Probability measure on $(0,infty)$

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
5
down vote

favorite












What can be a possible probability measure on $(0,infty)$? Give an example.



For $(0,1)$ Lebesgue measure can be used and it easily satisfies all the properties of probability measure. But when the set is $(0,infty)$, Lebesgue measure will not lie in 0 to 1 range. I am thinking that some mapping from $(0,infty)$ to $(0,1)$ would do the trick. Am I right?










share|cite|improve this question



















  • 1




    Hi and welcome to the site! Since this is a site that encourages and helps with learning, it is best if you show your own ideas and efforts in solving the question. Can you edit your question to add your thoughts and ideas about it?
    – 5xum
    Sep 3 at 10:48






  • 1




    Also, don't get discouraged by the downvote. I downvoted the question and voted to close it because at the moment, it is not up to site standards (you have shown no work you did on your own). If you edit your question so that you show what you tried and how far you got, I will not only remove the downvote, I will add an upvote.
    – 5xum
    Sep 3 at 10:48










  • @5xum done. edited the question.
    – Chintu
    Sep 3 at 10:54






  • 2




    Hint : can you find a positive continuous function $f$ on $(0,infty)$ such that $int_mathbbR^+ f(x) dx =1$ ?
    – nicomezi
    Sep 3 at 10:55







  • 1




    You recieved an answer to your question. Is it what you needed? If so, you should accept it!
    – 5xum
    Sep 4 at 7:31














up vote
5
down vote

favorite












What can be a possible probability measure on $(0,infty)$? Give an example.



For $(0,1)$ Lebesgue measure can be used and it easily satisfies all the properties of probability measure. But when the set is $(0,infty)$, Lebesgue measure will not lie in 0 to 1 range. I am thinking that some mapping from $(0,infty)$ to $(0,1)$ would do the trick. Am I right?










share|cite|improve this question



















  • 1




    Hi and welcome to the site! Since this is a site that encourages and helps with learning, it is best if you show your own ideas and efforts in solving the question. Can you edit your question to add your thoughts and ideas about it?
    – 5xum
    Sep 3 at 10:48






  • 1




    Also, don't get discouraged by the downvote. I downvoted the question and voted to close it because at the moment, it is not up to site standards (you have shown no work you did on your own). If you edit your question so that you show what you tried and how far you got, I will not only remove the downvote, I will add an upvote.
    – 5xum
    Sep 3 at 10:48










  • @5xum done. edited the question.
    – Chintu
    Sep 3 at 10:54






  • 2




    Hint : can you find a positive continuous function $f$ on $(0,infty)$ such that $int_mathbbR^+ f(x) dx =1$ ?
    – nicomezi
    Sep 3 at 10:55







  • 1




    You recieved an answer to your question. Is it what you needed? If so, you should accept it!
    – 5xum
    Sep 4 at 7:31












up vote
5
down vote

favorite









up vote
5
down vote

favorite











What can be a possible probability measure on $(0,infty)$? Give an example.



For $(0,1)$ Lebesgue measure can be used and it easily satisfies all the properties of probability measure. But when the set is $(0,infty)$, Lebesgue measure will not lie in 0 to 1 range. I am thinking that some mapping from $(0,infty)$ to $(0,1)$ would do the trick. Am I right?










share|cite|improve this question















What can be a possible probability measure on $(0,infty)$? Give an example.



For $(0,1)$ Lebesgue measure can be used and it easily satisfies all the properties of probability measure. But when the set is $(0,infty)$, Lebesgue measure will not lie in 0 to 1 range. I am thinking that some mapping from $(0,infty)$ to $(0,1)$ would do the trick. Am I right?







probability-theory






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Sep 3 at 10:53

























asked Sep 3 at 10:47









Chintu

779




779







  • 1




    Hi and welcome to the site! Since this is a site that encourages and helps with learning, it is best if you show your own ideas and efforts in solving the question. Can you edit your question to add your thoughts and ideas about it?
    – 5xum
    Sep 3 at 10:48






  • 1




    Also, don't get discouraged by the downvote. I downvoted the question and voted to close it because at the moment, it is not up to site standards (you have shown no work you did on your own). If you edit your question so that you show what you tried and how far you got, I will not only remove the downvote, I will add an upvote.
    – 5xum
    Sep 3 at 10:48










