Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

This is essentially Exercise 1.21 in Folland's Real Analysis, which states the following: If $\mu^*$ is an outer measure induced by a premeasure and $\overline{\mu}$ is the restriction of $\mu^*$ to the $\mu^*$-measurable sets, then $\overline{\mu}$ is saturated.

Definition: Folland says a measure $\overline{\mu}$ on a space $(X, \mathcal{M})$ is saturated if every locally measurable set is measurable, where a set $E$ is locally measurable if and only if $E \cap A$ is measurable for every $A \in \mathcal{M}$ with $\overline{\mu}(A) < \infty$.

I'm having trouble showing that when $E$ is a locally measurable set with $\mu^*(E) = \infty$, then $E$ is measurable. (The finite case is not hard.)

Here's what I have so far. Write $\mu_0$ for the premeasure, $\mathcal{A} \subset \mathcal{P}(X)$ for the algebra on which $\mu_0$ is defined, and $\mathcal{M}$ for the collection of all $\mu^*$-measurable sets. Also, let $\mathcal{A}_{\sigma}$ be the collection of countable unions of sets in $\mathcal{A}$. The hint is to use an earlier exercise: for any $\varepsilon > 0$, there is $A \in \mathcal{A}_{\sigma}$ with $E \subset A$ and $\mu^*(A) \leq \mu^*(E) + \varepsilon$. So I obtain $E = \bigcup_{j=1}^{\infty} E \cap A_j$, where each $A_j \in \mathcal{A}$. Then I want to use the locally measurable property, but it may be the case that $\mu_0(A_j) = \infty$ for some $j_0$.

Any ideas? We don't have any assumption that $\overline{\mu}$ is $\sigma$-finite, for example...

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 2 down vote accepted

Assume $E$ is a locally measurable set. It suffices to show that $$ \mu^*(F)\geq \mu^*(F\cap E)+\mu^*(F\cap E^c)\quad(*) $$ for all $F\subset X$ with $\mu^*(F)<\infty$. So let $F\subset X$ be such and let $\epsilon>0$. Using the earlier exercise, we find an $A\in\mathcal{A}_\sigma\subset\mathcal{M}$ with $F\subset A$ and $\mu^*(A)\leq\mu^*(F)+\epsilon$ (thus $\mu^*(A)<\infty$). Now $E\cap A\in\mathcal{M}$, since $E$ is locally measurable and $A\in\mathcal{M}$ is such that $\mu^*(A)<\infty$. It follows that $$ \mu^*(A)=\mu^*(A\cap(E\cap A))+\mu^*(A\cap(E\cap A)^c)=\mu^*(A\cap E)+\mu^*(A\cap E^c). $$ Since $F\subset A$, $$ \mu^*(A\cap E)+\mu^*(A\cap E^c)\geq \mu^*(F\cap E)+\mu^*(F\cap E^c). $$ All in all, we have $$ \mu^*(F)+\epsilon\geq \mu^*(A) \geq \mu^*(F\cap E)+\mu^*(F\cap E^c), $$ and since $\epsilon>0$ was arbitrary, we get $(*)$.

share|cite|improve this answer
Thanks! So you don't even need to make a distinction between E having infinite outer measure or not. – DA29731 Apr 5 '12 at 19:48


down vote


"Assume E is a locally measurable set. It suffices to show that μ ∗ (F)≥μ ∗ (F∩E)+μ ∗ (F∩E c )(∗) for all F⊂X with μ ∗ (F)<∞ .... "

The above proof tries to use the definition of outer measurability. In this, however, the sets F are not restricted to sets of bounded measure. If the generating premeasure is non-semifinite, the proof will therefore fail.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.