Real Analysis, Problem 3.2.14 The Radon Nikodym Theorem The Next CEO of Stack OverflowRadon–Nikodym derivative and “normal” derivativeCalculating Radon Nikodym derivativeRadon–Nikodym theorem: special caseA counter-example to Radon-Nikodym Theorem?Absolute continuity and Radon-Nikodym derivativeIs $sigma$-finiteness unnecessary for Radon Nikodym theorem?Lebesgue–Radon–Nikodym Theorem ExplanationReal Analysis, Folland Corollary 3.6, The Lebesgue-Radon-Nikodym TheoremWeakening the “positive $mu$” condition in Radon-Nikodym theoremCorollary of Radon-Nikodym theorem
What is the difference between 'contrib' and 'non-free' packages repositories?
Is it OK to decorate a log book cover?
Are British MPs missing the point, with these 'Indicative Votes'?
Is it correct to say moon starry nights?
How does a dynamic QR code work?
MT "will strike" & LXX "will watch carefully" (Gen 3:15)?
Is it okay to majorly distort historical facts while writing a fiction story?
How can the PCs determine if an item is a phylactery?
Why did early computer designers eschew integers?
Is a distribution that is normal, but highly skewed, considered Gaussian?
How to show a landlord what we have in savings?
Incomplete cube
My ex-girlfriend uses my Apple ID to login to her iPad, do I have to give her my Apple ID password to reset it?
What happens if you break a law in another country outside of that country?
What did the word "leisure" mean in late 18th Century usage?
Is a linearly independent set whose span is dense a Schauder basis?
Does Germany produce more waste than the US?
Which acid/base does a strong base/acid react when added to a buffer solution?
Early programmable calculators with RS-232
Can I cast Thunderwave and be at the center of its bottom face, but not be affected by it?
Direct Implications Between USA and UK in Event of No-Deal Brexit
pgfplots: How to draw a tangent graph below two others?
Is this a new Fibonacci Identity?
Creating a script with console commands
Real Analysis, Problem 3.2.14 The Radon Nikodym Theorem
The Next CEO of Stack OverflowRadon–Nikodym derivative and “normal” derivativeCalculating Radon Nikodym derivativeRadon–Nikodym theorem: special caseA counter-example to Radon-Nikodym Theorem?Absolute continuity and Radon-Nikodym derivativeIs $sigma$-finiteness unnecessary for Radon Nikodym theorem?Lebesgue–Radon–Nikodym Theorem ExplanationReal Analysis, Folland Corollary 3.6, The Lebesgue-Radon-Nikodym TheoremWeakening the “positive $mu$” condition in Radon-Nikodym theoremCorollary of Radon-Nikodym theorem
$begingroup$
Problem 3.3.14 - If $nu$ is an arbitrary signed measure and $mu$ is a $sigma$-finite measure on $(X,M)$ such that $null mu$, there exists an extended $mu$-integrable function $f:Xrightarrow [-infty,infty]$ such that $dnu = fdmu$. Hints:
a.) It suffices to assume that $mu$ is finite and $nu$ is positive.
b.) With these assumptions, there exists an $Ein M$ that is $sigma$-finite for $nu$ such that $mu(E)geq mu(F)$ for all sets $F$ that are $sigma$-finite for $nu$.
c.) The Radon-Nikodym theorem applies on $E$. If $Fcap E = emptyset$, then either $nu(F) = mu(F) = 0$ or $mu(F) > 0$ and $|nu(F)| = infty$.
Attempted proof - Consider $mu(E)$ where $E$ is a $sigma$-finite set for $nu$. Since we have that $mu$ is finite then clearly $mu(E)$ must be bounded which implies it has a supremum. We will define the supremum as $$L = supF: F textis sigma-textfinite for nu$$
Now lets take a sequence $E_n_1^infty$ that are $sigma$-finite with respect to $nu$ and $mu(E_n)rightarrow L$ as $nrightarrow infty$. Now let $$E = bigcup_1^inftyE_n$$ then $mu(E) leq L$ since it is taken to be a countable union of $sigma$-finite sets. On the other hand, $mu(E)geq mu(E_n)$ for all $n$ and since $mu(E_n)rightarrow L$ then $mu(E) = L$. Now since $mu(E) = L$ then clearly by definition of $L$ we have that $mu(E) > mu(F)$ for all sets $F$ that are $sigma$-finite for $nu$. Now we apply the Radon-Nikodym theorem: so, suppose that $Fcap E = emptyset$ well since $nullmu$ then by definition $nu(F) = mu(F) = 0$. If $mu(F) > 0$ then for sake of contradiction suppose $|nu(F)|neq infty$. Then since $mu$ is finite $mu(Fcup E) > mu(E)$ then this implies that $Ecup F$ is not $sigma$-finite since a $sigma$-finite set with a union of a finite set is $sigma$-finite. Therefore $|nu(F)| = infty$.
Thus I believe we can refer to Radon-Nikidym theorem to conclude that there exists an extended $mu$-integrable function $f:Xrightarrow [-infty,infty]$ such that $dnu = fdmu$.
I am not sure if this is completely correct, any suggestions is greatly appreciated.
real-analysis measure-theory proof-verification
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Problem 3.3.14 - If $nu$ is an arbitrary signed measure and $mu$ is a $sigma$-finite measure on $(X,M)$ such that $null mu$, there exists an extended $mu$-integrable function $f:Xrightarrow [-infty,infty]$ such that $dnu = fdmu$. Hints:
a.) It suffices to assume that $mu$ is finite and $nu$ is positive.
b.) With these assumptions, there exists an $Ein M$ that is $sigma$-finite for $nu$ such that $mu(E)geq mu(F)$ for all sets $F$ that are $sigma$-finite for $nu$.
c.) The Radon-Nikodym theorem applies on $E$. If $Fcap E = emptyset$, then either $nu(F) = mu(F) = 0$ or $mu(F) > 0$ and $|nu(F)| = infty$.
Attempted proof - Consider $mu(E)$ where $E$ is a $sigma$-finite set for $nu$. Since we have that $mu$ is finite then clearly $mu(E)$ must be bounded which implies it has a supremum. We will define the supremum as $$L = supF: F textis sigma-textfinite for nu$$
Now lets take a sequence $E_n_1^infty$ that are $sigma$-finite with respect to $nu$ and $mu(E_n)rightarrow L$ as $nrightarrow infty$. Now let $$E = bigcup_1^inftyE_n$$ then $mu(E) leq L$ since it is taken to be a countable union of $sigma$-finite sets. On the other hand, $mu(E)geq mu(E_n)$ for all $n$ and since $mu(E_n)rightarrow L$ then $mu(E) = L$. Now since $mu(E) = L$ then clearly by definition of $L$ we have that $mu(E) > mu(F)$ for all sets $F$ that are $sigma$-finite for $nu$. Now we apply the Radon-Nikodym theorem: so, suppose that $Fcap E = emptyset$ well since $nullmu$ then by definition $nu(F) = mu(F) = 0$. If $mu(F) > 0$ then for sake of contradiction suppose $|nu(F)|neq infty$. Then since $mu$ is finite $mu(Fcup E) > mu(E)$ then this implies that $Ecup F$ is not $sigma$-finite since a $sigma$-finite set with a union of a finite set is $sigma$-finite. Therefore $|nu(F)| = infty$.
