Suppose that you have $S \subseteq T \subseteq \mathbb{R^n}$, and that $T$ is Jordan measurable with $m(T) = 0$ as well.

Prove that $S$ is also Jordan measurable with $m(S) = 0$.

I have attempted to prove this, and I am unsure if I am correct. Hence I could use feedback on my proof.

S is jordan measurable with measure 0 if for every $\epsilon > 0$ there exists a finite collection of covers {$U_1$, $U_2$, ..., $U_n$} such that $\sum_{i=1}^n V(U_i) < \epsilon$.

Since every $x_i \in S$ and $S \subseteq T$, then $x_i \in T$. Since T is measure 0, there exists a collection of covers {$O_1$, ..., $O_n$}, so that $T \subseteq \bigcup_{i=1}^n O_i$.

Since $S \subseteq T$, then $S \subseteq\bigcup_{i=1}^n O_i$

Take $U_i$ = $O_i$, so that $O_i$ covers an open neighbourhood around $X_i$ in S.


$\sum_{i=1}^n V(U_i) = \sum_{i=1}^n V(O_i) < \epsilon$

More over, since S is measure 0, it is Jordan measurable.


The idea is indeed correct. But since you ask for corrections, here they come:

You seem to turn a bit in circles at the end: Your open cover $O_i$ is already a finite open cover for any subset $S$ of $T$, you don't need to rename it to $U_i$.

Also, it is not clear what you mean by "covers an open neighbourhood around $X_i$". At that point you are basically done and your definition of "Jordan measurable with measure zero" applies immediately, no need for more explanations.

Hope that helps!

  • $\begingroup$ One question - what is the difference between Jordan measurable and Jordan measure? We define it as the boundary of the set having measure 0. In this case, is the boundary of S then T? And since T has measure 0, then S is Jordan measurable? $\endgroup$ Apr 17 '17 at 16:13

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.