A question about the proof of the simple approximation lemma

by Artusartos
Tags: approximation, lemma, proof, simple
Artusartos is offline
Feb20-13, 04:31 PM
P: 245
The Simple Approximation Lemma

Let f be a measurable real-valued function on E. Assume f is bounded on E, that is, there is an [itex]M \geq 0[/itex] for which [itex]|f|\leq M[/itex] on E. Then for each [itex]\epsilon > 0[/itex], there are simple functions [itex]\phi_{\epsilon}[/itex] and [itex]\psi_{\epsilon}[/itex] defined on E which have the following approximation properties:

[itex]\phi_{\epsilon} \leq f \leq \psi_{\epsilon}[/itex] and [itex]0 \leq \psi_{\epsilon} - \phi_{\epsilon} < \epsilon[/itex] on E.

Proof: Let (c,d) be an open, bouned interval that contains the image of E, f(x), and [itex]c=y_0 < y_1 < ... < y_n = d[/itex] be a partition of the closed, bouned interval [c,d] such that [itex]y_{k}-y_{k-1} < \epsilon[/itex] for [itex]1 \leq k \leq n[/itex].

[tex]I_k = [y_{k-1}, y_k)[/tex] and [tex]E_k = f^{-1}(I_k)[/tex] for [itex]1 \leq k \leq n[/itex]

Since each [itex]I_k[/itex] is an inteval and the function f is measurable, each set [itex]E_k[/itex] is measurable. Define the simple functions [itex]\phi_{\epsilon}[/itex] and [itex]\psi_{\epsilon}[/itex] on E by

[tex]\phi_{\epsilon} = \sum^{n}_{k=1} y_{k-1} . \chi_{E_k}[/tex]

and [tex]\psi_{\epsilon} = \sum^{n}_{k=1} y_{k} . \chi_{E_k}[/tex]

Let x belong to E. Since [itex]f(E) \subseteq (c,d)[/itex], there is a unique k, [itex]1 \leq k \leq n[/itex], for which [itex]y_{k-1} \leq f(x) < y_k[/itex] and therefore [tex]\phi_{\epsilon} (x) = y_{k-1} \leq f(x) < y_k = \psi_{\epsilon} (x)[/tex].

But [itex]y_k - y_{k-1} < \epsilon[/itex], and therefore [itex]\phi_{\epsilon}[/itex] and [itex]\psi_{\epsilon}[/itex] have the required approximation properties.

My Question:

"Let x belong to E. Since [itex]f(E) \subseteq (c,d)[/itex], there is a unique k, [itex]1 \leq k \leq n[/itex], for which [itex]y_{k-1} \leq f(x) < y_k[/itex] and therefore [tex]\phi_{\epsilon} (x) = y_{k-1} \leq f(x) < y_k = \psi_{\epsilon} (x)[/tex]." So if we choose any x, we will aways be able to find [itex]y_k[/itex] and [itex]y_{k-1}[/itex] such that [tex]\phi_{\epsilon} (x) = y_{k-1} \leq f(x) < y_k = \psi_{\epsilon} (x)[/tex], right? But the theorem tell us that we need to find [itex]\phi_{\epsilon}[/itex] and [itex]\psi_{\epsilon}[/itex] so that [itex]\phi_{\epsilon}[/itex] is less than all possible values of f(x) and that [itex]\psi_{\epsilon}[/itex] is greater than all possible values of f(x) (not specific for any x you choose, so you the proof gives you a different [itex]y_k[/itex] and [itex]y_{k-1}[/itex] for each x...but the theorem tell us that there is only one for the whole function. Also, how can the whole function be greater than [itex]\phi_{\epsilon}[/itex] and less than [itex]\psi_{epsilon}[/itex], if the difference is less than epsilon?)...so I don't understand this proof.
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on Phys.org
Cougars' diverse diet helped them survive the Pleistocene mass extinction
Cyber risks can cause disruption on scale of 2008 crisis, study says
Mantis shrimp stronger than airplanes

Register to reply

Related Discussions
Proof of Zorn's Lemma Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics 8
Tube lemma generalization proof Calculus & Beyond Homework 2
Hensel's lemma (Understanding it's Proof) Linear & Abstract Algebra 2
Simple Proof of Weierstass Approximation Theorem? Calculus & Beyond Homework 1
Dirac delta approximation - need an outline of a simple and routine proof Calculus 2