I have one more question about the Lebesgue integral:(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

What if we defined the Lebesgue integral like this:

Let X be a measurable space and f any nonnegative function from X to R.

Then the Lebesgue integral of f as [tex]\int_X f d\mu = sup(I_X)[/tex] where [tex]I_X[/tex] is the integral of a simple function and the sup is taken over all simple measurable functions on X, such that 0<=s<=f.

As you see this definition is the same as the original, except, that the assumption that f is measurable is missing.

My question is: What would be wrong with this definition?

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Lebesgue integral once again

Loading...

Similar Threads - Lebesgue integral once | Date |
---|---|

I Lebesgue Integral of Dirac Delta "function" | Nov 17, 2017 |

A question about lebesgue integral | Nov 2, 2013 |

Do physicists know the Lebesgue integral? | Jan 9, 2012 |

Bounded Lebesgue integrals | Nov 1, 2011 |

Lebesgue integration over sets of measure zero | Sep 18, 2011 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**