Thus I believe we can refer to Radon-Nikidym theorem to conclude that there exists an extended $mu$-integrable function $f:Xrightarrow [-infty,infty]$ such that $dnu = fdmu$.
I am not sure if this is completely correct, any suggestions is greatly appreciated.
real-analysis measure-theory proof-verification
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
If you're still not able to decide on your own whether your analysis proofs are correct, even after asking literally dozens of these proof-verification questions, you have much deeper issues that need to be resolved with your faculty / tutor/ mentor. Not a website.
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jul 15 '16 at 23:10
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Problem 3.3.14 - If $nu$ is an arbitrary signed measure and $mu$ is a $sigma$-finite measure on $(X,M)$ such that $null mu$, there exists an extended $mu$-integrable function $f:Xrightarrow [-infty,infty]$ such that $dnu = fdmu$. Hints:
a.) It suffices to assume that $mu$ is finite and $nu$ is positive.
b.) With these assumptions, there exists an $Ein M$ that is $sigma$-finite for $nu$ such that $mu(E)geq mu(F)$ for all sets $F$ that are $sigma$-finite for $nu$.
c.) The Radon-Nikodym theorem applies on $E$. If $Fcap E = emptyset$, then either $nu(F) = mu(F) = 0$ or $mu(F) > 0$ and $|nu(F)| = infty$.
Attempted proof - Consider $mu(E)$ where $E$ is a $sigma$-finite set for $nu$. Since we have that $mu$ is finite then clearly $mu(E)$ must be bounded which implies it has a supremum. We will define the supremum as $$L = supF: F textis sigma-textfinite for nu$$
Now lets take a sequence $E_n_1^infty$ that are $sigma$-finite with respect to $nu$ and $mu(E_n)rightarrow L$ as $nrightarrow infty$. Now let $$E = bigcup_1^inftyE_n$$ then $mu(E) leq L$ since it is taken to be a countable union of $sigma$-finite sets. On the other hand, $mu(E)geq mu(E_n)$ for all $n$ and since $mu(E_n)rightarrow L$ then $mu(E) = L$. Now since $mu(E) = L$ then clearly by definition of $L$ we have that $mu(E) > mu(F)$ for all sets $F$ that are $sigma$-finite for $nu$. Now we apply the Radon-Nikodym theorem: so, suppose that $Fcap E = emptyset$ well since $nullmu$ then by definition $nu(F) = mu(F) = 0$. If $mu(F) > 0$ then for sake of contradiction suppose $|nu(F)|neq infty$. Then since $mu$ is finite $mu(Fcup E) > mu(E)$ then this implies that $Ecup F$ is not $sigma$-finite since a $sigma$-finite set with a union of a finite set is $sigma$-finite. Therefore $|nu(F)| = infty$.
Thus I believe we can refer to Radon-Nikidym theorem to conclude that there exists an extended $mu$-integrable function $f:Xrightarrow [-infty,infty]$ such that $dnu = fdmu$.
I am not sure if this is completely correct, any suggestions is greatly appreciated.
real-analysis measure-theory proof-verification
$endgroup$
Problem 3.3.14 - If $nu$ is an arbitrary signed measure and $mu$ is a $sigma$-finite measure on $(X,M)$ such that $null mu$, there exists an extended $mu$-integrable function $f:Xrightarrow [-infty,infty]$ such that $dnu = fdmu$. Hints:
a.) It suffices to assume that $mu$ is finite and $nu$ is positive.
b.) With these assumptions, there exists an $Ein M$ that is $sigma$-finite for $nu$ such that $mu(E)geq mu(F)$ for all sets $F$ that are $sigma$-finite for $nu$.
c.) The Radon-Nikodym theorem applies on $E$. If $Fcap E = emptyset$, then either $nu(F) = mu(F) = 0$ or $mu(F) > 0$ and $|nu(F)| = infty$.
Attempted proof - Consider $mu(E)$ where $E$ is a $sigma$-finite set for $nu$. Since we have that $mu$ is finite then clearly $mu(E)$ must be bounded which implies it has a supremum. We will define the supremum as $$L = supF: F textis sigma-textfinite for nu$$
Now lets take a sequence $E_n_1^infty$ that are $sigma$-finite with respect to $nu$ and $mu(E_n)rightarrow L$ as $nrightarrow infty$. Now let $$E = bigcup_1^inftyE_n$$ then $mu(E) leq L$ since it is taken to be a countable union of $sigma$-finite sets. On the other hand, $mu(E)geq mu(E_n)$ for all $n$ and since $mu(E_n)rightarrow L$ then $mu(E) = L$. Now since $mu(E) = L$ then clearly by definition of $L$ we have that $mu(E) > mu(F)$ for all sets $F$ that are $sigma$-finite for $nu$. Now we apply the Radon-Nikodym theorem: so, suppose that $Fcap E = emptyset$ well since $nullmu$ then by definition $nu(F) = mu(F) = 0$. If $mu(F) > 0$ then for sake of contradiction suppose $|nu(F)|neq infty$. Then since $mu$ is finite $mu(Fcup E) > mu(E)$ then this implies that $Ecup F$ is not $sigma$-finite since a $sigma$-finite set with a union of a finite set is $sigma$-finite. Therefore $|nu(F)| = infty$.
Thus I believe we can refer to Radon-Nikidym theorem to conclude that there exists an extended $mu$-integrable function $f:Xrightarrow [-infty,infty]$ such that $dnu = fdmu$.
I am not sure if this is completely correct, any suggestions is greatly appreciated.
real-analysis measure-theory proof-verification
real-analysis measure-theory proof-verification
asked Jul 15 '16 at 22:59
WolfyWolfy
2,36111241
2,36111241
1
$begingroup$
If you're still not able to decide on your own whether your analysis proofs are correct, even after asking literally dozens of these proof-verification questions, you have much deeper issues that need to be resolved with your faculty / tutor/ mentor. Not a website.
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jul 15 '16 at 23:10
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
If you're still not able to decide on your own whether your analysis proofs are correct, even after asking literally dozens of these proof-verification questions, you have much deeper issues that need to be resolved with your faculty / tutor/ mentor. Not a website.
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jul 15 '16 at 23:10
1
1
$begingroup$
If you're still not able to decide on your own whether your analysis proofs are correct, even after asking literally dozens of these proof-verification questions, you have much deeper issues that need to be resolved with your faculty / tutor/ mentor. Not a website.
