introduction to measure theory and lebesgue integration

1

INTRODUCTION TO MEASURE THEORY AND LEBESGUE INTEGRATION

Eduard EMELYANOV

Ankara — TURKEY 2007

2

FOREWORD

This book grew out of a one-semester course for graduate students that the author have taught at the Middle East Technical University of Ankara in 200406. It is devoted mainly to the measure theory and integration. They form the base for many areas of mathematics, for instance, the probability theory, and at least the large part of the base of the functional analysis, and operator theory. Under measure we understand a σ-additive function with values in R+ ∪ {∞} defined on a σ-algebra. We give the extension of this basic notion to σ-additive vector-valued measures, in particular, to signed and complex measures and refer for more delicate topics of the theory of vector-valued measures to the excellent book of Diestel and Uhl [3]. The σ-additivity plays a crucial role in our book. We do not discuss here the theory of finitely-additive functions defined on algebras of sets which are sometimes referred as finitely-additive measures. There are two key points in the measure theory. The Caratheodory extension theorem and construction of the Lebesgue integral. Other results are more or less technical. Nevertheless, we can also emphasize the importance of the Jordan decomposition of signed measure, theorems about convergence for Lebesgue integral, Cantor sets, the Radon – Nikodym theorem, the theory of Lp -spaces, the Liapounoff convexity theorem, and the Riesz representation theorem. We provide with proofs only basic results, and leave the proofs of the others to the reader, who can also find them in many standard graduate books on the measure theory like [1], [4], and [5]. Exercises play an important role in this book. We expect that a potential reader will try to solve at least half of them. Exercises marked with ∗ are more difficult, and sometimes are too difficult for the first reading. In the case if someone will use this book as a basic text-book for the analysis graduate course, the author recommends to study subsections marked with ◦ , omitting the material of subsections marked with ! . I am indebted to many. I thank Professor Safak Alpay for reading the manuscript and offering many valuable suggestions. I thank to our students of 2004-2006 METU graduate real analysis classes, especially Tolga Karayayla, who made many corrections. Finally, I thank to my wife Svetlana Gorokhova for helping in preparing of the manuscript.

3 Contents Introduction Chapter 1 1.1. σ-Algebras, Measurable Functions, Measures, the Egoroff Theorem, Exhaustion Argument 1.2. Vector-valued, Signed and Complex Measures, Variation of a Vector-valued Measure, Operations with Measures, the Jordan Decomposition Theorem, Banach Space of Signed Measures of Bounded Variation 1.3. Construction of the Lebesgue Integral, the Monotone Convergence Theorem, the Dominated Convergence Theorem, Chapter 2 2.1. The Caratheodory Theorem, Lebesgue Measure on R, Lebesgue – Stieltjes Measures, the Product of Measure Spaces, the Fubini Theorem 2.2. Lebesgue Measure on Rn , Lebesgue Integral in Rn , the Lusin Theorem, Cantor Sets Chapter 3 3.1. The Radon – Nikodym Theorem, Continuity of a Measure with Respect to another Measure, the Hahn Decomposition Theorem 3.2.

Hölder’s and Minkowski’s Inequalities, Completeness, Lp -Spaces, Duals

3.3.

The Liapounoff Convexity Theorem

Chapter 4 4.1.

Vector Spaces of Functions on Rn , Convolutions

4.2.

Radon Measures, the Riesz Representation Theorem

Bibliography Index

4

Chapter 1 1.1

σ-Algebras, Measurable Functions, Measures

Here we define the notion of σ-algebra which plays the key role in the measure theory. We study basic properties of σ-algebras and measurable functions. In the end of this section we define and study the notion of measure. 1.1.1.◦ σ-Algebras. theory.

The following notion is the principal in the measure

Definition 1.1.1 A collection A of subsets of a set X is called a σ-algebra if (a) X ∈ A; (b) if A ∈ A then X \ A ∈ A; S (c) given a sequence (Ak )k ⊆ A, we have Ak ∈ A. k

It follows from this definition that the empty set ∅ belongs to A since X ∈ A and ∅ = X \ X. Further, given a sequence (Ak )k ⊆ A, we have \ [ Ak = X \ (X \ Ak ) ∈ A. k

k

Finally, the difference A \ B := A ∩ (X \ B) and the symmetric difference A4B := (A \ B) ∪ (B \ A) both belong to A. Any σ-algebra of subsets of a set X has at least two elements: ∅ and X itself. One of the main and mostly obvious examples of a σ-algebra is P(X) is the set of all subsets of X. The following simple proposition shows us how to construct new σ-algebras from a given family of σ-algebras. 5

6

CHAPTER 1.

Proposition 1.1.1 Let {Ωα }α∈A be a nonempty family of σ-algebras in P(X), then Ω = ∩α Ωα is also a σ-algebra. 2 This proposition leads to the following definition. Definition 1.1.2 Let G ⊆ P(X), then the set of all σ-algebras containing G is nonempty since it contains P(X). Hence we may talk about the minimal σalgebra containing G. This σ-algebra is called the σ-algebra generated by G. An important special case of this notion is the following. Definition 1.1.3 Let X be a topological space and let G be the family of all open subsets of X. The σ-algebra generated by G is called the Borel algebra of X and denoted by B(X). 1.1.2.◦ Measurable functions. Let f be a real-valued function defined on a set X. We suppose that some σ-algebra Ω ⊆ P(X) is fixed. Definition 1.1.4 We say that f is measurable, if f −1 ([a, b]) ∈ Ω for any reals a < b. The following three propositions are obvious. Proposition 1.1.2 Let f : X → R be a function. Then the following conditions are equivalent: (a)

f is measurable;

(b)

f −1 ([0, b)) ∈ Ω for any real b;

(c)

f −1 ((b, ∞)) ∈ Ω for any real b;

(d)

f −1 (B) ∈ Ω for any B ∈ B(R). 2

Proposition 1.1.3 Let f and g be measurable functions, then (a)

α · f + β · g is measurable for any α, β ∈ R;

(b)

functions max{f, g} and f · g are measurable.

In particular, functions f + := max{f, 0}, f − := (−f )+ , and |f | := f + + f − are measurable. 2

1.1. σ-ALGEBRAS, MEASURABLE FUNCTIONS, MEASURES 7 Proposition 1.1.4 Let (fn )∞ n=1 be a sequence of measurable functions, then lim sup fn and lim inf fn n→∞

n→∞

are measurable. 2 1.1.3.◦ Measures.

The main definition here is the following.

Definition 1.1.5 Let A be a σ-algebra. A function µ : A → R ∪ {∞} is called a measure, if: (a)

µ(∅) = 0;

µ(A) ≥ 0 for all A ∈ A; and S P (c) µ( k Ak ) = k µ(Ak ) for any sequence (Ak )k of pairwise disjoint sets from A, that is Ai ∩ Aj = ∅ for i 6= j. (b)

The axiom (c) is called σ-additivity of the measure µ. As usual, we will also assume that any measure under consideration satisfies the following axiom: (d) for any subset A ∈ A with µ(A) = ∞, there exists B ∈ A such that B ⊆ A and 0 < µ(B) < ∞. This axiom allows to avoid a pathological case that for some A, with µ(A) = 0 it holds either µ(B) = 0 or µ(B) = ∞ for any B ⊆ A, B ∈ A. We will use often the following simple proposition, the proof of which is left to the reader. Proposition 1.1.5 Let µ be a measure on a σ-algebra A, An ∈ A, and An → A. Then A ∈ A and µ(A) = lim µ(An ). In particular, if (Bn )∞ n=1 is a decreasing n→∞ T∞ sequence of elements of A such that n=1 Bn = ∅, then µ(Bn ) → 0. 2 1.1.4.◦ Measure spaces. a measure.

We consider a fixed but arbitrary σ-algebra with

Definition 1.1.6 If A is a σ-algebra of subsets of X and µ is a measure on A, then the triple (X, A, µ) is called a measure space. The sets belonging to A are called measurable sets because the measure is defined for them.

8

CHAPTER 1.

Now we present several examples of measure spaces. Example 1.1.1 Let X = {x1 , . . . , xN } be a finite set, A be the σ-algebra of all subsets of X and a measure is defined by setting to each xi ∈ X a nonnegative number, say pi . This follows that the measure of a subset {xα1 , . . . , xαk } ⊆ X is just pα1 + · · · + pαk . If pi = 1 for all i, then the measure is called a counting measure because it counts the number of elements in a set. Example 1.1.2 If X is a topological space, then the most natural σ-algebra of subsets of X is the Borel algebra B(X). Any measure defined on a Borel algebra is called Borel measure. In Section 2.1, we will prove that on the Borel σalgebra B(R) there exists a unique measure such that µ([a, b]) = b − a for any interval [a, b] ⊆ R. Whenever we consider spaces X = [a, b], X = R, or X = Rn , we usually assume that the measure under consideration is the Borel measure. As presented in Definition 1.1.6, the notion of measure space is extremely general. In almost all applications, the following specific class of measure spaces is adequate. Definition 1.1.7 A measure space (X, A, µ) is called σ-finite if there is a sequence (Ak )∞ k=1 , Ak ∈ A, satisfying X=

∞ [

Ak

and

µ(Ak ) < ∞ for

all

k.

k=1

Obviously, any σ-finite measure satisfies the axiom (d). Moreover, a measure µ ∞ is σ-finite iff (= if and only if) there exists S∞an increasing sequence (Xn )n=1 of subsets of finite measure such that X = n=1 Xn . If X = R, then Ak may be chosen as intervals [−k, k]. In Rd , they may be chosen as balls of radius k, etc. Definition 1.1.8 A measure space (X, A, µ) is called finite if µ(X) < ∞. In particular, if µ(X) = 1, then the measure space is said to be probabilistic, and µ is said to be a probability. A measure µ is called separable if there exists a countable family R ⊆ A such that for any A ∈ A, µ(A) < ∞, and for any ε > 0 there exists B ∈ R satisfying µ(A4B) < ε. A measure µ is called complete if there holds: [ µ(A) = 0 & B ⊆ A ] ⇒ B ∈ A .

1.1. σ-ALGEBRAS, MEASURABLE FUNCTIONS, MEASURES 9 Every Borel measure on R (or on [0, 1], or on Rn , etc.) possesses a unique completion, which is called a Lebesgue measure. 1.1.5.◦ Convergence of functions and the Egoroff theorem. For measurable functions, there are several natural types of convergence. Some of them are given by the following definition. Definition 1.1.9 Let (fn )∞ n=1 be a sequence of R-valued functions defined on X. We say that: (a)

fn → f pointwise, if fn (x) → f (x) for all x ∈ X;

(b) fn → f almost everywhere (a.e.), if fn (x) → f (x) for all x ∈ X except a set of measure 0; (c)

fn → f uniformly, if for any ε > 0 there is n(ε) such that sup{|fn (x) − f (x)| : x ∈ X} ≤ ε

for all n ≥ n(ε). Theorem 1.1.1 (Egoroff ’s theorem) Suppose that µ(X) < ∞, {fn }∞ n=1 and f are measurable functions on X such that fn → f a.e. Then, for every ε > 0, there exists E ⊆ X such that µ(E) < ε and fn → f uniformly on E c = X \ E. Proof: Without loss of generality, we may assume that fn → f everywhere on X and (by replacing fn with fn − f ) that f ≡ 0. For k, n ∈ N, let En (k) :=

∞ [

{x : |fm (x)| ≥ k −1 }.

m=n

T Then, for a fixed k, En (k) decreases as n increases, and ∞ n=1 En (k) = ∅. Since µ(X) < ∞, we conclude that µ(En (k)) → 0 as n → ∞. Given ε > 0 and k ∈ N, choose nk such that µ(Enk (k)) < ε · 2−k , and set E :=

∞ [ k=1

Enk (k).

10

CHAPTER 1.

Then µ(E) < ε, and we have |fn (x)| < k −1

(∀n > nk , x 6∈ E).

Thus fn → 0 uniformly on X \ E. 2 1.1.6.◦ Exhaustion argument. Let (X, Σ, µ) be a σ-finite measure space. Given a sequence (Un )∞ n=1 ⊆ Σ, a set A ∈ Σ is called (Un )n -bounded if there exists n such that A ⊆ Un µ-almost everywhere. Theorem 1.1.2 (Exhaustion theorem) Let (Yn )∞ n=1 ⊆ Σ be a sequence satisfying Yn ↑ X and µ(Yn ) < ∞ for all n. Let P be some property of (Yn )n -bounded measurable sets, such that A ∈ P iff B ∈ P for all B, µ(A4B) = 0. Suppose that any (Yn )n -bounded set A, µ(A) > 0, has a subset B ∈ Σ, µ(B) > 0 with the property P. Moreover, assume that either (a) A1 ∪ A2 ∈ P for every A1 , A2 ∈ P, or (b) ∪n Bn ∈ P for every at most countable family (Bn )n of pairwise disjoint sets possessing the property P. Then there exists a sequence (Xn )∞ n=1 ⊆ Σ such that Xn ↑ X, and P 3 Xn ⊆ Yn for all n. Moreover, there exists a pairwise disjoint sequence (An )∞ n=1 ⊆ Σ such ∞ S that An = X and An ∈ P for all n. n=1

Proof:

Let A be a (Yn )n -bounded set with µ(A) > 0. Denote PA := {B ∈ P : B ⊆ A} & m(A) := sup{µ(B) : B ∈ PA } .

I(a) Suppose P satisfies (a). Then there exists a sequence (Fn )∞ n=1 ⊆ PA such that m(A) = lim µ(Fn ), We may assume, that Fn ↑ . By Proposition 1.1.5, the n→∞

set F = ∪∞ n=1 Fn satisfies µ(F ) = m(A). We show that µ(A) = m(A). If not then µ(A \ F ) > 0. The set A \ F has a subset of positive measure F0 ∈ P. Then Fn ∪ F0 ∈ PA and µ(Fn ∪ F0 ) > m(A) for a sufficiently large n, which contradicts to the definition of m(A). Therefore, µ(A) = m(A). Now we apply this for A = Yn . Thus, there exists a sequence (Xn0 )n ⊆ Σ such that Xn0 ⊆ Yn , Xn0 ∈ P, and µ(Yn \ Xn0 ) < n−1 for all n. By (a), we may assume 0 0 0 0 −1 that Xn0 ↑. The set X00 = ∪∞ n=1 Xn satisfies Yn \X0 ⊆ Yn \Xn , so µ(Yn \X0 ) < n

1.1. σ-ALGEBRAS, MEASURABLE FUNCTIONS, MEASURES 11 0 0 for all n. Then µ(Yn \ X00 ) = 0, and µ((∪∞ n=1 Yn ) \ X0 ) = 0, or µ(X \ X0 ) = 0. Let 0 0 Xn := (Xn ∪(X \X0 ))∩Yn , then the sequence (Xn )n has the required properties.

The desired pairwise disjoint sequence (An )∞ n=1 is given recurrently by A1 = X1 and Ak+1 = Xk+1 \ ∪ki=1 Ai . I(b) Suppose P satisfies (b). Let FA be the family of all pairwise disjoint families of elements of PA of nonzero measure. Then FA is ordered by inclusion and, obviously, satisfies the conditions of the Zorn lemma. Therefore, we have a maximal element in FA , say ∆. Then ∆ is at most countable family, say ∆ = {Dn }n . By (b), its union D := ∪n Dn is an element of PA as well. If D is a proper subset of A, then µ(A \ D) > 0. The set A \ D has a subset F ∈ P of the positive measure. Then ∆1 := ∆ ∪ {F } is an element of FA which is strictly greater then ∆. The obtained contradiction, shows that A ∈ P for every (Yn )n -bounded set A. So, we may take Xn := Yn for each n. m Now we apply this for A = Zm := Ym \ ∪m−1 k=1 Yk . Let Zm = ∪n Dn be a pairwise disjoint union, where Dnm ∈ P for all n, m. The family {Dnm }n,m is an at most countable disjoint decomposition of X, say {Dnm }n,m = (An )∞ n=1 . The sequence ∞ (An )n=1 satisfies the required properties. 2

1.1.7.◦ Exercises to Section 1.1. Exercise 1.1.1 Prove that the cardinality of any σ-algebra is either finite or uncountable. Exercise 1.1.2 Let f and g be measurable R-valued functions. Show that f · g is measurable. Exercise 1.1.3 For each X ⊆ N and for each k ∈ N define: nkX := card(X ∩ {1, ..., k}) . Let A be a family of all X ⊆ N such that the number µ(X) = lim k −1 nkX exists. Is A a k→∞

σ-algebra? Is µ a measure on A? Exercise 1.1.4 Prove Proposition 1.1.5. Exercise 1.1.5

∗

Let (Ω, Σ, µ) be a measure space. Show that the set R(µ) := {µ(E) : E ∈ Σ}

is, in general, neither closed nor convex in R ∪ {∞}. Is R(µ) closed if, additionally, µ is finite or non-atomic (see Exercise 1.1.9 for the definition)?

12

CHAPTER 1.

