Scribd
Upload
13 views

HW8 Solutions

The document contains 5 proofs of claims related to outer measure and measure theory. It proves that the outer measure of a set union its complement is the sum of their outer measures. It also proves that countable and rational subsets have outer measure zero. Additionally, it proves properties of outer measure under translation and dilation of sets.

Uploaded by

Дарья Бромот
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
13 views

HW8 Solutions

The document contains 5 proofs of claims related to outer measure and measure theory. It proves that the outer measure of a set union its complement is the sum of their outer measures. It also proves that countable and rational subsets have outer measure zero. Additionally, it proves properties of outer measure under translation and dilation of sets.

Uploaded by

Дарья Бромот
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Math361 Homework 08

April 24, 2014

1. Claim: If m∗ (A) = 0 for some A ⊂ R, then m∗ (A ∪ B) = m∗ (B) for any subset B in R.

Proof. Since B ⊂ A ∪ B, and then by countable sub additivity, we have m∗ (B) ≤ m∗ (A ∪ B) ≤


m∗ (B) + m∗ (A) = m∗ (B)

2. Claim: Any subset A ⊂ R consisting of one single point, i.e., A = {a} for some a ∈ R, has zero
outer measure, and so any countable subset of R has zero outer measure, and so the subset of all
rational numbers Q has outer measure zero.

Proof. Let A = {a}. Then A ⊂ (a − , a + ) for all  > 0. Since |(a − , a + )| = 2, we can say
m∗ (A) ≤ 2 for all  > 0, meaning that m∗ (A) = 0
Let B be a countable subset of R. Then we can find enumerate the elements of B into a sequence
P ∗sets Bn = {bn } such∗that B = ∪Bn . By countable
bn . We can make another sequence of singleton
additivity, we have m∗ (B) = m∗ (∪Bn ) ≤ m (Bn ) = 0 and so m (B) = 0. Since the rationals
are countable, we can say m∗ (Q) = 0.

3. Claim: m∗ ([0, 1] − Q) = 1.

Proof. Consider that [0, 1] − Q ⊂ [0, 1]. Thus, m∗ ([0, 1] − Q) ≤ 1.


Consider that the union of [0, 1]−Q and [0, 1]∩Q is [0, 1]. Thus we have by countable sub additivity

1 = m∗ ([0, 1]) ≤ m∗ ([0, 1] − Q) + m∗ ([0, 1] ∩ Q)

Since [0, 1] ∩ Q ⊂ Q, it must be that m∗ ([0, 1] ∩ Q) ≤ 0 =⇒ m∗ ([0, 1] ∩ Q) = 0. So we have

1 ≤ m∗ ([0, 1] − Q)

This proves both sides of the inequality, and so equality holds.

4. Claim: For any fixed real number t ∈ R and subset A ⊂ R, if we denote its t-translate by t + A =
{t + a|a ∈ A} ⊂ R, then m∗ (A) = m∗ (t + A)

Proof. Let {In } be a cover of A. Then we can translate each In over by t such that (a, b) maps to
(a + t, b + t). Notice that |(a, b)| = b − a = |(a + t, b + t)| or |In | = |In + t|. Call this new collection
of intervals {In + t}
Fix x ∈ (a, b). Then x + t ∈ (a + t, b + t). Thus, since {In } covers A, {In + t} covers A + t.
Since A + t ⊂ ∪{In + t}, we have m∗ (A + t) ≤ m∗ (∪{In + t}) ≤
P
|In + t|, that last move by
subaddivitity.
But since |In | = |In + t|, we have m∗ (A + t) ≤
P
|In |.

1
P
By definition of the infinum, for all  > 0, we can find a cover of A called {In } such that |In | <
m∗ (A) + .
That is, since m∗ (A + t) ≤
P
|In | holds for all covers of A, we can say

m∗ (A + t) < m∗ (A) + 

Thus, we let  → 0 and get


m∗ (A + t) ≤ m∗ (A)

This holds for all A ⊂ R and t ∈ R


Let A0 = t + A and t0 = −t. Then by the conclusion above, we have m∗ (t0 + A0 ) ≤ m∗ (A0 ). But
t0 + A0 = −t + t + A = A and A0 = t + A. Thus, we have m∗ (A) ≤ m∗ (t + A)
This proves equality.

5. Claim: If we fix t ≥ 0 and A ⊂ R, and we define the t-dilation of A to be the set tA = {ta|a ∈
A} ⊂ R, then m∗ (tA) = tm∗ (A)

Proof. Fix an interval


P I = (a,P b). Then |I| = b − a and |tI| = t(b − a), or that t|I| = |tI|. This
further implies that t|In | = |tIn |, if In is just an interval.
Let {In } cover A. Then we can dilate each interval by t. Let {tIn } be the dilated collection of
intervals.
Fix x ∈ (a, b).P Then tx ∈ (ta, tb). So we have tA ⊂ ∪{tIn }. This tells us that m∗ (tA) ≤
m∗ (∪{tIn }) ≤ |tIn |, the last move by subaddivitity.
t|In | = |tIn | and so m∗ (tA) ≤ t|In |.
P P P
But we knew that
P
By definition of the infinum, for allP > 0, we can find a cover of A called {In } such that |In | <
m∗ (A) + . This also tells us that t|In | < tm∗ (A) + t
Thus, we can conclude
m∗ (tA) < tm∗ (A) + t
and let  go to zero to get
m∗ (tA) ≤ tm∗ (A)
which holds for all A ⊂ R and t ≥ 0.
Let t = 0. Then tA = {0} and we are done, since tm∗ (A) = 0 = m∗ (0).
Let t 6= 0. Then define A0 = tA and t0 = t−1 . Thus, we have m∗ (t0 A0 ) ≤ t0 m∗ (A0 ). But t0 A0 = A
and A0 = tA and so we have m∗ (A) ≤ t−1 m∗ (tA) or tm∗ (A) ≤ m∗ (tA)
This proves equality.

You might also like