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jul 15 '16 at 23:10
$begingroup$
If you're still not able to decide on your own whether your analysis proofs are correct, even after asking literally dozens of these proof-verification questions, you have much deeper issues that need to be resolved with your faculty / tutor/ mentor. Not a website.
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jul 15 '16 at 23:10
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
@Wolfy, here is a detailed proof, following Folland's hints.
Problem 3.3.14 - If $nu$ is an arbitrary signed measure and $mu$ is a $sigma$-finite measure on $(X,M)$ such that $null mu$, there exists an extended $mu$-integrable function $f:Xrightarrow [-infty,infty]$ such that $dnu = fdmu$. Hints:
a.) It suffices to assume that $mu$ is finite and $nu$ is positive.
b.) With these assumptions, there exists an $Ein M$ that is $sigma$-finite for $nu$ such that $mu(E)geq mu(F)$ for all sets $F$ that are $sigma$-finite for $nu$.
c.) The Radon-Nikodym theorem applies on $E$. If $Fcap E = emptyset$, then either $nu(F) = mu(F) = 0$ or $mu(F) > 0$ and $|nu(F)| = infty$.
Proof - Let us work on hint a.).
Since $mu$ is a $sigma$-finite measure on $(X,M)$, there is a countable family $X_n_n$ of disjoint measurable subsets of $X$ such that, fo all $n$, $mu(X_n)<infty$ and $X=bigcup_n X_n$.
Now, let $P$ and $N$ be a Hahn decomposition of $X$ for $nu$. Then $X=Pcup N$, $Pcap N= emptyset$ and, for all measurable set $A$,
$$nu^+(A)=nu(Acap P) quad nu^-(A)=-nu(Acap N)$$
For each $n$, $nu^+|_X_nll mu|_X_n$ and $nu^-|_X_n ll mu|_X_n$.
If we can prove for those cases, that there are extended $mu$-integrable functions $f_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^+|_X_n = f_ndmu|_X_n$ and extended $mu$-integrable functions $g_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^-|_X_n = g_ndmu|_X_n$.
It is easy to see that $g_n = 0$ $mu$-a.e. on $Pcap X_n$ and $f_n = 0$ $mu$-a.e. on $Ncap X_n$. So, $h_n=f_n-g_n$ is well defined $mu$-a.e.. (I means we will not have $infty -infty$).
Since $X_n_n$ is a countable family of disjoint measurable subsets of $X$, we have that
$h= sum_n h_n$ is a measurable function and $h:Xrightarrow [-infty,infty]$ and we also have, for any $A$ measurable set,
beginalign*
nu(A) &= sum_nnu(Acap X_ncap P) + sum_nnu(Acap X_ncap N)= \
&= sum_nnu^+(Acap X_n) - sum_nnu^-(Acap X_n)= \
&= sum_n int_Acap X_n f_n dmu - sum_n int_Acap X_n g_n dmu= \
&= int_A sum_n f_n dmu - int_A sum_n g_n dmu= \
&= int_A sum_n (f_n - g_n) dmu = \
& =int_A sum_n h_n dmu = int_A h dmu
endalign*
So we have proved that, for any $A$ measurable set,
$$nu(A) = int_A h dmu$$
Since $nu$ is a signed measure, it does not attain either $+infty$ or $-infty$. It follows then that $h$ is not only measurable but it an extended $mu$-integrable function. (In other word, either $int h^+ dmu <infty$ or $int h^- dmu <infty$ or both).
Now, to complete the proof, all we need is to prove that
If $nu$ is a (positive) measure and $mu$ is a finite measure on $(X,M)$ such that $null mu$, there exists an extended measurable function $f:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu = fdmu$.
Consider the set
$$S = mu(F) : textrm $F$ is a $sigma$-finite set for $nu$ $$
Since we have that $mu$ is finite then clearly $S$ must be bounded which implies it has a finite supremum. We will define the supremum as
$$L = supmu(F) : F textis a sigmatext-finite set for nu$$
Now lets take a sequence $E_n_1^infty$ that are $sigma$-finite with respect to $nu$ and $mu(E_n)rightarrow L$ as $nrightarrow infty$. Now let $$E = bigcup_1^inftyE_n$$ then $mu(E) leq L$ since $E$ is a $sigma$-finite set (being a countable union of $sigma$-finite sets). On the other hand, $mu(E)geq mu(E_n)$ for all $n$ and since $mu(E_n)rightarrow L$ then $mu(E) = L$. Now since $mu(E) = L$ then clearly by definition of $L$ we have that $mu(E) > mu(F)$ for all sets $F$ that are $sigma$-finite for $nu$.
So we used hint b.). Now let us work on hint c.).
Now, since $nu|_E$ is $sigma$-finite and $nu|_Ell mu|_E$ we apply the Radon-Nikodym theorem, and so there is $f_1:Erightarrow [0,+infty)$ such that
$$nu(Acap E) =int_Acap E f_1 dmu tag1$$
Now, given any measurable set $F$ such that $Fcap E = emptyset$, suppose that $mu(F)>0$ and $nu(F) <infty$. Then $Ecup F$ is $sigma$-finite for $nu$, (that is $Ecup F in S$) and
$$mu(Ecup F) =mu(E) +mu( F) > mu(E)=L = sup S$$
Contradiction.
So, for any measurable set $F$ such that $Fcap E = emptyset$,
we have two cases:
$mu(F) =0$ then, since $nu ll mu$, $nu(F)=0$.- if $mu(F)>0$ then $nu(F)=+infty$.
So, for any measurable set $F$ such that $Fcap E = emptyset$,
$$ nu(F) = int_F +infty chi_E^c dmu $$
That means, for any measurable set $A$,
$$ nu(Acap E^c) = int_Acap E^c +infty chi_E^c dmu tag2$$
Let $f:X rightarrow [0,+infty]$ be defined as $f(x)=f_1(x)$ for $x in E$ and $f(x)=+infty$ for $x notin E$. From $(1)$ and $(2)$, we have, for any measurable set $A$,
$$nu(A)= nu(Acap E)+ nu(Acap E^c)= int_Acap E f_1 dmu +int_Acap E^c +infty chi_E^c dmu= int_A f dmu$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Hey Ramiro, I am just curious about your intuition with considering the set $S$. I follow everything up until that point, then I get a bit lost.
$endgroup$
– Wolfy
Dec 29 '16 at 17:55
$begingroup$
In the expression for $nu(A)$ in part (a), how are you able to take $sum_n=1^infty$ inside the integral. One can arbitrarily change summations and integrals when the $f_n$'s are non-negative. But in this case, $f_n$ is real valued. By the Dominated Convergence Theorem, don't we need $sum_n=1^infty int_A |f_n| dmu < infty$?
