ with $A subset B$ and
$$mu^*(A) = widetilde{mu}(B),$$
then the statement is true. For example, this is the case if $mu$ is the Lebesgue-measure on $mathbb{R}$ and $mathcal{A}$ is the $sigma$-algebra of all Borel-sets.
Proof: Take for $A_n$ the corresponding $B_n in mathcal{F}$ with $mu^*(A_n) = widetilde{mu}(B_n)$. Then $x in A$ implies that $x in A_m$ for all $m ge n$, starting at some $n in mathbb{N}$. Thus $x in liminf_{n rightarrow infty} B_n$, because $A_n subset B_n$, and
$$ mu^*(E) le widetilde{mu}(liminf_{n rightarrow infty} B_n) le liminf_{n rightarrow infty} , widetilde{mu}(B_n) = lim_{n rightarrow infty} mu^*(A_n).$$
This is only a partial answer. I am not sure, if the statement is in general true!
If the additive measure $mu$ on $mathcal{A}$ has the property that it extends to a measure $widetilde{mu}$ on a $sigma$-algebra $mathcal{F} supset mathcal{A}$ with the property that for any $A subset X$ there exists a $B in mathcal{F}$ with $A subset B$ and
$$mu^*(A) = widetilde{mu}(B),$$
then the statement is true. For example, this is the case if $mu$ is the Lebesgue-measure on $mathbb{R}$ and $mathcal{A}$ is the $sigma$-algebra of all Borel-sets.
Proof: Take for $A_n$ the corresponding $B_n in mathcal{F}$ with $mu^*(A_n) = widetilde{mu}(B_n)$. Then $x in A$ implies that $x in A_m$ for all $m ge n$, starting at some $n in mathbb{N}$. Thus $x in liminf_{n rightarrow infty} B_n$, because $A_n subset B_n$, and
$$ mu^*(E) le widetilde{mu}(liminf_{n rightarrow infty} B_n) le liminf_{n rightarrow infty} , widetilde{mu}(B_n) = lim_{n rightarrow infty} mu^*(A_n).$$
edited Nov 16 at 10:42
answered Nov 15 at 10:18
p4sch
3,630216
3,630216
Can you clarify your notation a bit? What are $G_n$? and what is $E$?
– Bar Alon
Nov 16 at 8:38
Sorry, I have corrected the typos: $G_n$ should be $B_n$.
– p4sch
Nov 16 at 8:55
add a comment |
Can you clarify your notation a bit? What are $G_n$? and what is $E$?
– Bar Alon
Nov 16 at 8:38
Sorry, I have corrected the typos: $G_n$ should be $B_n$.
– p4sch
Nov 16 at 8:55
Can you clarify your notation a bit? What are $G_n$? and what is $E$?
– Bar Alon
Nov 16 at 8:38
Can you clarify your notation a bit? What are $G_n$? and what is $E$?
– Bar Alon
Nov 16 at 8:38
Sorry, I have corrected the typos: $G_n$ should be $B_n$.
– p4sch
Nov 16 at 8:55
Sorry, I have corrected the typos: $G_n$ should be $B_n$.
– p4sch
Nov 16 at 8:55
add a comment |
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%2f2998560%2fcontinuity-from-below-of-outer-measure-extending-an-algebrea%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