Prove that every open set is lebesgue-measurable
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Let $mathbbR^nsupsetI=(a,b)=(a_1,b_1)times...times(a_n,b_n)$ with $a,binmathbbR^n$ such that $a_ilt b_i
$$forall i$.
So that the outer measure is defined as:
$$
mu^*(A)=infsum_iinJV(I_i)mid Asubsetbigcup_iinJ(I_i)
$$
Where:
$I_i_iinJ$ is a cover of A.
I have already proven that every $I$ is a Lebesgue-measurable set. Now I want to prove that every open set is Lebesgue-measurable.
I have done this, is it correct?
Let A be an open set. For every $xin A$ with $x=(x_1,..,x_n)$ there exist an $r>0 $ such that $B(x;r)subset A$. If we take $r$ small enough, there exists $alpha > 0$ such that:
$$
B(x;r)subset I_x=(x_1-alpha,x_1+alpha)times...times(x_n-alpha,x_n+alpha)subset A
$$
Then define $A$ with:
$$
A=bigcup_xin A I_x
$$
A is union of Lebesgue-measurable sets so A is Lebesgue-measurable.
measure-theory lebesgue-measure outer-measure
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Let $mathbbR^nsupsetI=(a,b)=(a_1,b_1)times...times(a_n,b_n)$ with $a,binmathbbR^n$ such that $a_ilt b_i
$$forall i$.
So that the outer measure is defined as:
$$
mu^*(A)=infsum_iinJV(I_i)mid Asubsetbigcup_iinJ(I_i)
$$
Where:
$I_i_iinJ$ is a cover of A.
I have already proven that every $I$ is a Lebesgue-measurable set. Now I want to prove that every open set is Lebesgue-measurable.
I have done this, is it correct?
Let A be an open set. For every $xin A$ with $x=(x_1,..,x_n)$ there exist an $r>0 $ such that $B(x;r)subset A$. If we take $r$ small enough, there exists $alpha > 0$ such that:
$$
B(x;r)subset I_x=(x_1-alpha,x_1+alpha)times...times(x_n-alpha,x_n+alpha)subset A
$$
Then define $A$ with:
$$
A=bigcup_xin A I_x
$$
A is union of Lebesgue-measurable sets so A is Lebesgue-measurable.
measure-theory lebesgue-measure outer-measure
Hi and welcome. What is your question?
â Matthew Leingang
Aug 27 at 18:26
1
@MatthewLeingang I want to prove that every open set is Lebesgue-measurable using what I described
â user586534
Aug 27 at 18:27
@MatthewLeingang is it something not clear? Thanks
â user586534
Aug 27 at 18:32
Ah, now I see if you have inserted âÂÂIs it correct?â and you're asking for your proof to be verified. Thank you.
â Matthew Leingang
Aug 27 at 18:41
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Let $mathbbR^nsupsetI=(a,b)=(a_1,b_1)times...times(a_n,b_n)$ with $a,binmathbbR^n$ such that $a_ilt b_i
$$forall i$.
So that the outer measure is defined as:
$$
mu^*(A)=infsum_iinJV(I_i)mid Asubsetbigcup_iinJ(I_i)
$$
Where:
$I_i_iinJ$ is a cover of A.
I have already proven that every $I$ is a Lebesgue-measurable set. Now I want to prove that every open set is Lebesgue-measurable.
I have done this, is it correct?
Let A be an open set. For every $xin A$ with $x=(x_1,..,x_n)$ there exist an $r>0 $ such that $B(x;r)subset A$. If we take $r$ small enough, there exists $alpha > 0$ such that:
$$
B(x;r)subset I_x=(x_1-alpha,x_1+alpha)times...times(x_n-alpha,x_n+alpha)subset A
$$
Then define $A$ with:
$$
A=bigcup_xin A I_x
$$
A is union of Lebesgue-measurable sets so A is Lebesgue-measurable.
measure-theory lebesgue-measure outer-measure
Let $mathbbR^nsupsetI=(a,b)=(a_1,b_1)times...times(a_n,b_n)$ with $a,binmathbbR^n$ such that $a_ilt b_i
$$forall i$.