$endgroup$
– user82261
Mar 27 at 0:40
$begingroup$
@user82261 In part (a), we assume to have extended $mu$-integrable functions $f_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^+|_X_n = f_ndmu|_X_n$ and extended $mu$-integrable functions $g_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^-|_X_n = g_ndmu|_X_n$. So $f_n$ and $g_n$ are non-negative functions.
$endgroup$
– Ramiro
Mar 27 at 11:26
$begingroup$
@Ramiro Right but $h_n$ is a real valued extended $mu-$ integrable function, right? You have used it in the expression where you changed the order of the sum and the integral? Or is that correct way to think about it is to first decompose $h_n$ into $f_n - g_n$, apply the result to each of these, and then combine them back again?
$endgroup$
– user82261
Mar 28 at 2:34
$begingroup$
@user82261 We first decompose $h_n$. I have edited the steps to make it clearer. Let me know if you have any further question.
$endgroup$
– Ramiro
Mar 28 at 10:26
add a comment |
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',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
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
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1860803%2freal-analysis-problem-3-2-14-the-radon-nikodym-theorem%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
@Wolfy, here is a detailed proof, following Folland's hints.
Problem 3.3.14 - If $nu$ is an arbitrary signed measure and $mu$ is a $sigma$-finite measure on $(X,M)$ such that $null mu$, there exists an extended $mu$-integrable function $f:Xrightarrow [-infty,infty]$ such that $dnu = fdmu$. Hints:
a.) It suffices to assume that $mu$ is finite and $nu$ is positive.
b.) With these assumptions, there exists an $Ein M$ that is $sigma$-finite for $nu$ such that $mu(E)geq mu(F)$ for all sets $F$ that are $sigma$-finite for $nu$.
c.) The Radon-Nikodym theorem applies on $E$. If $Fcap E = emptyset$, then either $nu(F) = mu(F) = 0$ or $mu(F) > 0$ and $|nu(F)| = infty$.
Proof - Let us work on hint a.).
Since $mu$ is a $sigma$-finite measure on $(X,M)$, there is a countable family $X_n_n$ of disjoint measurable subsets of $X$ such that, fo all $n$, $mu(X_n)<infty$ and $X=bigcup_n X_n$.
Now, let $P$ and $N$ be a Hahn decomposition of $X$ for $nu$. Then $X=Pcup N$, $Pcap N= emptyset$ and, for all measurable set $A$,
$$nu^+(A)=nu(Acap P) quad nu^-(A)=-nu(Acap N)$$
For each $n$, $nu^+|_X_nll mu|_X_n$ and $nu^-|_X_n ll mu|_X_n$.
If we can prove for those cases, that there are extended $mu$-integrable functions $f_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^+|_X_n = f_ndmu|_X_n$ and extended $mu$-integrable functions $g_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^-|_X_n = g_ndmu|_X_n$.
It is easy to see that $g_n = 0$ $mu$-a.e. on $Pcap X_n$ and $f_n = 0$ $mu$-a.e. on $Ncap X_n$. So, $h_n=f_n-g_n$ is well defined $mu$-a.e.. (I means we will not have $infty -infty$).
Since $X_n_n$ is a countable family of disjoint measurable subsets of $X$, we have that
$h= sum_n h_n$ is a measurable function and $h:Xrightarrow [-infty,infty]$ and we also have, for any $A$ measurable set,
beginalign*
nu(A) &= sum_nnu(Acap X_ncap P) + sum_nnu(Acap X_ncap N)= \
&= sum_nnu^+(Acap X_n) - sum_nnu^-(Acap X_n)= \
&= sum_n int_Acap X_n f_n dmu - sum_n int_Acap X_n g_n dmu= \
&= int_A sum_n f_n dmu - int_A sum_n g_n dmu= \
&= int_A sum_n (f_n - g_n) dmu = \
& =int_A sum_n h_n dmu = int_A h dmu
endalign*
So we have proved that, for any $A$ measurable set,
$$nu(A) = int_A h dmu$$
Since $nu$ is a signed measure, it does not attain either $+infty$ or $-infty$. It follows then that $h$ is not only measurable but it an extended $mu$-integrable function. (In other word, either $int h^+ dmu <infty$ or $int h^- dmu <infty$ or both).
Now, to complete the proof, all we need is to prove that
If $nu$ is a (positive) measure and $mu$ is a finite measure on $(X,M)$ such that $null mu$, there exists an extended measurable function $f:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu = fdmu$.
Consider the set
$$S = mu(F) : textrm $F$ is a $sigma$-finite set for $nu$ $$
Since we have that $mu$ is finite then clearly $S$ must be bounded which implies it has a finite supremum. We will define the supremum as
$$L = supmu(F) : F textis a sigmatext-finite set for nu$$
Now lets take a sequence $E_n_1^infty$ that are $sigma$-finite with respect to $nu$ and $mu(E_n)rightarrow L$ as $nrightarrow infty$. Now let $$E = bigcup_1^inftyE_n$$ then $mu(E) leq L$ since $E$ is a $sigma$-finite set (being a countable union of $sigma$-finite sets). On the other hand, $mu(E)geq mu(E_n)$ for all $n$ and since $mu(E_n)rightarrow L$ then $mu(E) = L$. Now since $mu(E) = L$ then clearly by definition of $L$ we have that $mu(E) > mu(F)$ for all sets $F$ that are $sigma$-finite for $nu$.
So we used hint b.). Now let us work on hint c.).
Now, since $nu|_E$ is $sigma$-finite and $nu|_Ell mu|_E$ we apply the Radon-Nikodym theorem, and so there is $f_1:Erightarrow [0,+infty)$ such that
$$nu(Acap E) =int_Acap E f_1 dmu tag1$$
Now, given any measurable set $F$ such that $Fcap E = emptyset$, suppose that $mu(F)>0$ and $nu(F) <infty$. Then $Ecup F$ is $sigma$-finite for $nu$, (that is $Ecup F in S$) and
$$mu(Ecup F) =mu(E) +mu( F) > mu(E)=L = sup S$$
Contradiction.
So, for any measurable set $F$ such that $Fcap E = emptyset$,
we have two cases:
$mu(F) =0$ then, since $nu ll mu$, $nu(F)=0$.- if $mu(F)>0$ then $nu(F)=+infty$.
So, for any measurable set $F$ such that $Fcap E = emptyset$,
$$ nu(F) = int_F +infty chi_E^c dmu $$
That means, for any measurable set $A$,
$$ nu(Acap E^c) = int_Acap E^c +infty chi_E^c dmu tag2$$
Let $f:X rightarrow [0,+infty]$ be defined as $f(x)=f_1(x)$ for $x in E$ and $f(x)=+infty$ for $x notin E$. From $(1)$ and $(2)$, we have, for any measurable set $A$,
$$nu(A)= nu(Acap E)+ nu(Acap E^c)= int_Acap E f_1 dmu +int_Acap E^c +infty chi_E^c dmu= int_A f dmu$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Hey Ramiro, I am just curious about your intuition with considering the set $S$. I follow everything up until that point, then I get a bit lost.
