Measure Theory-LebesgueMeasurable

  • Thread starter Thread starter WannaBe22
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Measure
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the existence of non-Lebesgue-measurable sets in the real numbers, specifically questioning whether a non-Lebesgue-measurable set can contain all rational numbers.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the properties of nonmeasurable sets, particularly the Vitali set, and consider the implications of combining such sets with rational numbers. Questions arise regarding the measurability of unions of sets and the relationship between measurability and sets of measure zero.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing guidance and prompting further exploration of the problem. There is a focus on clarifying the conditions under which sets remain measurable or nonmeasurable, particularly in the context of unions with measure zero sets.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of measure theory, particularly the definitions and properties of Lebesgue-measurable sets, while adhering to homework constraints that limit the provision of direct solutions.

WannaBe22
Messages
73
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Is there any non-Lebesgue-Measurable set A in R such as A contains all rational numbers?

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution


I've tried assuming that this is true... If such a set exists, then both A and A^c aren't countable... I've tried looking at A^c ... It's a non-countable set containing only non-rational numbers...I can't find any contradiction from this fact...
[I'm pretty sure the answer to the given question is no...]

Hope you'll be able to help me

Thanks !
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Don't try to construct a nonmeasurable set in such a way that it contains all of \mathbb{Q}. Instead, approach the problem in two parts: first get yourself a nonmeasurable set, then try to figure out whether you can make it contain \mathbb{Q} and still be nonmeasurable.
 
Well...After reading your guidance , I've tried taking the "Vitali Set" (The subset of
[-0.5,0.5] which, for each real number r, contains exactly one number v such that v-r is rational )... If we'll denote this set as P, then we need to consider P \cup Q.
P is nonmeasurable and contains excatly one rational numbers...I can't figure out whether our "union set" is measurable or not... We've added to P a set of measure 0...Does the new set is measurable or not?

Hope you'll be able to continue your guidance...

Thanks !
 
You have reduced the problem to exactly the question you need to answer. Let A \subset \mathbb{R} be any set, and Z \subset \mathbb{R} be a set of measure zero. How is the measurability or nonmeasurability of A \cup Z related to that of A? (What test for measurability should you be using to answer this question?)
 
Well... Z is obviously measurable...If A is also measurable then A \cup Z is also measurable... Hence, if A \cup Z is nonmeasurable , A must be nonmeasurable... So, if we take a nonmeasurable set A, containing all rational numbers, A-Q must also be nonmeasurable...But A-Q is a set contained in the irrational numbers set... Is it a contradiction?
As you can see, I'm pretty much stuck... Hope you'll be able to give me some further guidance

Thanks !
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K