Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

Given a measure space \((X, \mathcal{M}, \mu)\) and \(E \in \mathcal{M}\), define \(\mu_{E}(\mathcal{A})=\mu(A \cap E)\) for \(A \in \mathcal{M}\). Then \(\mu_{E}\) is a measure.

Short Answer

Expert verified
\(\mu_E\) is a measure since it satisfies all measure properties.

Step by step solution

01

Understand the Measure Definition

A measure is a function \( \mu : \mathcal{M} \to [0, \infty] \) that satisfies three properties: non-negativity, null empty set, and \(\sigma\)-additivity.
02

Check Non-Negativity

For any \( A \in \mathcal{M} \), \( \mu_E(A) = \mu(A \cap E) \geq 0 \) since \( \mu \) is non-negative and measures intersections as subsets of measurable sets.
03

Verify the Null Empty Set Property

Consider \( A = \emptyset \). Then \( A \cap E = \emptyset \), and thus \( \mu_E(\emptyset) = \mu(\emptyset \cap E) = \mu(\emptyset) = 0 \). This satisfies the property for measures.
04

Establish \(\sigma\)-additivity

Take a countable collection \( \{A_i\}_{i=1}^{\infty} \subseteq \mathcal{M} \). We have \( \mu_E\left(\bigcup_{i=1}^{\infty} A_i\right) = \mu\left(\bigcup_{i=1}^{\infty} (A_i \cap E)\right) \). Since \(\mu\) is \(\sigma\)-additive, \( \mu\left(\bigcup_{i=1}^{\infty} (A_i \cap E)\right) = \sum_{i=1}^{\infty} \mu(A_i \cap E) \), hence \( \mu_E\left(\bigcup_{i=1}^{\infty} A_i\right) = \sum_{i=1}^{\infty} \mu_E(A_i) \).

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Non-Negativity
In measure theory, one of the foundational properties of a measure is non-negativity. This means that for any measurable set \( A \), the measure \( \mu(A) \) must be greater than or equal to zero. This makes sense because a measure can be thought of as assigning a size or volume to sets, and it's logical that size can't be negative.

When checking non-negativity for our specific measure \( \mu_E \), defined as \( \mu_E(A) = \mu(A \cap E) \), we need to consider the intersection \( A \cap E \).
Since \( \mu \) is already a non-negative measure, the intersection \( A \cap E \) as a subset is also measured in a non-negative way:
  • For any \( A \in \mathcal{M} \), \( \mu_E(A) = \mu(A \cap E) \geq 0 \).
This confirms that non-negativity holds for \( \mu_E \) just as it does for the original measure \( \mu \).
Understanding this is crucial because it ensures all measurements are logically consistent; you cannot have a negative size in a system measuring size or probability.
Null Empty Set
The null empty set property is another important attribute of a measure. This property essentially states that the measure of an empty set is always zero.
\(\mu(\emptyset) = 0 \) signifies that there's nothing to measure, hence it cannot possess any volume or size.

When we look at \( \mu_E \), the measure is slightly adapted but retains this fundamental property.
Consider:
  • The measure \( \mu_E(\emptyset) = \mu(\emptyset \cap E) \).
  • Since \( \emptyset \cap E = \emptyset \), then \( \mu_E(\emptyset) = \mu(\emptyset) = 0 \).
This shows that whether you measure directly through \( \mu \) or indirectly through \( \mu_E \), empty sets remain unmeasurable in the sense of having a measure of zero.
Grasping this concept helps underline that non-existent elements in a set don't mistakenly contribute to the total measure, maintaining both theoretical and practical precision.
Sigma-additivity
Sigma-additivity (or \( \sigma \)-additivity) is the property that ensures the measure can handle countable unions of sets in a consistent manner.
This is an essential trait as it ensures that a measure can combine over an infinite count of sets while retaining reliability and accuracy.