$endgroup$
– Wolfy
Dec 29 '16 at 17:55
$begingroup$
In the expression for $nu(A)$ in part (a), how are you able to take $sum_n=1^infty$ inside the integral. One can arbitrarily change summations and integrals when the $f_n$'s are non-negative. But in this case, $f_n$ is real valued. By the Dominated Convergence Theorem, don't we need $sum_n=1^infty int_A |f_n| dmu < infty$?
$endgroup$
– user82261
Mar 27 at 0:40
$begingroup$
@user82261 In part (a), we assume to have extended $mu$-integrable functions $f_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^+|_X_n = f_ndmu|_X_n$ and extended $mu$-integrable functions $g_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^-|_X_n = g_ndmu|_X_n$. So $f_n$ and $g_n$ are non-negative functions.
$endgroup$
– Ramiro
Mar 27 at 11:26
$begingroup$
@Ramiro Right but $h_n$ is a real valued extended $mu-$ integrable function, right? You have used it in the expression where you changed the order of the sum and the integral? Or is that correct way to think about it is to first decompose $h_n$ into $f_n - g_n$, apply the result to each of these, and then combine them back again?
$endgroup$
– user82261
Mar 28 at 2:34
$begingroup$
@user82261 We first decompose $h_n$. I have edited the steps to make it clearer. Let me know if you have any further question.
$endgroup$
– Ramiro
Mar 28 at 10:26
add a comment |
$begingroup$
@Wolfy, here is a detailed proof, following Folland's hints.
Problem 3.3.14 - If $nu$ is an arbitrary signed measure and $mu$ is a $sigma$-finite measure on $(X,M)$ such that $null mu$, there exists an extended $mu$-integrable function $f:Xrightarrow [-infty,infty]$ such that $dnu = fdmu$. Hints:
a.) It suffices to assume that $mu$ is finite and $nu$ is positive.
b.) With these assumptions, there exists an $Ein M$ that is $sigma$-finite for $nu$ such that $mu(E)geq mu(F)$ for all sets $F$ that are $sigma$-finite for $nu$.
c.) The Radon-Nikodym theorem applies on $E$. If $Fcap E = emptyset$, then either $nu(F) = mu(F) = 0$ or $mu(F) > 0$ and $|nu(F)| = infty$.
Proof - Let us work on hint a.).
Since $mu$ is a $sigma$-finite measure on $(X,M)$, there is a countable family $X_n_n$ of disjoint measurable subsets of $X$ such that, fo all $n$, $mu(X_n)<infty$ and $X=bigcup_n X_n$.
Now, let $P$ and $N$ be a Hahn decomposition of $X$ for $nu$. Then $X=Pcup N$, $Pcap N= emptyset$ and, for all measurable set $A$,
$$nu^+(A)=nu(Acap P) quad nu^-(A)=-nu(Acap N)$$
For each $n$, $nu^+|_X_nll mu|_X_n$ and $nu^-|_X_n ll mu|_X_n$.
If we can prove for those cases, that there are extended $mu$-integrable functions $f_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^+|_X_n = f_ndmu|_X_n$ and extended $mu$-integrable functions $g_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^-|_X_n = g_ndmu|_X_n$.
It is easy to see that $g_n = 0$ $mu$-a.e. on $Pcap X_n$ and $f_n = 0$ $mu$-a.e. on $Ncap X_n$. So, $h_n=f_n-g_n$ is well defined $mu$-a.e.. (I means we will not have $infty -infty$).
Since $X_n_n$ is a countable family of disjoint measurable subsets of $X$, we have that
$h= sum_n h_n$ is a measurable function and $h:Xrightarrow [-infty,infty]$ and we also have, for any $A$ measurable set,
beginalign*
nu(A) &= sum_nnu(Acap X_ncap P) + sum_nnu(Acap X_ncap N)= \
&= sum_nnu^+(Acap X_n) - sum_nnu^-(Acap X_n)= \
&= sum_n int_Acap X_n f_n dmu - sum_n int_Acap X_n g_n dmu= \
&= int_A sum_n f_n dmu - int_A sum_n g_n dmu= \
&= int_A sum_n (f_n - g_n) dmu = \
& =int_A sum_n h_n dmu = int_A h dmu
endalign*
So we have proved that, for any $A$ measurable set,
$$nu(A) = int_A h dmu$$
Since $nu$ is a signed measure, it does not attain either $+infty$ or $-infty$. It follows then that $h$ is not only measurable but it an extended $mu$-integrable function. (In other word, either $int h^+ dmu <infty$ or $int h^- dmu <infty$ or both).
Now, to complete the proof, all we need is to prove that
If $nu$ is a (positive) measure and $mu$ is a finite measure on $(X,M)$ such that $null mu$, there exists an extended measurable function $f:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu = fdmu$.
Consider the set
$$S = mu(F) : textrm $F$ is a $sigma$-finite set for $nu$ $$
Since we have that $mu$ is finite then clearly $S$ must be bounded which implies it has a finite supremum. We will define the supremum as
$$L = supmu(F) : F textis a sigmatext-finite set for nu$$
Now lets take a sequence $E_n_1^infty$ that are $sigma$-finite with respect to $nu$ and $mu(E_n)rightarrow L$ as $nrightarrow infty$. Now let $$E = bigcup_1^inftyE_n$$ then $mu(E) leq L$ since $E$ is a $sigma$-finite set (being a countable union of $sigma$-finite sets). On the other hand, $mu(E)geq mu(E_n)$ for all $n$ and since $mu(E_n)rightarrow L$ then $mu(E) = L$. Now since $mu(E) = L$ then clearly by definition of $L$ we have that $mu(E) > mu(F)$ for all sets $F$ that are $sigma$-finite for $nu$.
So we used hint b.). Now let us work on hint c.).
Now, since $nu|_E$ is $sigma$-finite and $nu|_Ell mu|_E$ we apply the Radon-Nikodym theorem, and so there is $f_1:Erightarrow [0,+infty)$ such that
$$nu(Acap E) =int_Acap E f_1 dmu tag1$$
Now, given any measurable set $F$ such that $Fcap E = emptyset$, suppose that $mu(F)>0$ and $nu(F) <infty$. Then $Ecup F$ is $sigma$-finite for $nu$, (that is $Ecup F in S$) and
$$mu(Ecup F) =mu(E) +mu( F) > mu(E)=L = sup S$$
Contradiction.
So, for any measurable set $F$ such that $Fcap E = emptyset$,
we have two cases:
$mu(F) =0$ then, since $nu ll mu$, $nu(F)=0$.- if $mu(F)>0$ then $nu(F)=+infty$.
