Why is any Lebesgue-Stieltjes measure on $(mathbbR,mathcalB_mathbbR)$ not complete?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Let $F: mathbbR to mathbbR$ be any increasing, right-continuous function. Then we define the Lebesgue-Stieltjes measure associated to $F$ to be the unique measure $mu_F$ on $(mathbbR,mathcalB_mathbbR)$ such that $mu_F((a.b])=F(b)-F(a)$ for all $a, b$.
We wish to show that the completion of $mathcalB_mathbbR$ with respect to $mu_F$, denoted by $M_F$, is strictly larger than $mathcalB_mathbbR$.
Since $textcard(mathcalB_mathbbR)=mathfrakc$, it will suffice to exhibit a set $K$ in $M_F$ such that $mu_F(K)=0$ and $textcard(K)=mathfrakc$, for then $textcard(M_F)>mathfrakc$.
measure-theory lebesgue-measure
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Let $F: mathbbR to mathbbR$ be any increasing, right-continuous function. Then we define the Lebesgue-Stieltjes measure associated to $F$ to be the unique measure $mu_F$ on $(mathbbR,mathcalB_mathbbR)$ such that $mu_F((a.b])=F(b)-F(a)$ for all $a, b$.
We wish to show that the completion of $mathcalB_mathbbR$ with respect to $mu_F$, denoted by $M_F$, is strictly larger than $mathcalB_mathbbR$.
Since $textcard(mathcalB_mathbbR)=mathfrakc$, it will suffice to exhibit a set $K$ in $M_F$ such that $mu_F(K)=0$ and $textcard(K)=mathfrakc$, for then $textcard(M_F)>mathfrakc$.
measure-theory lebesgue-measure
Do you understand why the usual measure on the Borel algebra of $mathbbR$ is not complete?
â Kevin Carlson
May 31 '14 at 12:39
Yes, so I just used pretty much the same argument, thanks!
â Aubrey
May 31 '14 at 12:42
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Let $F: mathbbR to mathbbR$ be any increasing, right-continuous function. Then we define the Lebesgue-Stieltjes measure associated to $F$ to be the unique measure $mu_F$ on $(mathbbR,mathcalB_mathbbR)$ such that $mu_F((a.b])=F(b)-F(a)$ for all $a, b$.
We wish to show that the completion of $mathcalB_mathbbR$ with respect to $mu_F$, denoted by $M_F$, is strictly larger than $mathcalB_mathbbR$.
Since $textcard(mathcalB_mathbbR)=mathfrakc$, it will suffice to exhibit a set $K$ in $M_F$ such that $mu_F(K)=0$ and $textcard(K)=mathfrakc$, for then $textcard(M_F)>mathfrakc$.
measure-theory lebesgue-measure
Let $F: mathbbR to mathbbR$ be any increasing, right-continuous function. Then we define the Lebesgue-Stieltjes measure associated to $F$ to be the unique measure $mu_F$ on $(mathbbR,mathcalB_mathbbR)$ such that $mu_F((a.b])=F(b)-F(a)$ for all $a, b$.
We wish to show that the completion of $mathcalB_mathbbR$ with respect to $mu_F$, denoted by $M_F$, is strictly larger than $mathcalB_mathbbR$.
Since $textcard(mathcalB_mathbbR)=mathfrakc$, it will suffice to exhibit a set $K$ in $M_F$ such that $mu_F(K)=0$ and $textcard(K)=mathfrakc$, for then $textcard(M_F)>mathfrakc$.
measure-theory lebesgue-measure
measure-theory lebesgue-measure
asked May 31 '14 at 12:35
Aubrey
699414
699414
Do you understand why the usual measure on the Borel algebra of $mathbbR$ is not complete?
â Kevin Carlson
May 31 '14 at 12:39
Yes, so I just used pretty much the same argument, thanks!
â Aubrey
May 31 '14 at 12:42
add a comment |Â
Do you understand why the usual measure on the Borel algebra of $mathbbR$ is not complete?
â Kevin Carlson
May 31 '14 at 12:39
Yes, so I just used pretty much the same argument, thanks!