  • @5xum done. edited the question.
    – Chintu
    Sep 3 at 10:54






  • 2




    Hint : can you find a positive continuous function $f$ on $(0,infty)$ such that $int_mathbbR^+ f(x) dx =1$ ?
    – nicomezi
    Sep 3 at 10:55







  • 1




    You recieved an answer to your question. Is it what you needed? If so, you should accept it!
    – 5xum
    Sep 4 at 7:31












  • 1




    Hi and welcome to the site! Since this is a site that encourages and helps with learning, it is best if you show your own ideas and efforts in solving the question. Can you edit your question to add your thoughts and ideas about it?
    – 5xum
    Sep 3 at 10:48






  • 1




    Also, don't get discouraged by the downvote. I downvoted the question and voted to close it because at the moment, it is not up to site standards (you have shown no work you did on your own). If you edit your question so that you show what you tried and how far you got, I will not only remove the downvote, I will add an upvote.
    – 5xum
    Sep 3 at 10:48










  • @5xum done. edited the question.
    – Chintu
    Sep 3 at 10:54






  • 2




    Hint : can you find a positive continuous function $f$ on $(0,infty)$ such that $int_mathbbR^+ f(x) dx =1$ ?
    – nicomezi
    Sep 3 at 10:55







  • 1




    You recieved an answer to your question. Is it what you needed? If so, you should accept it!
    – 5xum
    Sep 4 at 7:31







1




1




Hi and welcome to the site! Since this is a site that encourages and helps with learning, it is best if you show your own ideas and efforts in solving the question. Can you edit your question to add your thoughts and ideas about it?
– 5xum
Sep 3 at 10:48




Hi and welcome to the site! Since this is a site that encourages and helps with learning, it is best if you show your own ideas and efforts in solving the question. Can you edit your question to add your thoughts and ideas about it?
– 5xum
Sep 3 at 10:48




1




1




Also, don't get discouraged by the downvote. I downvoted the question and voted to close it because at the moment, it is not up to site standards (you have shown no work you did on your own). If you edit your question so that you show what you tried and how far you got, I will not only remove the downvote, I will add an upvote.
– 5xum
Sep 3 at 10:48




Also, don't get discouraged by the downvote. I downvoted the question and voted to close it because at the moment, it is not up to site standards (you have shown no work you did on your own). If you edit your question so that you show what you tried and how far you got, I will not only remove the downvote, I will add an upvote.
– 5xum
Sep 3 at 10:48












@5xum done. edited the question.
– Chintu
Sep 3 at 10:54




@5xum done. edited the question.
– Chintu
Sep 3 at 10:54




2




2




Hint : can you find a positive continuous function $f$ on $(0,infty)$ such that $int_mathbbR^+ f(x) dx =1$ ?
– nicomezi
Sep 3 at 10:55





Hint : can you find a positive continuous function $f$ on $(0,infty)$ such that $int_mathbbR^+ f(x) dx =1$ ?
– nicomezi
Sep 3 at 10:55





1




1




You recieved an answer to your question. Is it what you needed? If so, you should accept it!
– 5xum
Sep 4 at 7:31




You recieved an answer to your question. Is it what you needed? If so, you should accept it!
– 5xum
Sep 4 at 7:31










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
5
down vote



accepted










Any Lebesgue integrable function $f:(0,infty)to[0,infty)$ which does not vanish almost everywhere can be made into a probability measure $mu_f$ on $(0,infty)$ by setting $$mu_f(S):=fracint_S,f(x),textdxint_0^infty,f(x),textdxtext for every measurable set S,.$$

Every absolutely continuous probability measure (relative to the Lebesgue measure) arises this way.



However, there are uncountably many other probability measures. Singular continuous measures on $(0,infty)$ such as the Cantor distribution and discrete probability measures on $(0,infty)$ are some of those probability measures not in the form $mu_f$ for some Lebesgue integrable function $f$. Of course, you can also have a convex combination of an absolutely continuous probability measure, a singular one, and a discrete one.



