Convergence of sequence of measurable sets

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the completeness of the metric space (X',d) defined by the symmetric difference metric d(A,B)=μ(A-B)+μ(B-A) for a totally finite measure μ. It is established that for a Cauchy sequence {An}, the limit is not simply A=∩nAn, as demonstrated by counterexamples where A_n does not converge to the intersection. Instead, two candidate limit sets are proposed: B_n=∪k=n∞ A_k and C_n=∩k=n∞ A_k, with the goal of showing that C=B to confirm convergence. The relationship C_n⊆A_n⊆B_n is noted, but further proof is needed to establish that the limits coincide. The inquiry seeks assistance in formalizing these concepts to demonstrate the convergence of the sequence.
sunjin09
Messages
310
Reaction score
0
Given a totally finite measure μ defined on a \sigma-field X, define the (pseudo)metric d(A,B)=μ(A-B)+μ(B-A), (the symmetric difference metric), it can be shown this is a valid pseudo-metric and therefore the metric space (X',d) is well defined if equivalent classes of sets [A_\alpha] where d(A_{\alpha_1},A_{\alpha_2})=0 are considered.

How do I show this metric space (X',d) is complete? In other words, given a Cauchy sequence {An}, the limit seems to be given by A=\cap_{n=1}^\infty A_n, but how do I formalize the proof? d(An,A)=μ(An-A)=\mu(A_n-\cap_{n=1}^\infty A_n)=...,
How do I make use of the Cauchy sequence {An}?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
It turns out the limit is not A=\cap_nA_n (e.g., A_1=\emptyset,A_n=A\neq\emptyset,n>1), unless A_{n+1}\subset A_n, in which case
\mu(A)=\mu(\cap_nA_n)=\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\mu(A_n), so that \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} d(A_n,A)=\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}[\mu(A_n)-\mu(A)]=0.

In the general case, what would be a suitable candidate limit set?
 
Last edited:
I have come up with two candidates, define {Bn} and {Cn} where B_n=\cup_{k=n}^\infty A_k and C_n=\cap_{k=n}^\infty A_k, it can be shown that {Bn} converges to B=\cap_{k=n}^\infty B_k and {Cn} converges to C=\cup_{k=n}^\infty C_k, it can also be shown that C_n\subset A_n\subset B_n, the problem is how to show C=B so that {An} has to converge to B or C. Can anybody help? Thanks a lot.
 
I was reading documentation about the soundness and completeness of logic formal systems. Consider the following $$\vdash_S \phi$$ where ##S## is the proof-system making part the formal system and ##\phi## is a wff (well formed formula) of the formal language. Note the blank on left of the turnstile symbol ##\vdash_S##, as far as I can tell it actually represents the empty set. So what does it mean ? I guess it actually means ##\phi## is a theorem of the formal system, i.e. there is a...

Similar threads

Replies
17
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
5K
Replies
18
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
2K
Back
Top