So, for any measurable set $F$ such that $Fcap E = emptyset$,
$$ nu(F) = int_F +infty chi_E^c dmu $$
That means, for any measurable set $A$,
$$ nu(Acap E^c) = int_Acap E^c +infty chi_E^c dmu tag2$$
Let $f:X rightarrow [0,+infty]$ be defined as $f(x)=f_1(x)$ for $x in E$ and $f(x)=+infty$ for $x notin E$. From $(1)$ and $(2)$, we have, for any measurable set $A$,
$$nu(A)= nu(Acap E)+ nu(Acap E^c)= int_Acap E f_1 dmu +int_Acap E^c +infty chi_E^c dmu= int_A f dmu$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Hey Ramiro, I am just curious about your intuition with considering the set $S$. I follow everything up until that point, then I get a bit lost.
$endgroup$
– Wolfy
Dec 29 '16 at 17:55
$begingroup$
In the expression for $nu(A)$ in part (a), how are you able to take $sum_n=1^infty$ inside the integral. One can arbitrarily change summations and integrals when the $f_n$'s are non-negative. But in this case, $f_n$ is real valued. By the Dominated Convergence Theorem, don't we need $sum_n=1^infty int_A |f_n| dmu < infty$?
$endgroup$
– user82261
Mar 27 at 0:40
$begingroup$
@user82261 In part (a), we assume to have extended $mu$-integrable functions $f_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^+|_X_n = f_ndmu|_X_n$ and extended $mu$-integrable functions $g_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^-|_X_n = g_ndmu|_X_n$. So $f_n$ and $g_n$ are non-negative functions.
$endgroup$
– Ramiro
Mar 27 at 11:26
$begingroup$
@Ramiro Right but $h_n$ is a real valued extended $mu-$ integrable function, right? You have used it in the expression where you changed the order of the sum and the integral? Or is that correct way to think about it is to first decompose $h_n$ into $f_n - g_n$, apply the result to each of these, and then combine them back again?
$endgroup$
– user82261
Mar 28 at 2:34
$begingroup$
@user82261 We first decompose $h_n$. I have edited the steps to make it clearer. Let me know if you have any further question.
$endgroup$
– Ramiro
Mar 28 at 10:26
add a comment |
$begingroup$
@Wolfy, here is a detailed proof, following Folland's hints.
Problem 3.3.14 - If $nu$ is an arbitrary signed measure and $mu$ is a $sigma$-finite measure on $(X,M)$ such that $null mu$, there exists an extended $mu$-integrable function $f:Xrightarrow [-infty,infty]$ such that $dnu = fdmu$. Hints:
a.) It suffices to assume that $mu$ is finite and $nu$ is positive.
b.) With these assumptions, there exists an $Ein M$ that is $sigma$-finite for $nu$ such that $mu(E)geq mu(F)$ for all sets $F$ that are $sigma$-finite for $nu$.
c.) The Radon-Nikodym theorem applies on $E$. If $Fcap E = emptyset$, then either $nu(F) = mu(F) = 0$ or $mu(F) > 0$ and $|nu(F)| = infty$.
Proof - Let us work on hint a.).
Since $mu$ is a $sigma$-finite measure on $(X,M)$, there is a countable family $X_n_n$ of disjoint measurable subsets of $X$ such that, fo all $n$, $mu(X_n)<infty$ and $X=bigcup_n X_n$.
Now, let $P$ and $N$ be a Hahn decomposition of $X$ for $nu$. Then $X=Pcup N$, $Pcap N= emptyset$ and, for all measurable set $A$,
$$nu^+(A)=nu(Acap P) quad nu^-(A)=-nu(Acap N)$$
For each $n$, $nu^+|_X_nll mu|_X_n$ and $nu^-|_X_n ll mu|_X_n$.
If we can prove for those cases, that there are extended $mu$-integrable functions $f_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^+|_X_n = f_ndmu|_X_n$ and extended $mu$-integrable functions $g_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^-|_X_n = g_ndmu|_X_n$.
It is easy to see that $g_n = 0$ $mu$-a.e. on $Pcap X_n$ and $f_n = 0$ $mu$-a.e. on $Ncap X_n$. So, $h_n=f_n-g_n$ is well defined $mu$-a.e.. (I means we will not have $infty -infty$).
Since $X_n_n$ is a countable family of disjoint measurable subsets of $X$, we have that
$h= sum_n h_n$ is a measurable function and $h:Xrightarrow [-infty,infty]$ and we also have, for any $A$ measurable set,
beginalign*
nu(A) &= sum_nnu(Acap X_ncap P) + sum_nnu(Acap X_ncap N)= \
&= sum_nnu^+(Acap X_n) - sum_nnu^-(Acap X_n)= \
&= sum_n int_Acap X_n f_n dmu - sum_n int_Acap X_n g_n dmu= \
&= int_A sum_n f_n dmu - int_A sum_n g_n dmu= \
&= int_A sum_n (f_n - g_n) dmu = \
& =int_A sum_n h_n dmu = int_A h dmu
endalign*
So we have proved that, for any $A$ measurable set,
$$nu(A) = int_A h dmu$$
Since $nu$ is a signed measure, it does not attain either $+infty$ or $-infty$. It follows then that $h$ is not only measurable but it an extended $mu$-integrable function. (In other word, either $int h^+ dmu <infty$ or $int h^- dmu <infty$ or both).
Now, to complete the proof, all we need is to prove that
If $nu$ is a (positive) measure and $mu$ is a finite measure on $(X,M)$ such that $null mu$, there exists an extended measurable function $f:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu = fdmu$.
Consider the set
$$S = mu(F) : textrm $F$ is a $sigma$-finite set for $nu$ $$
Since we have that $mu$ is finite then clearly $S$ must be bounded which implies it has a finite supremum. We will define the supremum as
$$L = supmu(F) : F textis a sigmatext-finite set for nu$$
Now lets take a sequence $E_n_1^infty$ that are $sigma$-finite with respect to $nu$ and $mu(E_n)rightarrow L$ as $nrightarrow infty$. Now let $$E = bigcup_1^inftyE_n$$ then $mu(E) leq L$ since $E$ is a $sigma$-finite set (being a countable union of $sigma$-finite sets). On the other hand, $mu(E)geq mu(E_n)$ for all $n$ and since $mu(E_n)rightarrow L$ then $mu(E) = L$. Now since $mu(E) = L$ then clearly by definition of $L$ we have that $mu(E) > mu(F)$ for all sets $F$ that are $sigma$-finite for $nu$.
So we used hint b.). Now let us work on hint c.).
Now, since $nu|_E$ is $sigma$-finite and $nu|_Ell mu|_E$ we apply the Radon-Nikodym theorem, and so there is $f_1:Erightarrow [0,+infty)$ such that
$$nu(Acap E) =int_Acap E f_1 dmu tag1$$
Now, given any measurable set $F$ such that $Fcap E = emptyset$, suppose that $mu(F)>0$ and $nu(F) <infty$. Then $Ecup F$ is $sigma$-finite for $nu$, (that is $Ecup F in S$) and
$$mu(Ecup F) =mu(E) +mu( F) > mu(E)=L = sup S$$
Contradiction.
