MHB Approximation property with F sigma and G delta Sets to show a set is measurable

Click For Summary
A set A in R^n is Lebesgue measurable if there exists an Fσ set B and a Gδ set C such that B is a subset of A, A is a subset of C, and the difference C\B is a null set. The discussion highlights the proof of the forward implication and the challenge of demonstrating that the measure of the set difference G\F is less than an arbitrary ε. It emphasizes the need to utilize the properties of the null set C\B and the measures of the closed and open sets involved. By constructing B and C appropriately, the measure relationship can be established, leading to the conclusion that A is measurable. The thread seeks assistance in completing this proof.
ryo0071
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Prove that a set $A\subset\mathbb{R}^n$ is (Lebesgue) measurable $\iff$ there exist a set $B$ which is an $F_{\sigma}$ and a set $C$ which is a $G_{\delta}$ such that $B\subset A\subset C$ and $C$~$B$ (C without B) is a null set.

$F_{\sigma}$ is a countable union of closed sets, and $G_{\delta}$ is a countable intersection of open sets.

I have proven the forward implication already. For the second one I know that I can pick one of the closed sets that make up $B$, say the closed set $F$ with $F \subset B$, and one of the open sets that make up $C$, say the open set $G$ with $C \subset G$. It then follows that $F \subset A \subset G$. I am having trouble showing that the measure of $G$~$F$ is less than an arbitrary $\epsilon > 0$. I know I need to use the fact that $C$~$B$ is a null set but I am not sure how.

Any help is appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ryo0071 said:
Prove that a set $A\subset\mathbb{R}^n$ is (Lebesgue) measurable $\iff$ there exist a set $B$ which is an $F_{\sigma}$ and a set $C$ which is a $G_{\delta}$ such that $B\subset A\subset C$ and $C$~$B$ (C without B) is a null set.

$F_{\sigma}$ is a countable union of closed sets, and $G_{\delta}$ is a countable intersection of open sets.

I have proven the forward implication already. For the second one I know that I can pick one of the closed sets that make up $B$, say the closed set $F$ with $F \subset B$, and one of the open sets that make up $C$, say the open set $G$ with $C \subset G$. It then follows that $F \subset A \subset G$. I am having trouble showing that the measure of $G$~$F$ is less than an arbitrary $\epsilon > 0$. I know I need to use the fact that $C$~$B$ is a null set but I am not sure how.

Any help is appreciated.

First, $$A = \bigcup_{k\geqslant1}\bigl(A\cap[-k,k]^n\bigr).$$ A countable union of measurable sets is measurable, so it will be sufficient to show that $A\cap[-k,k]^n$ is measurable. So we might as well assume that $A$ is bounded. (That will eliminate any problems that might arise from sets with infinite measure.)

Next, $B$ is a countable union of closed sets, say $B = \bigcup F_r$, and is therefore measurable. Replacing each $F_r$ by $\bigcup_{1\leqslant j\leqslant r}F_j$, we may assume that the sets $F_r$ form an increasing sequence. Then the measure $m(B)$ of $B$ is the sup of the measures $m(F_r).$ So we can find a closed set $F\subset B$ with $m(F) > m(B) - \varepsilon/2.$ By the same argument we can find an open set $G\supset C$ with $m(G)<m(C) + \varepsilon/2$. But $C$ is the union of $B$ and a null set, so $m(C) = m(B).$ It follows that $m(G) - m(F) < \varepsilon.$
 
Last edited:
We all know the definition of n-dimensional topological manifold uses open sets and homeomorphisms onto the image as open set in ##\mathbb R^n##. It should be possible to reformulate the definition of n-dimensional topological manifold using closed sets on the manifold's topology and on ##\mathbb R^n## ? I'm positive for this. Perhaps the definition of smooth manifold would be problematic, though.

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K