Prove u(A/E)=0 for Compact Hausdorff Spaces and Borel Measure

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Fermat1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Compact Measure
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on proving a property of Borel measures on compact Hausdorff spaces, specifically showing that for a Borel set A, the measure of the set difference A\E is zero under certain conditions involving a closed set E. The scope includes theoretical aspects of measure theory and properties of Borel sets.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that if A is an open set in K and disjoint from E, then u(A) must equal zero.
  • It is proposed that to show u(A\E)=0, one can use the definition of the measure in terms of infimum over open sets containing A\E.
  • Concerns are raised about the argument's simplicity and its lack of reliance on the compactness of K.
  • One participant suggests that since E is closed, its complement is open and disjoint from E, leading to the conclusion that u(K\E) = 0.
  • Another participant confirms that A\E being a subset of K\E supports the argument that u(A\E) must be zero.
  • There is a discussion about the potential issue with using outer regularity, as the open sets M considered may not be disjoint from E.
  • A later reply emphasizes the need to show that two measures are equal by checking the relationship for open sets.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express uncertainty about the validity of the initial argument and whether the compactness of K is adequately utilized. There is no consensus on the correctness of the proposed proof or the implications of the measures involved.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the potential oversight of the compactness of K in the argument and the dependence on the properties of Borel measures and sets. The discussion does not resolve whether the measures being compared are indeed equal.

Fermat1
Messages
180
Reaction score
0
Let K be a compact hausdorff space, and u a borel measure on K. You are given that if A is an open set in K with A and E disjoint, we have u(A)=0. (E is a certain closed set in K)
Show that for a borel set A, we have that u(AE)=u(A), where AE is the intersection.

we have that u(A)=u(AE)+u(A\E) so we only have to prove u(A/E)=0

u(A/E)=inf(u(M):M is open and A\E is a subset of M)

A\E is disjoint with E but unfortunately this does not imply M is disjoint with E .
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Fermat said:
Let K be a compact hausdorff space, and u a borel measure on K. You are given that if A is an open set in K with A and E disjoint, we have u(A)=0. (E is a certain closed set in K)
Show that for a borel set A, we have that u(AE)=u(A), where AE is the intersection.

we have that u(A)=u(AE)+u(A\E) so we only have to prove u(A/E)=0

u(A/E)=inf(u(M):M is open and A\E is a subset of M)

A\E is disjoint with E but unfortunately this does not imply M is disjoint with E .
This argument seems too simple to be believable, but I can't see what's wrong with it (I'm suspicious, because it does not use the compactness of $K$). You are given that $E$ is closed, so its complement $K\setminus E$ is an open set disjoint from $E$. Therefore $u(K\setminus E) = 0.$ If $A$ is a Borel set then $u(A\setminus E) \leqslant u(K\setminus E) = 0$.
 
Is the last part simply because A\E is a subset of K\E?
 
Fermat said:
Is the last part simply because A\E is a subset of K\E?
Yes. If $X$, $Y$ are Borel sets with $X\subseteq Y$ then $u(X)\leqslant u(Y)$.
 
Indeed, in the use of outer regularity, there is a problem as the involved $M$ may not be disjoint with $E$.

We have to show that the measures $\mu$ and $\nu\colon A\mapsto \mu(A\cap E)$ are actually equal.

Since the ambient space is compact, we can assume that $\mu$ is finite. We only have to check that the relationship $\mu(A)=\mu(A\cap E)$ holds for $A$ an open set. Using closeness of $E$, $A\cap E^c$ is an open set disjoint with $E$.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K