Exercise 1.1.6 Show that each separable measure which satisfies Axiom 1.1.3 d) is σ-finite. Exercise 1.1.7 ∗ Give an example of a family (Ωα )α∈[0,2π] of σ-subalgebras of the Borel algebra B([0, 1]2 ) such that for any α, β ∈ [0, 2π], α 6= β: Ωα ∩ Ωβ = {∅, [0, 1]2 } and (∀α)[α ∈ [0, π]](∀a)[0 ≤ a ≤ 1](∃B ∈ Ωα )[µ(B) = a]. 2 Exercise 1.1.8 ∗∗ Construct a sequence (Σn )∞ n=1 of σ-subalgebras of the Borel algebra B([0, 1] ) such that, for any n < m, Σm ⊆ Σn & Σn 6= Σm

and (∀n)(∀a)[0 ≤ a ≤ 1](∃B ∈ Σn )[µ(B) = a]. Exercise 1.1.9 ∗∗ Let (Ω, Σ, µ) be a measure space equipped with a probabilistic measure µ such that µ has no atom (non-atomic measure), i.e., for any A ∈ Σ, µ(A) > 0 implies that there exists A0 ⊆ A such that 0 < µ(A0 ) < µ(A). (a) Show that, for any 0 ≤ α ≤ 1, there exists B ∈ Σ such that µ(B) = α. (b) Give an example of a measure ν on (N, P(N)) such that ν(N) = 1 and, for any 0 ≤ α ≤ 1, there exists B ∈ P(N) such that µ(B) = α. Exercise 1.1.10 (TheP Borel – Cantelli lemma) Let (X, Σ, µ) be a measure space. Show ∞ that if {An }n ⊆ Σ and n=1 µ(An ) < ∞ then µ(lim sup An ) = 0. n→∞

Exercise 1.1.11 Show that Egoroff ’s theorem may fail if µ(X) = ∞. Exercise 1.1.12 ∗∗∗ Let (X, Ω, µ) be a measure space and µ(X) < ∞. Say that A ∼ B if µ(A4B) = 0. (a) Show that ∼ is an equivalence relation on Ω; (b) Show that the function ρ : (Ω/ ∼)2 → R: ρ([A], [B]) := µ(A4B), is a metric, and (Ω/ ∼, ρ) is a complete metric space. Exercise 1.1.13 ∗∗∗ Let (Ω/ ∼, ρ) be the metric space from Exercise 1.1.12. (a) Show that (Ω/ ∼, ρ) is compact, if (X, Ω, µ) is a purely atomic measure space. (b) Show that (Ω/ ∼, ρ) is not compact, if (X, Ω, µ) is not purely atomic. Here, the measure space (X, Ω, µ) is called purely atomic if for P any A ∈ Ω, µ(A) < ∞, there exists a sequence (an )∞ of elements of A such that µ(A) = n=1 n µ({an }). Exercise 1.1.14

∗

Show that in Proposition 1.1.4 pointwise limits lim sup fn and lim inf fn n→∞

may be replaced by a.e.-limits lim sup fn and lim inf fn . n→∞

n→∞

n→∞

1.2. VECTOR-VALUED MEASURES

1.2

13

Vector-valued Measures

In this section, we extend the notion of a measure. Then we study the basic operations with signed measures and present the Jordan decomposition theorem. We refer for further delicate results about vector-valued measures to [3] and about spaces of signed measures to [7] and [12]. 1.2.1.◦ Vector-valued, signed and complex measures. Let Σ be a σ-algebra of subsets of a set X, and let E = (E, k · k) be a Banach space. Definition 1.2.1 A function µ : Σ → E ∪ {∞} is called a vector-valued measure (or E-valued measure) if (a) µ(∅) S = 0; P (b) µ( k Ak ) = k µ(Ak ) for any pairwise disjoint sequence (Ak )k ⊆ Σ; (c) for any A ∈ Σ, µ(A) = ∞, there exists B ∈ Σ such that B ⊆ A and 0 < kµ(B)k < ∞. Example 1.2.1 Take Σ = P(N), and c0 is the Banach space of all convergent C-valued sequences with a fixed element (αn )n ∈ c0 . Define for any A ⊆ N: ψ(A) := (βn )n , where βn = αn if n ∈ A and βn = 0 if n 6∈ A. Then ψ is a c0 -valued measure on P(N). Example 1.2.2 Let X be a set and let Ω be a σ-algebra in P(X). Then for any m family {µk }m k=1 of finite measures on Ω and for any family {wk }k=1 of vectors of Rn , the Rn -valued measure Ψ on Ω is defined by the formula Ψ(E) :=

m X

µk (E) · wk

(E ∈ Ω).

k=1

Example 1.2.3 Let X be a set and let Ω be a σ-algebra in P(X). Then for m any family {µk }m k=1 of finite measures on Ω, for any family {Ak }k=1 of pairwise n n disjoint sets in Ω, and for any family {wk }m k=1 of vectors of R , the R -valued measure Φ on Ω is defined by the formula Φ(E) :=

m X k=1

µk (E ∩ Ak ) · wk

(E ∈ Ω).

14

CHAPTER 1.

From Definition 1.2.1, it is quite easy to see (and we leave this as an exercise to the reader) that if µ is an E-valued measure, then for two linearly independent vectors x, y ∈ E, kxk = kyk = 1, it is impossible to find sequences (An )∞ n=1 and ∞ (Bn )n=1 of elements of Σ such that µ(An ) = x , and kµ(Bn )k → ∞ , n→∞ kµ(An )k

kµ(An )k → ∞ , lim

µ(An ) = y. n→∞ kµ(Bn )k lim

This can be expressed as: any vector-valued measure cannot be infinite in two different directions. The next two definitions are special cases of Definition 1.2.1. Definition S 1.2.2 A function µ : Σ → R ∪ {∞} is called a signed measure if P µ(∅) = 0, µ( k Ak ) = k µ(Ak ) for any sequence (Ak )k of pairwise disjoint sets from Σ, and, for any A ∈ Σ, µ(A) = ∞, there exists B ∈ Σ such that B ⊆ A and 0 < |µ(B)| < ∞. Definition 1.2.3 P µ : Σ → C ∪ {∞} is called a complex measure S A function if µ(∅) = 0, µ( k Ak ) = k µ(Ak ) for any sequence (Ak )k of pairwise disjoint sets from Σ, and, for any A ∈ Σ, µ(A) = ∞, there exists B ∈ Σ such that B ⊆ A and 0 < |µ(B)| < ∞. There are many interesting classes of vector-valued measures. In this book we consider only a few of them, in particular, the classes given by the following definition. Definition 1.2.4 An E-valued measure µ is called finite if µ(A) ∈ E for every measurable A. An E-valued measure µ is called σ-finite if there is a sequence ∞ S Ak and µ|Ak is finite measure for all k ∈ N. (Ak )k , Ak ∈ Σ, satisfying X = k=1

An E-valued measure µ is called separable if there exists a countable family R ⊆ Σ such that, for any A ∈ Σ of a finite measure and for any ε > 0, there exists B ∈ R satisfying kµ(A4B)k < ε. The definitions of σ-finite, finite, and separable signed or complex measure are obvious.


15

1.2.2.◦ The variation of a vector-valued measure. Now we show how in the natural way construct a new measure from a given vector-valued measure. Let µ be a E-valued measure on (X, Σ). We define a function |µ| : Σ → R+ ∪ {∞} by the following formula: |µ|(A) := sup{

n=j X

n=j

kµ(An )k : An ∈ Σ,

[

An = A, Ak ∩ Ap = ∅ if k 6= p}.

n=1

n=1

(1.2.1) This function is called the variation of µ. It is an exercise for the reader to show that |µ| is additive and therefore monotone. Theorem 1.2.1 Let µ be an E-valued measure on (X, Σ). Then |µ| is a measure. Proof: Suppose that µ is an E-valued measure. We have to show only the σ-additivity of the function |µ| : Σ → R+ ∪ {∞}. S Let (An )∞ n=1 be a pairwise disjoint sequence of elements of Σ and A := n An . If |µ|(A) = ∞, then there is nothing to proof. So we may assume that |µ|(A) < ∞. Let π be a finite partition of A into pairwise disjoint members of Σ. Then X X X X kµ(E)k = kµ(E ∩ A)k = k µ(E ∩ An )k ≤ E∈π

E∈π

XX E∈π

E∈π

kµ(E ∩ An )k =

n

XX n

n

kµ(E ∩ An )k ≤

X n

E∈π

Since it holds for any partition π, we obtain the inequality X [ |µ|(An ). |µ|( An ) ≤ n

n

Since |µ| is additive and monotone, then for each n: i=n X i=1

|µ|(Ai ) = |µ|(

n [

i=1

|µ|(An ).

[ Ai ) ≤ |µ|( An ), n

(1.2.2)

16

CHAPTER 1.

and by taking the limit: ∞ X

[ |µ|(Ai ) ≤ |µ|( An ).

(1.2.3)

n

i=1

Combining (1.2.2) and (1.2.3) give us σ-additivity of |µ|. 2 It is also easy to see that µ is a σ-finite or finite E-valued measure iff |µ| is. Definition 1.2.5 An E-valued measure µ is called a vector-valued measure of bounded variation if |µ| is finite. The vector-valued measure constructed in Example 1.2.1 is of bounded variation if αn = 2−n ; and, of unbounded variation if αn = 1/n. 1.2.3.◦ Operations with vector-valued measures. Let Σ be a σ-algebra of subsets of a non-empty set X and let E be a Banach space. The set Mb = MbE (X, Σ) of all E-valued measures of bounded variation on Σ is a vector space with respect to the natural operations of addition and scalar multiplication, i.e., (µ1 + µ2 )(A) = µ1 (A) + µ2 (A),

(αµ)(A) = αµ(A)

(1.2.4)

for every A ∈ Σ. Theorem 1.2.2 Mb is a Banach space with respect to the norm k · kb : kµkb := |µ|(X) (∀µ ∈ Mb ) which is called the total variation of a measure µ. Proof: By (1.2.1) and (1.2.4), the map k · kb : Mb → R+ satisfies all axioms of norm. To show that Mb is complete under the norm k · kb , it is enough to show that if ∞ X kµn kb < ∞ (1.2.5) n=1

for some sequence

(µn )∞ n=1

of E-valued measures, then µ :=

∞ X n=1

µn ∈ Mb .

(1.2.6)

1.2. VECTOR-VALUED MEASURES For any A ∈ Σ, the series

∞ X

17

µn (A)

n=1

is convergent in E, because E is a Banach space, and there hold (1.2.5) and kµn (A)k ≤ kµn kb (∀n). So µ in (1.2.6) is well defined. We leave to the reader to show that µ ∈ Mb as an exercise. 2 In general, if µ1 and µ2 are not finite E-valued measures, the formula (1.2.4) does not define the sum of them. Thus, in general, the set of all E-valued measures is not a vector space. Now we are going to study the important case of finite signed measures. Let Mb be the Banach space of all finite signed measures on (X, Σ). First, we define a partial ordering in Mb saying that µ1 ≤ µ2 whenever µ1 (A) ≤ µ2 (A) (∀A ∈ Σ),

(1.2.7)

then Mb becomes a partially ordered vector space. We show that Mb is a vector lattice, which means, by the definition, that for every µ, ν ∈ Mb there exists sup{µ, ν} ∈ Mb . For this purpose, we denote for µ ∈ Mb the number kµk := sup{|µ(A)| : A ∈ Σ}. From |(µ1 + µ2 )(A)| ≤ |µ1 (A)| + |µ2 (A)| ≤ kµ1 k + kµ2 k holding for µ1 and µ2 in Mb and arbitrary A ∈ Σ, it follows that kµ1 + µ2 k ≤ kµ1 k + kµ2 k. Furthermore, it is evident that kαµk = |α| · kµk for µ ∈ Mb and a real α. Thus, k · k is, clearly, a norm in Mb (it is equivalent to k · kb in Theorem 1.2.2). We prove now that sup{µ1 , µ2 } exists in Mb for all µ1 and µ2 in Mb . For any A ∈ Σ, let the number ν(A) be defined by ν(A) = sup{µ1 (B) + µ2 (A \ B) : A ⊇ B ∈ Σ}.

18

CHAPTER 1.

It is not difficult to see that ν is a signed measure on Σ. Since the supremum on the right is less than or equal to kµ1 k + kµ2 k, we get sup{|ν(A)| : A ∈ Σ} ≤ kµ1 k + kµ2 k. It follows that ν is bounded and kνk ≤ kµ1 k + kµ2 k. Having shown that ν is an element of Mb , we prove now that ν = sup{µ1 , µ2 }. From the definition of ν, it is clear that ν(A) ≥ µ1 (A) and ν(A) ≥ µ2 (A) for every A ∈ Σ, so ν is an upper bound of µ1 and µ2 . Let τ be another upper bound. Then, for any A ∈ Σ and A ⊇ B ∈ Σ, we have τ (A) = τ (B) + τ (A \ B) ≥ µ1 (B) + µ2 (A \ B), so τ (A) ≥ sup{µ1 (B) + µ2 (A \ B) : A ⊇ B ∈ Σ} = ν(A). This shows that ν = sup{µ1 , µ2 } in Mb . Note now that inf{µ1 , µ2 } exists as well, because inf{µ1 , µ2 } = − sup{−µ1 , −µ2 }. Hence Mb is a vector lattice. As a direct consequence of this we have the following theorem in the case of finite signed measures. Theorem 1.2.3 (The Jordan decomposition theorem) If µ is a signed measure then there exist unique positive measures ν and ξ such that µ = ν − ξ and, for any positive measures ν 0 and ξ 0 such that µ = ν 0 − ξ 0 , the inequalities ν ≤ ν 0 and ξ ≤ ξ 0 hold. Proof: In the case when µ is finite, it is enough to take ν := µ+ = sup{0, µ} and ξ := µ− = − inf{0, µ}. If µ is not finite (or even not σ-finite) the proof is more complicated. We will not treat it in this book, and refer the reader for the proof to [5] and [4]. 2 We list main properties of the Banach space Mb = (Mb , k · kb ) of all signed measures of bounded variation on (X, Σ). Proofs are easy and left to the reader. (i) The norm k · kb on Mb satisfies |µ| ≤ |ν| ⇒ kµkb ≤ kνkb

(∀µ, ν ∈ Mb ),


19

where |µ| := sup{µ, −µ}. In other words, Mb is a Banach lattice. (ii) The norm k · kb is additive on the positive cone Mb+ of Mb : µ ≥ 0, ν ≥ 0 ⇒ kµ + νkb = kµkb + kνkb . (iii) Mb is Dedekind complete in the following sense. For any order bounded nonempty family {µα }α∈A , the supremum supα∈A µα exists and can be evaluated by the formula sup µα (B) = sup{ α∈A

k X

j=k

µαj (Bj ) : Bj ∈ Σ, αj ∈ A,

[

Bj = B, Bi ∩Bj = ∅ if i 6= j}

j=1

j=1

(1.2.8) for any B ∈ Σ . 1.2.4.◦ Exercises to Section 1.2. Exercise 1.2.1

∗∗

Exercise 1.2.2

∗

Prove the property of vector-valued measures given after Definition 1.2.1

Let µ be a E-valued measure on (X, Σ). Show that

|µ|(A) := sup{

∞ X

kµ(An )k : An ∈ Σ,

n=1

∞ [

An = A, Ak ∩ Ap = ∅ if k 6= p}.

n=1

Exercise 1.2.3 Let µ be a E-valued measure on (X, Σ). Show that |µ| is additive and monotone in the following sense: |µ|(A ∪ B) = |µ|(A) + |µ|(B) for any A, B ∈ Σ, A ∩ B = ∅, and |µ|(A) ≤ |µ|(B) for any A, B ∈ Σ, A ⊆ B. Exercise 1.2.4 ∗∗ Show that a signed measure µ is finite iff its variation |µ| is finite. Show that a signed measure µ is σ-finite iff its variation |µ| is σ-finite. Exercise 1.2.5 Show that the vector-valued measure constructed in Example 1.2.1 is of unbounded variation if αn = 1/n; and, of bounded variation if αn = 2−n .

20

CHAPTER 1.

Exercise 1.2.6 Let µ be a E-valued measure. Show that |µ| is a separable iff µ is separable. Exercise 1.2.7 Show that the function µ from Σ to E, which is defined in the proof of Theorem 1.2.2 by ∞ X µ(A) = µn (A) (∀A ∈ Σ), n=1

is an E-valued measure of bounded variation. Exercise 1.2.8 ∗∗∗ Let µ be a non-atomic signed measure of bounded variation on Σ (i.e. for any A ∈ Σ, µ(A) 6= 0, there exists B ∈ Σ, B ⊆ A, such that 0 < |µ(B)| < |µ(A)|). Using Exercise 1.1.9, show that, for any α, inf{µ(A) : A ∈ Σ} ≤ α ≤ sup{µ(A) : A ∈ Σ} , there is Aα ∈ Σ such that µ(Aα ) = α. Exercise 1.2.9 Let µ be a signed non-atomic measure on (Ω, Σ). Show that the set R(µ) := {µ(E) : E ∈ Σ}. is closed in R ∪ {∞}. Exercise 1.2.10 ∗ Let Mb be the Banach space of all finite signed measures on (X, Σ). Show that Mb is a partially ordered Banach space with respect to the order given in (1.2.7). Exercise 1.2.11 Show that Mb satisfies 1.2.4(i). Exercise 1.2.12 Show that Mb satisfies 1.2.4(ii). Exercise 1.2.13

∗∗

Show that (1.2.8) defines the supremum supα∈A µα .

Exercise 1.2.14 Show that the Rn -valued measure Ψ : Ω → Rn defined in Example 1.2.2 has a bounded variation and m X µk (X) · kwk k. |Ψ|(X) ≤ k=1 ∗∗

n

Exercise 1.2.15 Show that the R -valued measure Φ : Ω → Rn defined in Example 1.2.3 has a bounded variation and m X µk (Ak ) · kwk k. |Φ|(X) ≤ k=1

Show that the range R(Φ) := {Φ(E) : E ∈ Ω} n

of Φ is a compact subset of R if all µk are non-atomic. Exercise 1.2.16 ∗∗ Take the Rn -valued measure Φ as in Exercise 1.2.15 and assume that any µk , which was used in the construction of Φ, is non-atomic on Ak . Show that R(Φ) is convex in Rn .

1.3. THE LEBESGUE INTEGRAL

1.3

21

The Lebesgue Integral

Historically, many approaches to integration have been used (see the book [2] of S.B. Chae for nice historical remarks). No doubt that the Lebesgue integration is the most successful approach. In the following, we fix a σ-finite measure space (X, A, µ). To avoid unnecessary details, we consider only the case of Rvalued functions and leave obvious generalizations to C- or Rn -valued cases to the reader. 1.3.1.◦ The construction of the Lebesgue integral. Recall that if a certain property involving the points of measure space is true, except a subset having measure zero, then we say that this property is true almost everywhere (abbreviated as a.e.). We denote f + (x) = max(0, f (x)), f − (x) = max(0, −f (x)), and |f |(x) = f + (x) + f − (x). Let Ai ∈ A, i = 1, . . . , n, be such that µ(Ai ) < ∞ for all i, and Ai ∩ Aj = ∅ for all i 6= j. The function g(x) =

n X

λi χAi (x),

λi ∈ R,

i=1

is called a simple function. The Lebesgue integral of a simple function g(x) is defined as Z n X λi · µ(Ai ). g dµ := X

i=1

It is a simple exercise to show that the Lebesgue integral of a simple function is well defined. We leave this to the reader. Definition 1.3.1 Suppose that µ is finite. Let f : X → R be an arbitrary nonnegative bounded measurable function and let (gn )∞ n=1 be a sequence of simple functions which converges uniformly to f . Then the Lebesgue integral of f is Z Z f dµ := lim gn dµ. X

n→∞

X

22

CHAPTER 1.

It can be easily shown that the limit in Definition 1.3.1 exists and does not ∞ depend on the choice of a sequence (gn )∞ n=1 , and moreover, the sequence (gn )n=1 can be chosen such that 0 ≤ gn ≤ f for all n. Definition 1.3.2 Let f : X → R be an arbitrary nonnegative bounded measurable function. Then the Lebesgue integral of f is Z Z f dµ := sup { f dµ : A ∈ A , µ(A) < ∞ } X

A

Remark that the existence of the supremum in Definition 1.3.2 is guarantied by 1.1.3(d). Definition 1.3.3 Let f : X → R be a nonnegative unbounded measurable. Put f (x) if 0 ≤ f (x) ≤ M, fM (x) = M if M < f (x). Then the Lebesgue integral of f is Z Z f dµ := lim fM dµ. M →∞

X

X

Definition 1.3.4 Let f : X → R be a measurable function. Then the Lebesgue integral of f is defined by Z Z Z + f − dµ. f dµ − f dµ := X

X

X

If both of these terms are finite then the function f is called integrable. In this case we write f ∈ L1 . 1.3.2.◦ Elementary properties of the Lebesgue integral. the following notation. For any A ∈ A: Z Z f dµ := f · χA dµ. A

X

Let us give several obvious properties of Lebesgue integral.

