Verification of a semialgebra











up vote
1
down vote

favorite












The question concerns the verification that a set family is a semialgebra.




Definition. A non empty family $mathcal{S}subseteqmathcal{P}(X)$ is said semialgebra on $X$ if:



$1.$ For each $E, Finmathcal{S}$ we have $Ecap Finmathcal{S}$;



$2.$ For each $Einmathcal{S}$ exist $F_1,dots F_ninmathcal{S}$ disjoint such that $E^c=cup_{k=1}^n F_k$.




We consider the family $$mathcal{I_0}=underbrace{{(a,b];|;-inftyle ale b<+infty}}_{:=U}cupunderbrace{{(a_1,+infty);|;-infty<a_1<+infty}}_{:=V}.$$
The family $mathcal{I}_0$ is a semialgebra on $mathbb{R}$. We observe that if $a=b$, then $(a,b]=emptyset$, therefore $emptysetin mathcal{I_0}$ by definition. We suppose that $a<b$ and we prove $1$.



Case 1.[$E, Fin U$]



$(a_1,b_1]cap(a_2,b_2]=(sup{a_1,a_2}, min{b_1,b_2}]inmathcal{I_0}$.



Case 2.[$Ein U$ and $Fin V$]



$(a_1, b_1]cap(a_2,+infty)=(sup{a_1,a_2}, b_1]in mathcal{I_0}$



Case 3.[$E,Fin V$]



$(a_1,+infty)cap (a_2,+infty)=(sup{a_1,a_2},+infty)in mathcal{I_0}$.



Question. Could someone help me to prove the property $2.$?



Thanks!










share|cite|improve this question


























    up vote
    1
    down vote

    favorite












    The question concerns the verification that a set family is a semialgebra.




    Definition. A non empty family $mathcal{S}subseteqmathcal{P}(X)$ is said semialgebra on $X$ if:



    $1.$ For each $E, Finmathcal{S}$ we have $Ecap Finmathcal{S}$;



    $2.$ For each $Einmathcal{S}$ exist $F_1,dots F_ninmathcal{S}$ disjoint such that $E^c=cup_{k=1}^n F_k$.




    We consider the family $$mathcal{I_0}=underbrace{{(a,b];|;-inftyle ale b<+infty}}_{:=U}cupunderbrace{{(a_1,+infty);|;-infty<a_1<+infty}}_{:=V}.$$
    The family $mathcal{I}_0$ is a semialgebra on $mathbb{R}$. We observe that if $a=b$, then $(a,b]=emptyset$, therefore $emptysetin mathcal{I_0}$ by definition. We suppose that $a<b$ and we prove $1$.



    Case 1.[$E, Fin U$]



    $(a_1,b_1]cap(a_2,b_2]=(sup{a_1,a_2}, min{b_1,b_2}]inmathcal{I_0}$.



    Case 2.[$Ein U$ and $Fin V$]



    $(a_1, b_1]cap(a_2,+infty)=(sup{a_1,a_2}, b_1]in mathcal{I_0}$



    Case 3.[$E,Fin V$]



    $(a_1,+infty)cap (a_2,+infty)=(sup{a_1,a_2},+infty)in mathcal{I_0}$.



    Question. Could someone help me to prove the property $2.$?



    Thanks!










    share|cite|improve this question
























      up vote
      1
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      1
      down vote

      favorite











      The question concerns the verification that a set family is a semialgebra.




      Definition. A non empty family $mathcal{S}subseteqmathcal{P}(X)$ is said semialgebra on $X$ if:



      $1.$ For each $E, Finmathcal{S}$ we have $Ecap Finmathcal{S}$;



      $2.$ For each $Einmathcal{S}$ exist $F_1,dots F_ninmathcal{S}$ disjoint such that $E^c=cup_{k=1}^n F_k$.




      We consider the family $$mathcal{I_0}=underbrace{{(a,b];|;-inftyle ale b<+infty}}_{:=U}cupunderbrace{{(a_1,+infty);|;-infty<a_1<+infty}}_{:=V}.$$
      The family $mathcal{I}_0$ is a semialgebra on $mathbb{R}$. We observe that if $a=b$, then $(a,b]=emptyset$, therefore $emptysetin mathcal{I_0}$ by definition. We suppose that $a<b$ and we prove $1$.



      Case 1.[$E, Fin U$]



      $(a_1,b_1]cap(a_2,b_2]=(sup{a_1,a_2}, min{b_1,b_2}]inmathcal{I_0}$.