So that the outer measure is defined as:
$$
mu^*(A)=infsum_iinJV(I_i)mid Asubsetbigcup_iinJ(I_i)
$$
Where:
$I_i_iinJ$ is a cover of A.
I have already proven that every $I$ is a Lebesgue-measurable set. Now I want to prove that every open set is Lebesgue-measurable.
I have done this, is it correct?
Let A be an open set. For every $xin A$ with $x=(x_1,..,x_n)$ there exist an $r>0 $ such that $B(x;r)subset A$. If we take $r$ small enough, there exists $alpha > 0$ such that:
$$
B(x;r)subset I_x=(x_1-alpha,x_1+alpha)times...times(x_n-alpha,x_n+alpha)subset A
$$
Then define $A$ with:
$$
A=bigcup_xin A I_x
$$
A is union of Lebesgue-measurable sets so A is Lebesgue-measurable.
measure-theory lebesgue-measure outer-measure
edited Aug 27 at 20:39
Mefitico
65514
65514
asked Aug 27 at 18:21
user586534
Hi and welcome. What is your question?
â Matthew Leingang
Aug 27 at 18:26
1
@MatthewLeingang I want to prove that every open set is Lebesgue-measurable using what I described
â user586534
Aug 27 at 18:27
@MatthewLeingang is it something not clear? Thanks
â user586534
Aug 27 at 18:32
Ah, now I see if you have inserted âÂÂIs it correct?â and you're asking for your proof to be verified. Thank you.
â Matthew Leingang
Aug 27 at 18:41
add a comment |Â
Hi and welcome. What is your question?
â Matthew Leingang
Aug 27 at 18:26
1
@MatthewLeingang I want to prove that every open set is Lebesgue-measurable using what I described
â user586534
Aug 27 at 18:27
@MatthewLeingang is it something not clear? Thanks
â user586534
Aug 27 at 18:32
Ah, now I see if you have inserted âÂÂIs it correct?â and you're asking for your proof to be verified. Thank you.
â Matthew Leingang
Aug 27 at 18:41
Hi and welcome. What is your question?
â Matthew Leingang
Aug 27 at 18:26
Hi and welcome. What is your question?
â Matthew Leingang
Aug 27 at 18:26
1
1
@MatthewLeingang I want to prove that every open set is Lebesgue-measurable using what I described
â user586534
Aug 27 at 18:27
@MatthewLeingang I want to prove that every open set is Lebesgue-measurable using what I described
â user586534
Aug 27 at 18:27
@MatthewLeingang is it something not clear? Thanks
â user586534
Aug 27 at 18:32
@MatthewLeingang is it something not clear? Thanks
â user586534
Aug 27 at 18:32
Ah, now I see if you have inserted âÂÂIs it correct?â and you're asking for your proof to be verified. Thank you.
â Matthew Leingang
Aug 27 at 18:41
Ah, now I see if you have inserted âÂÂIs it correct?â and you're asking for your proof to be verified. Thank you.
â Matthew Leingang
Aug 27 at 18:41
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
No, your argument does not work as is, because it is not true that an arbitrary union of measurable sets is measurable (if it were, every set would be measurable since points are measurable).
What you need to do is to write $A$ as a countable union of certain $I_n$. You can achieve this for instance by considering the set
$$
A_r=xin A: x_kinmathbb Q, k=1,ldots,n.
$$
For each $xin A_r$ there exists $I_x,alpha=(x_1-alpha,x_1+alpha)timesldotstimes(x_n-alpha,x_n+alpha) $ such that $I_x,alphasubset A$. Then, if we let $I_x,alpha=emptyset$ when $I_x,alphanotsubset A$,
$$
A=bigcup_xin A_rbigcup_alphainmathbb Q_+ I_x,alpha
$$
is a countable union of intervals, so measurable.
It is right. I forgot that the union can only be countable. Thanks
â user586534
Aug 27 at 18:59
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
No, your argument does not work as is, because it is not true that an arbitrary union of measurable sets is measurable (if it were, every set would be measurable since points are measurable).