We will use


23

Lemma 1.3.1 Let f : X → R be an arbitrary nonnegative measurable function then Z Z f dµ = sup{ φ dµ : φ is a simple f unction such that 0 ≤ φ ≤ f }. X

X

Proof: Firstly consider the case of bounded f and finite µ. Then by the R definition of X f dµ there exists a sequence (see the remark after Definition 1.3.1) (gn )∞ n=1 of simple functions such that 0 ≤ gn ≤ f for all n, and (gn ) converges uniformly to f , and satisfies Z Z Z f dµ = lim gn dµ = sup gn dµ . X

n→∞

n

X

X

Now the using of Definitions 1.3.2 and 1.3.3 completes the proof. 2 L1. If f, g : X → R are measurable, g is integrable, and |f (x)| ≤ g(x), then f is integrable and Z Z f dµ ≤ g dµ. X

X

L2.

R X

|f | dµ = 0 if and only if f (x) = 0 a.e.

L3. If f1 , f2 : X → R are integrable then, for λ1 , λ2 ∈ R, the linear combination λ1 f1 + λ2 f2 is integrable and Z Z Z [λ1 f1 + λ2 f2 ] dµ = λ1 f1 dµ + λ2 f2 dµ. X

X

X

If f is integrable function, we write f ∈ L1 = L1 (X, A, µ). L4. Let f ∈ L1 , then the formula Z f dµ

ν(A) := A

defines a signed measure on the σ-algebra A. 1.3.3.◦ Convergence. If (fn )∞ n=1 is a sequence of integrable functions on a set X, the statement “fn → f as n → ∞” can be taken in many different senses, for example, for pointwise or uniform convergence (cf. the end of Section 1.1). One of them is L1 -convergence.

24

CHAPTER 1.

Definition 1.3.5 We say that a sequence (fn )∞ n=1 of integrable functions L1 converges to f (or converges in L1 ) if Z |fn − f | dµ → 0 as n → ∞. Of course, uniform convergence implies pointwise convergence, which in turn implies a.e.-convergence, but these modes of convergence do not imply L1 -convergence. The reader should keep in mind the following examples: (i) fn = n−1 χ(0,n) ; (ii) fn = χ(n,n+1) ; (iii) fn = nχ[0,1/n] ; (iv) f1 = χ[0,1] , f2 = χ[0,1/2] , f3 = χ[1/2,1] , f4 = χ[0,1/4] , f5 = χ[1/4,1/2] , and, in general, fn = χ[j/2k ,(j+1)/2k ] , where n = 2k + j with 0 ≤ j < 2k . In (i), (ii), and (iii), fn R→ 0 uniformly, pointwise, and a.e., respectively, but R fn 6→ 0 in L R 1 (in fact, |fn | dµ = fn dµ = 1 for all n). In (iv), fn → 0 in L1 since |fn | dµ = 2−k for 2k ≤ n < 2k+1 , but fn (x) does not converge for any x ∈ [0, 1], since there are infinitely many n for which fn (x) = 0 and infinitely many, for which fn (x) = 1. On the other hand, if fn → f a.e. and |fn | ≤ g ∈ L1 for all n, then fn → f in L1 . This will be clear from the dominated convergence theorem (see Theorem 1.3.2 below) since |fn − f | ≤ 2g. Also, we will see below that if fn → f in L1 then some subsequence converges to f a.e. 1.3.4.◦ The monotone convergence theorem. most important results about convergence.

Now we state one of the

Theorem 1.3.1 (The monotone convergence theorem) If (fn )∞ n=1 is a se+ quence in L1 such that fj ≤ fj+1 for all j and f = supn fn then Z Z f dµ = lim fn dµ. n→∞

X

X

R Proof: The limit of the increasing sequence ( f dµ)∞ n=1 (finite or infinite) X n R R exists. Moreover by 1.3.2.(L1), X fn dµ ≤ X f dµ for all n, so Z Z lim fn dµ ≤ f dµ. n→∞

X

X


25

To establish the reverse inequality, fix α ∈ (0, 1), let φ be a simple function with 0 ≤ φ ≤ f , and let En = {x : fn (x) ≥ αφ(x)}. Then (En )∞ n=1 is an increasing sequence of measurable sets whose union is X, and we have Z Z Z fn dµ ≥ fn dµ ≥ α φ dµ (∀n ≥ 1). X

En

En

By 1.3.2.(L4) and by Proposition 1.1.5, lim

R

φ dµ = En

n→∞

X

φ dµ, and hence

Z

Z fn dµ ≥ α

lim

n→∞

R

φ dµ.

X

X

Since this is true for all α, 0 < α < 1, it remains true for α = 1: Z Z lim fn dµ ≥ φ dµ . n→∞

X

X

Using Lemma 1.3.1, we may take the supremum over all simple functions φ, 0 ≤ φ ≤ f . Thus Z Z lim fn dµ ≥ f dµ. 2 n→∞

X

X

Proofs of the following two corollaries of Theorem 1.3.1 are left to the reader. + Corollary 1.3.1 If (fn )∞ n=1 is a sequence in L1 and f = then Z XZ f dµ = fn dµ. 2

P∞

n=1

fn pointwise

n + + Corollary 1.3.2 If (fn )∞ n=1 is a sequence in L1 , f ∈ L1 , and fn ↑ f a.e., then Z Z fn dµ ↑ f dµ. 2

1.3.5.◦ The Fatou lemma. The condition in the previous subsection that the sequence (fn )∞ n=1 is increasing can be omitted in the following way. + Lemma 1.3.2 (Fatou’s lemma) If (fn )∞ n=1 is any sequence in L1 then Z Z lim inf fn dµ ≤ lim inf fn dµ . n→∞

n→∞

26 Proof:

CHAPTER 1. For each k ≥ 1, we have inf fn ≤ fj (∀j ≥ k),

n≥k

hence

Z

Z inf fn dµ ≤

fj dµ (∀j ≥ k),

n≥k

hence

Z

Z inf fn dµ ≤ inf

n≥k

j≥k

fj dµ.

Now let k → ∞ and apply Theorem 1.3.1: Z Z Z lim inf fn dµ = lim inf fn dµ ≤ lim inf fn dµ . 2 n→∞

k→∞

n≥k

n→∞

+ + Corollary 1.3.3 If (fn )∞ n=1 is a sequence in L1 , f ∈ L1 , and fn → f a.e., then Z Z f dµ ≤ lim inf fn dµ. 2 n→∞

1.3.6.◦ The dominated convergence theorem. Now we present the following convergence theorem, which has many applications in PDEs, functional analysis, operator theory, etc. Theorem 1.3.2 (The dominated convergence theorem) Let f and g be measurable, let fn be measurable for any n such that |fn (x)| ≤ g(x) a.e., and fn → f a.e. If g is integrable then f and fn are also integrable and Z Z lim fn dµ = f dµ. n→∞

Proof: f is measurable by Exercise 1.1.14 and, since |f | ≤ g a.e., we have f ∈ L1 . We have that g + fn ≥ 0 a.e. and g − fn ≥ 0 so, by Fatou’s lemma, Z Z Z Z Z g dµ + f dµ ≤ lim inf (g + fn ) dµ = g dµ + lim inf fn dµ, n→∞

n→∞

1.3. THE LEBESGUE INTEGRAL 27 Z Z Z Z Z g dµ − f dµ ≤ lim inf (g − fn ) dµ = g dµ − lim sup fn dµ. n→∞

Therefore

Z lim inf

n→∞

n→∞

Z fn dµ ≥

Z f dµ ≥ lim sup

fn dµ,

n→∞

and the result follows. 2 1.3.7.! Convergence in measure. Another mode of convergence, that is frequently useful, is convergence in measure. We say that a sequence (fn )∞ n=1 of measurable functions on (X, M, µ) is Cauchy in measure if, for every ε > 0, µ({x : |fn (x) − fm (x)| ≥ ε}) → 0 as m, n → ∞, and that (fn )∞ n=1 converges in measure to f if, for every ε > 0, µ({x : |fn (x) − f (x)| ≥ ε}) → 0 as n → ∞. For example, the sequences (i), (iii), and (iv) above converge to zero in measure, but (ii) is not Cauchy in measure. Proposition 1.3.1 If fn → f in L1 then fn → f in measure. Proof:

Let En,ε = {x : |fn (x) − f (x)| ≥ ε}. Then Z Z |fn − f | dµ ≥ |fn − f | dµ ≥ εµ(En,ε ), En,ε

so µ(En,ε ) ≤ ε−1

R

|fn − f | dµ → 0. 2

The converse of Proposition 1.3.1 is false, as Examples 1.3.3.(i) and 1.3.3.(iii) show. Theorem 1.3.3 Suppose that (fn )∞ n=1 is Cauchy in measure. Then there is a measurable function f such that fn → f in measure, and there is a subsequence (fnj )j that converges to f a.e. Moreover, if fn → g in measure then g = f a.e.

28 Proof:

CHAPTER 1. We can choose a subsequence (gj )j = (fnj )j of (fn )∞ n=1 such that if

Ej = {x : |gj (x) − gj+1 (x)| ≥ 2−j } S P∞ −j then µ(Ej ) ≤ 2−j . If Fk = ∞ = 21−k , and if j=k Ej then µ(Fk ) ≤ k=1 2 x 6∈ Fk we have for i ≥ j ≥ k |gj (x) − gi (x)| ≤

i−1 X

|gl+1 (x) − gl (x)| ≤

l=j

i−1 X

2−l ≤ 21−j .

(1.3.1)

l=j

Thus (gj )j is pointwise Cauchy on Fkc . Let F =

∞ \ k=1

Fk = lim sup Ej . j

Then µ(F ) = 0, and if we set f (x) = lim gj (x) for x 6∈ F , and f (x) = 0 for x ∈ F , then f is measurable and gj → f a.e. By (1.3.1), we have that |gj (x) − f (x)| ≤ 21−j for x 6∈ Fk and j ≥ k. Since µ(Fk ) → 0 as k → ∞, it follows that gj → f in measure, because 1 1 {x : |fn (x) − f (x)| ≥ ε} ⊆ {x : |fn (x) − gj (x)| ≥ ε} ∪ {x : |gj (x) − f (x)| ≥ ε}, 2 2 and the sets on the right both have small measure when n and j are large. Likewise, if fn → g in measure 1 1 {x : |f (x) − g(x)| ≥ ε} ⊆ {x : |f (x) − fn (x)| ≥ ε} ∪ {x : |fn (x) − g(x)| ≥ ε} 2 2 for all n, hence µ({x : |f (x) − g(x)| ≥ ε}) = 0 for all ε > 0, and f = g a.e. 2 Theorem 1.3.4 Let fn → f in L1 , then there is a subsequence (fnk )k such that fnk → f a.e. Proof:

Let En,ε = {x : |fn (x) − f (x)| ≥ ε}.

1.3. THE LEBESGUE INTEGRAL Then

Z

29

Z |fn − f | dµ ≥

|fn − f | dµ ≥ εµ(En,ε ), En,ε

so µ(En,ε ) → 0. Then, by Theorem 1.3.3, there is a subsequence (fnk )k such that fnk → f a.e. 2 1.3.8.◦ Exercises to Section 1.3. Exercise 1.3.1 Check that the limit in Definition 1.3.1 exists and does not depend on the choice of a sequence (gn )∞ n=1 . Exercise 1.3.2 Prove the properties L1 − L4 of the Lebesgue integral from 1.3.2. Exercise 1.3.3 Investigate simple properties of sequences (fn )∞ n=1 in 1.3.3.(i)-(iv). Exercise 1.3.4 Let [a, b] be a compact interval in R and µ be a standard Borel measure on [a, b]. Show that the Lebesgue integral from any continuous function f : [a, b] → R coincides with the Riemann integral from f . Exercise 1.3.5 Show that the condition “µ(X) < ∞” in Egoroff ’s theorem can be replaced by “|fn | ≤ g for all n, where g ∈ L1 ”. Exercise 1.3.6 Prove the dominated convergence theorem by using of the Egoroff theorem. Exercise 1.3.7

∗

Let fn → f in measure and gn → g in measure. Show that fn · gn → f · g

in measure if µ(X) < ∞, but not necessarily if µ(X) = ∞. Exercise 1.3.8 Prove Corollary 1.3.1. Exercise 1.3.9 Prove Corollary 1.3.2. Exercise 1.3.10 Let fn → f in measure and fn ≥ 0 for all n. Show that Z Z f dµ ≤ lim inf fn dµ. n→∞

30

CHAPTER 1.

Exercise 1.3.11 Prove Corollary 1.3.3. Exercise 1.3.12 ∗∗ Let χAn → f in measure. Show that f is a.e. equal to the characteristic function of a measurable set. Exercise 1.3.13 Fix the Lebesgue measure on R. (a) Given a nonempty set Ξ ⊆ L+ 1 (R), show that nZ o Z inf ξ(t) dt : ξ ∈ Ξ ≤ f (t) dt for every f ∈ co(Ξ), where co(Ξ) is the convex hull of Ξ in the vector space L1 (R), which is, by the definition, the intersection of all convex sets containing Ξ. (b) Construct an example of a nonempty set Θ ⊆ L+ 1 (R) such that Z n o Z inf ξ(t) dt : ξ ∈ Θ < f (t) dt for every f ∈ co(Θ). (c) Show that a nonempty set ∆ ⊆ L+ 1 (R) satisfying Z o Z n ξ(t) dt : ξ ∈ ∆ < f (t) dt inf for every f ∈ co(∆) can not be finite. Exercise 1.3.14 Let f ∈ L1 (R) and F (t) := pare with Exercise 1.3.2.

Rt −∞

f (s)ds. Show that F is continuous. Com-

Chapter 2

2.1

The Extension of Measure

In this section we present the Caratheodory extension theorem which is the most important result in the measure theory. By using of this theorem, we can construct almost all important measures, in particular, the Lebesgue measure and Lebesgue – Stieltjes Measures on R. Then we consider the product of measure spaces and prove the Fubini theorem. 2.1.1.◦ Outer measures. Let X be a nonempty set. An outer measure (or submeasure) on X is a function ξ : P(X) → [0, ∞] that satisfies: (a) ξ(∅) = 0; (b) ξ(A) ≤ ξ(B) if A ⊆ B; ! ∞ ∞ S P (c) ξ Aj ≤ ξ(Aj ) for all sequences (Aj )j of subsets of X. j=1

j=1

The common way to obtain an outer measure is to start with a family G of “elementary sets” on which a notion of measure (= length, mass, charge, or volume) is defined (such as rectangles or cubes in Rn ) and then approximate arbitrary sets from the outside by countable unions of members of G.

31

32

CHAPTER 2.

Proposition 2.1.1 Let G ⊆ P(X) and let ρ : G → [0, ∞] be such that ∅ ∈ G, X ∈ G, and ρ(∅) = 0. For any A ⊆ X, define (∞ ) ∞ X [ ξ(A) = ρ∗ (A) = inf ρ(Gj ) : Gj ∈ G and A ⊆ Gj . (2.1.1) j=1

j=1

Then ξ is an outer measure. S Proof: For any A ⊆ X, we have A ⊆ ∞ j=1 X, so ξ is well defined. Obviously ξ(∅) = 0. To prove countable subadditivity, suppose {A }∞ j=1 ⊆ P(X) and ε > 0. Sj∞ k ∞ For each j, there exists {Gj }k=1 ⊆ G such that Aj ⊆ k=1 Gkj and ∞ X

ρ(Gkj ) ≤ ξ(Aj ) + ε2−j .

k=1

Then if A =

S∞

j=1

Aj , we have A⊆

∞ [ j,k=1

whence ξ(A) ≤

P

j=1

Gkj &

X

ρ(Gkj ) ≤

j,k

X

ξ(Aj ) + ε,

j

ξ(Aj ) + ε. Since ε > 0 is arbitrary, we have done. 2

2.1.2.◦ The Caratheodory theorem. The principle step that leads from outer measures to measures is following. Let ξ be an outer measure on X. Definition 2.1.1 A set A ⊆ X is called ξ-measurable if ξ(B) = ξ(B ∩ A) + ξ(B ∩ (X \ A))

(∀B ⊆ X).

(2.1.2)

Of course, the inequality ξ(B) ≤ ξ(B ∩ A) + ξ(B ∩ (X \ A)) holds for any A and B. So, to prove that A is ξ-measurable, it suffices to prove the reverse inequality, which is trivial if ξ(B) = ∞. Thus, we see that A is ξ-measurable iff ξ(B) ≥ ξ(B ∩ A) + ξ(B ∩ (X \ A))

(∀B ⊆ X, ξ(B) < ∞).

(2.1.3)

2.1. THE EXTENSION OF MEASURE

33

Theorem 2.1.1 (Caratheodory’s theorem) Let ξ be an outer measure on X. Then the family Σ of all ξ-measurable sets is a σ-algebra, and the restriction of ξ to Σ is a complete measure. Proof: First, we observe that Σ is closed under complements, since the definition of ξ-measurability of A is symmetric in A and Ac := X \ A. Next, if A, B ∈ Σ and E ⊆ X, ξ(E) = ξ(E ∩ A) + ξ(E ∩ Ac ) = ξ(E ∩ A ∩ B) + ξ(E ∩ A ∩ B c ) + ξ(E ∩ Ac ∩ B) + ξ(E ∩ Ac ∩ B c ). But (A ∪ B) = (A ∩ B) ∪ (A ∩ B c ) ∪ (Ac ∩ B) so, by subadditivity, ξ(E ∩ A ∩ B) + ξ(E ∩ A ∩ B c ) + ξ(E ∩ Ac ∩ B) ≥ ξ(E ∩ (A ∪ B)), and hence ξ(E) ≥ ξ(E ∩ (A ∪ B)) + ξ(E ∩ (A ∪ B)c ). It follows that A ∪ B ∈ Σ, so Σ is an algebra. Moreover, if A, B ∈ Σ and A ∩ B = ∅, ξ(A ∪ B) = ξ((A ∪ B) ∩ A) + ξ((A ∪ B) ∩ Ac ) = ξ(A) + ξ(B), so ξ is finitely additive on Σ. To show that Σ is a σ-algebra, it suffices to show that Σ is closed under countable disjoint unions. If (Aj )∞ j=1 is a sequence of disjoint sets in Σ, set Bn =

n [

Aj & B =

j=1

∞ [

Aj .

j=1

Then, for any E ⊆ X, ξ(E ∩ Bn ) = ξ(E ∩ Bn ∩ An ) + ξ(E ∩ Bn ∩ Acn ) = ξ(E ∩ An ) + ξ(E ∩ Bn−1 ), P so a simple induction shows that ξ(E ∩ Bn ) = nj=1 ξ(E ∩ Aj ). Therefore ξ(E) = ξ(E ∩ Bn ) + ξ(E ∩

Bnc )

≥

n X j=1

ξ(E ∩ Aj ) + ξ(E ∩ B c )

34

CHAPTER 2.

and, letting n → ∞, we obtain ξ(E) ≥

∞ X

c

ξ(E ∩ Aj ) + ξ(E ∩ B ) ≥ ξ

j=1

∞ [

! (E ∩ Aj )

+ ξ(E ∩ B c )

j=1

= ξ(E ∩ B) + ξ(E ∩ B c ) ≥ ξ(E). Thus the inequalities in this last calculation become equalities. It follows B ∈ Σ. P∞ Taking E = B we have ξ(B) = 1 ξ(Aj ), so ξ is σ-additive on Σ. Finally, if ξ(A) = 0 then we have for any E ⊆ X ξ(E) ≤ ξ(E ∩ A) + ξ(E ∩ Ac ) = ξ(E ∩ Ac ) ≤ ξ(E), so A ∈ Σ. Therefore ξ(E ∩ A) = 0 and ξ|Σ is a complete measure. 2 Combination of Proposition 2.1.1 and Theorem 2.1.1 gives the following corollary which is also called Caratheodory’s theorem. Corollary 2.1.1 Let G ⊆ P(X) be such that ∅ ∈ G, X ∈ G, and let ρ : G → [0, ∞] satisfy ρ(∅) = 0. Then the family Σ of all ρ∗ -measurable sets (where ρ∗ is given by (2.1.1)) is a σ-algebra, and the restriction of ρ∗ to Σ is a complete measure. 2 2.1.3.◦ Premeasures.

