Let $(X,\mathcal{A},\mu)$ be a measure space, $(X,\mathcal{A}_\mu,\overline{\mu})$ be its completion and $f: X \to [-\infty,\infty]$ $\mathcal{A}_\mu$-measurable. Then there exist $\mathcal{A}$-measurable functions $g,h: X \to [-\infty,\infty]$ with $g \leq f \leq h$ and $g = h$ $\mu$-a.e.

Proof. First assume $f \in \Sigma^+$. Then $$f = \sum_{i = 1}^n a_i \chi_{A_i}$$ where $a_i \leq 0$ and $A_i \in \mathcal{A}_\mu$ for $i = 1,\dots,n$. Since $\mathcal{A}_\mu$ is the completion of $\mathcal{A}$, there exist $E_i,F_i \in \mathcal{A}$ such that $$E_i \subseteq A_i \subseteq F_i \qquad \text{and} \qquad \mu(F_i \setminus E_i) = 0$$ for $i = 1,\dots,n$. Then $$g := \sum_{i = 1}^n a_i \chi_{E_i} \qquad \text{and} \qquad h := \sum_{i = 1}^n a_i \chi_{F_i}$$ have the desired properties. Now let $f$ be a $\mathcal{A}_\mu$-measurable nonnegative function. Then we find a sequence $(\varphi_n)_{n \in \mathbb{N}}$ of $\mathcal{A}_\mu$-measurable simple functions $0 \leq \varphi_n$ such that $\varphi_n \nearrow f$. By the first part we find sequences $(g_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$ and $(h_n)_{n \in \mathbb{N}}$ of $\mathcal{A}$-measurable functions such that $$g_n \leq \varphi_n \leq h_n \qquad \text{and} \qquad g_n = h_n \>\mu\text{-a.e.}$$ for any $n \in \mathbb{N}$.

Now I am a bit unsure how to proceed. Intuitively, we just take $$g := \lim_{n \to \infty} g_n \qquad \text{and} \qquad h := \lim_{n \to \infty} h_n$$ but I am not sure if this works. I mean it is not clear that $g_n$ and $h_n$ converge pointwise. Any help?

Edit. Maybe better would be $$g := \limsup_{n \to \infty} g_n \qquad \text{and} \qquad h := \liminf_{n \to \infty} h_n$$

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The idea to use $\liminf$ and $\limsup$ works fine. $\endgroup$ – saz Jan 26 '17 at 7:01
  • $\begingroup$ @saz Thanks a lot. Somehow I do not quite see yet, why then exactly $g = h$ holds $\mu$-a.e. (intuitively it is clear). Furthermore, I think there are counterexamples if we use for both $\limsup$ or $\liminf$ that this construction won't work. What are your thoughts about this? $\endgroup$ – TheGeekGreek Jan 26 '17 at 9:32

If we set

$$g:= \limsup_{n \to \infty} g_n \qquad \text{and} \qquad h := \liminf_{n \to \infty} h_n$$

(as you suggested), then both $g$ and $h$ are well-defined and $\mathcal{A}$-measurable. Moreover, since

$$N_n := \{g_n \neq h_n\}$$

satisfies $\mu(N_n)=0$ for all $n \geq 1$, we know that $N := \bigcup_n N_n \in \mathcal{A}$ is a $\mu$-null set and

$$\forall x \in X \backslash N, n \in \mathbb{N}: h_n(x) = g_n(x) = \varphi_n(x).$$

This implies

$$h(x) = g(x)=f(x) \qquad \text{for all $x \in X \backslash N$}.$$


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.