      Case 2.[$Ein U$ and $Fin V$]



      $(a_1, b_1]cap(a_2,+infty)=(sup{a_1,a_2}, b_1]in mathcal{I_0}$



      Case 3.[$E,Fin V$]



      $(a_1,+infty)cap (a_2,+infty)=(sup{a_1,a_2},+infty)in mathcal{I_0}$.



      Question. Could someone help me to prove the property $2.$?



      Thanks!










      share|cite|improve this question













      The question concerns the verification that a set family is a semialgebra.




      Definition. A non empty family $mathcal{S}subseteqmathcal{P}(X)$ is said semialgebra on $X$ if:



      $1.$ For each $E, Finmathcal{S}$ we have $Ecap Finmathcal{S}$;



      $2.$ For each $Einmathcal{S}$ exist $F_1,dots F_ninmathcal{S}$ disjoint such that $E^c=cup_{k=1}^n F_k$.




      We consider the family $$mathcal{I_0}=underbrace{{(a,b];|;-inftyle ale b<+infty}}_{:=U}cupunderbrace{{(a_1,+infty);|;-infty<a_1<+infty}}_{:=V}.$$
      The family $mathcal{I}_0$ is a semialgebra on $mathbb{R}$. We observe that if $a=b$, then $(a,b]=emptyset$, therefore $emptysetin mathcal{I_0}$ by definition. We suppose that $a<b$ and we prove $1$.



      Case 1.[$E, Fin U$]



      $(a_1,b_1]cap(a_2,b_2]=(sup{a_1,a_2}, min{b_1,b_2}]inmathcal{I_0}$.



      Case 2.[$Ein U$ and $Fin V$]



      $(a_1, b_1]cap(a_2,+infty)=(sup{a_1,a_2}, b_1]in mathcal{I_0}$



      Case 3.[$E,Fin V$]



      $(a_1,+infty)cap (a_2,+infty)=(sup{a_1,a_2},+infty)in mathcal{I_0}$.



      Question. Could someone help me to prove the property $2.$?



      Thanks!







      measure-theory






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Nov 10 at 17:13









      Jack J.

      4531317




      4531317






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          1
          down vote



          accepted
          +50










          $newcommand{I}{mathcal{I}_0}$
          Given $Ein I$, since $Ucap V=emptyset$, we have two cases.



          Case 1.[$Ein U$]
          begin{align}
          E&=(a,b]\
          E^C&=underbrace{(-infty,a]}_{F_1}cup underbrace{(b,+infty)}_{F_2}
          end{align}



          Notice that if $a=-infty$, then $F_1=emptyset$. It's trivial that $F_1cap F_2=emptyset$ and
          begin{align}
          F_1&in UsubsetI\
          F_2&in VsubsetI.
          end{align}



          Case 2.[$Ein V$]
          begin{align}
          E&=(a,+infty)\
          E^C&=underbrace{(-infty,a]}_{F_1}
          end{align}



          Of course, $F_1in UsubsetI$.






          share|cite|improve this answer




























            up vote
            0
            down vote













            From the context, I guess that $E^c$ means the complement of $E$ (not the closure). In that case, since the lower boundary may be $-infty$ for the sets in $U$, I think that writing out the complement as $(-infty, a] cup (b, infty)$ or $(-infty, a_1]$ (resp.) should give property 2 in a quite straight-forward manner.



            (I wanted to give this as a comment, but I do not have sufficient reputation.)






            share|cite|improve this answer





















            • @Pepjin de Maat thanks for your answer. Yes, $E^c$ means the complement of $E$.
              – Jack J.
              Nov 12 at 19:04










            • @JackJ. In that case, note that $(-infty, a], (-infty, a_1) in U$ and $(b, infty) in V$ and that for $a leq b$, we have $(-infty, a]$ is disjoint with $(b, infty)$; hence property 2 has been satisfied. The main exceptions are boundary cases like $b = -infty$, which can be solved by $(-infty, 0] cup (0, infty)$ which is again a combination of a subset in $U$ and one in $V$.
              – Pepijn de Maat
              Nov 12 at 19:11













            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',
            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
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2992852%2fverification-of-a-semialgebra%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








            up vote
            1
            down vote



            accepted
            +50










            $newcommand{I}{mathcal{I}_0}$
            Given $Ein I$, since $Ucap V=emptyset$, we have two cases.



