- 4,796
- 32
Let (X,µ) be a measure space with µ(X) infinite. I'm trying to find an example of a pair (X,µ) and a sequence {f_n} of L^1(X,µ) functions converging uniformly to a function f such that we do not have f_n --> f in L^1(X,µ).
The discussion focuses on the concepts of L^1 convergence and uniform convergence within the context of measure theory, specifically using the Lebesgue measure on the real line. An example is provided where a sequence of functions {f_n} converges uniformly to f = 0, yet does not converge in L^1 norm, illustrating that uniform convergence does not imply convergence in L^1. The L^1 norm is defined as \| f\|_{L^1(X,\mu)}=\int_X |f|d\mu, emphasizing the distinction between these types of convergence.
PREREQUISITESMathematicians, particularly those specializing in analysis, graduate students studying measure theory, and anyone interested in the nuances of convergence in functional spaces.
I don't see how you can conclude the statement is false from this.RedX said:If your measure space is Borel then I don't think this statement is true. A sequence of Borel measurable functions that has a limit converges to a Borel function.
morphism said:In fact it is possible to come up with an example satisfying the OP using X=R with Lebesgue measure. Take f_n to be a sequence of rectangles with decreasing height but increasing width, in such a way that f_n -> 0 uniformly but not in L^1. You can even rig it so that f_n doesn't converge in any L^p (1 <= p < inf).
RedX said:Doesn't L^1 mean the space of integrable functions? So why isn't f=0 in this space?
kilimanjaro said:Yes, f(x) = 0 is in L^1. The issue is whether f_n converges to f in the L^1 norm.