Non-measurable sets

  • Thread starter dimitri151
  • Start date
  • #1
117
3
In analysis we were shown the existence of non-Lebesgue measurable sets (eg a choice function over the rational equivalence partition of an interval). From the proof it seems that this means you can't assign number to the Lebesgue measure of this set i.e. if you say its measure is zero it's not enough and if you say it's some finite number then it is too much. However the way we learned Lebesgue measure was that Lebesgue measure was Lebesgue outer measure restricted to a certain family if sets. But Lebesgue outer measure is defined for all sets in P(R). So my question is what is the Lebesgue outer measure (what number) of a non-Lebesgue measurable set like the one above?
 

Answers and Replies

  • #3
117
3
I see. But if you specify unambiguously how the elements [itex]x\in[0,1][/itex] are chosen then the set E (the non-measurable set) will have a specific outer measure. But then there will be some set A not disjoint from E such that the sum of the outer measure of the part of A in E and the outer measure of the part of A not in E will be greater than the outer measure of A. It's hard to imagine how this could be.
 

Related Threads on Non-measurable sets

  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
23
Views
10K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
2K
Top