            Case 1.[$Ein U$]
            begin{align}
            E&=(a,b]\
            E^C&=underbrace{(-infty,a]}_{F_1}cup underbrace{(b,+infty)}_{F_2}
            end{align}



            Notice that if $a=-infty$, then $F_1=emptyset$. It's trivial that $F_1cap F_2=emptyset$ and
            begin{align}
            F_1&in UsubsetI\
            F_2&in VsubsetI.
            end{align}



            Case 2.[$Ein V$]
            begin{align}
            E&=(a,+infty)\
            E^C&=underbrace{(-infty,a]}_{F_1}
            end{align}



            Of course, $F_1in UsubsetI$.






            share|cite|improve this answer

























              up vote
              1
              down vote



              accepted
              +50










              $newcommand{I}{mathcal{I}_0}$
              Given $Ein I$, since $Ucap V=emptyset$, we have two cases.



              Case 1.[$Ein U$]
              begin{align}
              E&=(a,b]\
              E^C&=underbrace{(-infty,a]}_{F_1}cup underbrace{(b,+infty)}_{F_2}
              end{align}



              Notice that if $a=-infty$, then $F_1=emptyset$. It's trivial that $F_1cap F_2=emptyset$ and
              begin{align}
              F_1&in UsubsetI\
              F_2&in VsubsetI.
              end{align}



              Case 2.[$Ein V$]
              begin{align}
              E&=(a,+infty)\
              E^C&=underbrace{(-infty,a]}_{F_1}
              end{align}



              Of course, $F_1in UsubsetI$.






              share|cite|improve this answer























                up vote
                1
                down vote



                accepted
                +50







                up vote
                1
                down vote



                accepted
                +50




                +50




                $newcommand{I}{mathcal{I}_0}$
                Given $Ein I$, since $Ucap V=emptyset$, we have two cases.



                Case 1.[$Ein U$]
                begin{align}
                E&=(a,b]\
                E^C&=underbrace{(-infty,a]}_{F_1}cup underbrace{(b,+infty)}_{F_2}
                end{align}



                Notice that if $a=-infty$, then $F_1=emptyset$. It's trivial that $F_1cap F_2=emptyset$ and
                begin{align}
                F_1&in UsubsetI\
                F_2&in VsubsetI.
                end{align}



                Case 2.[$Ein V$]
                begin{align}
                E&=(a,+infty)\
                E^C&=underbrace{(-infty,a]}_{F_1}
                end{align}



                Of course, $F_1in UsubsetI$.






                share|cite|improve this answer












                $newcommand{I}{mathcal{I}_0}$
                Given $Ein I$, since $Ucap V=emptyset$, we have two cases.



                Case 1.[$Ein U$]
                begin{align}
                E&=(a,b]\
                E^C&=underbrace{(-infty,a]}_{F_1}cup underbrace{(b,+infty)}_{F_2}
                end{align}



                Notice that if $a=-infty$, then $F_1=emptyset$. It's trivial that $F_1cap F_2=emptyset$ and
                begin{align}
                F_1&in UsubsetI\
                F_2&in VsubsetI.
                end{align}



                Case 2.[$Ein V$]
                begin{align}
                E&=(a,+infty)\
                E^C&=underbrace{(-infty,a]}_{F_1}
                end{align}



                Of course, $F_1in UsubsetI$.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered Nov 16 at 13:36









                francescop21

                1,012115




                1,012115






















                    up vote
                    0
                    down vote













                    From the context, I guess that $E^c$ means the complement of $E$ (not the closure). In that case, since the lower boundary may be $-infty$ for the sets in $U$, I think that writing out the complement as $(-infty, a] cup (b, infty)$ or $(-infty, a_1]$ (resp.) should give property 2 in a quite straight-forward manner.



                    (I wanted to give this as a comment, but I do not have sufficient reputation.)






                    share|cite|improve this answer





















                    • @Pepjin de Maat thanks for your answer. Yes, $E^c$ means the complement of $E$.
                      – Jack J.
                      Nov 12 at 19:04










                    • @JackJ. In that case, note that $(-infty, a], (-infty, a_1) in U$ and $(b, infty) in V$ and that for $a leq b$, we have $(-infty, a]$ is disjoint with $(b, infty)$; hence property 2 has been satisfied. The main exceptions are boundary cases like $b = -infty$, which can be solved by $(-infty, 0] cup (0, infty)$ which is again a combination of a subset in $U$ and one in $V$.
                      – Pepijn de Maat
                      Nov 12 at 19:11

















                    up vote
                    0
                    down vote













                    From the context, I guess that $E^c$ means the complement of $E$ (not the closure). In that case, since the lower boundary may be $-infty$ for the sets in $U$, I think that writing out the complement as $(-infty, a] cup (b, infty)$ or $(-infty, a_1]$ (resp.) should give property 2 in a quite straight-forward manner.



