Lebesgue measurable âsparseâ set.

Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Recently, out of curiosity, I looked up the list of questions for Princeton generals, and one caught my attention:
Can you construct a measurable set on the interval $[0; 1]$ such that its intersection
with any subinterval of $[0; 1]$ has measure neither $0$ nor equal to the measure of
the whole subinterval? If so, is the indicator (characteristic) function of that set Riemann
integrable.
Second part of the question is relatively easy to answer, but first I was not able to figure out.
So the final question is: how can one construct such a set?
measure-theory lebesgue-measure
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Recently, out of curiosity, I looked up the list of questions for Princeton generals, and one caught my attention:
Can you construct a measurable set on the interval $[0; 1]$ such that its intersection
with any subinterval of $[0; 1]$ has measure neither $0$ nor equal to the measure of
the whole subinterval? If so, is the indicator (characteristic) function of that set Riemann
integrable.
Second part of the question is relatively easy to answer, but first I was not able to figure out.
So the final question is: how can one construct such a set?
measure-theory lebesgue-measure
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Recently, out of curiosity, I looked up the list of questions for Princeton generals, and one caught my attention:
Can you construct a measurable set on the interval $[0; 1]$ such that its intersection
with any subinterval of $[0; 1]$ has measure neither $0$ nor equal to the measure of
the whole subinterval? If so, is the indicator (characteristic) function of that set Riemann
integrable.
Second part of the question is relatively easy to answer, but first I was not able to figure out.
So the final question is: how can one construct such a set?
measure-theory lebesgue-measure
Recently, out of curiosity, I looked up the list of questions for Princeton generals, and one caught my attention:
Can you construct a measurable set on the interval $[0; 1]$ such that its intersection
with any subinterval of $[0; 1]$ has measure neither $0$ nor equal to the measure of
the whole subinterval? If so, is the indicator (characteristic) function of that set Riemann
integrable.
Second part of the question is relatively easy to answer, but first I was not able to figure out.
So the final question is: how can one construct such a set?
measure-theory lebesgue-measure
measure-theory lebesgue-measure
edited Oct 17 '16 at 20:03
user1008646
1826
1826
asked Jun 8 '16 at 16:56
Sergey Rusakov
8116
8116
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
4
down vote
accepted
Yes, such a set exists. Walter Rudin has constructed one in the following paper:
Rudin, W. "Well-distributed measurable sets." The American Mathematical Monthly 90.1 (1983): 41-42.
In his own words:
Theorem. There is a measurable set $Asubseteq I=[0,1]$ such that
$$0<m(Acap V)<m(V)$$
for every nonempty open set $Vsubseteq I$.
Proof. Let CTDP mean: Compact Totally Disconnected subset of $I$, having Positive measure. Let $I_n$ be an enumeration of all segments in $I$ whose endpoints are rational. Construct sequences $A_n$, $B_n$ of CTDP's as follows:
Start with disjoint CTDP's $A_1$ and $B_1$ in $I_1$.
Once $A_1,B_1,ldots,A_n-1,B_n-1$ are chosen, their union $C_n$ is CTD, hence $I_nsetminus C_n$ contains a nonempty segment $J$, and $J$ contains a pair $A_n,B_n$ of disjoint CTDP's. Continue in this way, and put
$$A=bigcup_n=1^infty A_n.$$
If $Vsubseteq I$ is open and nonempty, then $I_nsubseteq V$ for some $n$, hence $A_nsubseteq V$ and $B_nsubseteq V$. Thus
$$0<m(A_n)leq m(Acap V)<m(Acap V)+m(B_n)leq m(V);$$
the last inequality holds because $A$ and $B_n$ are disjoint. Done.
Thanks. I was never able to solve this problem in his RCA.
â Qiyu Wen
Jun 9 '16 at 15:35
@QiyuWen Me too, I struggled so much on that one!
â Spenser
Jun 9 '16 at 17:50
@Spenser: There is a mistake in your proof. Requesting an edit.
â Axion004
Sep 9 at 20:48
In the final inequality, $m(Acap B)+m(B_n)$ should read $m(Acap V)+m(B_n)$
â D. Brogan
Sep 9 at 22:18
@D.Brogan You are right; I changed it.
â Spenser
Sep 10 at 6:34
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
4
down vote
accepted
Yes, such a set exists. Walter Rudin has constructed one in the following paper:
Rudin, W. "Well-distributed measurable sets." The American Mathematical Monthly 90.1 (1983): 41-42.
In his own words:
Theorem. There is a measurable set $Asubseteq I=[0,1]$ such that
$$0<m(Acap V)<m(V)$$
for every nonempty open set $Vsubseteq I$.
