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 made up this question, but unable to solve it:

Let $f : \mathbb R \to \mathbb R$ be a continuous function such that $f(x) > 0$ for all $x \in \mathbb Q$. Is it necessary that $f(x) > 0$ almost everywhere?

This is my attempt.

  1. It is easy to show that $f(x) \geq 0$ everywhere, so the real question is whether $f$ can be zero at an "almost all" irrational points.

  2. The function can become $0$ at isolated points, e.g., $f(x) = (x - \sqrt{2})^2$. In particular, the qualification "almost" is necessary for the question to be nontrivial.

  3. Every rational point has an open neighborhood where $f$ is positive. Hence at least know that the set $\{ x \,:\, f(x) > 0 \}$ is not a measure-zero set.

  4. I first mistakenly assumed that Thomae's function provides a counter-example to this. Indeed, it is positive at all rationals and zero at all irrationals, but the function is continuous at only the irrationals, not everywhere.

Then I tried to prove that the question has an affirmative answer, but do not have much progress there. Please suggest some hints!

share|improve this question
    
I'm not sure I understand what "almost" means, mathematically. –  Peter Olson Sep 17 '11 at 15:44
4  
@Peter, "P is true almost everywhere" is the same as saying "The set of points where P is false is a measure-zero set". –  Srivatsan Sep 17 '11 at 16:18
add comment

2 Answers

up vote 30 down vote accepted

Here's a hint: If you can think of closed set $C \subset \mathbb{R}$ of positive measure containing no rationals, then the function sending $x$ to its distance from $C$ is an example.

(I changed this because I just realized you were looking for a hint)

share|improve this answer
2  
Very nice (and also natural) example. Thanks! Unfortunately, I already ran out of my votes; I cannot upvote this today. :-) [Added: Yes, I saw the full solution inadvertently, but I guess your hint would have worked for me as well. I know how to construct the requisite $C$.] –  Srivatsan Sep 17 '11 at 4:24
1  
@Mathemagician1234: I do not understand what "intersection of all subsets of R where m ({ x: f(x) = 0}" means. It is incorrect that you need to find open balls. Every open interval in $\mathbb R$ contains rational numbers, so every open interval will contain points where $f$ is positive. –  Jonas Meyer Dec 4 '11 at 5:29
2  
@Mathemagician1234: That is incorrect, and is confusing a correct statement with its incorrect converse. If a set is open, or contains an open subset, then it has positive measure. The converse is false. For example, there are dense sets with measure 0. Observe that $\mathbb R\setminus \mathbb Q$ contains no open set, but has positive measure. Also, please take a look at fat Cantor sets, for examples of sets of positive measure that do not differ from an open set by merely a null set. Here, however, the point is that there are closed subsets of irrationals with positive measure. –  Jonas Meyer Dec 4 '11 at 18:15
1  
@Mathemagician1234 : $\mathbb{R} \setminus \mathbb{Q}$ is the set-theoretic difference, not the quotient space. In other words, $\mathbb{R} \setminus \mathbb{Q}$ is the set of irrational numbers, not the result of squashing all the rational numbers in $\mathbb{R}$ to a single point. –  Adam Smith Dec 4 '11 at 21:44
1  
@Math: Here is some standard notation: $\mathbb R/\mathbb Q$ is a quotient, while $\mathbb R\setminus \mathbb Q=\{x\in\mathbb R:x\not\in\mathbb Q\}$, the latter being the same thing you denoted "$\mathbb R-\mathbb Q$" or "$\mathrm{comp}(\mathbb Q)$ in $\mathbb R$". I used a backslash, meaning the set difference, rather than a forward slash, which would mean a quotient. –  Jonas Meyer Dec 5 '11 at 2:58
show 12 more comments

Here's another approach to the question, in hint form:

(1) Construct a function $f(x)$ that is continuous, nonnegative, positive at $x=0$, bounded above by 1, and supported on an interval of length at most 1.

(2) Deduce that if $a,b>0$ and $c$ are real numbers, then $a f(b(x-c))$ is continuous, nonnegative, positive at $x=c$, bounded above by $a$, and supported on an interval of length at most $1/b$.

(3) Let $q_1,q_2,q_3,\dots$ be an enumeration of the rationals. Show that the function $$\sum_{j=1}^\infty 2^{-j} f\big( 2^j(x-q_j) \big)$$ is continuous, nonnegative, positive at every rational number, but equal to zero on a set of infinite measure.

share|improve this answer
    
This is also a nice solution. Thank you. –  Srivatsan Sep 19 '11 at 0:06
    
+1 for this "complementary" solution to the approaches suggested above. –  Mathemagician1234 Dec 4 '11 at 17:19
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.