So, for any measurable set $F$ such that $Fcap E = emptyset$,
we have two cases:
$mu(F) =0$ then, since $nu ll mu$, $nu(F)=0$.- if $mu(F)>0$ then $nu(F)=+infty$.
So, for any measurable set $F$ such that $Fcap E = emptyset$,
$$ nu(F) = int_F +infty chi_E^c dmu $$
That means, for any measurable set $A$,
$$ nu(Acap E^c) = int_Acap E^c +infty chi_E^c dmu tag2$$
Let $f:X rightarrow [0,+infty]$ be defined as $f(x)=f_1(x)$ for $x in E$ and $f(x)=+infty$ for $x notin E$. From $(1)$ and $(2)$, we have, for any measurable set $A$,
$$nu(A)= nu(Acap E)+ nu(Acap E^c)= int_Acap E f_1 dmu +int_Acap E^c +infty chi_E^c dmu= int_A f dmu$$
$endgroup$
@Wolfy, here is a detailed proof, following Folland's hints.
Problem 3.3.14 - If $nu$ is an arbitrary signed measure and $mu$ is a $sigma$-finite measure on $(X,M)$ such that $null mu$, there exists an extended $mu$-integrable function $f:Xrightarrow [-infty,infty]$ such that $dnu = fdmu$. Hints:
a.) It suffices to assume that $mu$ is finite and $nu$ is positive.
b.) With these assumptions, there exists an $Ein M$ that is $sigma$-finite for $nu$ such that $mu(E)geq mu(F)$ for all sets $F$ that are $sigma$-finite for $nu$.
c.) The Radon-Nikodym theorem applies on $E$. If $Fcap E = emptyset$, then either $nu(F) = mu(F) = 0$ or $mu(F) > 0$ and $|nu(F)| = infty$.
Proof - Let us work on hint a.).
Since $mu$ is a $sigma$-finite measure on $(X,M)$, there is a countable family $X_n_n$ of disjoint measurable subsets of $X$ such that, fo all $n$, $mu(X_n)<infty$ and $X=bigcup_n X_n$.
Now, let $P$ and $N$ be a Hahn decomposition of $X$ for $nu$. Then $X=Pcup N$, $Pcap N= emptyset$ and, for all measurable set $A$,
$$nu^+(A)=nu(Acap P) quad nu^-(A)=-nu(Acap N)$$
For each $n$, $nu^+|_X_nll mu|_X_n$ and $nu^-|_X_n ll mu|_X_n$.
If we can prove for those cases, that there are extended $mu$-integrable functions $f_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^+|_X_n = f_ndmu|_X_n$ and extended $mu$-integrable functions $g_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^-|_X_n = g_ndmu|_X_n$.
It is easy to see that $g_n = 0$ $mu$-a.e. on $Pcap X_n$ and $f_n = 0$ $mu$-a.e. on $Ncap X_n$. So, $h_n=f_n-g_n$ is well defined $mu$-a.e.. (I means we will not have $infty -infty$).
Since $X_n_n$ is a countable family of disjoint measurable subsets of $X$, we have that
$h= sum_n h_n$ is a measurable function and $h:Xrightarrow [-infty,infty]$ and we also have, for any $A$ measurable set,
beginalign*
nu(A) &= sum_nnu(Acap X_ncap P) + sum_nnu(Acap X_ncap N)= \
&= sum_nnu^+(Acap X_n) - sum_nnu^-(Acap X_n)= \
&= sum_n int_Acap X_n f_n dmu - sum_n int_Acap X_n g_n dmu= \
&= int_A sum_n f_n dmu - int_A sum_n g_n dmu= \
&= int_A sum_n (f_n - g_n) dmu = \
& =int_A sum_n h_n dmu = int_A h dmu
endalign*
So we have proved that, for any $A$ measurable set,
$$nu(A) = int_A h dmu$$
Since $nu$ is a signed measure, it does not attain either $+infty$ or $-infty$. It follows then that $h$ is not only measurable but it an extended $mu$-integrable function. (In other word, either $int h^+ dmu <infty$ or $int h^- dmu <infty$ or both).
Now, to complete the proof, all we need is to prove that
If $nu$ is a (positive) measure and $mu$ is a finite measure on $(X,M)$ such that $null mu$, there exists an extended measurable function $f:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu = fdmu$.
Consider the set
$$S = mu(F) : textrm $F$ is a $sigma$-finite set for $nu$ $$
Since we have that $mu$ is finite then clearly $S$ must be bounded which implies it has a finite supremum. We will define the supremum as
$$L = supmu(F) : F textis a sigmatext-finite set for nu$$
Now lets take a sequence $E_n_1^infty$ that are $sigma$-finite with respect to $nu$ and $mu(E_n)rightarrow L$ as $nrightarrow infty$. Now let $$E = bigcup_1^inftyE_n$$ then $mu(E) leq L$ since $E$ is a $sigma$-finite set (being a countable union of $sigma$-finite sets). On the other hand, $mu(E)geq mu(E_n)$ for all $n$ and since $mu(E_n)rightarrow L$ then $mu(E) = L$. Now since $mu(E) = L$ then clearly by definition of $L$ we have that $mu(E) > mu(F)$ for all sets $F$ that are $sigma$-finite for $nu$.
So we used hint b.). Now let us work on hint c.).
Now, since $nu|_E$ is $sigma$-finite and $nu|_Ell mu|_E$ we apply the Radon-Nikodym theorem, and so there is $f_1:Erightarrow [0,+infty)$ such that
$$nu(Acap E) =int_Acap E f_1 dmu tag1$$
Now, given any measurable set $F$ such that $Fcap E = emptyset$, suppose that $mu(F)>0$ and $nu(F) <infty$. Then $Ecup F$ is $sigma$-finite for $nu$, (that is $Ecup F in S$) and
$$mu(Ecup F) =mu(E) +mu( F) > mu(E)=L = sup S$$
Contradiction.
So, for any measurable set $F$ such that $Fcap E = emptyset$,
we have two cases:
$mu(F) =0$ then, since $nu ll mu$, $nu(F)=0$.- if $mu(F)>0$ then $nu(F)=+infty$.
So, for any measurable set $F$ such that $Fcap E = emptyset$,
$$ nu(F) = int_F +infty chi_E^c dmu $$
That means, for any measurable set $A$,
$$ nu(Acap E^c) = int_Acap E^c +infty chi_E^c dmu tag2$$
Let $f:X rightarrow [0,+infty]$ be defined as $f(x)=f_1(x)$ for $x in E$ and $f(x)=+infty$ for $x notin E$. From $(1)$ and $(2)$, we have, for any measurable set $A$,
$$nu(A)= nu(Acap E)+ nu(Acap E^c)= int_Acap E f_1 dmu +int_Acap E^c +infty chi_E^c dmu= int_A f dmu$$
edited Mar 28 at 10:21
answered Jul 16 '16 at 3:29
RamiroRamiro
7,32421535
7,32421535
$begingroup$
Hey Ramiro, I am just curious about your intuition with considering the set $S$. I follow everything up until that point, then I get a bit lost.
