Is the Intersection of Sets with Measure 1 Also Measure 1?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chris L T521
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The problem discusses whether the intersection of sets with measure 1 also has measure 1. It is shown that if sets \( A_n \) are subsets of \([0,1]\) with \( m(A_n) = 1 \), then \( m(\bigcap_{n=1}^{\infty} A_n) = 1 \). The solution involves defining the complements \( B_j = \overline{A_j} \) and demonstrating that their union has measure 0. Consequently, since the measure of the complement of the intersection is 0, the measure of the intersection itself must be 1. This confirms that the intersection of sets with measure 1 retains that measure.
Chris L T521
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
913
Reaction score
0
Here's this week's problem!

-----

Problem
: Suppose that $A_n\subset[0,1]$ such that $m(A_n)=1$ for $n=1,2,3,\cdots$. Show that $\displaystyle m(\bigcap\limits_{n=1}^{\infty}A_n)=1.$

-----

Remember to read the http://www.mathhelpboards.com/showthread.php?772-Problem-of-the-Week-%28POTW%29-Procedure-and-Guidelines to find out how to http://www.mathhelpboards.com/forms.php?do=form&fid=2!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This week's problem was correctly answered by Ackbach. You can find his solution below.

[sp]Let $S=[0,1]$ be the universe of discourse, so we define set complements in terms of $S$: for any set $C\subseteq S$, $\overline{C}:= S \setminus C$. For each $j=1,2,3,\dots$ define $B_{j}=\overline{A_{j}}$. Since $m(S)=1$, it follows that $m(B_{j})=0$ for all $j=1,2,3,\dots$. Now
$$m \left( \overline{ \bigcap_{j=1}^{ \infty} A_{j}} \right)=m \left( \bigcup_{j=1}^{ \infty} \overline{A_{j}} \right) = m \left( \bigcup_{j=1}^{ \infty} B_{j} \right).$$
Now then, define the following new sequence of sets based on the $B_{j}$:
\begin{align*}
C_{1}&=B_{1} \\
C_{2}&= B_{2} \setminus B_{1} \\
C_{3}&= B_{3} \setminus (B_{1} \cup B_{2}) \\
C_{4}&= B_{4} \setminus (B_{1} \cup B_{2} \cup B_{3}) \\
\vdots \\
C_{n}&= B_{n} \setminus \left( \bigcup_{j=1}^{n-1}B_{j} \right).
\end{align*}

Then the elements of the sequence $\{C_{j}\}$ are mutually disjoint, and
$$\bigcup_{j=1}^{ \infty}C_{j}= \bigcup_{j=1}^{ \infty}B_{j},$$
and therefore
$$m \left( \bigcup_{j=1}^{ \infty}C_{j} \right)=m \left( \bigcup_{j=1}^{ \infty}B_{j} \right).$$
But $m(C_{j}) \le m(B_{j})$, since $C_{j} \subseteq B_{j}$. It follows that $m(C_{j})=0$. However, since the $\{C_{j}\}$ are mutually disjoint, it must be that
$$m \left( \bigcup_{j=1}^{ \infty}C_{j} \right) = \sum_{j=1}^{ \infty}m(C_{j})=0.$$
Since
$$m \left( \overline{ \bigcap_{j=1}^{ \infty} A_{j}} \right) =0,$$
it follows that
$$m \left( \bigcap_{j=1}^{ \infty} A_{j} \right)=1.$$
QED.[/sp]
 

Similar threads

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