Is the Set Defined by a Continuous Almost Everywhere Function Rectifiable?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on proving that the set S, defined by a continuous almost everywhere function g that is positive on the interval [a,b], is rectifiable. A key approach involves demonstrating that S is bounded and that its boundary has measure zero. The initial challenge was confirming the boundedness of g, given its continuity almost everywhere. Participants noted that since g is positive and continuous almost everywhere, S can be shown to be bounded. The problem has been resolved, confirming that S is indeed rectifiable.
johnson12
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
let g:[a,b] -> R be a function that is continuous almost everywhere. assume that g(x) > 0 on [a,b]. Show that the set
S = { (x,y): 0 <= y <= g(x) , a <= x <= b} is rectifiable.

One way to attack it, is to show that S is bounded and boundary of S has measure zero. the problem I am having is how to show that S is bounded, since g is continuous a.e. I don't now whether or not g is bounded on [a,b].

any comments at all are strongly appreciated, thanks.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
forgot to mention the definition of rectifiable here: a (bounded) set S is rectifiable if

\int_{S} 1 exists. (so it has volume.)update: PROBLEM HAS BEEN SOLVED.
 
Last edited:
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
4K
Replies
10
Views
2K