Regarding dominated convergence theorem in Folland

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The Dominated Convergence Theorem, as presented by Folland, asserts that if a sequence of functions ##\{f_n\}## in ##L^1## converges almost everywhere to a function ##f##, and there exists a nonnegative function ##g \in L^1## such that ##|f_n| \leq g## almost everywhere, then ##f## is also in ##L^1## and the integral of ##f## equals the limit of the integrals of ##f_n##. The proof relies on the measurability of ##f##, which can be established using Proposition 2.11 and Proposition 2.12, regardless of whether the measure ##\mu## is complete. The discussion highlights the importance of understanding the implications of these propositions in the context of measure theory.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Dominated Convergence Theorem
  • Familiarity with measure theory concepts, specifically ##L^1## spaces
  • Knowledge of measurable functions and their properties
  • Proficiency in handling almost everywhere (a.e.) convergence
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of Proposition 2.11 in detail, particularly regarding completeness of measures
  • Explore Proposition 2.12 and its application in measure theory
  • Learn about the properties of ##L^1## spaces and their significance in functional analysis
  • Investigate the differences in behavior of functions under various measures and their completions
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of analysis, and anyone studying measure theory and integration, particularly those focusing on the Dominated Convergence Theorem and its applications in real analysis.

psie
Messages
315
Reaction score
40
TL;DR
I am stuck at the very first sentence in the proof of Folland's version of the dominated convergence theorem. The wording confuses me and I'm not sure if he assumes the measure to be complete and the limiting function to be measurable.
The Dominated Convergence Theorem. Let ##\{f_n\}## be a sequence in ##L^1## such that (a) ##f_n\to f## a.e., and (b) there exists a nonnegative ##g\in L^1## such that ##|f_n|\leq g## a.e. for all ##n##. Then ##f\in L^1## and ##\int f=\lim\int f_n##.

Proof. ##f## is measurable (perhaps after redefinition on a null set) by Prop. 2.11 and 2.12, and since ##|f|\leq g## a.e., we have ##f\in L^1##. ...

That's the first sentence in the proof. Prior to this Folland mentions the spaces ##L^1(\overline{\mu})## and ##L^1(\mu)## and how "we can (and shall) identify these spaces." (here ##\overline{\mu}## is the completion of ##\mu##). The propositions mentioned in the proof read as follows:

Proposition. 2.11. The following implications are valid iff the measure ##\mu## is complete:
a) If ##f## is measurable and ##f=g## ##\mu##-a.e., then ##g## is measurable.
b) If ##f_n## is measurable for ##n\in\mathbb N## and ##f_n\to f## ##\mu##-a.e., then ##f## is measurable.

Proposition. 2.12. Let ##(X, \mathcal M,m)## be a measure space and let ##(X,\overline{\mathcal M} ,\overline \mu)## be its completion. If ##f## is an ##\overline{\mathcal M}##-measurable function on ##X##, there is an ##\mathcal M##-measurable function ##g## such that ##f=g## ##\overline{\mu}##-almost everywhere.

I'm really confused by Folland's first sentence in the proof of the dominated convergence theorem. My interpretation of Folland's theorem and first sentence is that he assumes ##\{f_n\}\subset L^1(\overline{\mu})##, so by Prop. 2.11b ##f## is measurable. Now by Prop. 2.12, i.e. by redefinition on a null set, we can find ##f_0\in L^1(\mu)## such that $f=f_0$ a.e. Does this make sense to you? My interpretation assumes the measure to be complete; I don't see otherwise why he'd refer to Proposition. 2.11.

Grateful for any thoughts or comments.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Here's an alternative interpretation, which I think is the correct one.

The measure ##\mu## is not assumed to be complete. As for the measurability of ##f##; we know that ##f_n## converge to ##f## ##\mu##-almost everywhere. Consider temporarily the completion of your ##\sigma##-algebra and measure. The ##f_n##'s are measurable with respect to that completion, and still converge ##\overline{\mu}##-a.e to ##f##. This is because if a function is measurable with respect to some ##\sigma##-algebra, then also with respect to any larger ##\sigma##-algebra (also, ##\{x:f_n(x)\not\to f(x)\}## is still a ##\overline{\mu}##-null set). By Proposition 2.11, ##f## is measurable with respect to the complete ##\sigma##-algebra. By Proposition 2.12, ##f## is equal ##\overline{\mu}##-a.e. to a function that's measurable with respect to the incomplete ##\sigma##-algebra (and we agree to denote that measurable function by ##f##, which is what Folland means by redefining ##f## on a null set).
 
I'm not sure I understand your concerns. 2.11(b) makes ##f## measurable and ##|f|<g## guarantees ##\int |f|<\int g<\infty .##
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: psie
fresh_42 said:
I'm not sure I understand your concerns. 2.11(b) makes ##f## measurable and ##|f|<g## guarantees ##\int |f|<\int g<\infty .##
2.11b makes ##f## measurable provided the measure is complete, but Folland does not state the measure is complete.
 
FYI, my Firefox browser is not displaying the Latex overline. My Chrome and Microsoft Edge browsers display it properly. Readers might want to not use Firefox for this thread.
 
2.12 says that in questions about ##L^1## it doesn't matter if you work with the given measure or its completion. So assume the measure is complete.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: psie

Similar threads

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