Proof. Let CTDP mean: Compact Totally Disconnected subset of $I$, having Positive measure. Let $I_n$ be an enumeration of all segments in $I$ whose endpoints are rational. Construct sequences $A_n$, $B_n$ of CTDP's as follows:
Start with disjoint CTDP's $A_1$ and $B_1$ in $I_1$.
Once $A_1,B_1,ldots,A_n-1,B_n-1$ are chosen, their union $C_n$ is CTD, hence $I_nsetminus C_n$ contains a nonempty segment $J$, and $J$ contains a pair $A_n,B_n$ of disjoint CTDP's. Continue in this way, and put
$$A=bigcup_n=1^infty A_n.$$
If $Vsubseteq I$ is open and nonempty, then $I_nsubseteq V$ for some $n$, hence $A_nsubseteq V$ and $B_nsubseteq V$. Thus
$$0<m(A_n)leq m(Acap V)<m(Acap V)+m(B_n)leq m(V);$$
the last inequality holds because $A$ and $B_n$ are disjoint. Done.
Thanks. I was never able to solve this problem in his RCA.
â Qiyu Wen
Jun 9 '16 at 15:35
@QiyuWen Me too, I struggled so much on that one!
â Spenser
Jun 9 '16 at 17:50
@Spenser: There is a mistake in your proof. Requesting an edit.
â Axion004
Sep 9 at 20:48
In the final inequality, $m(Acap B)+m(B_n)$ should read $m(Acap V)+m(B_n)$
â D. Brogan
Sep 9 at 22:18
@D.Brogan You are right; I changed it.
â Spenser
Sep 10 at 6:34
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
accepted
Yes, such a set exists. Walter Rudin has constructed one in the following paper:
Rudin, W. "Well-distributed measurable sets." The American Mathematical Monthly 90.1 (1983): 41-42.
In his own words:
Theorem. There is a measurable set $Asubseteq I=[0,1]$ such that
$$0<m(Acap V)<m(V)$$
for every nonempty open set $Vsubseteq I$.
Proof. Let CTDP mean: Compact Totally Disconnected subset of $I$, having Positive measure. Let $I_n$ be an enumeration of all segments in $I$ whose endpoints are rational. Construct sequences $A_n$, $B_n$ of CTDP's as follows:
Start with disjoint CTDP's $A_1$ and $B_1$ in $I_1$.
Once $A_1,B_1,ldots,A_n-1,B_n-1$ are chosen, their union $C_n$ is CTD, hence $I_nsetminus C_n$ contains a nonempty segment $J$, and $J$ contains a pair $A_n,B_n$ of disjoint CTDP's. Continue in this way, and put
$$A=bigcup_n=1^infty A_n.$$
If $Vsubseteq I$ is open and nonempty, then $I_nsubseteq V$ for some $n$, hence $A_nsubseteq V$ and $B_nsubseteq V$. Thus
$$0<m(A_n)leq m(Acap V)<m(Acap V)+m(B_n)leq m(V);$$
the last inequality holds because $A$ and $B_n$ are disjoint. Done.
Thanks. I was never able to solve this problem in his RCA.
â Qiyu Wen
Jun 9 '16 at 15:35
@QiyuWen Me too, I struggled so much on that one!
â Spenser
Jun 9 '16 at 17:50
@Spenser: There is a mistake in your proof. Requesting an edit.
â Axion004
Sep 9 at 20:48
In the final inequality, $m(Acap B)+m(B_n)$ should read $m(Acap V)+m(B_n)$
â D. Brogan
Sep 9 at 22:18
@D.Brogan You are right; I changed it.
â Spenser
Sep 10 at 6:34
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
accepted
up vote
4
down vote
accepted
Yes, such a set exists. Walter Rudin has constructed one in the following paper:
Rudin, W. "Well-distributed measurable sets." The American Mathematical Monthly 90.1 (1983): 41-42.
In his own words:
Theorem. There is a measurable set $Asubseteq I=[0,1]$ such that
$$0<m(Acap V)<m(V)$$
for every nonempty open set $Vsubseteq I$.
Proof. Let CTDP mean: Compact Totally Disconnected subset of $I$, having Positive measure. Let $I_n$ be an enumeration of all segments in $I$ whose endpoints are rational. Construct sequences $A_n$, $B_n$ of CTDP's as follows:
Start with disjoint CTDP's $A_1$ and $B_1$ in $I_1$.