Our main definition in this subsection is following.

Definition 2.1.2 Let A be an algebra of subsets of X, i.e. A contains ∅ and X, and A is closed under finite intersections and complements. A function ζ : A → [0, ∞] is called a premeasure if ζ(∅) = 0 and ζ(

∞ [

j=1

Aj ) =

∞ X

ζ(Aj )

j=1

for any disjoint sequence (Aj )j of elements of A such that

S∞

j=1

Aj ∈ A.

Theorem 2.1.2 If ζ is a premeasure on an algebra A ⊆ P(X) and ζ ∗ : P(X) → [0, ∞] is given by (2.1.1) then ζ ∗ |A = ζ and every A ∈ A is ζ ∗ -measurable.

2.1. THE EXTENSION OF MEASURE Proof:

35

First, ζ is obviously additive and hence monotone on A, i.e. A ⊆ B ⇒ ζ(A) ≤ ζ(B) (∀A, B ∈ A).

Suppose that A ∈ A, An ∈ A, and A ⊆

S∞

n=1

Bn := A ∩ (An \

n−1 [

An . Then Aj ) ∈ A,

j=1

since A is an algebra. The sequence (Bn )∞ n=1 is disjoint. This implies ζ(A) =

∞ X

ζ(Bn ) ≤

n=1

∞ X

ζ(An ),

n=1

and therefore ζ(A) ≤ ζ ∗ (A) (here we used the monotonity of ζ). The reverse inequality ζ ∗ (A) ≤ ζ(A) follows from the definition of ζ ∗ . To show that every A ∈ A is ζ ∗ -measurable, take A ∈ A, Y ⊆ X, and ε > 0. Then, by (2.1.1), there exists a sequence (An )∞ n=1 in A such that Y ⊆

∞ [

An &

Since ζ is additive on A, Y ∩ A ⊆ (X \ A)) then ζ (Y ) + ε ≥

∞ X n=1

ζ(An ∩ A) +

ζ(An ) ≤ ζ ∗ (Y ) + ε.

n=1

n=1

∗

∞ X

∞ X

S∞

n=1 (An

∩ A), and Y ∩ (X \ A) ⊆

S∞

n=1 (An

∩

ζ(An ∩ (X \ A)) ≥ ζ ∗ (Y ∩ A) + ζ ∗ (Y ∩ (X \ A)).

n=1

Since ε > 0 is arbitrary and ζ ∗ is an outer measure, ζ ∗ (Y ) ≥ ζ ∗ (Y ∩ A) + ζ ∗ (Y ∩ (X \ A)) ≥ ζ ∗ (Y ). Y ⊆ X is arbitrary, so A is ζ ∗ -measurable. 2 Theorem 2.1.3 If ζ is a premeasure on an algebra A ⊆ P(X) and Aˆ is the ˆ A = ζ. σ-algebra generated by A, then there exists a measure ζˆ on Aˆ such that ζ| Moreover, if ζ is σ-finite, then ζˆ is unique extension of ζ.

36

CHAPTER 2.

Proof: By Caratheodory’s theorem and Theorem 2.1.2, such an extension ζ ∗ ˆ which extends ζ exists. We leave to the reader to show that measure ζˆ on A, from A, is unique if the premeasure ζ is σ-finite. 2 2.1.4.◦ The Lebesgue and Lebesgue – Stieltjes measure on R. The most important application of Caratheodory’s theorem is the construction of the Lebesgue measure on R. Take G as the set of all intervals [a, b], where a, b ∈ R∪{−∞, +∞} and [a, b] = ∅ if a > b. Define the function ρ : G → R∪{∞} by ρ([a, b]) := b − a (∀a ≤ b) & ρ([a, b]) = 0 (∀a > b). The function ρ has the obvious extension (which we denote also by ρ) to the algebra A generated by all finite or infinite intervals, and this extension is a premeasure on A. The σ-algebra Σ given by Corollary 2.1.1 is called the the Lebesgue σ-algebra in R, and the restriction of ρ∗ to Σ = Σ(R) is called the Lebesgue measure on R and is denoted by µ. By Theorem 2.1.3, µ is the unique extension of ρ. By the construction, B(R) ⊆ Σ(R). Hence the Lebesgue measure is a Borel measure. It can be shown that B(R) 6= Σ(R) (see Exercise 2.1.8) and that the Lebesgue measure can be obtained also as the completion of any Borel measure ω such that ω([a, b]) = b − a (∀a ≤ b). The notion of the Lebesgue measure on R has the following very natural generalization. Suppose that µ is a σ-finite Borel measure on R, and let F (x) := µ((−∞, x]) (∀x ∈ R).

(2.1.4)

Then F is increasing and right continuous (see Exercise 2.1.9). Moreover, if b > a, (−∞, b] = (−∞, a] ∪ (a, b], so µ((a, b]) = F (b) − F (a). Our procedure used above can be to turn this process around and construct a measure µ starting from an increasing, right-continuous function F . The special case F (x) = x will yield the usual Lebesgue measure. As building blocks we can use the left-open, right-closed intervals in R i.e. sets of the form (a, b] or (a, ∞) or ∅, where −∞ ≤ a < b < ∞. We call such sets h-intervals. The family A of all finite disjoint unions of h-intervals is an algebra, moreover, the σ-algebra generated by A is the Borel algebra B(R). We omit the direct and routine proof of the following elementary lemma.


37

Lemma 2.1.1 Given an increasing and right continuous function F : R → R, if (aj , bj ] (j = 1, . . . , n) are disjoint h-intervals, let µ0

n [ (aj , bj ] 1

! =

n X

[F (bj ) − F (aj )] ,

1

and let µ0 (∅) = 0. Then µ0 is a premeasure. 2 Theorem 2.1.4 If F : R → R is any increasing, right continuous function, there is a unique Borel measure µF on R such that µF ((a, b]) = F (b) − F (a)

(∀a, b).

If G is another such function then µF = µG iff F − G is constant. Conversely, if µ is a Borel measure on R that and we define   µ((0, x]) 0 F (x) =  −µ((x, 0])

is finite on all bounded Borel sets, if x > 0, if x = 0, if x < 0,

then F is increasing and right continuous function, and µ = µF . Proof: Each F induces a premeasure on B(R) by Lemma 2.1.1. It is clear that F and G induce the same premeasure S∞ iff F − G is constant, and that these premeasures are σ-finite (since R = −∞ (j, j + 1]). The first two assertions follow now from Exercise 2.1.11. As for the last one, the monotonicity of µ implies the monotonicity of F , and the continuity of µ from above and from below implies the right continuity of F for x ≥ 0 and x < 0. It is evident that µ = µF on A, and hence µ = µF on B(R) (accordingly to Exercise 2.1.11). 2 Lebesgue – Stieltjes measures possess some important and useful regularity properties. Let us fix a complete Lebesgue – Stieltjes measure µ on R associated to an increasing, right continuous function F . We denote by Σµ the Lebesgue algebra correspondent to µ. Thus, for any E ∈ Σµ , (∞ ) ∞ X [ µ(E) = inf [F (bj ) − F (aj )] : E ⊆ (aj , bj ] j=1

j=1

38

CHAPTER 2. = inf

(∞ X

∞ [

µ((aj , bj ]) : E ⊆

j=1

) (aj , bj ] .

j=1

Since B(R) ⊆ Σµ , we may replace in the second formula for µ(E) h-intervals by open intervals, namely. Lemma 2.1.2 For any E ∈ Σµ , (∞ ) ∞ X [ µ(E) = inf µ((aj , bj )) : E ⊆ (aj , bj ) . 2 j=1

j=1

Theorem 2.1.5 If E ∈ Σµ then µ(E) = inf{µ(U ) : U ⊇ E and U is open} = sup{µ(K) : K ⊆ E and K is compact}. Proof:

By Lemma 2.1.2, for any ε > 0, there exist intervals (aj , bj ) such that E⊆

∞ [

(aj , bj ) & µ(E) ≤

j=1

∞ X

µ((aj , bj )) + ε.

j=1

S∞

If U = j=1 (aj , bj ) then U is open, E ⊆ U , and µ(U ) ≤ µ(E) + ε. On the other hand, µ(U ) ≥ µ(E) whenever E ⊆ U so the first equality is valid. For the second one, suppose first that E is bounded. If E is closed then E is compact and the equality is obvious. Otherwise, given ε > 0, we can choose an open U , E¯ \ E ⊆ U , such that µ(U ) ≤ µ(E¯ \ E) + ε. Let K = E¯ \ U . Then K is compact, K ⊆ E, and µ(K) = µ(E) − µ(E ∩ U ) = µ(E) − [µ(U ) − µ(U \ E)] ≥ µ(E) − µ(U ) + µ(E¯ \ E) ≥ µ(E) − ε. If E is unbounded, let Ej = E ∩ (j, j + 1]. By the preceding argument, for any ε S > 0, there exist a compact Kj ⊆ Ej with µ(Kj ) ≥ µ(Ej ) − ε2−j . Let Hn = j=n j=−n Kj . Then Hn is compact, Hn ⊆ E, and j=n

µ(Hn ) ≥ µ(

[

Ej ) − ε.

j=−n

Sj=n Since µ(E) = lim µ( j=−n Ej ), the result follows. 2 n→∞

The proofs of the following two theorems are left to the reader as exercises.


39

Theorem 2.1.6 If E ⊆ R, the following are equivalent: (a) E ∈ Σµ ; (b) E = V \ N1 , where V is a Gδ –set and µ(N1 ) = 0; (c) E = H ∪ N2 , where H is an Fσ –set and µ(N2 ) = 0. 2 Theorem 2.1.7 If E ∈ Σµ and µ(E) < ∞ then, for every ε > 0, there is a set A that is a finite union of open intervals such that µ(E4A) < ε.2

2.1.5.◦ Product measures. Let {(Xα , Σα , µα )}α∈∆ be a nonempty family of measure Q spaces. In this subsection we show how to construct a product-measure on Xα . First we define the family Ω of blocks: α∈∆

A(Aα1 , Aα2 , . . . , Aαn ) := Aα1 ×Aα2 ×· · ·×Aαn ×

Y

Xα (Aαk ∈ Σαk );

α∈∆; α6=αk : k=1,...,n

and define a function: µ : Ω → R+ ∪ {∞}: µ(A(Aα1 , Aα2 , . . . , Aαn )) := µα1 (Aα1 )·µα2 (Aα2 )·. . .·µαn (Aαn )·

Y

µα (Xα ).

α∈∆; α6=αk :k=1,...,n

This function possesses an extension (by additivity) on the algebra A generated by Ω. It is an exercise to show that µ is a premeasure on A. Definition 2.1.3 The measure µ ˆ on the σ-algebra Σ generated by A accordingly to Theorem 2.1.3 is called the product measure of {µα }α∈∆ , and the triple Y ( Xα , Σ, µ ˆ). α∈∆

is called the N product of measure spaces (X Nα , Σα , µα ). We denote the σalgebra Σ by α∈∆ Σα , and the measure µ ˆ by α∈∆ µα . This construction is essentially non-trivial only in the following two cases. The first one is when card(∆) < ∞. The second one is when every µα is a probability measure (i.e. µα (Xα ) = 1 for all α). There are many interesting and important results about the product of measure spaces. The mostly used one is the Fubini theorem about changing the order

40

CHAPTER 2.

of integration. Let us use the the following notations. If E ⊆ X1 × X2 and x1 ∈ X1 , x2 ∈ X2 , we define Ex1 := {x ∈ X2 : (x1 , x) ∈ E} & E x2 := {x ∈ X1 : (x, x2 ) ∈ E} . Also, if f : X1 × X2 → R is a function, we define fx1 : X2 → R and f x2 : X1 → R by fx1 (x) := f (x1 , x) & f x2 (x) := f (x, x2 ) . In this notations, for example, (χE )x1 = χEx1 and (χE )x2 = χE x2 . Theorem 2.1.8 (Fubini’s theorem) Let µ1 , µ2 be σ-finite measures on (X1 , Σ1 ) and (X2 , Σ2 ), (X1 × X2 , Σ1 ⊗ Σ2 , µ1 ⊗ µ2 ) = (X1 , Σ1 , µ1 ) × (X2 , Σ2 , µ2 ), and let f ∈ L1 (X1 × X2 , Σ1 ⊗ Σ2 , µ1 ⊗ µ2 ). Then fx1 ∈ L1 (X2 , Σ2 , µ2 ) µ1 -a.e., and f x2 ∈ L1 (X1 , Σ1 , µ1 ) µ2 -a.e., and Z Z Z Z Z x2 f d(µ1 ⊗ µ2 ) = f dµ1 dµ2 = fx1 dµ2 dµ1 . X1 ×X2

X2

X1

X1

X2

To prove this theorem, we need several lemmas. Lemma 2.1.3 Let (X1 , Σ1 , µ1 ) and (X2 , Σ2 , µ2 ) be measure spaces, E ∈ Σ1 ⊗Σ2 , and let f be a Σ1 ⊗ Σ2 -measurable function on X1 × X2 , then: (a) Ex1 ∈ Σ2 for all x1 ∈ X1 and E x2 ∈ Σ1 for all x2 ∈ X2 ; (b) fx1 is Σ2 -measurable and f x2 is Σ1 -measurable for all x1 ∈ X1 and x2 ∈ X2 . Proof:

Denote by A the collection of all A ⊆ X1 × X2 such that Ax1 ∈ Σ2

& Ax2 ∈ Σ1

(∀ x1 ∈ X1 , x2 ∈ X2 ) .

The family A contains all rectangles. Thus, since [

∞ [

A n ] x1 =

n=1

∞ [

[An ]x1 , [

n=1

∞ [

Bn ]

x2

=

n=1

∞ [

[Bn ]x2

(2.1.5)

n=1

and [X1 × X2 \ A]x1 = X2 \ Ax1 , [X1 × X2 \ A]x2 = X1 \ Ax2 ,

(2.1.6)

A is a σ-algebra. So Σ1 ⊗ Σ2 ⊆ A, and (a) is proved. Now the part (b) follows from (a) due to fx−1 (A) = [f −1 (A)]x1 1

& [f x2 ]−1 (A) = [f −1 (A)]x2

(∀A ⊆ R) . 2

(2.1.7)


41

Definition 2.1.4 A family M ⊆ P(X) is called a monotone class if M is closed under countable increasing unions and countable decreasing intersections. The proof of the following lemma is an elementary exercise and we leave it to the reader. Lemma 2.1.4 If A ⊆ P(X) is an algebra then the monotone class generated by A coincides with the σ-algebra generated by A. 2 Lemma 2.1.5 Let (X1 , Σ1 , µ1 ) and (X2 , Σ2 , µ2 ) be measure spaces, E ∈ Σ1 ⊗Σ2 . Then the functions x1 → µ2 (Ex1 ) and x2 → µ1 (E x2 ) are measurable on (X1 , Σ1 ) and (X2 , Σ2 ), and Z Z x2 µ2 (Ex1 ) dµ1 . (2.1.8) µ1 (E ) dµ2 = µ1 ⊗ µ2 (E) = X2

X1

Proof: First we consider the case when µ1 and µ2 are finite. Let A be the family of all E ∈ Σ1 ⊗ Σ2 for which (2.1.8) is true. If E = A × B, then µ1 (E x2 ) = µ1 (A)χB (x2 ) and µ2 (Ex1 ) = µ2 (B)χA (x1 ), so E ∈ A. By additivity, it follows that finite disjoint unions of rectangles are in A so, by Lemma 2.1.4, it will suffice to show thatSA is a monotone class. If (En )∞ n=1 is an increasing ∞ sequence in A and E = n=1 En , then the function fn (x2 ) = µ1 ((En )x2 ) are measurable and increase pointwise to f (y) = µ1 (E x2 ). Hence f is measurable and, by the monotone convergence theorem, Z Z x2 µ1 (E ) dµ2 = lim µ1 ((En )x2 ) dµ2 = lim µ1 × µ2 (En ) = µ1 × µ2 (E). X2

n→∞

n→∞

X2

Likewise µ1 × µ2 (E) = X1 µ2 (Ex ) dµ1 , so E ∈ A. Similarly, if (En )∞ n=1 is a T∞ decreasing sequence in A and E = n=1 En , the function x2 → µ1 ((E1 )x2 ) is in L1 (µ2 ) because µ1 ((E1 )x2 ) ≤ µ1 (X1 ) < ∞ and µ2 (X2 ) < ∞, so the dominated convergence theorem can be applied to show that E ∈ A. Thus, A is a monotone class, and the proof is complete for the case of finite measure spaces. Finally, if µ1 and µ2 are σ-finite, we can write X1 × X2 as the union of an increasing sequence (X1j ×X2j )∞ n=1 of rectangles of finite measure. If E ∈ Σ1 ⊗Σ2 , the preceding argument applies to E ∩ (X1j × X2j ) for each j gives us Z Z j j j x2 µ1 × µ2 (E ∩ (X1 × X2 )) = µ1 (E ∩ X1 ) dµ2 = µ2 (Ex1 ∩ X2j ) dµ1 . R

X2j

X1j

The application of the monotone convergence theorem then yields the desired result. 2

42

CHAPTER 2.

Lemma 2.1.6 (Tonelli’s theorem) Let (X1 , Σ1 , µ1 ) and (X2 , Σ2 , µ2 ) be measure spaces, and f : X1 × X2 → R+ be a Σ1 ⊗ Σ2 -measurable function. Then the functions Z Z fµ2 (x1 ) := fx1 dµ2 & fµ1 (x2 ) := f x2 dµ1 X2

X1

are Σ1 -measurable and Σ2 -measurable, respectively, and Z Z Z Z Z x2 fx1 dµ2 dµ1 . (2.1.9) f dµ1 ⊗ µ2 = f dµ1 dµ2 = X1 ×X2

X2

X1

X1

X2

Proof: In the case when f is a characteristic function, the statement of this lemma follows from Lemma 2.1.5. Therefore, by linearity, it holds also for nonnegative simple functions. If a nonnegative measurable function f is arbitrary, there exists a sequence of nonnegative simple functions which increase pointwise to f , say (fn )∞ n=1 . By the monotone convergence theorem, Z Z Z n fµ2 dµ1 = lim fµ2 dµ1 = lim fn dµ1 ⊗ µ2 , n→∞

X1

and

Z

Z fµ1 dµ2 = lim

n→∞

X2

where fµn2 (x1 )

n→∞

X1

fµn1

Z fn dµ1 ⊗ µ2 ,

dµ2 = lim

X2

Z :=

X1 ×X2

[fn ]x1 dµ2 , X2

n→∞

fµn1 (x2 )

X1 ×X2

Z :=

[fn ]x2 dµ1 .