To verify \( \sigma \)-additivity for \( \mu_E \), consider a countable collection of sets \( \{A_i\}_{i=1}^{\infty} \):
  • With \( \mu_E \), we define: \( \mu_E\left(\bigcup_{i=1}^{\infty} A_i\right) = \mu\left(\bigcup_{i=1}^{\infty} (A_i \cap E)\right) \).
  • Because the original measure \( \mu \) is \( \sigma \)-additive, it applies: \( \mu\left(\bigcup_{i=1}^{\infty} (A_i \cap E)\right) = \sum_{i=1}^{\infty} \mu(A_i \cap E) \).
  • Thus, \( \mu_E \) follows that \( \mu_E\left(\bigcup_{i=1}^{\infty} A_i\right) = \sum_{i=1}^{\infty} \mu_E(A_i) \).
Sigma-additivity showcases the robustness of measure theory, allowing it to manage infinite scenarios in a fluid, coherent manner.
By doing so, we ensure our measure remains reliable whether dealing with simple or complex and infinite set arrangements.

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

Let \((X, \mathcal{M}, \mu)\) be a finite measure space. a. If \(E, F \in \mathcal{M}\) and \(\mu(E \Delta F)=0\), then \(\mu(E)=\mu(F)\). b. Say that \(E \sim F\) if \(\mu(E \Delta F)=0\); then \(\sim\) is an equivalence relation on \(\mathcal{M}\). c. For \(E, F \in \mathcal{M}\), define \(\rho(E, F)=\mu(E \Delta F)\). Then \(\rho(E, G) \leq \rho(E, F)+\) \(\rho(F, G)\), and hence \(\rho\) defines a metric on the space \(\mathcal{M} / \sim\) of equivalence classes.

There exists a Borel set \(A \subset[0,1]\) such that \(0

A family of sets \(\mathcal{R} \subset \mathcal{P}(X)\) is called a ring if it is closed under finite unions and differences (i.e., if \(E_{1}, \ldots, E_{n} \in \mathcal{R}\), then \(\bigcup_{1}^{n} E_{j} \in \mathcal{R}\), and if \(E, F \in \mathcal{R}\), then \(E \backslash F \in \mathcal{R}\) ). A ring that is closed under countable unions is called a \(\sigma\)-ring. a. Rings (resp. \(\sigma\)-rings) are closed under finite (resp. countable) intersections. b. If \(\mathcal{R}\) is a ring (resp. \(\sigma\)-ring), then \(\mathcal{R}\) is an algebra (resp. \(\sigma\)-algebra) iff \(X \in \mathcal{R}\). c. If \(\mathcal{R}\) is a \(\sigma\)-ring, then \(\left\\{E \subset X: E \in \mathcal{R}\right.\) or \(\left.E^{c} \in \mathcal{R}\right\\}\) is a \(\sigma\)-algebra. d. If \(\mathcal{R}\) is a \(\sigma\)-ring, then \(\\{E \subset X: E \cap F \in \mathcal{R}\) for all \(F \in \mathcal{R}\\}\) is a \(\sigma\)-algebra.

Suppose \(\left\\{\alpha_{j}\right\\}_{1}^{\infty} \subset(0,1)\). a. \(\prod_{1}^{\infty}\left(1-\alpha_{j}\right)>0\) iff \(\sum_{1}^{\infty} \alpha_{j}<\infty\). (Compare \(\sum_{1}^{\infty} \log \left(1-\alpha_{j}\right)\) to \(\left.\sum \alpha_{j} .\right)\) b. Given \(\beta \in(0,1)\), exhibit a sequence \(\left\\{\alpha_{j}\right\\}\) such that \(\prod_{1}^{\infty}\left(1-\alpha_{j}\right)=\beta\).

If \(\mu_{1}, \ldots, \mu_{n}\) are measures on \((X, \mathcal{M})\) and \(a_{1}, \ldots, a_{n} \in[0, \infty)\), then \(\sum_{1}^{n} a_{j} \mu_{j}\) is a measure on \((X, \mathcal{M})\).

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Math Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free