|
|
Line 9: |
Line 9: |
| == Proof == | | == Proof == |
|
| |
|
| First, observe that <math>\mathcal{M}</math> is closed under complements due to symmetry in the meaning of <math> \mu </math>-measurability. Now, we show if <math> A, B </math> then <math> A \cup B \in \mathcal{M} </math>. | | First, observe that <math>\mathcal{M}</math> is closed under complements due to symmetry in the meaning of <math> \mu </math>-measurability. Now, we show if <math> A, B </math> then <math> A \cup B \in \mathcal{M} </math><ref name="Folland">Gerald B. Folland, ''Real Analysis: Modern Techniques and Their Applications, second edition'', §2.2 </ref>. |
|
| |
|
| Suppose <math>E \subseteq X </math>. Then | | Suppose <math>E \subseteq X </math>. Then |
Statement
Consider an out measure on . Define
.
Then is a -algebra and is a measure on .
Proof
First, observe that is closed under complements due to symmetry in the meaning of -measurability. Now, we show if then [1].
Suppose . Then
and by subadditivity
But certainly, since the inequality in the other direction also holds, and we conclude
hence and we have is an algebra.
Now, suppose and are disjoint. Then
so is finitely additive.
Next, we show is closed under countable disjoint unions. Given a disjoint sequence of sets , for all , by countable subadditivity,
It remains to show the other inequality direction. Since is closed under finite unions, . By using the definition of -measurability,
and by monotonicity,
Since this holds for all ,
which proves
Similarly as before, the other inequality direction is proved by monotonicity, so we conclude equality and we have that .
The only thing that remains to be shown is closure under countable unions. Consider a sequence of sets not necessarily disjoint. Define
Their unions are equal and is disjoint, hence contained in .
This finishes all parts to the proof.
- ↑ Gerald B. Folland, Real Analysis: Modern Techniques and Their Applications, second edition, §2.2