Notes:Halmos measure theory skeleton
From Maths
Contents
[hide]Skeleton
If we were to cut out all the "extra" (and useful) theorems into just the core that let us get from pre-measures to measures we would be left with what I call the "skeleton". The "core" of Halmos' measure theory book is the following:
- Ring of sets, R - DONE - Alec (talk) 20:31, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
- σ-ring, R
- Measure, μ, countably additive extended real valued set function on a σ-ring, R, μ:R→ˉR≥0
- Pre-measure, ˉμ, countably additive extended real valued set function defined on a ring of sets, R, ˉμ:R→ˉR≥0
- Goal 1: "extend" a pre-measure, ˉμ to a measure, μ such that (for a ring of sets R): ∀A∈R[ˉμ(A)=μ(A)][Question 1]
- Hereditary set system - a system of sets, say H, such that ∀A∈H∀B∈P(A)[B∈H]
- Outer-measure, μ∗ - extended real valued countably subadditive monotonic set function with μ∗(∅)=0
- Theorem: for a pre-measure, ˉμ on a ring R the function:
- μ∗:H→ˉR≥0given by μ∗:A↦inf{∞∑n=1ˉμ(An) | (An)∞n=1⊆R∧A⊆∞⋃n=1An}
- is an outer measure
- μ∗:H→ˉR≥0
- Theorem: for a pre-measure, ˉμ on a ring R the function:
- μ∗-measurable sets
- Theorem: - the set of all μ∗-measurable sets is a σ-ring and μ∗ is a measure on this sigma-ring
- Theorem: - every set in σR(R) is μ∗-measurable and μ∗ is a measure on this sigma-ring
- Theorem: - the measure induced on the sigma-ring of μ∗-measurable sets is the same as the outer measure induced by the outer-measure when restricted to the σ-ring generated by R[Question 3]
- We haven't shown anything to do with equality of these two sigma-rings! We only show that the outer measure each induce is the same!
Questions
- Jump up ↑ Why specifically a measure? An outer-measure extends a measure to be able to measure every subset of every set in R - at the cost of it no longer being additive but instead subadditive - why do we want additivity so much? Why is subadditivity not good enough? Obviously it's a weaker property as additivity ⟹ subadditivity
- Jump up ↑ Suppose H(S) is the hereditary system generated by a collection of subsets, S, and σR(S) the σ-ring generated by S, is it true that:
- H(σR(S))=σR(H(S))?
- H(σR(S))
- Jump up ↑ I could phrase this better
Old notes
[Expand]
These notes were "too long" I need to compress it into steps.