Additionally, if you want a probability measure $nu$ whose essential support is precisely $(0,infty)$, then the absolutely continuous part $nu_textabs$ of $nu$ cannot be $0$ (since essential supports of singular and discrete probability measures are Lebesgue null sets). In other words, $nu_textabs$ is of the form $nu_textabs=alpha,mu_f$ for some $alphain(0,1]$ and for some Lebesgue integrable function $f:(0,infty)to[0,infty)$ which vanishes on a set of Lebesgue measure $0$.






share|cite|improve this answer


















  • 2




    @mathamity This is a complete and rather technical "yes" answer to your question. I hope you appreciate that the technicalities are just a way to formalize your correct but vaguely stated intuition that there is some "distortion" of Lebesgue measure that makes it finite and does the trick.
    – Ethan Bolker
    Sep 3 at 12:26










  • that just blew my mind XD
    – Chintu
    Sep 4 at 8:39










Your Answer




StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: false,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













 

draft saved


draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2903751%2fprobability-measure-on-0-infty%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest






























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
5
down vote



accepted










Any Lebesgue integrable function $f:(0,infty)to[0,infty)$ which does not vanish almost everywhere can be made into a probability measure $mu_f$ on $(0,infty)$ by setting $$mu_f(S):=fracint_S,f(x),textdxint_0^infty,f(x),textdxtext for every measurable set S,.$$

Every absolutely continuous probability measure (relative to the Lebesgue measure) arises this way.



However, there are uncountably many other probability measures. Singular continuous measures on $(0,infty)$ such as the Cantor distribution and discrete probability measures on $(0,infty)$ are some of those probability measures not in the form $mu_f$ for some Lebesgue integrable function $f$. Of course, you can also have a convex combination of an absolutely continuous probability measure, a singular one, and a discrete one.



Additionally, if you want a probability measure $nu$ whose essential support is precisely $(0,infty)$, then the absolutely continuous part $nu_textabs$ of $nu$ cannot be $0$ (since essential supports of singular and discrete probability measures are Lebesgue null sets). In other words, $nu_textabs$ is of the form $nu_textabs=alpha,mu_f$ for some $alphain(0,1]$ and for some Lebesgue integrable function $f:(0,infty)to[0,infty)$ which vanishes on a set of Lebesgue measure $0$.






share|cite|improve this answer


















  • 2




    @mathamity This is a complete and rather technical "yes" answer to your question. I hope you appreciate that the technicalities are just a way to formalize your correct but vaguely stated intuition that there is some "distortion" of Lebesgue measure that makes it finite and does the trick.
    – Ethan Bolker
    Sep 3 at 12:26










  • that just blew my mind XD
    – Chintu
    Sep 4 at 8:39














up vote
5
down vote



accepted










Any Lebesgue integrable function $f:(0,infty)to[0,infty)$ which does not vanish almost everywhere can be made into a probability measure $mu_f$ on $(0,infty)$ by setting $$mu_f(S):=fracint_S,f(x),textdxint_0^infty,f(x),textdxtext for every measurable set S,.$$

Every absolutely continuous probability measure (relative to the Lebesgue measure) arises this way.



However, there are uncountably many other probability measures. Singular continuous measures on $(0,infty)$ such as the Cantor distribution and discrete probability measures on $(0,infty)$ are some of those probability measures not in the form $mu_f$ for some Lebesgue integrable function $f$. Of course, you can also have a convex combination of an absolutely continuous probability measure, a singular one, and a discrete one.



Additionally, if you want a probability measure $nu$ whose essential support is precisely $(0,infty)$, then the absolutely continuous part $nu_textabs$ of $nu$ cannot be $0$ (since essential supports of singular and discrete probability measures are Lebesgue null sets). In other words, $nu_textabs$ is of the form $nu_textabs=alpha,mu_f$ for some $alphain(0,1]$ and for some Lebesgue integrable function $f:(0,infty)to[0,infty)$ which vanishes on a set of Lebesgue measure $0$.






share|cite|improve this answer


















  • 2




    @mathamity This is a complete and rather technical "yes" answer to your question. I hope you appreciate that the technicalities are just a way to formalize your correct but vaguely stated intuition that there is some "distortion" of Lebesgue measure that makes it finite and does the trick.
    – Ethan Bolker
    Sep 3 at 12:26










  • that just blew my mind XD
    – Chintu
    Sep 4 at 8:39












up vote
5
down vote



accepted







up vote
5
down vote



accepted






Any Lebesgue integrable function $f:(0,infty)to[0,infty)$ which does not vanish almost everywhere can be made into a probability measure $mu_f$ on $(0,infty)$ by setting $$mu_f(S):=fracint_S,f(x),textdxint_0^infty,f(x),textdxtext for every measurable set S,.$$

Every absolutely continuous probability measure (relative to the Lebesgue measure) arises this way.



