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.

$\mu, \nu$ measures $(X,M)$ with $\nu \ll \mu$ and $\lambda = \mu + \nu$.

Show: $f=\frac{d\nu}{d\lambda}$ then $0 \leq f < 1$ $\mu$-a.e. and $\frac{d\nu}{d\mu} = \frac{f}{1-f}$.


In our context a measure is positive if not stated differently. So in this case $\mu,\nu$ and $\lambda$ are positiv. Let $A\in M$ with $\lambda(A)=0$ then it follows from $\lambda(A)=\mu(A)+\nu(A)=0$ that $\nu(A) =0$ and therefore it is $\nu \ll \lambda$ (and also $\mu \ll \lambda$). Then according to Radon-Nikodym it follows $\nu(A) = \int_A f d\lambda$.

That $f \geq 0$ $\mu$-a.e. follows from $\mu \ll \lambda$ and $0 < \nu(A) = \int_A f d\lambda$ for all $A$ (therefore $f \geq 0$ $\lambda$-a.e.).

For the second part I tried proof by contradiction. Assume $\mu(A) > 0$ and $f(x) > 1$ for all $x\in A$. From $\lambda(A) = \mu(A) + \nu(A)$ it follows then, that $\lambda(A) > 0$.

Then $\nu(A) = \int_A f d\lambda > \int_A 1 d\lambda = \lambda(A)$.

So that $\lambda(A) = \mu(A) + \nu(A) > \mu(A) + \lambda(A)$ which contradicts $\mu(A) > 0$.


But then how to show the last part?

Since $\nu \ll \mu$ it is (already proven) $\frac{d\nu}{d\lambda} = \frac{d\nu}{d\mu}\cdot\frac{d\mu}{d\lambda}$

So $\int_A f\cdot\frac{1}{1-f} d\mu \overset{!}{=} \nu(A) = \int_A \frac{d\nu}{d\lambda} d\lambda = \int_A \frac{d\nu}{d\mu}\cdot\frac{d\mu}{d\lambda} d\lambda$

So I need to show $1-f=\frac{d\lambda}{d\mu}$ (since $\lambda \ll \mu$ and $\mu \ll \lambda$ it is proven that $\frac{d\lambda}{d\mu} = \left( \frac{d\mu}{d\lambda} \right) ^{-1}$)

$\int_A 1-f d\mu = \mu(A) - \int_A \frac{d\nu}{d\lambda}d\mu = \cdots$

share|improve this question
    
Hm, I don't see how to get there.. I somehow got stuck in certain reasoning patterns now after trying too long.. –  numaaa Feb 3 '13 at 19:49

1 Answer 1

You have to show $$\frac{f}{1-f} \stackrel{!}{=} \frac{\mathrm{d}\nu}{\mathrm{d}\mu} = \frac{\mathrm{d}\nu}{\mathrm{d}\lambda} \frac{\mathrm{d}\lambda}{\mathrm{d}\mu},$$ so the Ansatz would have to be $\frac{\mathrm{d}\mu}{\mathrm{d}\lambda} = 1-f$ (which makes sense, since $\mu = \lambda - \nu$).

share|improve this answer

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.