X1

This proves (2.1.9) and the lemma. 2 Proof of Theorem 2.1.8: Since an R-valued function f is Lebesgue integrable iff its positive f + and negative f − parts are integrable, it is sufficient to prove the theorem only for nonnegative function f ∈ L1 (X1 × X2 , Σ, µ1 ⊗ µ2 ). But this was exactly done in Lemma 2.1.6. 2 2.1.6.◦ Exercises to Section 2.1. Exercise 2.1.1 Show : α ∈ G} is a finite or countable family of intervals in S that if {(aα , bα ) P R such that [0, 1] ⊆ α∈G (aα , bα ) then α∈G |aα − bα | > 1.


43

Exercise 2.1.2 ∗ Show that the length of intervals in R is a premeasure on the subalgebra in P(R) generated by all intervals. Exercise 2.1.3 ∗ Give an example of an outer measure on P(N) which is not a premeasure on any subalgebra A ⊆ P(N) of infinite cardinality. Exercise 2.1.4 ∗∗ Give an example of an algebra A in P(N) which is not a σ-algebra, and an example of a function ρ : A → [0, 1], such that ρ(∅) = 0, and ρ(N) = 1, for which the outer measure ρ∗ constructed in Proposition 2.1.1 is identically equal to zero. Exercise 2.1.5 Prove the uniqueness in Theorem 2.1.3 Exercise 2.1.6 measurable.

∗∗

Let G be a set of half-open intervals in R. Prove that

S

g∈G

g is Lebesgue

Exercise 2.1.7 Show that the Lebesgue measure can be obtained as the completion of any Borel measure ω such that ω([a, b]) = b − a (∀a ≤ b). Exercise 2.1.8 ∗ Prove that card(B(R)) < card(Σ(R)). Remark that in Exercise 2.2.6 we will see that Σ(R) 6= P(R). Exercise 2.1.9 Show that the distribution function F of the Borel measure µ given in (2.1.4) is increasing and right continuous. Exercise 2.1.10

∗

Prove Lemma 2.1.1.

Exercise 2.1.11 Let A ⊆ P(X) be an algebra, let µ0 be a σ-finite premeasure on A, and let Ω be the σ-algebra generated by A. Show that there exists a unique extension of µ0 to a measure µ on Ω. Exercise 2.1.12

∗∗

Prove Theorem 2.1.7.

Exercise 2.1.13 on the algebra A.

∗∗

Show that the function µ defined in the subsection 2.1.5 is a premeasure

Exercise 2.1.14 Show that if ∆ is infinite Q and R is taking with the Lebesgue measure then the measure µ ˆ constructed in 2.1.5 on R does not satisfy 1.1.3.(d). α∈∆

44

CHAPTER 2.

Exercise 2.1.15 Prove the formulas in (2.1.5), (2.1.6) and (2.1.7). Exercise 2.1.16 Prove Lemma 2.1.4. Exercise 2.1.17 ∗∗ Prove the Steinhaus theorem: for any Lebesgue measurable set A ⊆ R such that µ(A) > 0 there exist nonempty open intervals I ⊆ A − A, J ⊆ A + A. Show that the conclusion of the theorem is true for the standard Cantor set in spite of it has measure zero. Exercise 2.1.18 ∗ Let f : R → R be an additive function. Show that f is linear if f is bounded on a Lebesgue measurable set A ⊆ R, µ(A) > 0. Show that f is linear if f is bounded on a standard Cantor set. Show that f is linear if f is measurable on a nontrivial interval. Show that f is not Lebesgue measurable on any nontrivial interval if f is discontinuos at least at one point. Exercise 2.1.19 ∗∗ Let A, B be Lebesgue measurable subsets of Rn such that µ(A) > 0 and µ(B) > 0. Prove that µ({x ∈ Rn : µ(A ∩ (B − x)) > 0}) > 0. Exercise 2.1.20 ∗∗ Let A be a subalgebra of P([0, 1]2 ) generated by all rectangles A × B where A and B are Lebesgue measurable subsets of [0, 1]. Let ζ : A → R be the unique additive extension of the function defined on rectangles by the formula: ζ(A × B) = µ(A ∩ B) , where µ is the Lebesgue measure. Show that ζ is a premeasure on A. Exercise 2.1.21 Show that the statement of Lemma 2.1.6 may fail without the positivity of the function f .

2.2

Lebesgue Measure and Integral in Rn

In this section, we study Rn and functions from Rn to R from the point of view of the Lebesgue measure and Lebesgue integration. All results presented below possess obvious C-valued analogs. Then we define and study Cantor sets which are very interesting from the point of view of the set topology and the measure theory. Cantor sets are closed Borel nowhere dense subsets of the interval [0, 1] or, more generally, of a Hausdorff space. The main advantage of Cantor sets is

2.2. LEBESGUE MEASURE AND INTEGRAL IN RN

45

that they are used in constructions of many examples in analysis. 2.2.1.◦ The Lebesgue measure on Rn . The Lebesgue measure µn on Rn is the completion of the product of the Lebesgue measure on R according to Definition 2.1.3. The domain Σn of µn (of course, B(Rn ) ⊆ Σn ) is the class of Lebesgue measurable sets in Rn . We write µ for µn and Z Z f (x) dx := f dµ. We extend of previous section to the n-dimensional case. If Qn some of the results n E = 1 Ej is a block in R , we call sets Ej ⊆ R the sides of the block E. Theorem 2.2.1 Let E ∈ Σn . Then (a)

µ(E) = inf{µ(U ) : E ⊆ U, U open} = sup{µ(K) : K ⊆ E, K compact};

(b) E = A1 ∪ N1 = A2 \ N2 , where A1 is an Fσ set, A2 is a Gδ set, and µ(N1 ) = µ(N2 ) = 0; (c) If µ(E) < ∞ then, for any ε > 0, there is a finite family {Rj }N j=1 of disjoint SN blocks, whose sides are intervals such that µ(E4 j=1 Rj ) < ε. Proof: By the definition of product measures, if S E ∈ Σn and ε > 0, there is a ∞ countable family {Tj }∞ j=1 of blocks such that E ⊆ j=1 Tj and ∞ X

µ(Tj ) ≤ µ(E) + ε.

j=1

For each j, by applying Theorem 2.1.6 to the sides of Rj , we can findSblocks Uj ⊇ Fj whose sides are open sets such that µ(Uj ) < µ(Tj )+ε2−j . If U = ∞ j=1 Uj then U is open and ∞ X µ(Uj ) ≤ µ(E) + 2ε. µ(U ) ≤ j=1

This proves the first equation in part (a). The second equation and part (b) follow as in the proofs of Theorems 2.1.6 and 2.1.7.

46

CHAPTER 2.

Next, if µ(E) < ∞ then µ(Uj ) < ∞ for all j. Since the sides of Uj are countable unions of open intervals, by taking suitable finite subunions, we obtain blocks Vj ⊆ Uj whose sides are finite unions of intervals such that µ(Vj ) ≥ µ(Uj )−ε2−j . If N is sufficiently large, we have ! ! ! N N ∞ [ [ [ µ E\ Vj ≤ µ Uj \ Vj + µ Uj < 2ε j=1

and µ

j=1

N [ j=1

! Vj \ E

≤µ

j=N +1 ∞ [

! Uj \ E

< ε,

j=1

S SN so µ(E4 N j=1 Vj ) < 3ε. Since j=1 Vj can be expressed as a finite disjoint union of rectangles whose sides are intervals, we have proved (c). 2 2.2.2.◦ Lebesgue integrable functions on Rn . Let µ be the Lebesgue measure in Rn . The set M(Rn , µ) of all real µ-measurable functions on Rn is a real vector space (addition and scalar multiplication are pointwise). By L1 (Rn , µ) we denote its subspace of all Lebesgue integrable functions (with finite integral). Now write f ≈ g for f and g in M(Rn , µ), whenever f and g differ only on a µ-null set (a set of measure zero). It is easily seen that ≈ is an equivalence relation. Let L0 = L0 (Rn , µ) be the set of equivalence classes of functions in M(Rn , µ). We denote the equivalence classes of f, g, . . . by [f ], [g], . . .. The set L0 becomes a real vector space by defining [f ] + [g] = [f + g] and α[f ] = [αf ] for a real α. Observe that these definitions do not depend on the choice of f and g in their equivalence classes. The same is true for the partial order in L0 , if we define [f ] ≤ [g] to mean f (x) ≤ g(x) for all x ∈ Rn except a null set. In practice, the elements of L0 = L0 (Rn , µ) are usually denoted by f, g, . . . and treated as if they were functions instead of equivalence classes of functions. Theorem 2.2.2 If f ∈ L1 (µ) and ε > 0, there is a simple R function φ = PN , where each R is a product of intervals such that |f − φ| dµ < ε, α χ j j=1 j Rj and R there is a continuous function g vanishing outside of a bounded set such that |f − g| dµ < ε. Proof: By the definition of Lebesgue integrable functions, we can approximate f by simple functions in L1 -norm. Then use Theorem 2.2.1 to approximate a simple function by a function φ of the desired form. Finally, use the Urysohn Lemma to approximate such φ by a continuous function. 2


47

Theorem 2.2.3 The Lebesgue measure on Rn is translation-invariant. Namely, let a ∈ Rn . Define the shift τa : Rn → Rn by τa (x) = x + a. (a)

If E ∈ Ln then τa (E) ∈ Ln and µ(τa (E)) = µ(E);

(b) If f : Rn → R is Lebesgue measurable then so is f ◦ τa . Moreover, if either f ≥ 0 or f ∈ L1 (µ) then Z Z (f ◦ τa ) dµ = f dµ. Proof: Since τa and its inverse τ−a are continuous, they preserve the class of Borel sets. The formula µ(τa (E)) = µ(E) follows easily from the trivial onedimensional variant of this result if E is a block. For a general Borel set E, the formula µ(τa (E)) = µ(E) follows from the previous step, since µ is determined by its action on blocks. Assertion (a) now follows immediately. If f is Lebesgue measurable and B is a Borel set in R, we have f −1 (B) = E ∪ N , where E is Borel and µ(N ) = 0. But τa−1 (E) is Borel and µ(τa−1 (N )) = 0, so (f ◦ τa )−1 (B) ∈ Σn and f is Lebesgue measurable. The equality Z Z (f ◦ τa ) dµ = f dµ reduces to the equality µ(τ−a (E)) = µ(E) when f = χE . It is true for simple functions by linearity, and hence for nonnegative measurable functions by the definition of integral. Taking positive and negative parts of real and imaginary parts, we obtain the result for f ∈ L1 (µ). 2 2.2.3.◦ The Lusin theorem. This theorem says that any Lebesgue measurable function on Rn can be approximated by a (partially defined) continuous function. More precisely. Theorem 2.2.4 (Lusin’s theorem) If f is a Lebesgue measurable function on Rn and ε > 0 then there exist a measurable set A ⊆ Rn such that µ(Rn \ A) ≤ ε and the restriction of f onto A is continuous.

48

CHAPTER 2.

Proof: First, assume that f vanishes outside of some Ik = [−k, k]n . There exists a sequence (ψm )m of simple functions vanishing outside Ik such that ψm → f pointwise. By Egoroff’s theorem, there exist G ⊆ Ik such that µ(G) > (2k)n − ε/2 and ψk → f uniformly on G. By Theorem 2.2.1, we can find for each m a compact Cm ⊆ G such that µ(Cm \ G) < 2−m−1 ε and ψk is continuous on Ck . Take C = ∩∞ m=1 Cm , then µ(Ik \ C) ≤ µ(Ik \ G) + µ(G \ C) < ε. Each ψm is continuous on C, and the sequence (ψm )m converges uniformly on C. Then ψm |C → ψ, which is continuous on C, and since ψm → f pointwise then f |C is continuous. In the general case when f is a Lebesgue measurable function on Rn we denote the set (−k, k)n by Jk . As it was shown, for any k, there exists Rk ∈ Σn such that f |Rk is continuous, Rk ⊆ Ik , and µ(Ik \ Rk ) < 2−k ε. Denote Ak := (Jk \ Ik−1 ) ∩ Rk , where I0 = ∅. Then the restriction of f onto A := ∪∞ k=1 Ak is continuous and µ(Rn \ A) < ε. 2 Corollary 2.2.1 If f ∈ L1 (Rn ) and ε > 0 then there exists a continuous function g : Rn → R such that Z |f − g| dµ ≤ ε. 2 Rn

2.2.4.◦ Cantor sets. x=

Each x ∈ [0, 1] has a base-3 expansion ∞ X

xj 3−j , where xj ∈ {0, 1, 2}.

j=1

This expansion is unique unless x is of the form m · 3−k for some integers m, k; in which case x has two expansions: one with xj = 0 for j > k and one with xj = 2 for j > k. Assuming m is not divisible by 3, one of these expansions will have xk = 1 and the other will have xk = 0 or 2. If we agree always to use the latter expansion, we see that x1 = 1 ⇔ x ∈ (1/3, 2/3),


49

x1 6= 1 and x2 = 1 ⇔ x ∈ (1/9, 2/9) ∪ (7/9, 8/9), and so forth. It will also be useful to observe that if x=

∞ X

−j

xj 3

& y=

j=1

∞ X

yj 3−j ,

j=1

then x < y iff there exists n such that xn < yn and xj = yj for 1 ≤ j < n. Definition 2.2.1 The standard Cantor set C is the set of all x ∈ [0, 1] having P −j a base-3 expansion x = ∞ x 3 with xj 6= 1 for all j. j=1 j Thus, C =

T∞

n=1

∆n , where

∆1 := [0, 1] \ (1/3, 2/3) , ∆2 := ∆1 \ ((1/9, 2/9) ∪ (7/9, 8/9)), etc. Obviously, C is compact, nowhere dense, and totally disconnected (i.e. the only connected subsets of C are single points). Moreover, C has no isolated points. These simple properties of C we leave to the reader as an exercise. 2.2.5.◦ Basic properties of the standard Cantor set. properties of C are summarized as follows:

Other basic

Proposition 2.2.1 Let C be the standard Cantor set, then C is a Borel set such that µ(C) = 0 & card(C) = c. Proof: C is obtained from [0, 1] by removing one interval of length 31 , two intervals of length 19 , and so forth. Thus, ∞ X 2j 1 1 µ(C) = 1 − =1− · = 0. j+1 3 3 1 − (2/3) j=0

Suppose x ∈ C, so that x =

P∞

j=1

xj 3−j , where xj = 0 or 2 for all j. Let

f (x) =

∞ X j=1

yj 2−j ,

(2.2.1)

50

CHAPTER 2.

where yj = xj /2. The series defining f (x) is the base-2 expansion of a number in [0, 1], and any number in [0, 1] can be obtained in this way. Hence f maps C onto [0, 1] and card(C) is continuum. 2 2.2.6.◦ Generalized Cantor sets. The construction of the standard Cantor set which is starting with [0, 1] and successively removing open middle thirds of intervals has an obvious generalization. If I is a bounded interval and α ∈ (0, 1), let us call the open interval with the same midpoint as I, and length equal to α times the length of I the “open middle αth” of I. If (αj )∞ j=1 is any sequence of numbers in (0, 1) then we define a decreasing sequence (∆j )∞ j=1 of closed sets as follows: ∆0 = [0, 1], and ∆j is obtained by removing the open middle αj th from each of the intervals that make up Kj−1 . The resulting limiting set K=

∞ \

∆j

j=1

is called a generalized Cantor set. Generalized Cantor sets possess all properties of the standard Cantor set C, but they do not have always the Lebesgue measure zero. As for their Lebesgue measure, clearly µ(∆j ) = (1 − αj )µ(∆j−1 ), so µ(K) =

∞ Y (1 − αj ). j=1

If the αj are all equal to a fixed α ∈ (0, 1), we have µ(K) = 0. However, if αj → 0 rapidly enough, µ(K) will be strictly positive and, for any β ∈ [0, 1), one can choose αj so that µ(K) = β. 2.2.7.◦ Cantor functions. following property.

The map f : C → [0, 1] given by (3.1.1) has the

If x, y ∈ C, x < y, then f (x) < f (y) unless x and y are endpoints of one of the intervals removed from [0, 1] in obtaining C (in this case, f (x) = m·2−k for some nonnegative integers m, k; and f (x) and f (y) are the two base-2 expansions of this number).


51

Therefore we can extend f to a map fˆ : [0, 1] → [0, 1] by setting it to be constant on each interval removed from C. The map fˆ, which is obviously increasing and continuous, is called the standard Cantor function. This notion can be naturally extended to a generalized Cantor function by using of the notion of the generalized Cantor set. 2.2.8.◦ Applications of Cantor sets and functions in constructing of counterexamples. Generalized Cantor sets are examples of nowhere dense subsets of [0, 1] with Lebesgue measure 1 − ε, where ε > 0 is arbitrarily. Let Ck S be a generalized Cantor set such that µ(Ck ) > 1 − k1 , then A = ∞ A k=1 k is a set of the first category (i.e. the countable union of nowhere dense sets) and µ(A) = 1. By the Baire theorem, [0, 1] is a set of the second category (i.e. the set which is not of the first category) as a complete metric space. Therefore, [0, 1] \ A is an example of a dense subset of [0, 1] of the second category of Lebesgue measure zero. By addition and multiplication, we define a Cantor like set K ⊆ [a, b] in an interval [a, b] as: K := a + (b − a) · G, where G is a some generalized Cantor set. The similar idea is used in the definition of a Cantor like function on an interval [a, b]. Now it is obvious how (with the help of Cantor like sets) to construct an example of a dense subset D ⊆ R of the second category of Lebesgue measure zero. Cantor like functions give us the following quite simple construction of a continuous function f : R → [0, 1] which is nowhere differentiable. Let {an }n be a countable dense subset of R, and suppose that an 6= an+1 for all n. For each n, take a Cantor like function fn on the interval [an , an+1 ], then the function f :=

∞ X

2−n fn

j=1

possesses desired properties. 2.2.8.◦ Exercises to Section 2.2. Exercise 2.2.1

∗

Show that the Lebesgue measure in Rn is separable.

Exercise 2.2.2

∗

Prove Corollary 2.2.1.

52

CHAPTER 2.

Exercise 2.2.3

∗

Show that the Lebesgue measure in Rn is rotation invariant.

Exercise 2.2.4 Show that the family of all maps from Rn to Rn preserving the Lebesgue measure in Rn is a group. Exercise 2.2.5 ∗∗ Give an example of a transformation S : Rn → Rn , such that S is not equal a.e. to any affine transformation of R and S preserves the Lebesgue measure in Rn . Can such a transformation be continuous? Exercise 2.2.6 ∗ Let Γ be a unit circle {λ ∈ C : |λ| = 1} endowed with the Lebesgue measure. Then any λ ∈ Γ is of the form ei 2π α , where α ∈ [0, 1). (a)

Show that ≈ defined below is an equivalence relation on Γ: ei 2π α1 ≈ ei 2π α1

if

α1 − α2 ∈ Q .

