Convergence in Measure: Understanding and Proving Almost Everywhere Convergence

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

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of convergence in measure within the context of measure theory. Participants explore the implications of a sequence of measurable functions converging in measure to two different functions, specifically addressing the assertion that these functions must be equal almost everywhere. The conversation includes attempts to prove this assertion and clarifications on related mathematical concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the assertion that if a sequence of functions converges in measure to two functions, then those functions must be equal almost everywhere, expressing uncertainty about how to begin the proof.
  • Another participant provides a mathematical argument using the triangle inequality to show that the measure of the set where the two functions differ can be bounded by the measures of the sets where each function differs from the sequence, suggesting that this leads to a limiting argument.
  • A different participant suggests that a subsequence of the original sequence converges almost everywhere, implying that the two functions must be equal almost everywhere due to the uniqueness of limits in this context.
  • Some participants discuss the categorization of measure theory within mathematical education, suggesting it fits into both calculus and analysis, with one participant advocating for its relevance in probability theory.
  • One participant expresses understanding of the proof structure, indicating that the measure of the set where the two functions differ can be shown to be zero through a series of inequalities and limits.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the proof of the assertion regarding almost everywhere equality of the functions. There are multiple approaches and interpretations presented, indicating ongoing debate and exploration of the topic.

Contextual Notes

Some participants mention the need for careful handling of limits and measures, indicating that certain assumptions or steps in the proof may require further clarification or justification.

Fredrik
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
Messages
10,876
Reaction score
423
Not sure where to post about measure theory. None of the forums seems quite right.

Suppose that ##(X,\Sigma,\mu)## is a measure space. A sequence ##\langle f_n\rangle_{n=1}^\infty## of almost everywhere real-valued measurable functions on X is said to converge in measure to a measurable function f, if for all ε>0, ##\mu(\{x\in X:|f_n(x)-f(x)|\geq\varepsilon\})\to 0##.

The book says that it's easily seen that if ##\langle f_n\rangle## converges in measure to two measurable functions f and g, then f=g almost everywhere. I don't see it.

I understand that I need to prove that ##\mu(\{x\in X: |f(x)-g(x)|>0\})=0##, but I don't even see how to begin.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Note that

|f(x)-g(x)|\leq |f(x)-f_n(x)|+|f_n(x)-g(x)|

So if |f(x)-g(x)|\geq \varepsilon, then also

|f(x)-f_n(x)|+|f_n(x)-g(x)|\geq \varepsilon.

But this must mean that either |f(x)-f_n(x)|\geq \varepsilon/2 or |f_n(x)-g(x)|\geq \varepsilon/2 (proceed by contradiction: assume that neither holds). So

\{x\in X~\vert~|f(x)-g(x)|\geq \varepsilon\}\subseteq \{x\in X~\vert~|f(x)-f_n(x)|\geq \varepsilon/2\}\cup \{x\in X~\vert~|g(x)-f_n(x)|\geq \varepsilon/2\}

Taking \mu of both sides yields

\mu\{x\in X~\vert~|f(x)-g(x)|\geq \varepsilon\}\leq \mu\{x\in X~\vert~|f(x)-f_n(x)|\geq \varepsilon/2\}+ \mu\{x\in X~\vert~|g(x)-f_n(x)|\geq \varepsilon/2\}

I think you can take it from here. It's just a limiting argument now.

Another nice argument (but a little more difficult to prove) is to show that the sequence has a subsequence which converges a.e. Now f=g a.e. by uniqueness of the limit a.e.
 
Fredrik said:
Not sure where to post about measure theory. None of the forums seems quite right.

From wikipedia:

"Calculus (Latin, calculus, a small stone used for counting) is a branch of mathematics focused on limits, functions, derivatives, integrals, and infinite series. This subject constitutes a major part of modern mathematics education."

and:

"Mathematical analysis, which mathematicians refer to simply as analysis, has its beginnings in the rigorous formulation of infinitesimal calculus. It is a branch of pure mathematics that includes the theories of differentiation, integration and measure, limits, infinite series,[1] and analytic functions."Seems to me this fits Calculus & Analysis.
 
I like Serena said:
From wikipedia:

"Calculus (Latin, calculus, a small stone used for counting) is a branch of mathematics focused on limits, functions, derivatives, integrals, and infinite series. This subject constitutes a major part of modern mathematics education."

and:

"Mathematical analysis, which mathematicians refer to simply as analysis, has its beginnings in the rigorous formulation of infinitesimal calculus. It is a branch of pure mathematics that includes the theories of differentiation, integration and measure, limits, infinite series,[1] and analytic functions."


Seems to me this fits Calculus & Analysis.

I prefer this in the probability forum. Measure theory (and convergence in probability, like here) are really important probability concepts. So it might make sense that a probabilist knows more about them then an analyst (it certainly is my experience that this is the case).
 
Ah, I think I understand it now. Your argument tells us that for all ##\varepsilon,\varepsilon'>0##, we have ##\mu(\{x\in X:|f(x)-g(x)|\geq\varepsilon)<\varepsilon'##. This implies that for all ##\varepsilon>0##, we have ##\mu(\{x\in X:|f(x)-g(x)|\geq\varepsilon\})=0##. We still have to do something tricky for the final step, something like this:

$$\big\{x\in X:|f(x)-g(x)|>0\big\}=\bigcup_{n=1}^\infty\bigg\{x\in X:|f(x)-g(x)|\geq\frac{1}{n}\bigg\}$$
$$\mu\big(\big\{x\in X:|f(x)-g(x)|>0\big\}\big) \leq\sum_{n=1}^\infty\mu\bigg( \bigg\{x\in X:|f(x)-g(x)|\geq\frac{1}{n}\bigg\} \bigg)=0$$ Thank you.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K