Suppose that $\mu$ is a Radon measure on $X$. If $\phi\in L^{1}(\mu)$ and $\phi\geq 0$, show that $\nu(E)=\int_{E}\phi\;d\mu$ is a Radon measure.

$\nu$ is a finite measure so we just need to check the regularity conditions. I was showing the outer regularity on all Borel sets and I did it for sets with finite $\mu$-measure. I'm not sure about the argument for sets with infinite $\mu$-measure. Likewise for inner regularity on open sets.

  • $\begingroup$ I probably should add that $X$ is a locally compact Hausdorff space. $\endgroup$ – cyc Apr 13 '13 at 16:36
  • $\begingroup$ Presumably not $\sigma$-finite, otherwise you would have finished already... $\endgroup$ – copper.hat Apr 13 '13 at 17:00
  • $\begingroup$ @copper.hat: Yes indeed. $\endgroup$ – cyc Apr 13 '13 at 17:36
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ It probably helps to note that $\nu$ vanishes outside the $\sigma$-finite set $U = \bigcup_{n} \{ \varphi \gt 1/n\}$, so you can reduce to the case that $\mu$ is $\sigma$-finite. $\endgroup$ – Martin Apr 13 '13 at 18:56
  • $\begingroup$ @Martin: I'm not sure how the reduction goes. $\endgroup$ – cyc Apr 13 '13 at 21:13

This is just an elaboration of Martin's astute comment above:

Let $N = \phi^{-1} \{0 \}$. Then $\nu A = \nu (A \setminus N)$. Furthermore, $N^c = \cup_k \Delta_k$, where $\Delta_k = \phi^{-1} (\frac{1}{k}, \infty)$.

We can bound $\mu \Delta_k$ as follows: $\|\phi\|_1 \ge \nu \Delta_k = \int_{\Delta_k} \phi d \mu \ge \frac{1}{k} \mu \Delta_k$, and so $\mu \Delta_k \le k \|\phi\|_1$.

We have $A \setminus N = \cup_k (A \cap \Delta_k)$, and since $\Delta_k$ is increasing, we have $\nu (A \cap \Delta_n) \to \nu(\cup_k (A \cap \Delta_k))$.

Let $\epsilon>0$, then choose $n$ such that $\nu(\cup_k (A \cap \Delta_k)) - \nu (A \cap \Delta_n)< \frac{\epsilon}{2}$.

Now we need to approximate $A \cap \Delta_n$ by a compact set. Since $\mu$ is a Radon measure, there exists a sequence of compact sets $C_k \subset A \cap \Delta_n$ such that $\mu C_k \to \mu (A \cap \Delta_n)$. Without loss of generality (finite unions of compact sets are still compact) we may assume that the $C_k$ are increasing. We have $\mu((A \cap \Delta_n) \setminus \cup_k C_k) = 0$, hence $1_{C_k}(x) \to 1_{A \cap \Delta_n}(x)$ a.e. [$\mu$]. Since $1_{C_k}(x) \le 1$, the dominated convergence theorem gives $\int_{C_k} \phi d \mu \to \int_{A \cap \Delta_n} \phi d \mu $. Hence for some $k$, we have $\int_{A \cap \Delta_n} \phi d \mu - \int_{C_k} \phi d \mu < \frac{\epsilon}{2}$, and so \begin{eqnarray} \nu A &=& \nu (A \setminus N) \\ &=& \nu ( \cup_k (A \cap \Delta_k)) \\ &<& \nu (A \cap \Delta_n) + \frac{\epsilon}{2} \\ &=& \int_{A \cap \Delta_n} \phi d \mu + \frac{\epsilon}{2} \\ &<& \int_{C_k} \phi d \mu + \frac{\epsilon}{2} + \frac{\epsilon}{2} \\ &=& \nu C_k + \epsilon \end{eqnarray} Hence $\nu A = \sup \{ \nu C | C \subset A, C \text{ compact} \}$. $\nu$ is bounded by $\nu X = \|\phi\|_1$, hence is locally finite, and so $\nu$ is a Radon measure.

If you want to get outer regularity, let $A$ be a Borel set, and let $C_k \subset A^c$ be a sequence of compact sets such that $\nu C_k \to \nu A^c$. Now let $U_k = C_k^c$. Then $U_k$ is open and $A \subset U_k$. Since $\nu$ is finite, we have $\nu X = \nu A + \nu A^c = \nu U_k + \nu C_k$. It follows that $\nu U_k \to \nu A$. It follows that $\nu A = \inf \{ \nu U | A \subset U, U \text{ open} \}$, hence $\nu$ is outer regular.

  • $\begingroup$ That settles the problem with inner regularity right? I'm still unsure about outer regularity. $\endgroup$ – cyc Apr 13 '13 at 21:37
  • $\begingroup$ To be more precise, I want to arrive at $\nu(E)=\inf\{\nu(U):E\subset U,U\;\text{open}\}$ for all Borel sets $E$, and $\nu(V)=\sup\{\nu(K):K\subset V,K\;\text{compact}\}$ for all open sets $V$. I can see that any set $E$ can be partitioned into two parts by $N=\phi^{-1}\{0\}$. One part is $\sigma$-finite which respect to $\mu$ and the other is $\nu$-null. For outer regularity, I can probably find an open set approximating the $\sigma$-finite part, but I need an open set that contains the whole of $E$ and that's bothering me. $\endgroup$ – cyc Apr 14 '13 at 1:02
  • $\begingroup$ @learner: I added something about outer regular to the answer. $\endgroup$ – copper.hat Apr 14 '13 at 2:14
  • $\begingroup$ What downvote? Did something happen that I'm not aware of? $\endgroup$ – cyc Jul 2 '14 at 6:19
  • $\begingroup$ @learner: I got a downvote about 6 hours ago. I don't care about the downvote other than understanding what was wrong. It is not particularly helpful if the downvoter doesn't indicate why. $\endgroup$ – copper.hat Jul 2 '14 at 6:32

Suppose $\{E_n : n \geq 1\}$ is a maximal family of pairwise disjoint positive measure compact subsets of $X$. Then $Y = X \backslash \bigcup \{E_n : n \geq 1\}$ must be $\mu$-null otherwise we can add a positive measure compact subset of $Y$ to our family. Doesn't this show that $\mu$ must be sigma finite?

Edit: This is flawed in that such a maximal family may be uncountable.

  • $\begingroup$ I'm not sure I fully understand. How do you get this maximal family? $\endgroup$ – cyc Apr 13 '13 at 18:44
  • $\begingroup$ Consider the collection of all families of pairwise disjoint compact subsets of X of positive measure. This collection is clearly closed under increasing unions hence we can apply Zorn's lemma. Oh I see the problem, it maybe possible that this maximal family is uncountable - Bizarre! $\endgroup$ – hot_queen Apr 13 '13 at 18:51

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.