Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

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

Show that the image of the curve $\Gamma\in\mathscr{C}^{1}\left([a,b]\to\mathbb{R}^{d}\right)$ has d-dimensional Lebesgue measure zero (of course, $d\geq2$).

This can be proved using the absolute continuity of $\Gamma'$ (since $[a,b]$ is compact and $\Gamma'$ is assumed continuous, hence in $L^{1}([a,b])$) together with the fundamental theorem of calculus to obtain an $\epsilon$-small cover of $\Gamma$ by balls.

But I am trying to prove this using more elementary means (i.e. without integration). Intuitively, since $\Gamma$ is smooth, we ought to (for fine enough partitions) be able to cover $\Gamma$ by boxes which arise from its tangent line. And by taking the partition of $[a,b]$ to be finer and finer, the "tangent box" cover ought to also get smaller and smaller.

More rigorously, the vector-version of the mean value theorem can be applied: $$|\Gamma(t_{i-1})-\Gamma(t_{i})|\leq(t_{i}-t_{i-1})|\Gamma'(t_{i}^{\star})|\leq M_{i}\Delta t$$ where $t_{i}^{\star}\in(t_{i-1},t_{i})$ and $M_{i}=\sup_{t\in[t_{i-1},t_{i}]}|\Gamma'(t)|$ which exists and is finite since $\Gamma'$ is continuous.

But to me, it's not quite clear how to rigorously construct a cover by boxes from here.


In the proof I mentioned (using integration), essentially you sum the left hand side over all partition intervals of uniform length $\delta$ (which depends on the $\Gamma'$), and "integrate" the right hand side.

Actually, to be more specific, for each $\epsilon>0$ there exists a $\delta>0$ such that $||P||<\delta$ implies $\int_{t_{i-1}}^{t_{i}}|\Gamma'(t)|dt<\epsilon$ (e.g. absolute continuity). This allows you to define numbers $\epsilon_{i}=\sup_{t,\bar{t}\in[t_{i-1},t_{i}]}|\Gamma(t)-\Gamma(\bar{t})|\leq\epsilon$ so that $\sum_{i=1}^{\#P}\epsilon_{i}\leq||\Gamma'||_{L^{1}([a,b])}$. Then you can use these $\epsilon_{i}$ to put balls at each point $\Gamma(t_{i})$ of radius (say) $2\epsilon_{i}$, thus giving you an $\epsilon$-small cover. Again though, this is harder to establish without integration theory.

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 5 down vote accepted

Let's prove it more generally for a Lipschitz curve $\gamma: [a,b]\to \mathbb R^d$ with Lipschitz constant $L = \mathrm{Lip}(\gamma)$, instead.

Given an interval $I = (c-\epsilon/2, c+\epsilon/2)\cap [a,b]$ of length $\le \epsilon$, it is immediate that $\gamma(I)\subset B_{L\epsilon}(\gamma(c))$. Hence, letting $\lambda$ denote the $d$-dimensional Lebesgue measure we obtain $$\lambda(\gamma(I)) \le L^d\omega_d \epsilon^d$$

Now given $n\in \mathbb N$, let $\epsilon = (b-a)/n$. Then we can cover $[a,b]$ by $n$ intervals $I_1, \dots, I_n$ of length $\epsilon$ and by the above it follows that $$\lambda(\gamma([a,b])) \le \sum_{i=1}^n \lambda(\gamma(I_i)) \le n L^d\omega_d \epsilon^d = \frac{\omega_dL^d(b-a)^d}{n^{d-1}}$$

Since $n$ can be chosen arbitrarily big, this implies that $\lambda(\gamma([a,b])) = 0$ if $d\ge 2$.

Remark: Essentially the same argument shows that a Lipschitz function can never increase the Hausdorff dimension of a set.

share|cite|improve this answer
Hello, what does $B_{L\epsilon}(\gamma(c))$ stand for? A Borel set? – Matriz Jan 19 at 21:18

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.