$endgroup$
– Wolfy
Dec 29 '16 at 17:55
$begingroup$
In the expression for $nu(A)$ in part (a), how are you able to take $sum_n=1^infty$ inside the integral. One can arbitrarily change summations and integrals when the $f_n$'s are non-negative. But in this case, $f_n$ is real valued. By the Dominated Convergence Theorem, don't we need $sum_n=1^infty int_A |f_n| dmu < infty$?
$endgroup$
– user82261
Mar 27 at 0:40
$begingroup$
@user82261 In part (a), we assume to have extended $mu$-integrable functions $f_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^+|_X_n = f_ndmu|_X_n$ and extended $mu$-integrable functions $g_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^-|_X_n = g_ndmu|_X_n$. So $f_n$ and $g_n$ are non-negative functions.
$endgroup$
– Ramiro
Mar 27 at 11:26
$begingroup$
@Ramiro Right but $h_n$ is a real valued extended $mu-$ integrable function, right? You have used it in the expression where you changed the order of the sum and the integral? Or is that correct way to think about it is to first decompose $h_n$ into $f_n - g_n$, apply the result to each of these, and then combine them back again?
$endgroup$
– user82261
Mar 28 at 2:34
$begingroup$
@user82261 We first decompose $h_n$. I have edited the steps to make it clearer. Let me know if you have any further question.
$endgroup$
– Ramiro
Mar 28 at 10:26
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Hey Ramiro, I am just curious about your intuition with considering the set $S$. I follow everything up until that point, then I get a bit lost.
$endgroup$
– Wolfy
Dec 29 '16 at 17:55
$begingroup$
In the expression for $nu(A)$ in part (a), how are you able to take $sum_n=1^infty$ inside the integral. One can arbitrarily change summations and integrals when the $f_n$'s are non-negative. But in this case, $f_n$ is real valued. By the Dominated Convergence Theorem, don't we need $sum_n=1^infty int_A |f_n| dmu < infty$?
$endgroup$
– user82261
Mar 27 at 0:40
$begingroup$
@user82261 In part (a), we assume to have extended $mu$-integrable functions $f_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^+|_X_n = f_ndmu|_X_n$ and extended $mu$-integrable functions $g_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^-|_X_n = g_ndmu|_X_n$. So $f_n$ and $g_n$ are non-negative functions.
$endgroup$
– Ramiro
Mar 27 at 11:26
$begingroup$
@Ramiro Right but $h_n$ is a real valued extended $mu-$ integrable function, right? You have used it in the expression where you changed the order of the sum and the integral? Or is that correct way to think about it is to first decompose $h_n$ into $f_n - g_n$, apply the result to each of these, and then combine them back again?
$endgroup$
– user82261
Mar 28 at 2:34
$begingroup$
@user82261 We first decompose $h_n$. I have edited the steps to make it clearer. Let me know if you have any further question.
$endgroup$
– Ramiro
Mar 28 at 10:26
$begingroup$
Hey Ramiro, I am just curious about your intuition with considering the set $S$. I follow everything up until that point, then I get a bit lost.
$endgroup$
– Wolfy
Dec 29 '16 at 17:55
$begingroup$
Hey Ramiro, I am just curious about your intuition with considering the set $S$. I follow everything up until that point, then I get a bit lost.
$endgroup$
– Wolfy
Dec 29 '16 at 17:55
$begingroup$
In the expression for $nu(A)$ in part (a), how are you able to take $sum_n=1^infty$ inside the integral. One can arbitrarily change summations and integrals when the $f_n$'s are non-negative. But in this case, $f_n$ is real valued. By the Dominated Convergence Theorem, don't we need $sum_n=1^infty int_A |f_n| dmu < infty$?
$endgroup$
– user82261
Mar 27 at 0:40
$begingroup$
In the expression for $nu(A)$ in part (a), how are you able to take $sum_n=1^infty$ inside the integral. One can arbitrarily change summations and integrals when the $f_n$'s are non-negative. But in this case, $f_n$ is real valued. By the Dominated Convergence Theorem, don't we need $sum_n=1^infty int_A |f_n| dmu < infty$?
$endgroup$
– user82261
Mar 27 at 0:40
$begingroup$
@user82261 In part (a), we assume to have extended $mu$-integrable functions $f_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^+|_X_n = f_ndmu|_X_n$ and extended $mu$-integrable functions $g_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^-|_X_n = g_ndmu|_X_n$. So $f_n$ and $g_n$ are non-negative functions.
$endgroup$
– Ramiro
Mar 27 at 11:26
$begingroup$
@user82261 In part (a), we assume to have extended $mu$-integrable functions $f_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^+|_X_n = f_ndmu|_X_n$ and extended $mu$-integrable functions $g_n:Xrightarrow [0,infty]$ such that $dnu^-|_X_n = g_ndmu|_X_n$. So $f_n$ and $g_n$ are non-negative functions.
$endgroup$
– Ramiro
Mar 27 at 11:26
$begingroup$
@Ramiro Right but $h_n$ is a real valued extended $mu-$ integrable function, right? You have used it in the expression where you changed the order of the sum and the integral? Or is that correct way to think about it is to first decompose $h_n$ into $f_n - g_n$, apply the result to each of these, and then combine them back again?
$endgroup$
– user82261
Mar 28 at 2:34
$begingroup$
@Ramiro Right but $h_n$ is a real valued extended $mu-$ integrable function, right? You have used it in the expression where you changed the order of the sum and the integral? Or is that correct way to think about it is to first decompose $h_n$ into $f_n - g_n$, apply the result to each of these, and then combine them back again?
$endgroup$
– user82261
Mar 28 at 2:34
$begingroup$
@user82261 We first decompose $h_n$. I have edited the steps to make it clearer. Let me know if you have any further question.
$endgroup$
– Ramiro
Mar 28 at 10:26
$begingroup$
@user82261 We first decompose $h_n$. I have edited the steps to make it clearer. Let me know if you have any further question.
$endgroup$
– Ramiro
Mar 28 at 10:26
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
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
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1860803%2freal-analysis-problem-3-2-14-the-radon-nikodym-theorem%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
Required, but never shown
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
Required, but never shown
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
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
$begingroup$
If you're still not able to decide on your own whether your analysis proofs are correct, even after asking literally dozens of these proof-verification questions, you have much deeper issues that need to be resolved with your faculty / tutor/ mentor. Not a website.
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jul 15 '16 at 23:10