What you need to do is to write $A$ as a countable union of certain $I_n$. You can achieve this for instance by considering the set
$$
A_r=xin A: x_kinmathbb Q, k=1,ldots,n.
$$
For each $xin A_r$ there exists $I_x,alpha=(x_1-alpha,x_1+alpha)timesldotstimes(x_n-alpha,x_n+alpha) $ such that $I_x,alphasubset A$. Then, if we let $I_x,alpha=emptyset$ when $I_x,alphanotsubset A$,
$$
A=bigcup_xin A_rbigcup_alphainmathbb Q_+ I_x,alpha
$$
is a countable union of intervals, so measurable.
It is right. I forgot that the union can only be countable. Thanks
â user586534
Aug 27 at 18:59
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
No, your argument does not work as is, because it is not true that an arbitrary union of measurable sets is measurable (if it were, every set would be measurable since points are measurable).
What you need to do is to write $A$ as a countable union of certain $I_n$. You can achieve this for instance by considering the set
$$
A_r=xin A: x_kinmathbb Q, k=1,ldots,n.
$$
For each $xin A_r$ there exists $I_x,alpha=(x_1-alpha,x_1+alpha)timesldotstimes(x_n-alpha,x_n+alpha) $ such that $I_x,alphasubset A$. Then, if we let $I_x,alpha=emptyset$ when $I_x,alphanotsubset A$,
$$
A=bigcup_xin A_rbigcup_alphainmathbb Q_+ I_x,alpha
$$
is a countable union of intervals, so measurable.
It is right. I forgot that the union can only be countable. Thanks
â user586534
Aug 27 at 18:59
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
No, your argument does not work as is, because it is not true that an arbitrary union of measurable sets is measurable (if it were, every set would be measurable since points are measurable).
What you need to do is to write $A$ as a countable union of certain $I_n$. You can achieve this for instance by considering the set
$$
A_r=xin A: x_kinmathbb Q, k=1,ldots,n.
$$
For each $xin A_r$ there exists $I_x,alpha=(x_1-alpha,x_1+alpha)timesldotstimes(x_n-alpha,x_n+alpha) $ such that $I_x,alphasubset A$. Then, if we let $I_x,alpha=emptyset$ when $I_x,alphanotsubset A$,
$$
A=bigcup_xin A_rbigcup_alphainmathbb Q_+ I_x,alpha
$$
is a countable union of intervals, so measurable.
No, your argument does not work as is, because it is not true that an arbitrary union of measurable sets is measurable (if it were, every set would be measurable since points are measurable).
What you need to do is to write $A$ as a countable union of certain $I_n$. You can achieve this for instance by considering the set
$$
A_r=xin A: x_kinmathbb Q, k=1,ldots,n.
$$
For each $xin A_r$ there exists $I_x,alpha=(x_1-alpha,x_1+alpha)timesldotstimes(x_n-alpha,x_n+alpha) $ such that $I_x,alphasubset A$. Then, if we let $I_x,alpha=emptyset$ when $I_x,alphanotsubset A$,
$$
A=bigcup_xin A_rbigcup_alphainmathbb Q_+ I_x,alpha
$$
is a countable union of intervals, so measurable.
edited Aug 27 at 20:15
answered Aug 27 at 18:38
Martin Argerami
117k1071165
117k1071165
It is right. I forgot that the union can only be countable. Thanks
â user586534
Aug 27 at 18:59
add a comment |Â
It is right. I forgot that the union can only be countable. Thanks
â user586534
Aug 27 at 18:59
It is right. I forgot that the union can only be countable. Thanks
â user586534
Aug 27 at 18:59
It is right. I forgot that the union can only be countable. Thanks
â user586534
Aug 27 at 18:59
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%2f2896500%2fprove-that-every-open-set-is-lebesgue-measurable%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
Hi and welcome. What is your question?
â Matthew Leingang
Aug 27 at 18:26
1
@MatthewLeingang I want to prove that every open set is Lebesgue-measurable using what I described
â user586534
Aug 27 at 18:27
@MatthewLeingang is it something not clear? Thanks
â user586534
Aug 27 at 18:32
Ah, now I see if you have inserted âÂÂIs it correct?â and you're asking for your proof to be verified. Thank you.
â Matthew Leingang
Aug 27 at 18:41