S

(b) Let Γ = κ Γκ be a representation of Γ as the union of equivalence classes with respect to ≈ . By using of the axiom of choice, define a set Ω ⊆ Γ such that |Ω ∩ Γκ | = 1 for any κ. Let for any α ∈ R Ωα := {ei 2π α ω : ω ∈ Ω}. Show that, for any two rationals r1 6= r2 from [0, 1), Ωr1 ∩ Ωr2 = ∅, and [ Γ= Ωr . r∈Q ∩[0,1)

(c) By using (b), show that Ω is not Lebesgue measurable subset of Γ. (d) Construct non-measurable subsets of [0, 1], R, and Rn . Exercise 2.2.7 Show that any generalized Cantor set is compact, nowhere dense, totally disconnected, and has no isolated points. Exercise 2.2.8 ∗ Show that for any β ∈ [0, 1) there is a generalized Cantor set K ⊆ [0, 1] such that µ(K) = β. Exercise 2.2.9 ∗ Give an example of a subset in [0, 1] which is of the second category and has Lebesgue measure one. Exercise 2.2.10 ∗ Give an algorithm for constructing of a generalized Cantor function and show that it is continuous. Exercise 2.2.11 ∗∗ Construct a function f : [0, 1] → [0, 1] such that f 0 = 0 a.e. and f is constant on no nonempty subinterval of [0, 1].


53

Exercise 2.2.12 ∗ Give an example of a set D ⊆ Rn of Lebesgue measure zero such that D ∩ U is of the second category for any nonempty open U ⊆ Rn . Exercise 2.2.13 ∗ Construct an example of a dense subset D ⊆ Rn of the second category and of Lebesgue measure zero. Exercise 2.2.14 a < b:

∗∗∗

Construct a Borel subset A ⊆ R such that for each interval [a, b], where µ(A ∩ [a, b]) > 0 & µ((R \ A) ∩ [a, b]) > 0.

Exercise 2.2.15 ∗∗∗ Construct a sequence (Ak )∞ k=1 of pairwise disjoint Borel subsets Ak ⊆ R such that for each interval [a, b], a < b, and k ∈ N µ(Ak ∩ [a, b]) > 0. Exercise 2.2.16 ∗∗∗ Construct a sequence (Ak )k∈N of pairwise disjoint Borel subsets Ak ⊆ Rn such that, for each rectangle H = [a1 , b1 ] × · · · × [an , bn ]

(∀j ∈ {1, . . . , n} aj < bj )

and for each k ∈ N, we have that µ(Ak ∩ H) > 0. Exercise 2.2.17 ∗∗∗ Construct a nonnegative Lebesgue measurable function f on R, which Rb is finite everywhere and a f dµ = ∞ for all a < b. Exercise 2.2.18 ∗∗∗ Construct a sequence (fn )∞ n=1 of pairwise disjoint nonnegative Lebesgue measurable functions on R such that each fn is finite everywhere and Z

b

fn dµ = ∞ a

for all a < b and n ∈ N. Exercise 2.2.19

∗∗

Let f ∈ L1 (R, µ) such that for every open U ⊆ R Z Z f dµ = f dµ. U

Show that f = 0 a.e.

¯ U

54

CHAPTER 2.

Chapter 3

3.1

The Radon – Nikodym Theorem

In this section, we prove the Radon – Nikodym theorem and present several its applications, in particular, the Hahn decomposition theorem. 3.1.1.◦ The Radon – Nikodym theorem. Let (X, B, µ) be a measure space and let f : X → R be a nonnegative integrable function. Then µf defined by Z f (x) dµ (∀A ∈ A)

µf (A) = A

is a finite measure accordingly to 1.3.2 L4. There is a converse of the last property. Namely, the following theorem is of great importance. We give its direct proof accordingly to A. Schep [10]. Theorem 3.1.1 (The Radon – Nikodym theorem) Let ν and µ be finite measures on (X, B). Then there exist D ∈ B with µ(D) = 0 and a nonnegative µ-integrable function f0 such that Z f0 dµ (∀E ∈ B) . ν(E) = ν(E ∩ D) + E

First, we need the following lemma. Lemma 3.1.1 Let ν and µ be finite measures on (X, B) satisfying 0 ≤ ν ≤ µ on B. Then there exists a measurable function f0 , 0 ≤ f0 ≤ 1, such that Z ν(E) = f0 dµ (∀E ∈ B) . E

55

56 Proof:

CHAPTER 3. Let Z H = {f : f is measurable , ν(E) ≥

f dµ for all E ∈ B}. E

Note that H 6= ∅, since 0 belongs to H. Moreover, when f1 , f2 ∈ H, then max{f1 , f2 } ∈ H. Indeed, if A = {x : f1 (x) ≥ f2 (x)} then Z Z Z max{f1 , f2 } dµ = f1 dµ + f2 dµ ≤ ν(E ∩ A) + ν(E ∩ Ac ) = ν(E). E

E∩Ac

E∩A

Let M := sup

nZ

o

f dµ : f ∈ H .

X

Then 0 ≤ M < ∞, so there exist sequence (fn )∞ n=1 ⊆ H with fn ↑ such that R −1 f dµ > M − n . Let f0 = lim fn then f0 is a measurable function X n R taking values in [0,R 1]. By the monotone convergence theorem, f0 ∈ H and X f0 dµ ≥ M . Hence X f0 dµ = M . R To complete the proof, we show that ν(E) = E f0 dµ for all E ∈ B. If not, there exists E ∈ B satisfying Z f0 dµ .

ν(E) > E

Denote E1 = {x ∈ E : f0 (x) = 1} and E0 = E \ E1 . It follows from Z Z Z ν(E0 ) + ν(E1 ) > f0 dµ = f0 dµ + µ(E1 ) ≥ f0 dµ + ν(E1 ) E

E0

E0

R

that ν(E0 ) > E0 f0 dµ. Thus we may assume that f0 (x) < 1 for all x ∈ E (otherwise, we replace E with E0 ). Let Fn := {x ∈ E : f0 (x) < 1 − n−1 }. Then Fn ↑ E, and ν(Fn ) → ν(E). Therefore, there exists n0 such that Z ν(Fn0 ) > (f0 + n−1 0 χFn0 ) dµ . Fn0

We assert that f0 + n−1 0 χF ∈ H for some measurable F ⊆ Fn0 , µ(F ) > 0. If not, then every measurableRsubset F of Fn0 with Rpositive µ-measure contains −1 a measurable subset G with G (f0 + n−1 0 χF ) dµ = G (f0 + n0 χG ) dµ > ν(G). Denote this property by P, namely, Z A ∈ P ⇔ A ∈ B , A ⊆ Fn0 & (f0 + n−1 0 χA ) dµ > ν(A) . A

3.1. THE RADON – NIKODYM THEOREM

57

The property P satisfies conditions of Theorem 1.1.2. Namely, every measurable subset of Fn0 of non-zero measure contains a subset of non-zero measure with the property P, and P is closed under at most countable unions of pairwise disjoint families. Therefore by Theorem 1.1.2, Fn0 ∈ P, and Z (f0 + n−1 ν(Fn0 ) > 0 χFn0 ) dµ > ν(Fn0 ), Fn0

which is a contradiction. Thus f0 + n−1 0 χF ∈ H for some measurable subset F of Fn0 with a positive µ-measure. However, Z −1 (f0 + n−1 0 χF ) dµ = M + n0 µ(F ) > M . This contradiction yields ν(E) =

R E

f0 dµ for all E ∈ B. 2

Proof of Theorem 3.1.1: Let λ = µ+ν. Then 0 ≤ ν ≤ λ so, by Lemma 3.1.1, R there exists a Lebesgue integrable g : X → [0, 1], such that ν(E) = E g dλ for R all E in B. Then µ(E) = (1 − g) dλ for all E ∈ B. Let D = {x : g(x) = 1}, E R then µ(D) = D 0 dλ = 0. Now, the equality Z Z g dµ g dν + ν(E) = E

E

implies Z

Z

g dµ (1 − g) dν = E R R for all E ∈R B. Hence X φ(1R − g) dν = X φg dµ for all nonnegative simple φ and, thus, X f (1 − g) dν = X f g dµ for all nonnegative measurable f . Taking f = (1 + g + · · · + g n )χE , we have Z Z n+1 (1 − g ) dν = (1 + g + · · · + g n )g dµ E

E

E

for all E in B and all n ≥ 1. Since 0 ≤ g(x) < 1 on Dc , it follows from the monotone convergence theorem that Z Z c n+1 ν(E ∩ D ) = lim (1 − g ) dν = lim (1 + g + · · · + g n )g dµ n→∞

E∩Dc

Z = E∩Dc

n→∞

g(1 − g)−1 dµ =

E∩Dc

Z f0 dµ, E

58

CHAPTER 3.

where f0 = g(1 − g)−1 χDc . The proof is completed. 2 In some textbooks the Radon – Nikodym theorem is given in a slightly different form. We need the following definition. Definition 3.1.1 Let µ and ν be signed measures on a σ-algebra A. Then ν is called µ-continuous if ν(A) = 0 for every A ∈ A such that µ(A) = 0. In this case, we write ν 0, there exists δ > 0 such that |ν(A)| ≤ ε whenever µ(A) ≤ δ. Give an example which shows that this assertion may fail if ν is not finite. Exercise 3.1.5 Let ν and µ be σ-finite positive measures and let ν 0 for any λ ∈ Λ. Exercise 3.1.7 Obtain the Hahn decomposition theorem for σ-finite signed measure as a corollary of this theorem for finite signed measure. Exercise 3.1.8

∗

Prove the Hahn decomposition theorem for arbitrary signed measure.

Exercise 3.1.9 Obtain the Jordan decomposition theorem as a corollary of the Hahn decomposition theorem. Exercise 3.1.10 ∗ Let S be a nonsingular transformation of (X, Σ, µ) and let PS be the corresponding Frobenius – Perron operator PS : L1 (µ) → L1 (µ). Show that: (a) PS is well defined; (b) PS is a linear operator; (c) PS preserves the L1 -norm of any nonnegative f ∈ L1 (µ). Exercise 3.1.11 Let S be a nonsingular transformation of (X, Σ, µ). Show that S n is nonsingular transformation for any nonnegative integer n and that PS n = PSn for n ≥ 0. Exercise 3.1.12 ∗∗ Let S be a transformation of [0, 1] with the Lebesgue measure. Find the Frobenius – Perron operator if: (a) S(x) = 4x(1 − x); (b) S(x) = 4x2 (1 − x2 ); (c) S(x) = sin πx; (d) S(x) = tan(x + 1).

3.2. LP -SPACES

61

Exercise 3.1.13 ∗ Let S be a nonsingular transformation of (X, Σ, µ) and let PS be the corresponding Frobenius – Perron operator PS : L1 (µ) → L1 (µ). Prove that, for every nonnegative f, g ∈ L1 (µ), the condition supp(f ) ⊆ supp(g) implies supp(PS f ) ⊆ supp(PS g) a.e., where supp(ψ) := {x : ψ(x) 6= 0} for ψ ∈ L1 (µ), and supp(f ) is defined for f ∈ L1 as follows: supp(f ) := A such that ψ(x) 6= 0 a.e. on A , ψ(x) = 0 a.e. on X \ A for any ψ ∈ [f ]. Exercise 3.1.14 ∗∗ In notations of Exercise 2.1.20, show that the unique extension ζ of the premeasure ζ (which exists due to Caratheodory theorem) to the product σ-algebra Σ([0, 1]) × Σ([0, 1])) is not µ×µ-continuous. Although the premeasure ζ on the subalgebra A ⊂ Σ([0, 1])× Σ([0, 1])) generated by all rectangles with measurable sides is µ × µ-continuous in the following sense: µ × µ(W ) = 0 ⇒ ζ(W ) = 0 (∀ W ∈ A) .

3.2

Lp -Spaces

Here we present basic results about Lp -spaces. We assume in this section that all measurable functions are C-valued and all linear spaces are complex. 3.2.1.◦ Lp -spaces for 0 ≤ p ≤ ∞. Let (X, A, µ) be a measure space and let p be a fixed real number 0 ≤ p < ∞. We denote by Lp = Lp (X, A, µ) the set of all measurable functions f : X → C such that Z |f |p dµ < ∞. For any f ∈ Lp , we define a function kf kp : Lp → R+ as Z p1 p kf kp := |f | dµ . This function introduces the natural topology on Lp (X, A, µ) by the base {U (f, ε) : f ∈ Lp , ε > 0}, where U (f, ε) := {g ∈ Lp : kf − gkp < ε}.

62

CHAPTER 3.

Here we don’t give the proof of this result. Below, in the next subsection, we state the important case by showing that if 1 ≤ p < ∞ then Lp is a linear space and the function k · kp is a seminorm. The most popular examples of Lp -spaces are: Lp [0, 1] and Lp (R), where we consider the Lebesgue measure on [0, 1] and on R. Another type of examples is following. Let X be a nonempty set, let A = P(X) be the power set of X (i.e. the σ-algebra of all subsets of X), and let µ be the counting measure on X. Every function f : X → C is measurable. A commonly used notation of Lp (X, A, µ) in this P case is `p (X). It is easy to verify that a function f : X → C is in `p (X) iff x∈X |f (x)|p < ∞, in the sense that the finite subsumes have a finite upper bound. The choices X = N and X = Z are of a special interest; these yield the space of absolutely p-summable sequences (resp., bilateral sequences). If X = N then we denote Lp (N) by `p . In the case p = ∞, we cannot directly generalize the definition of our function k · kp , and we treat this case as follow. Set L∞ = L∞ (X, A, µ), the set of all measurable functions f : X → C such that there exists a constant M ∈ R, |f |(x) ≤ M

a.e.

It is obvious that L∞ (X, A, µ) is a topological linear space for the topology given by the seminorm k · k∞ defined as kf k∞ = esssup(|f |) = inf{M ∈ R : |f |(x) ≤ M a.e.}. The main examples of L∞ -spaces are L∞ [0, 1], L∞ (R), and `∞ , which are defined similarly to Lp [0, 1], Lp (R), and `p . 3.2.2.◦ Inequalities.

We begin with elementary analytic lemma.

Lemma 3.2.1 If a ≥ 0, b ≥ 0, and 0 < λ < 1 then aλ b1−λ ≤ λa + (1 − λ)b, with equality iff a = b.

3.2. LP -SPACES

63

Proof: The result is obvious if b = 0; otherwise, dividing both sides by b and setting t = a/b, we are reduced to showing that tλ ≤ λt + (1 − λ) with equality iff t = 1. The derivative f 0 (t) = λtλ−1 − λ of the function f (t) = tλ − λt satisfies: f 0 (t) > 0 if t < 1; f 0 (1) = 0; f 0 (t) < 0 if t > 1. Then f is strictly increasing for t < 1 and strictly decreasing for t > 1, so its maximum value, namely 1 − λ, occurs at t = 1. 2 If p > 1, we define q =

p ; p−1

thus q > 0 and satisfies p−1 +q −1 = 1, i.e. p+q = pq.

The following inequality which called the Elementary Young Inequality αβ ≤

αp β q + p q

is true for all α, β ≥ 0 and p > 1. For the proof, it is enough to substitute λ = p1 , 1

1

α = a p , and β = b q in Lemma 3.2.1. Theorem 3.2.1 (H¨ older’s inequality) Let p > 1, f ∈ Lp , and g ∈ Lq . Then f · g ∈ L1 and kf · gk1 ≤ kf kp kgkq . (3.2.1) Proof: The result is trivial if kf kp = 0 or kgkq = 0, since f = 0 or g = 0 a.e. Moreover, we observe that if (3.2.1) holds for a some f and g then it also holds for all scalar multiples of f and g; for it, f and g are replaced by a · f and b · g, both sides of (3.2.1) change by a factor of |ab|. It suffices therefore to prove (3.2.1) when kf kp = kgkq = 1 with equality iff |f |p = |g|q a.e. To this end, we apply the Young inequality with α = |f (x)| and β = |g(x)| to obtain |f (x)g(x)| ≤ p−1 |f (x)|p + q −1 |g(x)|q .

(3.2.2)

Integration of the both sides yields Z Z −1 p −1 kf gk1 ≤ p |f | dµ + q |g|q dµ = p−1 + q −1 = 1 = kf kp kgkq . Equality holds here iff it holds a.e. in (3.2.1) and, by Lemma 3.2.1, this happens exactly iff |f |p = |g|q a.e. 2 One of the most important application of the Hölder inequality is the following inequality.

64

CHAPTER 3.

Theorem 3.2.2 (Minkowski’s inequality) Let p ≥ 1, f, g ∈ Lp . Then f + g ∈ Lp and kf + gkp ≤ kf kp + kgkp . Proof:

The result is obvious if p = 1 or f + g = 0 a.e.. Otherwise, we have |f + g|p ≤ (|f | + |g|)|f + g|p−1 = |f ||f + g|p−1 + |g||f + g|p−1 .

Taking the integral, k(f + g)p k1 ≤ kf (f + g)p−1 k1 + kg(f + g)p−1 k1 .

(3.2.3)

Integration of the inequality |f + g)|p ≤ 2p max{|f |, |g|}p ≤ 2p max{|f |p , |g|p } gives us f + g ∈ Lp . Since (p − 1)q = p when q is the conjugate to p and applying Hölder’s inequality to the functions p

φ = f ∈ Lp , ψ = (f + g)p−1 = (f + g) q ∈ Lq , we have kf (f + g)p−1 k1 ≤ kφ · ψk1 ≤ kφkp kψkq = kf kp k(f + g)p−1 kq .

(3.2.4)

Similarly kg(f + g)p−1 k1 ≤ kgkp k(f + g)p−1 kq .

(3.2.5)

Combining (3.2.3), (3.2.4), and (3.2.5) gives us R Z p1 |f + g|p dµ p kf + gkp = |f + g| dµ = R 1 = ( |f + g|p dµ) q R |f + g|p dµ k(f + g)p k1 ≤ kgkp + kf kp . 2 = R 1 k(f + g)p−1 kq ( |f + g|(p−1)q dµ) q Corollary 3.2.1 Lp is a vector space with respect to pointwise linear operations. The function f → kf kp is a seminorm on Lp . 2

3.2. LP -SPACES

65

3.2.3.◦ Completeness of Lp , where 1 ≤ p < ∞ . given in the following theorem.

