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
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on deriving a formula for the measure of the union of n measurable sets in a metric space, particularly when the sets are not necessarily disjoint. The established formula is given as $$ \mu(\bigcup_{j = 1}^n A_j) = \sum_{j = 1}^n \mu(A_j) - \sum_{1\le j_1 < j_2 \le n} \mu(A_{j_1} \cap A_{j_2}) + \sum_{1 \le j_1 < j_2 < j_3 \le n} \mu(A_{j_1} \cap A_{j_2} \cap A_{j_3}) - \cdots + (-1)^{n-1} \mu(\bigcap_{j = 1}^n A_j)$$. This formula accounts for overlapping sets by using the principle of inclusion-exclusion.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of measure theory concepts, specifically measurable sets.
  • Familiarity with metric spaces and their properties.
  • Knowledge of the principle of inclusion-exclusion in set theory.
  • Basic proficiency in mathematical notation and summation notation.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principle of inclusion-exclusion in detail to understand its application in measure theory.
  • Explore advanced topics in measure theory, such as Lebesgue measure and its properties.
  • Learn about measurable functions and their significance in analysis.
  • Investigate applications of measure theory in probability and statistics.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of advanced mathematics, and researchers in fields requiring a deep understanding of measure theory and its applications.

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