How Can We Generalize Lebesgue Measurable Functions in Higher Dimensions?

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mathmari
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on generalizing the concept of Lipschitz functions in the context of Lebesgue measurable sets in higher dimensions. Specifically, it establishes that if \( E \subset \mathbb{R}^d \) is Lebesgue measurable, then the function \( \phi(t) = m \left ((-\infty, t_1) \times \cdots \times (-\infty, t_d) \cap E\right ) \) is Lipschitz. The proposed generalization involves using rectangles in \( \mathbb{R}^d \) defined by the product of intervals, \( (-\infty, t_1) \times \cdots \times (-\infty, t_d) \).

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lebesgue measurable sets in \( \mathbb{R}^d \)
  • Familiarity with Lipschitz continuity
  • Knowledge of measure theory
  • Basic concepts of multivariable calculus
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of Lipschitz functions in higher dimensions
  • Explore Lebesgue measure and integration in \( \mathbb{R}^d \)
  • Investigate the implications of using rectangles in measure theory
  • Learn about generalizations of classical theorems in measure theory
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of analysis, and researchers interested in measure theory and its applications in higher dimensions.

mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! :o

If $E \subset \mathbb{R}$ is Lebesgue measurable and $\phi(t)=m \left ((-\infty, t) \cap E\right )$, then $\phi$ is Lipschitz.

How could we generalize this sentence in $\mathbb{R}^d$?? (Wondering)

If $E \subset \mathbb{R}^d$ is Lebesgue measurable and $\phi(t)=m \left (\dots \cap E\right )$, then $\phi$ is Lipschitz.

What should be instead of $(-\infty, t)$ ?? (Wondering)

Maybe a rectangle in $\mathbb{R}^d$?? Or something else?? (Wondering)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, you can use a rectangle in $\mathbb{R}^d$. Specifically, the rectangle should be of the form $(-\infty, t_1)\times \cdots \times (-\infty, t_d)$. This is the set of all points $(x_1,\dots,x_d)$ such that $x_i < t_i$ for all $i=1,\dots,d$.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K