A basic property of Lp is

Theorem 3.2.3 Let (fn )∞ n=1 be a sequence in Lp = Lp (X, Σ, µ) satisfying kfm −fn kp → 0 as n, m → ∞. Then there exists f ∈ Lp with lim kfn −f kp = 0. n→∞

Proof: We prove this theorem for 1 ≤ p < ∞. The case p = ∞ is more elementary and it is left for the reader as an exercise. We may suppose, by passing to a subsequence, that kfn+1 − fn kp ≤ 2−n (∀n ∈ N). Thus we have

P∞

n=1

kfn+1 − fn kp ≤ 1. With the convention f0 = 0, define

gn := |f1 | + |f2 − f1 | + · · · + |fn − fn−1 | =

n X

|fk − fk−1 |.

k=1

By Theorem 3.2.2, gn ∈ Lp and kgn kp ≤

n X

kfk − fk−1 kp = kf1 kp +

k=1

n X

kfk − fk−1 kp ≤ kf1 kp + 1 .

k=2

Thus gnp ∈ L1 for all n and Z |gn |p dµ = kgn kpp ≤ (kf1 kp + 1)p .

(3.2.6)

X p ∞ Since (gn )∞ n=1 is an increasing sequence and p ≥ 1, the sequence ((gn ) )n=1 is also increasing. It follows from (3.2.6) and the monotone convergence theorem that there exists h ∈ L1 , h ≥ 0, such that (gn )p ↑ h a.e. Denoting g := h1/p , we have g ∈ Lp and gn ↑ g a.e.

Let E ∈ Σ be such that µ(E) = 0 and gn (x) ↑ g(x) for all x ∈ X \ E. Then g(x) = lim gn (x) = lim n→∞

n→∞

n X k=1

|fk (x) − fk−1 (x)| (∀x ∈ X \ E) .

66

CHAPTER 3.

P Thus the series ∞ k (x) − fk−1 (x)| is convergent to g(x) for all x ∈ X \ E. k=1 P|f ∞ Therefore the series k=1 (fk (x) − fk−1 (x)) is also convergent for x ∈ X \ E, and satisfies: lim fn (x) = lim

n→∞

n X

n→∞

(fk (x) − fk−1 (x)) ≤ g(x) (∀x ∈ X \ E) .

k=1

Define f (x) := lim fn (x) for x ∈ X \ E , and f (x) := 0 for x ∈ E. n→∞

Then f is measurable, fn → f a.e., and |f | ≤ g. Therefore |f |p ≤ g p = h ∈ L1 , and |f |p ∈ L1 , i.e., f ∈ Lp . It remains to show that kfn − f kp → 0. Given an ε > 0, choose Nε such that kfm − fn kp ≤ ε for all m, n ≥ Nε . Fix m ≥ Nε , then Z |fm − fn |p dµ ≤ εp for all n ≥ Nε . X

Since |fm − fn |p ∈ L1 for all n ≥ Nε , it follows from the Fatou lemma that Z Z p |fm − fn |p dµ ≤ εp . (3.2.7) (lim sup |fm − fn | ) dµ ≤ lim sup X

n→∞

n→∞

X

In particular, lim sup |fm − fn |p ∈ L1 . But |fm − fn |p → |fm − f |p a.e. as n→∞

n → ∞, thus

lim sup |fm − fn |p = |fm − f |p a.e. n→∞

R

p

p

So X |fm − f | dµ ≤ ε by (3.2.7), i.e., kfm − f kp ≤ εp for all m ≥ Nε . Since ε > 0 has been chosen arbitrary, the proof is completed. 2 3.2.4.◦ Lp -spaces for 1 ≤ p < ∞. Let now 1 ≤ p < ∞ and (X, A, µ) be a measure space. Take the following relation ”≈” on Lp (X, A, µ): f ≈ g ⇔ f (x) = g(x) a.e.

(3.2.8)

Obviously ”≈” is an equivalence relation and {f : f ≈ 0} = {f : kf kp = 0} is a linear subspace of Lp . Thus we may consider a quotient space Lp (X, A, µ) := Lp (X, A, µ)/{f : kf kp = 0}.

3.2. LP -SPACES

67

We will denote elements of Lp (X, A, µ) in the same way as functions of Lp (X, A, µ), so we will identify f ∈ Lp (X, A, µ) with [f ] ∈ Lp (X, A, µ). The seminorm k · kp on Lp becomes the norm on Lp . We use the same symbol k·kp for its denotation. Accordingly to Corollary 3.2.1, all Lp -spaces are normed linear spaces. As a direct consequence of Theorem 3.2.3, we have the following theorem. Theorem 3.2.4 Every Lp -space is a Banach space for 1 ≤ p < ∞, i.e. every Cauchy sequence in Lp has a norm limit. 2 As an application of the last theorem, we have the following important property ∞ P of Lp -spaces. Let 1 ≤ p < ∞. If fn ∈ Lp and kfi kp < ∞ then there exists i=1

f ∈ Lp such that

n

X

fi = 0 . lim g − n→∞

i=1

In this case, we write g =

∞ P

p

fi .

i=1

In Lp -spaces, the norm convergence and the a.e. convergence are related to each other as follows. Theorem 3.2.5 Let 1 ≤ p < ∞, {fn }∞ n=1 ⊆ Lp , and let g ∈ Lp satisfy fn (x) → 0 a.e. & |fn (x)| ≤ g(x) a.e. (∀n). Then kfn kp → 0. 2 The proof of this theorem is a direct application of the dominated convergence theorem. Theorem 3.2.6 Let 1 ≤ p < ∞, {fn }∞ n=1 ⊆ Lp , and let M ∈ R satisfy fn (x) ↑ a.e. & kfn kp ≤ M (∀n ∈ N). Then there exists f ∈ Lp such that kfn − f k → 0. 2

68

CHAPTER 3.

The proof of this theorem is a direct application of the monotone convergence theorem. 3.2.5.! Separable Lp -spaces. A Banach space X is called separable if there exists a countable family {xn }n ⊆ X such that its norm closure is equal to X. It is easy to see that L∞ (µ) is separable iff its dimension is finite. Theorem 3.2.7 If the measure µ is σ-finite and separable and 1 ≤ p < ∞ then Lp (µ) = Lp (X, Σ, µ) is separable. Proof: We will prove that the countable collection Y of all simple functions, which are finite sums with rational complex coefficients of characteristic functions of measurable sets from a fixed countable family R (where R is a collection of sets as in Definition 1.1.8), is dense in Lp (µ). Let f ∈ Lp (µ) and ε > 0 be given. Since there exists an increasing sequence Xn ↑ X (each Xn of finite measure), we have |f − f · χXn | ↓ 0 pointwise. Hence, there exists a set X 0 of finite measure (we may assume that X 0 = X1 ) such that if we define f1 := f · χX1 then kf − f1 kp ≤ ε/3. The function f1 can be written as f = (g1 − g2 ) + i(h1 − h2 ), where g1 , g2 , h1 , h2 are non-negative members of Lp vanishing outside of X1 . For g1 , there exists a sequence (g (n) )∞ n=1 of rational simple functions, non-negative and vanishing outside of X1 , such that g (n) ↑ g1 pointwise. Then |g1 − g (n) |p ↓ 0, so kg1 − g (n) kp ≤ ε/12 for n sufficiently large. Similarly for g2 , h1 , and h2 . By linear combination, we obtain a rational simple function f2 vanishing outside X1 and such that kf1 − f2 kp ≤ ε/3. P The function f2 can be written as f2 = kj=1 αj χAj , where all αj are rational complex, all Aj are mutually disjoint, and ∪kj=1 Aj = X1 . For each Aj , there exists a set Bj ∈ R such that µ(Aj 4Bj ) ≤ εp /(3k|αj |)p , so kχAj − χBj kp = µ(Aj 4Bj )1/p ≤ ε/(3k|αj |) .

3.2. LP -SPACES Hence, writing f3 =

69 Pk

j=1

αj χBj , we have

kf2 − f3 kp ≤

k X

|αj | · kχAj − χBj kp ≤ ε/3 .

j=1

It follows that kf −f3 kp ≤ ε. Since f3 ∈ Y , this shows that Lp (µ) is separable. 2 3.2.6.◦ Hilbert spaces and L∞ -spaces. Despite of the historically different definitions of Hilbert spaces and L2 -spaces, they are the same object and it is a quite reasonable idea to define Hilbert space as an L2 -space. The main tool in the investigation of Hilbert spaces is a notion of the scalar product: Z (f, g) := f · g¯ dµ (f, g ∈ L2 ). 1

The scalar product generates the norm k · k of L2 as kf k = |(f, f )| 2 . The scalar product leads to the notion of orthogonality of functions. Two functions f, g ∈ L2 are called orthogonal if (f, g) = 0. The family {fα }α∈A is called an orthonormal basis of L2 if kfα k = 1 for any α and (fα , fβ ) = 0 for any α 6= β. The following theorem is a generalization of the well known Pythagorian theorem. Theorem 3.2.8 Any L2 -space has at least one orthonormal basis. If {fα }α∈A is an orthonormal basis of L2 then for any f ∈ L2 X f= (f, fα )fα . 2 α∈A

In Hilbert spaces, the Hölder inequality is known as the Cauchy – Schwarz inequality: 1 1 |(f, g)| ≤ (f, f ) 2 · (g, g) 2 (f, g ∈ L2 ). L∞ -space is the quotient space of L∞ with respect to the equivalence relation ”≈” defined in (3.2.8). The correspondent norm we will denote by k · k∞ . The poof of the next theorem is direct and routine and we refer for them to any textbook on functional analysis.

70

CHAPTER 3.

Theorem 3.2.9 Every L∞ -space is a Banach space. 2 It is an important remark that Theorem 3.2.5 and Theorem 3.2.6 fail for infinite dimensional L∞ -spaces. All Lp -spaces for 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞ are vector lattices and, since |f | ≤ |g| ⇒ kf k ≤ kgk (∀f, g ∈ Lp ), they are Banach lattices. 3.2.7.! The duality and the weak convergence. Let X be a complex Banach space. A function ψ : X → C is called a linear functional if ψ(αx + βy) = αψ(x) + βψ(y)

∀x, y ∈ X, α, β ∈ C.

A linear functional ψ is called continuous if kxn − xk → 0 ⇒ ψ(xn − x) → 0. The set of all continuous linear functionals on the Banach space X is called the dual space (or adjoint) to X and denoted by X ∗ . Theorem 3.2.10 The dual space X ∗ of a Banach space X is a Banach space with respect to the norm kψk = sup{|ψ(x)| : x ∈ X, kxk ≤ 1}. 2 There is a standard way for constructing continuous linear functionals on Lp spaces. Namely, for 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞ let q be such that 1/p + 1/q = 1 . Let g ∈ Lq , denote Z gˆ(f ) = hf, gi :=

f · g dµ ∀f ∈ Lp .

By the Hölder inequality, if p < ∞ (and, by the direct arguments, if p = ∞) gˆ is a continuous linear functional on Lp . Moreover, it can be evaluated that kˆ g k = kgkq . If p < ∞ then this is the most general form of a continuous linear functional on Lp -space.

3.2. LP -SPACES

71

Theorem 3.2.11 Let 1 ≤ p < ∞. Then, for every continuous linear functional ψ on Lp , there exists a unique g ∈ Lq such that ψ = gˆ. Moreover, the dual space L∗p is isometrically isomorphic to Lq . 2 It is convenient to write L∗p = Lq . The structure of the dual of L∞ is more complicated. We say only that L∗∞ is much more bigger then L1 if dim(L∞ ) = ∞. For measurable functions and, in particular, for functions from Lp -spaces, we have studied several modes of convergence: the convergence in measure, convergence in norm, uniform convergence, etc. Now we give one more type of convergence in Lp -spaces for 1 ≤ p < ∞. Definition 3.2.1 A sequence (fn )∞ n=1 ⊆ Lp is weakly convergent to f ∈ Lp if Z Z lim fn · g dµ = f · g dµ (∀g ∈ Lq ), n→∞

where, as usual, p−1 + q −1 = 1. From the Hölder inequality, we have |hfn − f, gî| ≤ kfn − f kp · kgkq and, thus, if kfn − f kp converges to zero, so does hfn − f, gî. Hence the convergence in norm implies the weak convergence. In general, the weak convergence is strictly weaker then the norm convergence. There is only one interesting exception, namely. Theorem 3.2.12 Let (ρn )∞ n=1 be a sequence of elements of `1 which converges weakly to ρ ∈ `1 . Then kρn − ρk → 0. 2 The weak convergence generates the weak topology on Lp . This topology is, by the definition, the weakest topology on Lp in which all functionals gˆ (where g ∈ Lq , p−1 + q −1 = 1) are continuous. The following theorem is very important. Although the proof uses only ideas from the measure theory, it is quite involved, and we omit it in this book. Theorem 3.2.13 Let g ∈ L+ 1 , then the set [0, g] ⊆ L1 is weakly compact. 2

72

CHAPTER 3.

3.2.8.◦ Exercises to Section 3.2. Exercise 3.2.1 Prove the Chebyshev inequality: µ({x : |f (x)| > ε}) ≤

kf kpp , εp

where f ∈ Lp for 0 < p < ∞, and ε > 0. Exercise 3.2.2

∗∗∗

Let 1 ≤ a < b < c ≤ ∞. Show that 1−α La ∩ Lc ⊆ Lb & kf kb ≤ kf kα , a · kf kc

where α is defined by b−1 = αa−1 + (1 − α)c−1 . Exercise 3.2.3

∗∗∗

Let µ be a finite measure and 1 ≤ a ≤ b ≤ ∞. Show that −1

Lb ⊆ La & kf ka ≤ kf kb · µ(X)(a

−b−1 )

.

This implies, in particular, that the strong convergence in Lb implies the strong convergence in La with the same limit. Suppose that µ is infinite, construct an example of a sequence (fn )∞ n=1 in La ∩ Lb and f ∈ La ∩ Lb such that kfn − f kb → 0, but kfn − f ka 6→ 0. Exercise 3.2.4 the function

∗

Let (X, Σ, µ) be a finite measure space and let f ∈ L∞ (X, Σ, µ). Show that N (p) := kf kp ,

(1 ≤ p < ∞)

is continuous and lim N (n) = kf k∞ . n→∞

Exercise 3.2.5 Show that the linear subspace of all simple functions is dense in Lp -space for any 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞. Exercise 3.2.6 Show that `p and Lp (R) are separable Banach spaces for any 1 ≤ p < ∞. Exercise 3.2.7 Let fn = sin nx ∈ Lp [0, 1], where 1 ≤ p < ∞. Show that fn → 0 weakly, but fn 6→ 0 in measure. Exercise 3.2.8 Let gn = nχ[0, n1 ] ∈ Lp [0, 1], where 1 ≤ p < ∞. Show that gn → 0 in measure, but gn 6→ 0 weakly.

3.3. THE LIAPOUNOFF CONVEXITY THEOREM

73

Exercise 3.2.9 (Minkowski’s Inequality for Integrals. I.) ∗∗∗ Let 1 ≤ p < ∞, and let (X, M, µ), (Y, N , ν) be σ-finite measure spaces, and let f ≥ 0 be a M ⊗ N -measurable function on X × Y . Show that hZ p i1/p Z 1/p f (x, y) dν(y) dµ(x) ≤ f (x, y)p dµ(x) dν(y).

Exercise 3.2.10 (Minkowski’s Inequality for Integrals. II.) ∗∗∗ Let 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞, f (·, y) ∈ Lp (µ) for a.e. y, and let the function y → kf (·, y)kp be in L1 (ν). R Show that f (x, ·) ∈ L1 (ν) for a.e. x; the function x → f (x, y) dν(y) is in Lp (µ); and Z

Z

f (·, y) dν(y) ≤ kf (·, y)kp dν(y). p

Exercise 3.2.11

∗∗∗


Exercise 3.2.12

∗∗∗


Exercise 3.2.13 ∗∗ Let An is a measurable subset of [0, 1] for each n, χAn ∈ L1 , and χAn → f weakly in L1 . Show that f is not necessarily a characteristic function of some measurable set. Exercise 3.2.14 Let (X, Σ, µ) be a measure space, and P be a Frobenius – Perron operator on L1 (X, Σ, µ). Show that the dual operator P ∗ on L∞ (X, Σ, µ) satisfies the condition that P ∗ (χA ) is a characteristic function of some measurable set for every A ∈ Σ.

3.3

The Liapounoff Convexity Theorem

In Exercise 1.2.8, we have seen that if µ is a non-atomic signed measure of bounded variation on Σ then the range of µ is the closed interval [inf{µ(A) : A ∈ Σ}, sup{µ(A) : A ∈ Σ}]. One of the central and nicest result about vector-valued measures is the Liapounoff convexity theorem, which says that the range of a non-atomic Rn -valued measure of bounded variation is compact and convex. In this section, we give a direct proof of this theorem, which is due to D.A. Ross [8].

74

CHAPTER 3.

3.3.1.◦ One-dimensional case. For the convenience of the reader, who will not study the proof of main theorem of this section, we give here the proof of the result of Exercise 1.2.8, which is very partial, but important, case of the Liapounoff theorem. First by the Jordan decomposition theorem, we may suppose that µ has nonnegative values only. Also we may suppose, that sup{µ(A) : A ∈ Σ} = 1. So we have to show that the range of µ coincides with the interval [0, 1]. It takes obviously the values 0 and 1. Let 0 < α < 1. Consider the family F of all pairs (A, B) of measurable subsets of X satisfying µ(A) ≤ α, µ(B) ≤ 1 − α. The family F is ordered by inclusion, and it is trivial to show that it satisfies conditions of the Zorn lemma. Therefore, there exists a maximal element, say (A0 , B0 ) in F. If µ(A0 ) < α, then µ(X \(A0 ∪B0 )) > 0, and there exists a subset Y of X \(A0 ∪B0 ) (due to non-atomic condition on µ) with 0 < µ(Y ) < α − µ(A0 ). Thus we get that a pair (A1 , B0 ) is strictly greater then (A0 , B0 ), where A1 := A0 ∪ Y . The obtained contradiction with the maximality of (A0 , B0 ) shows that µ(A0 ) = α, what is required. 3.3.2.◦ Examples. First, let us show that the Liapounoff convexity theorem may fail for E-valued measures, if E is an infinite dimensional Banach space (see, [3]). Example 3.3.1 (J.J. Uhl, Jr.) A non-atomic vector-valued measure of bounded variation, whose range is closed and is neither convex nor compact. Let B([0, 1]) be the Borel algebra on [0, 1] and µ be the Lebesgue measure. Define G : B([0, 1]) → L1 (µ) by G(E) := χE . If π ⊆ B([0, 1]) is a partition of [0, 1], it is evident that X E∈π

kG(E)k1 =

X

µ(E) = 1.

E∈π

By an easy application of the dominated convergence theorem, G(Σ) is closed in L1 (µ). Show that G(Σ) is not a convex set. Indeed, 21 χ[0,1] ∈ coG(Σ), but 1 1 kG(E) − χ[0,1] k1 = [µ([0, 1] \ E) + µ(E)]/2 = 2 2

(∀E ∈ Σ).


75

To see that G(Σ) is not compact, let En = {t ∈ [0, 1] : sin(2n πt) > 0} for each positive integer n. An easy computation shows that kG(Em ) − G(En )k =

1 4

(∀m 6= n).

