4
$\begingroup$

In Rudin's Real and Complex Analysis (page 19, definition 1.23) we take a measurable function $f:X\rightarrow [0,\infty]$ in which $(X,\mathcal M,\mu)$ is a measure space with $\sigma-$algebra $\mathcal M$ and measure $\mu$. We define the integral of this function over $E\in \mathcal M$ to be: $$\int_E f\text{ }d\mu=\sup\int_E s\text{ }d\mu \tag{1},$$ in which $s$ is a simple function, $s:X\rightarrow [0,\infty)$, defined as: $$s(x)=\sum_{i=1}^n \alpha_i\chi_{A_i}, \tag{2}$$ in which $\chi_{A_i}(x)$ is the characteristic function on $X$. Rudin states that the supremum in $(1)$ is being taken over all simple measurable functions such that $0 \leq s\leq f$, I do not know what this means. Is this a pointwise comparison of the functions between $0$ and $f$?

Standard mandatory disclaimer: I am a physicist not a mathematician.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ Yes. In other words, it is a supremum over all functions $s$ such that $s$ and $f-s$ are non-negative functions. $\endgroup$
    – popoolmica
    Commented Nov 8, 2020 at 17:39
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @popoolmica So when we integrate any function $f$ we are sort of approximating it as a (generally large) simple function? $\endgroup$
    – Charlie
    Commented Nov 8, 2020 at 17:40
  • $\begingroup$ I'm not sure why you say generally large. However, yes, you consider all simple functions which are smaller than $f$. That is the right definition since, it turns out, to get closer and closer to the supremum, you have to pick $s$ to approximate $f$ better and better. This is at least how I think of this mechanism. $\endgroup$
    – popoolmica
    Commented Nov 8, 2020 at 17:46
  • $\begingroup$ @popoolmica I see, thanks for your help! $\endgroup$
    – Charlie
    Commented Nov 8, 2020 at 17:47

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

Break it into pieces:

$1). S$ is the collection of simple functions such that $s(x)\le f(x)$ for all $x\in X$.

$2).\ I:= \{\int_X s:s\in S\}$ is a set of numbers, with each $\int_X s$ defined as in your question.

$3).\ $ Since $I$ is a set of numbers, we can take $\sup I=\sup\{\int_Xs:s\in S\}.$ The result is a number in the extended reals, and this is the integral of $f$ by definition.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ So we take the function $f$ on $X$ and "approximate" it as simple functions acting on the measurable sets in $X$, then integrate those "approximations" and take the largest result to be the integral of $f$? $\endgroup$
    – Charlie
    Commented Nov 8, 2020 at 17:46
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Charlie Yes, exactly. It might help to actually do the calculation for an easy function like $y=x^2$ and with the simple functions defined for example, in baby Rudin. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 8, 2020 at 17:53
  • $\begingroup$ Great! Thanks for the answer, this is much clearer now :) $\endgroup$
    – Charlie
    Commented Nov 8, 2020 at 17:55
  • $\begingroup$ You are welcome. Glad to help. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 8, 2020 at 23:48

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .