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

  • Thread starter Thread starter e(ho0n3
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Measure Set
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves a sequence of measurable subsets of the real numbers and requires proving that the measure of a specific set constructed from these subsets is zero. The context is rooted in measure theory, particularly focusing on properties of measurable sets and their measures.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of a theorem related to the measure of intersections of decreasing sequences of sets. There is an exploration of the relationship between the measures of the sets and the convergence of their sums.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants offering insights and questioning the reasoning behind certain steps. Some guidance has been provided regarding the implications of the finite sum of measures, but there is no explicit consensus on the approach to show that the limit is zero.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the definitions and properties of the sets involved, particularly regarding the nature of the unions and intersections of the measurable sets. There is a mention of the need for clarification on the structure of the intervals involved.

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.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K