Sigma Algebras .... Axler, Page 26 ....

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sigma
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the definition of a ##\sigma##-algebra as presented in Sheldon Axler's "Measure, Integration & Real Analysis," specifically in Chapter 2. Participants clarify that while the set of all subsets of ##\mathbb{R}## is indeed a ##\sigma##-algebra, it cannot serve as the domain for Lebesgue measure due to the violation of countable additivity. The conversation emphasizes the distinction between the theoretical properties of a ##\sigma##-algebra and practical applications in measure theory, particularly regarding Borel sets.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of measure theory concepts, particularly ##\sigma##-algebras.
  • Familiarity with Lebesgue measure and its properties.
  • Knowledge of Borel sets and their significance in real analysis.
  • Basic comprehension of countable additivity in the context of measures.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties and definitions of ##\sigma##-algebras in detail.
  • Explore the construction and properties of Lebesgue measure.
  • Investigate the role of Borel sets in measure theory.
  • Learn about countable additivity and its implications for measures.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, particularly those focusing on real analysis, measure theory, and anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of ##\sigma##-algebras and Lebesgue measure.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
TL;DR
I need help in order to fully understand the implications of Axler's definition of a ##\sigma##-algebra ... ...
I am reading Sheldon Axler's book: Measure, Integration & Real Analysis ... and I am focused on Chapter 2: Measures ...

I need help in order to fully understand the implications of Axler's definition of a ##\sigma##-algebra ... ...

The relevant text reads as follows:

Axler - Sigma Algebres ... Page 26 .png


Now in the above text Axler implies that the set of all subsets of ##\mathbb{R}## is not a ##\sigma##-algebra ... ...

... BUT ... which of the three bullet points of the definition of a ##\sigma##-algebra is violated by the set of all subsets of ##\mathbb{R}## ... and how/why is it violated ...
Help will be much appreciated ...

Peter
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Math Amateur said:
Summary:: I need help in order to fully understand the implications of Axler's definition of a ##\sigma##-algebra ... ...

I am reading Sheldon Axler's book: Measure, Integration & Real Analysis ... and I am focused on Chapter 2: Measures ...

I need help in order to fully understand the implications of Axler's definition of a ##\sigma##-algebra ... ...

The relevant text reads as follows:

View attachment 267217

Now in the above text Axler implies that the set of all subsets of ##\mathbb{R}## is not a ##\sigma##-algebra ... ...

... BUT ... which of the three bullet points of the definition of a ##\sigma##-algebra is violated by the set of all subsets of ##\mathbb{R}## ... and how/why is it violated ...
Help will be much appreciated ...

Peter

Axler does not say that. The collection of all subsets is a ##\sigma##-algebra (trivially). Axler says that we cannot define Lebesgue-measure on this ##\sigma##-algebra and that's why we define Lebesgue measure on Borel sets.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Math Amateur
Math Amateur said:
Now in the above text Axler implies that the set of all subsets of ##\mathbb{R}## is not a ##\sigma##-algebra
No, he doesn't. The set of all subsets of ##\mathbb{R}## is obviously a ##\sigma##-algebra. It's just that we can't extend the notion of length on all the subsets of ##\mathbb{R}## without violating some highly desirable properties we want it to have (like countable additivity). So we force ourselves to give up on the idea of using all the subsets of ##\mathbb{R}## as the domain of our measure, but we still want this set of subsets to satisfy the properties in the definition of ##\sigma##-algebra.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Math Amateur
Thanks to Dragon27 and Math_QED for clarifying the issue ...

Much appreciate your help ...

Peter
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K