If E is measurable then so it's each of it's translates

  • Thread starter SiddharthM
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Measurable
In summary, the conversation discusses using Caratheodory's definition of measurability of sets to prove that a translated version of a measurable set is also measurable. The conversation includes hints and identities to help with the proof, ultimately using the fact that Lebesgue outer measure is translation invariant.
  • #1
SiddharthM
176
0
I'm working with caratheodory's definition of measurability of sets as given in Royden. I'm trying to prove that given any measurable set E we have that E+y={x+y|where x is contained in E} is also measurable. I'm looking for a hint not the entire solution please.

I think I've actually done this problem before in my real analysis class and i remember there being a 'special set' (the silver bullet) that relates E with E+y through operations allowed in sigma algebras...i could be wrong

thanks for any help, again no solutions just hints please.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
actually I think it's simpler than I thought. We use the fact that lebesgue outer measure is translation invariant, that is m(A)=m(A+y) for any set A and any real number y. We also use two identities

(E+y)^c=E^c+y (that is the compliment of the translate is the translate of the compliment) and
[(A-y) intersect (E)]+y=A intersect (E+y)

I will not prove these things as it is simple to do so.

Let A be any subset of reals, put B=A-y, then since E is measurable
mB=m(B intersect E)+m(B intersect E^c)
since m is translation invariant
mB=m([B intersect E]+y)+m([B intersect E^c]+y)
Now using the first identity above we see that
mB=m(A intersect (E+y))+m(B intersect (E^c+y))
using the 2nd identity we have
mB=m(A intersect (E+y))+m(B intersect (E+y)^c)
and mB=mA because of trans invariance. QED
 
  • #3


Hint:

One way to approach this problem is to use the fact that measurable sets form a sigma-algebra, which means that they are closed under countable unions and complements. Try to use this property to show that E+y is also measurable. You may also want to consider using the definition of measurable sets in terms of outer measure and the fact that outer measure is translation invariant.
 

1. What does it mean for E to be measurable?

Being measurable means that the set E has a well-defined and finite size or volume. In other words, we can accurately measure the amount of space that E occupies.

2. How does the measurability of E relate to its translates?

If E is measurable, then it means that we can accurately determine its size or volume. This also applies to each of its translates, meaning that we can accurately measure the size or volume of any set that is obtained by moving E in any direction.

3. Can you provide an example of a measurable set and its translates?

One example of a measurable set is a square with side length 2 units. Its translates would be other squares with the same side length, obtained by moving the original square horizontally, vertically, or diagonally.

4. Are all sets with finite size or volume measurable?

No, not all sets with finite size or volume are measurable. In order for a set to be measurable, it must also satisfy certain mathematical properties, such as being able to be divided into smaller subsets that can be accurately measured.

5. How does the concept of measurability relate to the field of science?

Measurability is a fundamental concept in science, as it allows us to accurately quantify and compare physical quantities. In fields such as physics and chemistry, measurability is essential for conducting experiments and making accurate predictions about the natural world.

Similar threads

  • Calculus
Replies
10
Views
132
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
186
  • Differential Equations
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
703
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
5
Views
1K
Back
Top