However, there are uncountably many other probability measures. Singular continuous measures on $(0,infty)$ such as the Cantor distribution and discrete probability measures on $(0,infty)$ are some of those probability measures not in the form $mu_f$ for some Lebesgue integrable function $f$. Of course, you can also have a convex combination of an absolutely continuous probability measure, a singular one, and a discrete one.



Additionally, if you want a probability measure $nu$ whose essential support is precisely $(0,infty)$, then the absolutely continuous part $nu_textabs$ of $nu$ cannot be $0$ (since essential supports of singular and discrete probability measures are Lebesgue null sets). In other words, $nu_textabs$ is of the form $nu_textabs=alpha,mu_f$ for some $alphain(0,1]$ and for some Lebesgue integrable function $f:(0,infty)to[0,infty)$ which vanishes on a set of Lebesgue measure $0$.






share|cite|improve this answer














Any Lebesgue integrable function $f:(0,infty)to[0,infty)$ which does not vanish almost everywhere can be made into a probability measure $mu_f$ on $(0,infty)$ by setting $$mu_f(S):=fracint_S,f(x),textdxint_0^infty,f(x),textdxtext for every measurable set S,.$$

Every absolutely continuous probability measure (relative to the Lebesgue measure) arises this way.



However, there are uncountably many other probability measures. Singular continuous measures on $(0,infty)$ such as the Cantor distribution and discrete probability measures on $(0,infty)$ are some of those probability measures not in the form $mu_f$ for some Lebesgue integrable function $f$. Of course, you can also have a convex combination of an absolutely continuous probability measure, a singular one, and a discrete one.



Additionally, if you want a probability measure $nu$ whose essential support is precisely $(0,infty)$, then the absolutely continuous part $nu_textabs$ of $nu$ cannot be $0$ (since essential supports of singular and discrete probability measures are Lebesgue null sets). In other words, $nu_textabs$ is of the form $nu_textabs=alpha,mu_f$ for some $alphain(0,1]$ and for some Lebesgue integrable function $f:(0,infty)to[0,infty)$ which vanishes on a set of Lebesgue measure $0$.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited Sep 3 at 12:39

























answered Sep 3 at 12:02









Batominovski

25.7k22881




25.7k22881







  • 2




    @mathamity This is a complete and rather technical "yes" answer to your question. I hope you appreciate that the technicalities are just a way to formalize your correct but vaguely stated intuition that there is some "distortion" of Lebesgue measure that makes it finite and does the trick.
    – Ethan Bolker
    Sep 3 at 12:26










  • that just blew my mind XD
    – Chintu
    Sep 4 at 8:39












  • 2




    @mathamity This is a complete and rather technical "yes" answer to your question. I hope you appreciate that the technicalities are just a way to formalize your correct but vaguely stated intuition that there is some "distortion" of Lebesgue measure that makes it finite and does the trick.
    – Ethan Bolker
    Sep 3 at 12:26










  • that just blew my mind XD
    – Chintu
    Sep 4 at 8:39







2




2




@mathamity This is a complete and rather technical "yes" answer to your question. I hope you appreciate that the technicalities are just a way to formalize your correct but vaguely stated intuition that there is some "distortion" of Lebesgue measure that makes it finite and does the trick.
– Ethan Bolker
Sep 3 at 12:26




@mathamity This is a complete and rather technical "yes" answer to your question. I hope you appreciate that the technicalities are just a way to formalize your correct but vaguely stated intuition that there is some "distortion" of Lebesgue measure that makes it finite and does the trick.
– Ethan Bolker
Sep 3 at 12:26












that just blew my mind XD
– Chintu
Sep 4 at 8:39




that just blew my mind XD
– Chintu
Sep 4 at 8:39

















 

draft saved


draft discarded















































 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2903751%2fprobability-measure-on-0-infty%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest













































































這個網誌中的熱門文章

How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

Mutual Information Always Non-negative

Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?