Exercises:Measure Theory - 2016 - 1/Section B/Problem 1

From Maths
< Exercises:Measure Theory - 2016 - 1‎ | Section B
Revision as of 23:29, 21 October 2016 by Alec (Talk | contribs) (More solution)

Jump to: navigation, search

Section B

Problem B1

Part i)

Suppose that An are algebras of sets satisfying AnAn+1. Show that nNAn is an algebra.

  • Caution:Is or desired?
Solution
  1. Closed under complementation: AnNAn[AnNAn]
    • Let AnNAn be given.
      • By definition of union: [AnNAn][iN[AAi]]
        • As Ai is an algebra of sets itself:
          • AAi
        • Thus AnNAn
    • Since AnNAn was arbitrary, we have shown this for all such A, thus nNAn is closed under complementation.
  2. Closed under union: A,BnNAn[ABnNAn]
    • Let A,BnNAn be given.
      • By definition of union we see:
        1. iN[AAi] and
        2. jN[BAj]
        • Define k:=Max({i,j})
          • Now AiAk and AjAk (at least one of these will be strict equality, it matters not which)
          • Thus A,BAk
          • As Ak is an algebra of sets:
            • C,DAk[CDAk]
          • Thus ABAk
          • So ABnNAn (explicitly, hN[ABAh] - namely choosing h to be k as we have defined it, and we have this if and only if AB is in the union, by the definition of union)
    • Since A,BnNAn were arbitrary we have shown this for all such A and B. As required.

Part ii)

Check that if the An are all sigma-algebras that their union need not be a sigma-algebra.

Is a countable union of sigma-algebras (whether monotonic or not) an algebra?

Hint: Try considering the set of all positive integers, Z1 with its sigma-algebras An:=σ(Cn) where Cn:=P({1,2,,n}) where {1,2,,n}N and P denotes the power set

Check that if B1 and B2 are sigma-algebras that their union need not be an algebra of sets

Solution

Suppose all the Ais are sigma-algebras now, and suppose that AnAn+1 still holds. We wish to show that their union, nNAn is not a sigma-algebra.

  • Our first guess will be that the σ--closed property does not hold. That is:
  • ¬[(An)nNnNAn[nNAnnNAn]] which is equivalent to (in that or if and only if):
    • (An)nNnNAn[nNAnnNAn] (Caution:Things look very similar here! Read with care!)
  • As before: nNAnnNAn¬(kN[nNAnAk]) kN[nNAnAk]
    • So we need to find a (An)n=1nNAn such that kN[nNAnAk]
      • As AnAn+1 we know AAn+1[AAn], as they're proper subsets of each other.
        • Thus, define An:=Xn where XnAn+1 and XnAn (which we have just shown to exist).
          • Now we must prove kN[nNAnAk]
            • Let kN be given.
              • Notice Ak+1nNAn (it is probably actually but we do not require this and I cannot be bothered to prove they're not equal) as each element participating in a union is a subset of the union
                • Saving work. Better to use instance (this is what the hint is for) See new notepad.


Notes

References