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

Could please someone help me? I proved that

$X \subseteq [0,1]$ has Lebesgue outer measure $\mu^\ast (X)> 0$ iff $\forall Y$ with $\mu (Y) = 1$, $X \cap Y \neq \varnothing$

But both directions of proof seem to be the same. This is what I wrote:

Let $\mu^\ast (X) > 0$. If there was $Y \subseteq [0,1]$ with $\mu (Y) = 1$ and $X \cap Y = \varnothing$ then $X \subseteq [0,1] \setminus Y$ and then $\mu^\ast (X) \le \mu^\ast ([0,1] \setminus Y) = 0$ which is contradiction.

Other direction: Assume there is $Y$ such that $Y \cap X = \varnothing$ then $X \subseteq [0,1] \setminus Y$ and then $\mu^\ast (X) \le \mu^\ast ([0,1] \setminus Y) = 0$.

Is this valid proof? Or did I prove same direction twice? Thank you for correcting me.

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 3 down vote accepted

It is indeed the same direction twice. You have shown that

$$X\subseteq[0,1]\textrm{ and }\mu^*(X)>0\implies X\cap Y\neq\emptyset \textrm{ for all measurable }Y\subseteq [0,1]\textrm{ with }\mu(Y)=1.$$

You have shown it directly the first time and the contrapositive the second time. For the other direction, let $X\subseteq[0,1]$ and $\mu^*(X)=0$ and find a measurable set $Y\subseteq[0,1]$ with $\mu(Y)=1$ such that $X\cap Y=\emptyset$.

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.