Can the Measure Be Obtained from the Value of an Integral?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Kevin_spencer2
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Measure
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between measures and integrals, specifically questioning whether the measure can be derived from the value of a Lebesgue integral when the measure is not explicitly known. The scope includes theoretical aspects of measure theory and integrals, with considerations for both finite and infinite-dimensional cases.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions if the form of a measure can be extracted from the value of an integral of a trial function, suggesting that knowing the integral might provide insights into the measure itself.
  • Another participant argues that a single function over a fixed interval cannot define a measure, emphasizing that measures must be defined over measurable sets and that knowing the integral of a constant function over all measurable sets would yield the measure.
  • A different participant introduces the concept of the Dirac delta function, proposing that results related to it could be used to define measures in specific contexts, particularly in infinite-dimensional cases.
  • Another contribution suggests that if the integral of a function over an interval can define a measure, this measure can be extended to open sets and Borel sets, noting that complex functions lead to complex measures rather than ordinary positive measures.
  • A final participant inquires about numerical methods for evaluating multi-dimensional integrals given a known measure, specifically questioning the implications in infinite-dimensional spaces with Gaussian measures.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether a measure can be derived from an integral, with some asserting that it cannot be done with a single function while others explore specific cases where it might be possible. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the extraction of measures from integrals.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in defining measures based on single functions and the necessity of considering measurable sets. The discussion also touches on the complexities introduced by infinite-dimensional spaces and the nature of complex measures.

Kevin_spencer2
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
Let be a Lebesgue integral with a measure M on the interval (a,b) so:

[tex]\int_{a}^{b}dMf(x)=I(a,b,M)[/tex]

We don't know or can't say what M (measure) is , however my question is if we had a trial function U(x) so we could calculate I(a,b,M) for this U without recalling to the measure,either by numerical or other methods my question is if we could obtain the form of the measure , from the value of the integral:

[tex]\int_{a}^{b}dM\mathcal U(x)[/tex] ?.

I mean, to know the lebesgue integral you should know the measure, but if you knew the exact (or approximate) value of an integral could you extract the measure from it?.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A single function over a fixed interval? No. The measure has to be defined over each measurable set. Of course, it you knew the integral of f(x)= 1 over every measurable set, that would be the measure.
 
could we use the 'aximatic' result due to dirac delta function, or dirac measure? so:

[tex]\int_{a}^{b}dM\delta (x-c)=1[/tex] with a<c<b (or a similar result)

I would be interested mainly in infinite-dimensional case so:

[tex]\int \mathcal [\phi] \delta (\phi) =1[/tex] or similar.
 
If a,b are arbitrary, then this allows you to define a measure by setting:

[tex]\mu((a,b))=\int_{a}^{b}dMf(x)[/tex]

Then, since any open set is the countable disjoint union of open intervals, this extends uniquely to a measure on the open sets, and so also on the borel sets (the sigma algebra generated by the open sets).

This can be done for an arbitrary complex function f, although if f is not a non-negative function, what you get is not an ordinary positive measure, but what's called a complex measure. If f=1, then this recovers the lebesque measure (or whatever dM is).
 
thankx and a last question, if you have the multi-dimensional integral:

[tex]\int_{V}d\mathcal M f(X)[/tex]

where M is the measure and it's known then my question is how could you solve this integral by Numerical methods?, what happens in the infinite-dimensional case with a 'Gaussian measure' (the only that can be defined in a inifinite dimensional space) now that you have the measure and the integrand could you evaluate it by numerical metods?? even in the case that the space is infinite-dimensional (i.e function space)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K