What is the maximal function of a finite Borel measure on $\Bbb R^n$?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Euge
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    2017
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The maximal function of a finite Borel measure $\mu$ on $\mathbb{R}^n$ is defined as $$\mathcal{M}\mu(x) = \sup_{0 < r < \infty} \frac{\mu(B(x;r))}{m(B(x;r))}$$ where $m$ is the Lebesgue measure. It has been established that if $\mu$ is mutually singular with respect to $m$, denoted as $\mu \perp m$, then $\mathcal{M}\mu = \infty$ almost everywhere with respect to $\mu$. This conclusion is critical for understanding the behavior of measures in relation to Lebesgue measure.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of finite Borel measures
  • Knowledge of Lebesgue measure on $\mathbb{R}^n$
  • Familiarity with the concept of mutual singularity of measures
  • Basic principles of measure theory
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of finite Borel measures in detail
  • Explore the implications of mutual singularity in measure theory
  • Learn about the Lebesgue differentiation theorem
  • Investigate applications of maximal functions in analysis
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, particularly those specializing in measure theory, analysis, and anyone interested in the properties of Borel measures and their maximal functions.

Euge
Gold Member
MHB
POTW Director
Messages
2,072
Reaction score
245
Here is this week's POTW:

-----
Suppose $\mu$ is a finite Borel measure on $\Bbb R^n$. Define the maximal function of $\mu$ by $$\mathcal{M}\mu(x) = \sup_{0 < r < \infty} \frac{\mu(B(x;r))}{m(B(x;r))}\quad (x\in \Bbb R^n)$$ Here, $m$ denotes the Lebesgue measure on $\Bbb R^n$. Show that if $\mu$ is mutually singular with respect to $m$ (i.e., $\mu \perp m$), then $\mathcal{M}\mu = \infty$ a.e. $[\mu]$.-----

Remember to read the http://www.mathhelpboards.com/showthread.php?772-Problem-of-the-Week-%28POTW%29-Procedure-and-Guidelines to find out how to http://www.mathhelpboards.com/forms.php?do=form&fid=2!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No one answered this week's problem. You can read my solution below.
It suffices to show that the symmetric derivative $D\mu = \infty$ a.e. [$\mu$]. As $\mu\perp m$, there is a Borel set $A \subset \Bbb R^d$ such that $m(A) = 0 = \mu(\Bbb R^d \setminus A)$. Then $D\mu(x) = \infty$ for all $x\in A\setminus \cup A_n$, where $A_n$ consists of all $x\in A$ for which there is a sequence $r_k \to 0$ such that $\mu(B(x;r_k)) < n\, m(B(x;r_k))$ for all $k$.

By regularity of $\mu$, there are open sets $O_k$ containing $A$ such that $m(O_k) < 3^{-k}$ for all $k$. Letting $n$ and $k$ be fixed, we observe that for each $x\in A_n$, there is an open ball $B(x) \subset O_k$ containing $x$ such that $\mu(B(x)) < n\, m(B(x))$. Let $\Sigma_{k,n}$ be the union of the balls $(1/3)B(x)$ as $x$ ranges over $A_n$. If $K$ is a fixed compact subset of $\Sigma_{k,n}$, then $K$ is covered by finitely many of the balls $(1/3)B(x)$. By a covering lemma, there is a finite set $S$ such that the collection $\{B(x) : x\in S\}$ covers $K$ and $\{(1/3)B(x):x\in S\}$ is disjoint. Now

$$\mu(K) \le \sum_{x\in S} \mu(B(x)) < n \sum_{x\in S} m(B(x)) = 3^d n \sum_{x\in S} m((1/3)B(x)) \le 3^d n\, m(O_j) < 3^{d-j}n$$

By regularity of $\mu$, $\mu(\Sigma_{k,n}) \le 3^{d-j}n$. If $\Sigma_n := \cap_k \Sigma_{k,n}$, then $D\mu(x) = \infty$ for every $x\in A \setminus \cup \Sigma_n$ and $\mu(\Sigma_n) = 0$ for all $n$. Hence, $D\mu = \infty$ a.e. [$\mu$].
 

Similar threads

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