Help understanding a passage from a proof of change of variables formula

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the application of Theorem 2.40 from Folland's book regarding the change of variables formula. The user seeks clarification on how Theorem 2.40 is utilized in the context of the set ##W_K## and the sequence of open sets ##U_j##. It is established that part (a) of Theorem 2.40 is crucial for understanding the relationship between the Borel subset ##E## and the open sets ##U_j##, which are contained within ##W_{K+1}##. The proof's complexity necessitates a detailed examination of these components to fully grasp their implications.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of measure theory, specifically Borel sets.
  • Familiarity with the change of variables formula in integration.
  • Knowledge of determinants and their role in transformations.
  • Basic concepts of open sets in topology.
NEXT STEPS
  • Review Folland's Theorem 2.40 for a deeper understanding of its implications.
  • Study the change of variables formula in detail, focusing on its applications in measure theory.
  • Explore the properties of Borel sets and their significance in real analysis.
  • Investigate the relationship between determinants and the behavior of functions under transformations.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, graduate students in analysis, and anyone studying measure theory and the change of variables formula will benefit from this discussion.

psie
Messages
315
Reaction score
40
TL;DR
I'm reading a proof of the change of variables formula for a ##C^1## diffeomorphism ##G:\Omega\subset\mathbb R^n\to\mathbb R^n## in Folland for the Lebesgue integral, that is $$\int_{G(\Omega)}f(x)\,dx=\int_\Omega f\circ G(x)|\det D_xG|\,dx.$$Here ##D_xG## is the Jacobian matrix. There's a reference to an earlier theorem that I struggle with.
Here's an excerpt from the proof of the change of variables formula in Folland's book (Theorem 2.47, page 76, 2nd edition, 6th and later printings):

Let ##W_K=\Omega\cap\{x:|x|<K\text{ and } |\det D_xG|<K\}##. If ##E## is a Borel subset of ##W_K##, by Theorem 2.40 there is a decreasing sequence of open sets ##U_j\subset W_{K+1}## such that ##E\subset \bigcap_1^\infty U_j## and ##m\left(\bigcap_1^\infty U_j\setminus E\right)=0##.

For reference, see Theorem 2.40 below. I don't understand how he is using Theorem 2.40 in the quoted passage. Which part of Theorem 2.40 is he using? Moreover, I don't understand the role of ##W_K## and in particular, why ##U_j\subset W_{K+1}##? It'd be awesome if someone could clarify these points.

1730584948768.png
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I've worked it out I think. He uses part (a) and everything follows from this. I know, I didn't give a lot of context, but the proof is long.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: fresh_42

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K