Take the 2-minute tour ×
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.

I am reading Evans and Gariepy's book on GMT and I have a couple questions:

1) if E is a set of locally finite perimeter, is it true that E is $ \| \partial E\|$- measurable?

2) At a certain point, he uses the estimate $ \mathcal{H}^{n-1} ( \partial B(x,r)) \leq c r^{n-1}$ where x is in the reduced boundary of E, and c is some constant. I don't know why this estimate is true.

Thank you for any help

share|improve this question
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 0 down vote accepted
  1. Not necessarily. Recall that in the definition of sets of finite perimeter, as well as of the measure $\|\partial E\|$, the set $E\subset \mathbb R^n$ is identified with an element of $L^1$ represented by its characteristic function. In particular, we can add to $E$ any set of $n$-dimensional measure zero without affecting $\|\partial E\|$. If $D$ is an open disk in $\mathbb R^2$, then $\|\partial D\|$ is the linear measure on its boundary (up to a constant multiple). Adding to $D$ a non-measurable subset of $\partial D$, we obtain a set $E$ which is non-measurable with respect to $\|\partial E\|$.

  2. This estimate has nothing to do with $E$ or its boundary. By the scaling property of Hausdorff measure (page 63), it suffices to prove that $\mathcal{H}^{n-1}(\partial B(0,1))$ is finite. This can be proved directly by observing that $\partial B(0,1)$ is the Lipschitz image of an $(n-1)$-dimensional cube. An alternative, and perhaps more natural way, is to appeal to surface area formulas on page 101 of the book.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

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.