enter image description here

Isn't this very obvious? What kind of proof is expected for this kind of question?

The definition of measurability says a mapping $f: E \rightarrow F$ is said to be measurable relative to $\mathcal{E}$ and $\mathcal{F}$ if $f^{-1} B \in \mathcal{E}$ for every $B$ in $\mathcal{F}$.

So here, $f: E\rightarrow F$ is measurable relative to $\mathcal{E}$ and $\mathcal{F}$, so $f^{-1}B \in \mathcal{E}$ for every $B$ in $\mathcal{F}$ and $g: E \rightarrow G$ is measurable relative to $\mathcal{E}$ and $\mathcal{G}$ so $g^{-1}C \in \mathcal E$ for every C in $G$. Hence, $h^{-1}D = (f^{-1}D, g^{-1}D) \in \mathcal{E}$ for every D in $\mathcal{F} \times \mathcal{G}$.

It seems very wrong because I am just regurgitating the definitions.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ What's $(f^{-1}D,g^{-1}D)$? That doesn't look like a subset of $E$ in the first place. $\endgroup$ – Saucy O'Path Jun 30 '18 at 9:25

The product $\sigma$-algebra $\mathcal{F} \otimes \mathcal{G}$ by definition is generated by the family

$\mathcal{P}:= \{A \times B: A \in \mathcal{F}, B \in \mathcal{G}\}$

and so $h:(E, \mathcal{E}) \to (F \times G, \mathcal{F} \otimes \mathcal{G})$ is measurable iff

$$ \forall A \times B \in \mathcal{P}: h^{-1}[A \times B] \in \mathcal{E}$$

This is a general fact on generating sets of $\sigma$-algebras (analogous to such properties for bases and subbases in topology):

If $f: (E,\mathcal{E}) \to (F, \mathcal{F})$ is a function between measurable spaces and $\mathcal{F} = \sigma(\mathcal{P})$, so the image $\sigma$-algebra is generated by some subfamily $\mathcal{P}$, then $f$ is measurable iff $\forall P \in \mathcal{P}: f^{-1}[P] \in \mathcal{E}$.

The proof is not hard: the left to right implication of the iff is the definition of measurability, and for the right to left implication, define $\mathcal{F}' = \{A \subseteq F: f^{-1}[A] \in \mathcal{E}\}$, and do the easy check that $\mathcal{F}'$ is a $\sigma$-algebra on $F$, using properties like $f^{-1}[F\setminus A] = E\setminus f^{-1}[A]$ and $f^{-1}[\bigcup_n A_n] = \bigcup_n f^{-1}[A_n]$. By the right hand side assumption, $\mathcal{P} \subseteq \mathcal{F}'$ and so $$\mathcal{E} = \sigma(\mathcal{P}) \subseteq \mathcal{F}'$$ by minimality. But this exactly says that $f$ is measurable.

Finally, note that $h^{-1}[A \times B] = f^{-1}[A] \cap g^{-1}[B]$ and as $f^{-1}[A], g^{-1}[B] \in \mathcal{E}$ (because $f,g$ are measurable), so is their intersection. QED.


Let $p_F:F\times G\to F$ be prescribed by $(a,b)\mapsto a$.

Let $p_G:F\times G\to G$ be prescribed by $(a,b)\mapsto b$.

Then by definition of $\mathcal F\otimes\mathcal G$:

$h:(E,\mathcal E)\to(F\times G,\mathcal F\otimes\mathcal G)$ is measurable if and only if the functions $p_F\circ H:(E,\mathcal E)\to(F,\mathcal F)$ and $p_G\circ H:(E,\mathcal E)\to(G,\mathcal G)$ are both measurable.

So you are asked to prove that: $$p_F\circ H:(E,\mathcal E)\to(F,\mathcal F)\text{ and }p_G\circ H:(E,\mathcal E)\to(G,\mathcal G)$$ are indeed measurable.

"$f:(A,\mathcal A)\to(B,\mathcal B)$ is measurable" means in my answer that $f$ is a function $A\to B$ measurable wrt $\mathcal A$ and $\mathcal B$.