                    (I wanted to give this as a comment, but I do not have sufficient reputation.)






                    share|cite|improve this answer





















                    • @Pepjin de Maat thanks for your answer. Yes, $E^c$ means the complement of $E$.
                      – Jack J.
                      Nov 12 at 19:04










                    • @JackJ. In that case, note that $(-infty, a], (-infty, a_1) in U$ and $(b, infty) in V$ and that for $a leq b$, we have $(-infty, a]$ is disjoint with $(b, infty)$; hence property 2 has been satisfied. The main exceptions are boundary cases like $b = -infty$, which can be solved by $(-infty, 0] cup (0, infty)$ which is again a combination of a subset in $U$ and one in $V$.
                      – Pepijn de Maat
                      Nov 12 at 19:11















                    up vote
                    0
                    down vote










                    up vote
                    0
                    down vote









                    From the context, I guess that $E^c$ means the complement of $E$ (not the closure). In that case, since the lower boundary may be $-infty$ for the sets in $U$, I think that writing out the complement as $(-infty, a] cup (b, infty)$ or $(-infty, a_1]$ (resp.) should give property 2 in a quite straight-forward manner.



                    (I wanted to give this as a comment, but I do not have sufficient reputation.)






                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    From the context, I guess that $E^c$ means the complement of $E$ (not the closure). In that case, since the lower boundary may be $-infty$ for the sets in $U$, I think that writing out the complement as $(-infty, a] cup (b, infty)$ or $(-infty, a_1]$ (resp.) should give property 2 in a quite straight-forward manner.



                    (I wanted to give this as a comment, but I do not have sufficient reputation.)







                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer










                    answered Nov 12 at 18:43









                    Pepijn de Maat

                    366




                    366












                    • @Pepjin de Maat thanks for your answer. Yes, $E^c$ means the complement of $E$.
                      – Jack J.
                      Nov 12 at 19:04










                    • @JackJ. In that case, note that $(-infty, a], (-infty, a_1) in U$ and $(b, infty) in V$ and that for $a leq b$, we have $(-infty, a]$ is disjoint with $(b, infty)$; hence property 2 has been satisfied. The main exceptions are boundary cases like $b = -infty$, which can be solved by $(-infty, 0] cup (0, infty)$ which is again a combination of a subset in $U$ and one in $V$.
                      – Pepijn de Maat
                      Nov 12 at 19:11




















                    • @Pepjin de Maat thanks for your answer. Yes, $E^c$ means the complement of $E$.
                      – Jack J.
                      Nov 12 at 19:04










                    • @JackJ. In that case, note that $(-infty, a], (-infty, a_1) in U$ and $(b, infty) in V$ and that for $a leq b$, we have $(-infty, a]$ is disjoint with $(b, infty)$; hence property 2 has been satisfied. The main exceptions are boundary cases like $b = -infty$, which can be solved by $(-infty, 0] cup (0, infty)$ which is again a combination of a subset in $U$ and one in $V$.
                      – Pepijn de Maat
                      Nov 12 at 19:11


















                    @Pepjin de Maat thanks for your answer. Yes, $E^c$ means the complement of $E$.
                    – Jack J.
                    Nov 12 at 19:04




                    @Pepjin de Maat thanks for your answer. Yes, $E^c$ means the complement of $E$.
                    – Jack J.
                    Nov 12 at 19:04












                    @JackJ. In that case, note that $(-infty, a], (-infty, a_1) in U$ and $(b, infty) in V$ and that for $a leq b$, we have $(-infty, a]$ is disjoint with $(b, infty)$; hence property 2 has been satisfied. The main exceptions are boundary cases like $b = -infty$, which can be solved by $(-infty, 0] cup (0, infty)$ which is again a combination of a subset in $U$ and one in $V$.
                    – Pepijn de Maat
                    Nov 12 at 19:11






                    @JackJ. In that case, note that $(-infty, a], (-infty, a_1) in U$ and $(b, infty) in V$ and that for $a leq b$, we have $(-infty, a]$ is disjoint with $(b, infty)$; hence property 2 has been satisfied. The main exceptions are boundary cases like $b = -infty$, which can be solved by $(-infty, 0] cup (0, infty)$ which is again a combination of a subset in $U$ and one in $V$.
                    – Pepijn de Maat
                    Nov 12 at 19:11




















                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    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.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2992852%2fverification-of-a-semialgebra%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    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







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Plaza Victoria

                    Puebla de Zaragoza

                    Musa