Open Bounded subset with non-zero measure boundary

In summary: Your Name]In summary, we discussed finding closed and unbounded set E such that the limit of m(O_n) does not equal m(E), and an open and bounded set E such that the same limit does not hold. For the first part, the Cantor set is a suitable example. For the second part, the set (0,1) \cup (2,3) in \mathbb{R} is a good choice.
  • #1
Kreizhn
743
1

Homework Statement


Let m be the Lebesgue measure on [itex] \mathbb R^d [/itex], and define the open sets [itex] O_n = \{ x \in \mathbb R^d : d(x,E) < \frac1n \} [/itex] where
[tex] d(A,B) = \inf\{ |x-y| : x \in A, y \in B \} [/tex]

1) Find a closed and unbounded set E such that [itex] \lim_{n\to\infty} m(O_n) \neq m(E) [/itex].

2) Find an open and bounded set E such that [itex] \lim_{n\to\infty} m(O_n) \neq m(E) [/itex].

The Attempt at a Solution



This is technically the second part to question, which was to show that if E is compact then the limits do in fact hold. I think I might have the first part. In particular, I've just chosen a countable number of copies of the cantor set C in [itex] \mathbb R[/itex]. This set has zero measure, but [itex] m(O_n) = \infty [/itex] for every [itex] n \in \mathbb N [/itex] and so the limits don't converge.

My real issue is trying to find an open bounded set. My first thoughts were to try the complement to the cantor set [itex] [0,1]\setminus C [/itex] but this doesn't seem to produce the desired results. In particular, I know that we must have that [itex] m(E) < m(O_n) [/itex] by monotonicity, but since E is open (and we'll assume non-empty) then m(E) > 0, so there won't be any 0 = infinity mumbo jumbo here. In particular, it seems to me that the set I want will be one such that m(E) is not the same as m(cl E) where cl E is the closure of E. That is, the boundary of E will have non-zero measure. I just can't think of such a set.

Any help would be appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2


Hello,

Thank you for your post. I think you are on the right track with your approach for the first part. The Cantor set is indeed a good example of a closed and unbounded set that satisfies the given conditions.

For the second part, I suggest considering the set E = (0,1) \cup (2,3) in \mathbb{R}. This set is open and bounded, and has a finite measure of 2. However, as n goes to infinity, the measure of O_n will also go to infinity, as the distance between E and any point outside of E will approach 0. Therefore, the limits do not converge.

I hope this helps. Let me know if you have any further questions.


 

1. What is an open bounded subset with non-zero measure boundary?

An open bounded subset with non-zero measure boundary is a subset of a larger set that is both open and bounded, where the boundary of the subset has a non-zero measure. In simpler terms, it is a region within a larger set that is not necessarily closed or infinite, and the edge of this region has a measurable size.

2. How is the measure of a boundary determined?

The measure of a boundary is determined by the length, area, or volume (depending on the dimensionality of the set) of the edge or boundary of the subset. This can be calculated using mathematical techniques such as integration or by using specialized formulas for specific shapes.

3. What is the significance of having a non-zero measure boundary?

A non-zero measure boundary indicates that the subset is not completely enclosed within the larger set, and therefore has a distinct and measurable edge. This can be important in various fields of science, such as physics and biology, where the boundary of a system or organism can play a crucial role in its behavior and properties.

4. How is an open bounded subset with non-zero measure boundary different from a closed bounded subset?

An open bounded subset is not completely enclosed within the larger set, while a closed bounded subset is. This means that the boundary of an open bounded subset is not included in the subset itself, while the boundary of a closed bounded subset is part of the subset. Additionally, the measure of the boundary of a closed bounded subset may be zero, while the measure of the boundary of an open bounded subset is non-zero.

5. Can an open bounded subset with non-zero measure boundary have an infinite measure?

No, an open bounded subset with non-zero measure boundary cannot have an infinite measure. The term "bounded" implies that the subset has a finite size, while having a non-zero measure boundary means that the boundary itself has a measurable size. Therefore, the measure of the subset as a whole must also be finite.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
993
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
14
Views
521
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
628
Back
Top