Measure Union of n Measurable Sets: Formula & Examples

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mathmari
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Measure Union
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion focuses on finding a formula for the measure of the union of \( n \) measurable sets in a metric space, specifically when the sets are not necessarily disjoint. Participants explore different formulations and approaches to express this measure accurately.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that for disjoint sets, the measure of the union is given by the sum of the measures of the individual sets, but notes that for non-disjoint sets, the measure is less than or equal to this sum.
  • Another participant proposes a formula involving the measures of the sets and their intersections, specifically stating that the measure of the union can be expressed as a sum of measures of individual sets minus the measures of their pairwise intersections, plus measures of triple intersections, and so on, following an inclusion-exclusion principle.
  • A repeated formulation of the inclusion-exclusion principle is provided, emphasizing the need for an equation rather than an inequality, and reiterating the same formula for the measure of the union of \( n \) measurable sets.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants present multiple formulations for the measure of the union of measurable sets, indicating that there is no consensus on a single formula. The discussion includes both inequalities and explicit equations, reflecting differing perspectives on how to approach the problem.

Contextual Notes

Some participants emphasize the need for a proof of the proposed formulas, suggesting that the discussion may involve assumptions about the properties of the measurable sets and their intersections that are not fully explored.

mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! :o

At any metric space, find a formula that gives the measure of the union of $n$ measurable sets, not necessary disjoint.

If the sets are disjoint the measure of the union is $$\mu \left ( \cup_{n=1}^{\infty} A_n \right)=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\mu(A_n)$$ right??

And when the sets are not disjoint the $=$ gets $\leq$.

Is this the formula that I am asked to find?? (Wondering)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mathmari said:
At any metric space, find a formula that gives the measure of the union of $n$ measurable sets, not necessary disjoint.
One option is
\[
\mu\left(\bigcup_{i=1}^n A_i\right)=\sum_{i=1}^n\mu\left(A_i\setminus\bigcup_{k=1}^{i-1}A_k\right).
\]
 
Since you are asked to find a formula, you must give an equation, not an inequality. I'll write down the formula, and leave it to you to prove it.

Let $A_1,\ldots, A_n$ be $n$ measurable sets. Then

$$ \mu(\bigcup_{j = 1}^n A_j) = \sum_{j = 1}^k \mu(A_j) -\sum_{1\le j_1 < j_2 \le n} \mu(A_{j_1} \cap A_{j_2}) +\sum_{1 \le j_1 < j_2 < j_3 \le n}\mu(A_{j_1} \cap A_{j_2} \cap A_{j_3}) - \cdots + (-1)^{n-1} \mu(\bigcap_{j = 1}^n A_j)$$
 
Evgeny.Makarov said:
One option is
\[
\mu\left(\bigcup_{i=1}^n A_i\right)=\sum_{i=1}^n\mu\left(A_i\setminus\bigcup_{k=1}^{i-1}A_k\right).
\]

Euge said:
Since you are asked to find a formula, you must give an equation, not an inequality. I'll write down the formula, and leave it to you to prove it.

Let $A_1,\ldots, A_n$ be $n$ measurable sets. Then

$$ \mu(\bigcup_{j = 1}^n A_j) = \sum_{j = 1}^k \mu(A_j) -\sum_{1\le j_1 < j_2 \le n} \mu(A_{j_1} \cap A_{j_2}) +\sum_{1 \le j_1 < j_2 < j_3 \le n}\mu(A_{j_1} \cap A_{j_2} \cap A_{j_3}) - \cdots + (-1)^{n-1} \mu(\bigcap_{j = 1}^n A_j)$$

I understand! Thank you both very much! (Sun)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K