â Aubrey
May 31 '14 at 12:42
Do you understand why the usual measure on the Borel algebra of $mathbbR$ is not complete?
â Kevin Carlson
May 31 '14 at 12:39
Do you understand why the usual measure on the Borel algebra of $mathbbR$ is not complete?
â Kevin Carlson
May 31 '14 at 12:39
Yes, so I just used pretty much the same argument, thanks!
â Aubrey
May 31 '14 at 12:42
Yes, so I just used pretty much the same argument, thanks!
â Aubrey
May 31 '14 at 12:42
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
We mimic the construction of the Cantor set. For any interval $I$, let us call an open subinterval $J$ of $I$ with $mu_F(J)geqmu_F(I)/2$ and endpoints in the interior of $I$ an "open middle superhalf" of $I$. Observe that, since it is increasing, $F$ has only countably many points of discontinuity. Let $K_1$ be a closed interval with endpoints where $F$ is continuous, and $K_n+1$ be obtained by removing from each of the intervals comprising $K_n$ an open middle superhalf at whose endpoints $F$ is continuous. Then one can check that $K=bigcap_1^inftyK_n$ has the desired properties.
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
We mimic the construction of the Cantor set. For any interval $I$, let us call an open subinterval $J$ of $I$ with $mu_F(J)geqmu_F(I)/2$ and endpoints in the interior of $I$ an "open middle superhalf" of $I$. Observe that, since it is increasing, $F$ has only countably many points of discontinuity. Let $K_1$ be a closed interval with endpoints where $F$ is continuous, and $K_n+1$ be obtained by removing from each of the intervals comprising $K_n$ an open middle superhalf at whose endpoints $F$ is continuous. Then one can check that $K=bigcap_1^inftyK_n$ has the desired properties.
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
We mimic the construction of the Cantor set. For any interval $I$, let us call an open subinterval $J$ of $I$ with $mu_F(J)geqmu_F(I)/2$ and endpoints in the interior of $I$ an "open middle superhalf" of $I$. Observe that, since it is increasing, $F$ has only countably many points of discontinuity. Let $K_1$ be a closed interval with endpoints where $F$ is continuous, and $K_n+1$ be obtained by removing from each of the intervals comprising $K_n$ an open middle superhalf at whose endpoints $F$ is continuous. Then one can check that $K=bigcap_1^inftyK_n$ has the desired properties.
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
We mimic the construction of the Cantor set. For any interval $I$, let us call an open subinterval $J$ of $I$ with $mu_F(J)geqmu_F(I)/2$ and endpoints in the interior of $I$ an "open middle superhalf" of $I$. Observe that, since it is increasing, $F$ has only countably many points of discontinuity. Let $K_1$ be a closed interval with endpoints where $F$ is continuous, and $K_n+1$ be obtained by removing from each of the intervals comprising $K_n$ an open middle superhalf at whose endpoints $F$ is continuous. Then one can check that $K=bigcap_1^inftyK_n$ has the desired properties.
We mimic the construction of the Cantor set. For any interval $I$, let us call an open subinterval $J$ of $I$ with $mu_F(J)geqmu_F(I)/2$ and endpoints in the interior of $I$ an "open middle superhalf" of $I$. Observe that, since it is increasing, $F$ has only countably many points of discontinuity. Let $K_1$ be a closed interval with endpoints where $F$ is continuous, and $K_n+1$ be obtained by removing from each of the intervals comprising $K_n$ an open middle superhalf at whose endpoints $F$ is continuous. Then one can check that $K=bigcap_1^inftyK_n$ has the desired properties.
edited Jun 2 '14 at 5:52
answered May 31 '14 at 12:41
Aubrey
699414
699414
add a comment |Â
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%2f815949%2fwhy-is-any-lebesgue-stieltjes-measure-on-mathbbr-mathcalb-mathbbr-n%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
Do you understand why the usual measure on the Borel algebra of $mathbbR$ is not complete?
â Kevin Carlson
May 31 '14 at 12:39
Yes, so I just used pretty much the same argument, thanks!
â Aubrey
May 31 '14 at 12:42