One of the questions on a past final for a measure theory course I'm taking is "Let X be a set. How many $\sigma$-algebras of subsets of X contain exactly $5$ elements?". Would the answer to this question just be $infinity$ since we don't have any information about the set X? Apologies if this question may seem obvious but I find measure theory extremely difficult to wrap my head around.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Can you come up with an example of a set $X$ and a $\sigma$-algebra on $X$ that has 5 elements? $\endgroup$ – Alonso Delfín Jul 31 '20 at 22:57
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ By any chance is it impossible to have a $\sigma$-algebra on X with 5 elements since we must always have a set and its compliment in that $\sigma$-algebra which would thus mean there is always an even number of elements? If I'm way off I apologize! $\endgroup$ – Jack Jul 31 '20 at 23:03
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Yes! In general, it can be shown that any $\sigma$-algebra with a finite number of elements must have $2^n$ elements for some $n$. If you are interested, I can add a sketch of a proof for this fact as an answer. $\endgroup$ – Alonso Delfín Jul 31 '20 at 23:05
  • $\begingroup$ @AlonsoDelfín There is one, here: math.stackexchange.com/questions/181555/… $\endgroup$ – uniquesolution Jul 31 '20 at 23:07
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Thank you so much for your help! A sketch would be amazing, thank you. $\endgroup$ – Jack Jul 31 '20 at 23:07

The answer is none.

The reason is the following theorem:

Theorem. If $\mathcal{F}$ is a $\sigma$-algebra on $X$ that has a finite number of elements, then $\mathrm{card}(X)=2^n$ for some $n$.

I'll give a sketch of a proof and I'll leave it to you to fill in all the missing details.

Sketch of proof. Assume w.l.o.g. that $X \neq \varnothing$. For each $x \in X$ let $$ \mathcal{F}_x:=\{ E \in \mathcal{F} : x \in E\} $$ Clearly each $\mathcal{F}_x \neq \varnothing$. We say $x \sim y$ in $X$ if $\mathcal{F}_x = \mathcal{F}_y$. This gives an equivalence relation on $X$. Some useful facts that you can check are:

  • that the equivalence classes are actually given by $$ [x]=\bigcap_{E \in \mathcal{F}_x}E \in \mathcal{F} $$
  • that for each $E \in \mathcal{F}$ $$ E=\bigsqcup_{x \in E} [x] $$ where $\bigsqcup_{x \in E}$ means that the union is disjoint (i.e. if $x, y \in E$ are such that $x \neq y$, then $[x] \neq [y]$).

Let $\mathscr{A}$ be the set whose elements are distinct equivalence classes of $\sim$ and put $n := \mathrm{card}(\mathscr{A})$. If you want a clear picture, this means that after selecting $n$ representatives you have $$ \mathscr{A}=\{[x_1], \ldots, [x_n]\} $$ Let $\mathcal{P}(\mathscr{A})$ be the power set of $\mathscr{A}$. From basic set theory we know that $\mathrm{card}(\mathcal{P}(\mathscr{A}))=2^n$. Finally, define a map $\varphi: \mathcal{P}(\mathscr{A}) \to \mathcal{F}$ by letting $$ \varphi(\mathscr{B}):= \bigsqcup_{[x] \in \mathscr{B}} [x] $$ for any $\mathscr{B} \subseteq \mathscr{A}$ with $\mathscr{B}\neq \varnothing$ and $\varphi(\varnothing):=\varnothing$. It is not hard at this point to check that $\varphi$ is a bijection and therefore that $\mathrm{card}(\mathcal{F})=2^n$. $\blacksquare$


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.