Once $A_1,B_1,ldots,A_n-1,B_n-1$ are chosen, their union $C_n$ is CTD, hence $I_nsetminus C_n$ contains a nonempty segment $J$, and $J$ contains a pair $A_n,B_n$ of disjoint CTDP's. Continue in this way, and put
$$A=bigcup_n=1^infty A_n.$$
If $Vsubseteq I$ is open and nonempty, then $I_nsubseteq V$ for some $n$, hence $A_nsubseteq V$ and $B_nsubseteq V$. Thus
$$0<m(A_n)leq m(Acap V)<m(Acap V)+m(B_n)leq m(V);$$
the last inequality holds because $A$ and $B_n$ are disjoint. Done.
Yes, such a set exists. Walter Rudin has constructed one in the following paper:
Rudin, W. "Well-distributed measurable sets." The American Mathematical Monthly 90.1 (1983): 41-42.
In his own words:
Theorem. There is a measurable set $Asubseteq I=[0,1]$ such that
$$0<m(Acap V)<m(V)$$
for every nonempty open set $Vsubseteq I$.
Proof. Let CTDP mean: Compact Totally Disconnected subset of $I$, having Positive measure. Let $I_n$ be an enumeration of all segments in $I$ whose endpoints are rational. Construct sequences $A_n$, $B_n$ of CTDP's as follows:
Start with disjoint CTDP's $A_1$ and $B_1$ in $I_1$.
Once $A_1,B_1,ldots,A_n-1,B_n-1$ are chosen, their union $C_n$ is CTD, hence $I_nsetminus C_n$ contains a nonempty segment $J$, and $J$ contains a pair $A_n,B_n$ of disjoint CTDP's. Continue in this way, and put
$$A=bigcup_n=1^infty A_n.$$
If $Vsubseteq I$ is open and nonempty, then $I_nsubseteq V$ for some $n$, hence $A_nsubseteq V$ and $B_nsubseteq V$. Thus
$$0<m(A_n)leq m(Acap V)<m(Acap V)+m(B_n)leq m(V);$$
the last inequality holds because $A$ and $B_n$ are disjoint. Done.
edited Sep 10 at 6:34
answered Jun 9 '16 at 7:29
Spenser
14k33276
14k33276
Thanks. I was never able to solve this problem in his RCA.
â Qiyu Wen
Jun 9 '16 at 15:35
@QiyuWen Me too, I struggled so much on that one!
â Spenser
Jun 9 '16 at 17:50
@Spenser: There is a mistake in your proof. Requesting an edit.
â Axion004
Sep 9 at 20:48
In the final inequality, $m(Acap B)+m(B_n)$ should read $m(Acap V)+m(B_n)$
â D. Brogan
Sep 9 at 22:18
@D.Brogan You are right; I changed it.
â Spenser
Sep 10 at 6:34
add a comment |Â
Thanks. I was never able to solve this problem in his RCA.
â Qiyu Wen
Jun 9 '16 at 15:35
@QiyuWen Me too, I struggled so much on that one!
â Spenser
Jun 9 '16 at 17:50
@Spenser: There is a mistake in your proof. Requesting an edit.
â Axion004
Sep 9 at 20:48
In the final inequality, $m(Acap B)+m(B_n)$ should read $m(Acap V)+m(B_n)$
â D. Brogan
Sep 9 at 22:18
@D.Brogan You are right; I changed it.
â Spenser
Sep 10 at 6:34
Thanks. I was never able to solve this problem in his RCA.
â Qiyu Wen
Jun 9 '16 at 15:35
Thanks. I was never able to solve this problem in his RCA.
â Qiyu Wen
Jun 9 '16 at 15:35
@QiyuWen Me too, I struggled so much on that one!
â Spenser
Jun 9 '16 at 17:50
@QiyuWen Me too, I struggled so much on that one!
â Spenser
Jun 9 '16 at 17:50
@Spenser: There is a mistake in your proof. Requesting an edit.
â Axion004
Sep 9 at 20:48
@Spenser: There is a mistake in your proof. Requesting an edit.
â Axion004
Sep 9 at 20:48
In the final inequality, $m(Acap B)+m(B_n)$ should read $m(Acap V)+m(B_n)$
â D. Brogan
Sep 9 at 22:18
In the final inequality, $m(Acap B)+m(B_n)$ should read $m(Acap V)+m(B_n)$
â D. Brogan
Sep 9 at 22:18
@D.Brogan You are right; I changed it.
â Spenser
Sep 10 at 6:34
@D.Brogan You are right; I changed it.
â Spenser
Sep 10 at 6:34
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1818710%2flebesgue-measurable-sparse-set%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password