Measurable Function (Another Question)

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter TheBigBadBen
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function Measurable
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion confirms that if \( f:\mathbb{R}\rightarrow\mathbb{R} \) is a measurable function and \( E\subset\mathbb{R} \) is measurable, then \( f(E) \) is not necessarily measurable. However, if \( f \) is continuous, then \( f(E) \) is measurable. The Cantor function serves as a critical counterexample, demonstrating that a continuous function can map a measurable set to a non-measurable set, as illustrated by the function \( g(x) = x + f(x) \) and its implications through Vitali's theorem.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of measurable functions in real analysis
  • Familiarity with the Cantor function and its properties
  • Knowledge of Vitali's theorem and its applications
  • Concept of connected subsets in the real line
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of measurable functions in real analysis
  • Explore the implications of the Cantor function in measure theory
  • Learn about Vitali's theorem and its significance in measure theory
  • Investigate connected subsets of the real line and their measurability
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of real analysis, and anyone interested in the properties of measurable functions and their implications in measure theory.

TheBigBadBen
Messages
79
Reaction score
0
Is it true that if $$f:\mathbb{R}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}$$ is a measurable function and $$E\subset\mathbb{R}$$ is measurable, then $$f(E)$$ is measurable? What if f is assumed to be continuous?

I think that the answer is no for the first and yes for the second, but I have no idea how to prove/disprove either.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
girdav said:
Indeed, for the first question the answer is no: real analysis - Range of function measurable? - Mathematics Stack Exchange

For the second one, the range of $\Bbb R$ of a continuous function is connected. What are the connected subsets of the real line? Are they measurable?

As it ends up, my intuition for the second problem was totally off. In fact, the counterexample handily provided for my other question
http://www.mathhelpboards.com/f50/measurable-function-4789/
does the job here.

We have the following argument:
Let $$f(x)$$ be the Cantor function, and let C be the cantor set. Note that $$f(C) = [0,1]$$, since f is non-increasing on all points outside of C.

Define $$g:[0,1]\rightarrow [0,2]$$ by $$g(x) = x + f(x)$$. Since g maps every interval outside of C to an interval of the same length, we can deduce that $$m(g(C))=1$$. By Vitali's theorem, there is a non-measurable set $$A\subset g(C)$$. Note that $$B:=g^{-1}(A)$$ is a subset of C. Because B is a subset of a null set, B is null and hence measurable.

Thus, we have $$g(B) = A$$. g is a continuous (and hence measurable) function that takes a measurable set, B, to a non-measurable set, A. Thus, the answer to both questions is no.
 
You are right. For the second question I misread the question, I believed you asked about $f(\Bbb R)$. I've now edited.

Your counter-example seems correct.
 

Similar threads

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