Proving m(X)=0: Sequence of Measurable Sets

  • Thread starter Thread starter e(ho0n3
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Measure Set
e(ho0n3
Messages
1,349
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Let (X_n) be a sequence of measurable subsets of \mathbb R such that

\sum_{i=1}^\infty m(X_i) < \infty

Define

X = \bigcap_{i=1}^\infty \left( \bigcup_{j=i}^\infty X_j \right)

Prove that m(X) = 0.

Homework Equations


Theorem. Let (E_n) be a sequence of measurable sets such that E_{n+1} \subseteq E_n and m(E_1) < \infty. Then

m\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^\infty E_i \right) = \lim_{i \to \infty} m(E_i)


The Attempt at a Solution


Define E_i = \bigcup\limits_{j=i}^\infty X_j. Then by the aforementioned theorem,

m(X) = \lim_{i \to \infty} m(E_i)

My only problem is showing that the limit is in fact 0. I haven't used that \sum m(X_i) < \infty. Any tips?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
you can say that m(X) <= m(E_{i}) for each i, and
m(E_{i}) = lim m(X_{j}) = 0 since the sum was finite.
 
I don't understand why m(E_i) = \lim m(X_j). We have that

E_i = \bigcup_{j=i}^\infty X_j

so

m(E_i) \le \sum_{j=i}^\infty m(X_j)

I do agree that \lim m(X_j) = 0.
 
are these intervals strictly nested or can there be a smallest interval?

[edit] i need clarifying: what exactly is INT(UNION(X_i)) with two indexes i and j?
 
Last edited:
sorry that's only true if the E_{i} where increasing, but

lim_{i\rightarrow\infty}\left(\sum^{\infty}_{j=i}m(X_{j})\right) =lim_{i\rightarrow\infty}m(X_{i}).

recall that if an infinite series converges you can make the remainder sum arbitrarily small.
 
You're right. That didn't occur to me. Thanks for the tip.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...

Similar threads

Back
Top