  • $\begingroup$ Why the if and only if condition? I cannot see why they are equivalent $\endgroup$ – user10024395 Jun 30 '18 at 9:56
  • $\begingroup$ $\mathcal F\otimes\mathcal G$ is by definition the smallest $\sigma$-algebra on $F\times G$ such that $p_F$ and $p_G$ are measurable. The composition of measurable functions is measurable, so if $H$ is measurable then also $p_F\circ H$ and $p_G\circ H$. Do you have troubles with the other side? $\endgroup$ – drhab Jun 30 '18 at 10:02
  • $\begingroup$ The other side: if $p_{F}\circ H$ and $p_{G}\circ H$ are measurable then $H^{-1}\left(p_{F}^{-1}\left(\mathcal{F}\right)\cup p_{G}^{-1}\left(\mathcal{G}\right)\right)\subseteq\mathcal{E}$ and consequently $\sigma\left(H^{-1}\left(p_{F}^{-1}\left(\mathcal{F}\right)\cup p_{G}^{-1}\left(\mathcal{G}\right)\right)\right)\subseteq\mathcal{E}$ . Finally in general it can be shown that $\sigma\left(H^{-1}(\mathcal{V})\right)=H^{-1}(\sigma(\mathcal{V}))$ and applying that here gives $H^{-1}(\mathcal{F}\otimes\mathcal{G})\subseteq\mathcal{E}$ (i.e. $H$ is measurable). $\endgroup$ – drhab Jun 30 '18 at 10:23
  • $\begingroup$ For a proof of $\sigma(H^{-1}(\mathcal V)=H^{-1}(\sigma(\mathcal V))$ see here. $\endgroup$ – drhab Jun 30 '18 at 10:30

While it is obvious that $h^{-1}[R\times S]=f^{-1}[R]\cap g^{-1}[S]\in\mathcal E$ for all $R\in\mathcal F$ and $S\in\mathcal G$, the proof must account for the fact that not all the sets of $\mathcal F\otimes\mathcal G$ are products of sets and, in point of fact, there aren't very explicit descriptions of a $\sigma$-algebra in terms of its generators.

The tool to use is the fact that if $\mathcal H$ is a $\sigma$-algebra on $H$ and $r:X\to H$ is a function, then $\{r^{-1}[K]\,:\, K\in \mathcal H\}$ is a $\sigma$-algebra as well.


Let $p_F$ and $p_G$ denote projections onto $F$ and $G$ respectively.

We have

\begin{align} \mathcal{F} \otimes \mathcal{G} &= \sigma(p_F^{-1}(\mathcal{F}) \cup p_G^{-1}(\mathcal{G})) \\ &= \sigma(\{p_F^{-1}(A) : A \in \mathcal{F}\} \cup \{p_G^{-1}(B) : B \in \mathcal{G}\}) \\ &= \sigma(\{A \times G : A \in \mathcal F\} \cup \{F \times B : B \in \mathcal G\})\\ &= \sigma(\{A \times B : A \in \mathcal F, B \in \mathcal G\}) \end{align}

whereas the last equality holds because $A \times B = (A \times G) \cap (F \times B)$.

Now for every $A \in \mathcal F, B \in \mathcal G$ we have $$h^{-1}(A \times B) = \underbrace{f^{-1}(A)}_{\in \mathcal{E}} \cap \underbrace{g^{-1}(B)}_{\in \mathcal{E}} \in \mathcal{E}$$

because $f$ and $g$ are measurable.

Verify that $\{C \subseteq F \times G : h^{-1}(C) \in \mathcal{E}\}$ is a $\sigma$-algebra on $E$ and clearly $$\{A \times B : A \in \mathcal F, B \in \mathcal G\} \subseteq \{C \subseteq F \times G : h^{-1}(C) \in \mathcal{E}\}$$

Then also $$\mathcal{F} \otimes \mathcal{G} = \sigma(\{A \times B : A \in \mathcal F, B \in \mathcal G\}) \subseteq \{C \subseteq F \times G : h^{-1}(C) \in \mathcal{E}\}$$

or in other words $h^{-1}(C) \in \mathcal{E} $ for every $C \in \mathcal{F} \otimes \mathcal{G}$. Hence $h$ is measurable w.r.t $\mathcal{E}$ and $\mathcal{F} \otimes \mathcal{G}$.


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.