Hence G(Σ) is not compact. Example 3.3.2 (A. Liapounoff) An `2 -valued non-atomic measure of bounded variation whose range is not convex. Let Σ = B[0, 2π] with the Lebesgue measure µ. Accordingly to Exercise 3.3.4, select a complete orthogonal system (wn )∞ n=0 inRL2 [0, 2π] such that each wn assumes only the values ±1 and 2π w0 = χ[0,2π] while 0 wn (t) dt = 0 for n ≥ 1. For each n, define λn on Σ by Z −n λn (E) = 2 [(1 + wn (t))/2] dt, E

E ∈ Σ. Define G : Σ → `2 by G(E) = (λ0 (E), λ1 (E), . . . , λn (E), . . .). By Exercise 3.3.6, G is a non-atomic `1 -valued measure. G has bounded variation, since kG(E)k`2 ≤ 2µ(E) for each E ∈ Σ. Now consider G([0, 2π]) = (2π, π/2, π/4, . . .) and suppose there is E ∈ Σ such that G(E) = G([0, 2π])/2. Then we have

Z dt = µ(E)

π = λ0 (E) = E

and for n ≥ 1 −n−1

2

−n

Z

π = λn (E) = 2

[(1 + wn (t))/2] dt = 2−n µ(E ∩ Un ),

E

where Un = {s ∈ [0, 2π] : wn (s) = 1}. From this and the identities µ(Un ) = µ(E) = π,

76

CHAPTER 3.

it follows µ(E ∩ Un ) = µ(E \ Un ) = µ(Un \ E) = µ([0, 2π] \ (E ∪ Un )) = π/2 for n > 0. Define f = χE − χ[0,2π]\E . Then we have Z 2π f (t) · w0 (t) dt = π − π = 0 0

and, for n > 0, we have Z 2π f (t)·wn (t) dt = µ(E ∩Un )+µ([0, 2π]\(E ∪Un )) = µ(E \Un )−µ(Un \E) = 0. 0

Since f ∈ L2 ([0, 2π]) and f 6= 0, this contradicts the completeness of (wn )∞ n=0 and shows that G(Σ) is not convex.

3.3.3.! Liapounoff ’s convexity theorem. Suppose that Ψ is an Rn -valued measure on (X, Σ). The following theorem was stated by A. Liapounoff in [6]. Theorem 3.3.1 (Liapounoff convexity theorem) If Ψ is non-atomic and has the bounded variation then R(Ψ) := {Ψ(A) : A ∈ Σ} is a closed convex subset of Rn . We deduce this theorem from its special case, when R(Ψ) ⊆ Rn+ . Suppose that µ1 , µ2 , . . . , µn are finite non-atomic measures on (X, Σ). Denote by Φ = (µ1 , . . . , µn ) the corresponding Rn -valued measure. Lemma 3.3.1 The set {Φ(E) : E ∈ Σ} ⊆ Rn+ is closed and convex. The proof of this lemma is postponed until the next subsection. Proof of Theorem 3.3.1: Let Ψ be non-atomic and have bounded variation. Then Ψ = (ν1+ − ν1− , . . . , νn+ − νn− )


77

and, by the Hahn decomposition theorem (Theorem 3.1.3), there exists a family {Pk }nk=1 ⊆ Σ such that Pk is a positive set for νk and X \ Pk is a negative set for νk . Denote Pk0 := Pk and Pk1 := X \ Pk for all k ∈ 1, n. It follows from Lemma 3.3.1 that, for any function f : 1, n → {0, 1}, the set Rf (Ψ) := {Ψ(A) : A ∈ Σ, A ⊆

n \

f (k)

Pk

}

k=1

is closed and convex in Rn . Then our range R(Ψ) is a closed and convex subset of Rn , as a finite sum of closed convex subsets of Rn : X Rf (Ψ). 2 R(Ψ) = f is a function from 1,n to {0,1} 3.3.4.! Proof of Lemma 3.3.1. This lemma is an application of the following, more elaborate, lemma the proof of which is postponed until the next subsection. Lemma 3.3.2 Let µ1 , µ2 , . . . , µn be finite non-atomic measures on (X, Σ). Denote by Φ = (µ1 , . . . , µn ) the corresponding Rn -valued measure. (LT1) For each E in Σ and r ∈ [0, 1], there is a subset A of E with A in Σ and Φ(A) = r · Φ(E). (LT2) For each E in Σ, there is an r ∈ (0, 1) and a subset A of E with A in Σ and Φ(A) = r · Φ(E). (LT3) For each E in Σ, there is a subfamily {Ar }r∈[0,1] of Σ such that Ar ⊆ As ⊆ E whenever 0 ≤ r ≤ s ≤ 1 and Φ(Ar ) = r · Φ(E) for each r in [0, 1]. Moreover, the conditions (LT1), (LT2), and (LT3) are equivalent To see that Lemma 3.3.1 follows from Lemma 3.3.2, let E and F belong to Σ, and let 0 ≤ r ≤ 1. By (LT1), there are subsets E1 of E \ F and F1 of F \ E with Φ(E1 ) = r · Φ(E \ F ) and Φ(F1 ) = (1 − r) · Φ(F \ E). Then Φ(E1 ∪ [E ∩ F ] ∪ F1 ) = r · Φ(E) + (1 − r) · Φ(F ). This shows that R(Φ) is convex. Now we show that R(Φ) is closed. It is known that any bounded closed convex subset of Rn is the convex hull of the set of all its extreme points. Thus R(Φ) =

78

CHAPTER 3.

co(Ex(R(Φ))), and to show that R(Φ) is closed it is enough to show that z ∈ R(Φ) for any z ∈ Ex(R(Φ)). Let z ∈ Ex(R(Φ)). There is (and unique up to scalar multiplication) yz ∈ Rn such that (z, yz ) = max{(x, yz ) : x ∈ R(Φ)} = sup{(x, yz ) : x ∈ R(Φ)}.

(3.3.1)

Consider a signed measure µz on (X, Σ) defined by µz (A) := (Φ(A), yz ) (A ∈ Σ). Then, by (3.3.1), (z, yz ) = sup{µz (A) : A ∈ Σ}.

(3.3.2)

It follows from (3.3.2) that there is a set E ∈ Σ such that (z, yz ) = µz (E) = (Φ(E), yz ). Since z is an extreme point of R(Φ) and yz satisfies (3.3.1), z = Φ(E) ∈ R(Φ), what is required. 2 3.3.5.! Proof of Lemma 3.3.2. The proof is carried out by an induction on the number n of non-atomic measures. It is convenient to assume (LT3), the strongest of the three statements, as the induction hypothesis for n measures, then prove the weakest of the statements, (LT2), for n+1 measures. We therefore need to show first that (LT1), (LT2), and (LT3) are equivalent, in the sense that a vector-valued measure Φ satisfying one of the statements must satisfy all three. The implications (LT3) ⇒ (LT1) ⇒ (LT2) are clear. Assume then that (LT2) holds, and fix a set E in Σ. If A is a measurable subset of E, r is in [0, 1], and Φ(A) = r · Φ(E), then write rA = r. Let E be the family of all such A. Order E by A < B if A ⊆ B and rA < rB . Let C be a maximal chain in E with ∅ and E belonging to C. Put I = {rA : A ∈ C}. It suffices to show that I = [0, 1] (since we can take {Ar }r∈[0,1] = C). Suppose (in search of a contradiction) that a ∈ (0, 1) \ I. Put a∞ = sup(I ∩ [0, a)) ≤ a & b∞ = inf(I ∩ (a, 1]) ≥ a. There exist An and Bn in E for n =S1, 2, 3, . . . such that T rAn increases to a∞ and rBn decreases to b∞ . Put A∞ = n An and B∞ = n Bn . It is easy to see


79

that A∞ and B∞ are members of E with a∞ = rA∞ and T b∞ = rB∞ . Since C S is totally ordered, A∞ = {A ∈ C : rA < a} and B∞ = {A ∈ C : rA > a}. Because C is maximal, A∞ and B∞ belong to C and (a∞ , b∞ ) ∩ I = ∅. By (LT2), there is a subset C of B∞ \ A∞ with Φ(C) = r · Φ(B∞ \ A∞ ). Then A∞ ∪ C is in E and a∞ < r(A∞ ∪C) < b∞ , so C ∪ {A∞ ∪ C} is a chain in E that properly extends C, a contradiction. Thus LT3 ⇔ LT1 ⇔ LT2 . Given the measures µ1 , . . . , µn , put Φ0 = (µ1 , µ1 + µ2 , µ1 + µ2 + µ3 , . . . , µ1 + . . . + µn ). If A belongs to Σ and Φ0 (A) = r · Φ0 (E), then one can easy verify that Φ(A) = r · Φ(E). So we may always assume µ1 µ2 . . . µn . When n = 1, (LT2) is trivial since µ1 is non-atomic (see Exercise 1.1.9), so Lemma 3.3.2 is immediate. We proceed by induction on n. Suppose that Lemma 3.3.2 holds for up to n measures, and that E ∈ Σ and measures µ1 , µ2 , . . . , µn+1 are given. Put ν = (µ2 , . . . , µn+1 ). By two applications of (LT1), there are disjoint sets E 1 , E 2 , and E 3 in Σ with E = E 1 ∪E 2 ∪E 3 and ν(E i ) = (1/3)·ν(E) for each i. By (LT3), for each i, there is a subfamily {Air }r∈[0,1] of Σ such that Air ⊆ Ais ⊆ E i whenever 0 ≤ r ≤ s ≤ 1 and ν(Air ) = r · ν(E i ) = (r/3) · ν(E). We may assume that Ai1 = E i . There are now three cases. Case 1: µ1 (E i ) = (r/3) · µ1 (E) for some i. Since also ν(E i ) = (1/3) · ν(E), (LT2) holds with r = 1/3. Case 2:

for some choice of i1 , i2 , and i3 , µ1 (E i1 ) ≥ µ1 (E i3 ) > (1/3) · µ1 (E) > µ1 (E i2 ).

For definiteness, take i1 = 1, i2 = 2, and i3 of Σ by  1  A3r A1 ∪ A23r−1 Ar =  11 A1 ∪ A21 ∪ A33r−2

= 3. Define a subfamily {Ar }r∈[0,1] if 0 ≤ r ≤ 1/3; if 1/3 < r ≤ 2/3; if 2/3 < r ≤ 1.

One readily verifies that ν(Ar ) = r·ν(E) for r in [0, 1]. If µ1 (E) = 0 then Case 1 applies. Otherwise the function φ given on [0, 1] by φ(r) = µ1 (Ar )/µ1 (E) is well

80

CHAPTER 3.

defined. Note that φ is increasing, and, the assumption µ1 µ2 ensures that φ is continuous. Moreover, φ(1/3) =

µ1 (A11 ) µ1 (E 1 ) = > 1/3, µ1 (E) µ1 (E)

and φ(2/3) =

µ1 (A11 ∪ A21 ) µ1 (E 1 ∪ E 2 ) µ1 (E) − µ1 (E 3 ) = = < 1 − 1/3 = 2/3. µ1 (E) µ1 (E) µ1 (E)

By the intermediate value theorem, φ(r) = r for some r ∈ (1/3, 2/3). In other words, µ1 (Ar ) = r · µ1 (E). Since already ν(Ar ) = r · ν(E), A = Ar ensures that (LT2) holds. Case 3:

for some choice of i1 , i2 , and i3 , µ1 (E i1 ) ≤ µ1 (E i3 ) < (1/3) · µ1 (E) < µ1 (E i2 ).

In this case, the argument from Case 2 applies without change, except now φ(1/3) < 1/3 and φ(2/3) > 2/3. This exhausts the cases (since µ1 (E) = µ1 (E 1 ) + µ1 (E 2 ) + µ1 (E 3 )) and proves the theorem. 2 3.3.6.! Exercises to Section 3.3. Exercise 3.3.1 ∗ Let C := {x = (x1 , x2 ) ∈ R2 : |x1 | ≤ 1 & |x2 | ≤ 1}. Construct a R2 -valued measure ν on B[0, 1] such that R(ν) = C. Exercise 3.3.2 ∗∗∗ Let D := {x = (x1 , x2 ) ∈ R2 : x21 + x22 ≤ 1} be the closed unit disk in R2 . Construct an R2 -valued measure ν on the Borel algebra B[0, 1] whose range R(ν) is equal to D. Exercise 3.3.3 such that

∗

Construct two R2 -valued measures µ and ν of bounded variation on B[0, 1] R(ν) ∪ R(µ) ⊆ {x = (x1 , x2 ) ∈ R2 : x1 ≥ 0 & x2 ≥ 0},

and R(ν) + R(µ) 6= R(ν + µ). Exercise 3.3.4 ∗∗ Show that in L2 ([0, 2π], µ) there exists a complete orthogonal system (wn )∞ n=0 R 2π of {−1, 1}-valued functions such that w0 = χ[0,2π] while 0 wn dµ = 0 for n ≥ 1.


81

Exercise 3.3.5 ∗∗∗ Show that the result of Exercise 3.3.4 can be extended to the case of a non-atomic measure space with finite measure. Namely, show that if (X, Σ, µ) is a measure space with a non-atomic finite measure µ, then in L2 (µ) there exists a complete orthogonal R system (wn )∞ n=0 of {−1, 1}-valued functions such that w0 ≡ 1 and X wn dµ = 0 for n ≥ 1. Exercise 3.3.6 Show that the function G : B[0, 2π] → `2 constructed in Example 3.3.2 is a non-atomic `2 -valued measure. Exercise 3.3.7 Let µ be a finite signed measure on (X, Σ). Show that there exists A ∈ Σ such that µ(A) = sup{µ(B) : b ∈ Σ} . Prove the following facts about convex subsets of Rn which were used in the proof of Lemma 3.3.1. Exercise 3.3.8 Let A be a bounded closed convex subset of Rn . Show that A is the convex hull of all extreme points of A. Exercise 3.3.9 Let A be a bounded convex subset of Rn and let a ∈ A be an extreme point of the closure A of A. Show that there is (and unique up to scalar multiplication) y ∈ Rn such that (a, y) = max{(x, y) : x ∈ A} = sup{(x, y) : x ∈ A}. Let A, a, and y be as before, and let b ∈ A. Show that (b, y) = max{(x, y) : x ∈ A} ⇒ b = a .

82

CHAPTER 3.

Chapter 4

4.1

Function Spaces on Rn

In this section we describe some elementary notions which play an important role in the Fourier analysis and its applications to PDEs. Our aim is to give only a few basic constructions from measure theory concerning function spaces on Rn . We do not give any introduction to Fourier transform and to the theory of distributions; for this propose, we send the reader to many special text-books (see, for example, [4] and [9]). 4.1.1.◦ Multi-indexes. Let U be an open set in Rn and m ≥ 0, we dem note by C (U ) the space of all real or complex valued functions on U whose partial derivatives of order ≤ m exist and are continuous. We set C ∞ (U ) = T∞ m n ∞ m=1 C (U ). Furthermore, for any E ⊆ R , we denote by C00 (E) the space of all C ∞ -functions on Rn whose support is compact and contained in E. If E = Rn or U = Rn , we usually write without any confusion Lp = Lp (Rn ), C00 = C00 (Rn ), and C ∞ = C ∞ (Rn ). The proof of the next simple lemma is left to the reader as an exercise (Exercise 4.1.2). Lemma 4.1.1 If f ∈ C00 (Rn ) then f is uniformly continuous. 2 If x = (xk )nk=1 , y = (yk )nk=1 ∈ Rn , we set (x , y) :=

n X

xk yk ,

k=1

83

kxk :=

p (x , x).

84

CHAPTER 4.

It will be convenient to have a compact notation for partial derivatives. We write ∂j = ∂x∂ j , and we use multi-index notation for higher-order derivatives. A multi-index is an ordered n-tuple of nonnegative integers. If α = (α1 , . . . , αn ) is a multi-index, we set α1 αn n n X Y ∂ ∂ α |α| = αj , α! = αj !, ∂ = ◦ ··· ◦ ; ∂x ∂x 1 n j=1 j=1 and if x ∈ Rn , then xα =

n Q

xαk k ∈ R.

k=1 ∞

n

Two subspaces of C (R ) are of the great importance. The first one is the space ∞ C00 of C ∞ -functions with compact support. The existence of nonzero functions ∞ in C00 is not quite obvious; the standard construction is based on the fact that the function η(t) = e−1/t · χ(0,∞) (t) is C ∞ -function even at the origin. If we set exp[(kxk2 − 1)−1 )] if kxk < 1, 2 ψ(x) = η(1 − kxk ) = (4.1.1) 0 if kxk ≥ 1, We have ψ ∈ C ∞ and supp(ψ) is the closed unit ball in Rn . The second important subspace of C ∞ is the Schwartz space S consisting of those C ∞ -functions which, together with all their derivatives, vanish at infinity faster than any power of kxk. More precisely, for any nonnegative integer N and any multi-index α, we define kf k(N,α) = sup (1 + kxk)N |∂ α f (x)|; x∈Rn

then S = {f ∈ C ∞ : kf k(N,α) < ∞ for all N, α}. 2

Examples of functions in S are fα (x) = xα e−kxk , where α is any multi-index. ∞ Also, clearly, C00 ⊆ S. Another important observation is that if f ∈ S then α ∂ f ∈ Lp for all α and all p ∈ [1, ∞]. Indeed, |∂ α f (x)| ≤ CN (1 + kxk)−N for all N , and (1 + kxk)−N ∈ Lp for all N > n/p. Proposition 4.1.1 S is a Fr´ echet space (= complete linear metric space) with the topology defined by the seminorms {k · k(N,α) }N,α . Proof: It is enough to prove the completeness of S. If (fk )∞ k=1 is a Cauchy sequence in S then kfj − fk k(N,α) → 0 for all N, α. In particular, for each multiindex α, the sequence (∂ α fk )∞ k=1 converges uniformly to a continuous function

4.1. FUNCTION SPACES ON RN

85

gα . Denoting by ej the vector (0. . . . , 1, . . . , 0) with the 1 in the j-th position, we have Z t

fk (x + tej ) − fk (x) =

∂j fk (x + sej ) ds. 0

Letting k → ∞, we obtain Z g0 (x + tej ) − g0 (x) =

t

gej (x + sej ) ds. 0

Here we consider the vector ej as a multi-index. Then gej = ∂j g0 , and an induction on |α| yields gα = ∂ α g0 for all α. Now it is easy to check that kfk − g0 k(N,α) → 0 for all α. 2 4.1.2.◦ Shift operation and convolution. Let f be a function on Rn and y ∈ Rn . We define the shift of f with respect to the vector y by (τy f )(x) := f (x − y) . Observe that kτy f kp = kf kp for 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞. It is almost obvious that a continuous function f is uniformly continuous iff kτy f − f k∞ → 0 as kyk → 0. Proposition 4.1.2 If 1 ≤ p < ∞, the translation is continuous in the Lp norm; that is, if f ∈ Lp and z ∈ Rn , then limy→0 kτy+z f − τz f kp = 0. Proof: Since τy+z = τy τz , replacing f by τz f it suffices to assume that z = 0. First, if g ∈ C00 , for kyk ≤ 1 the functions τy g are all supported in a common compact set K. So, by Lemma 4.1.1, Z |τy g − g|p dµ ≤ kτy g − gkp∞ µ(K) → 0 as kyk → 0 . (4.1.2) Rn

Now suppose f ∈ Lp . If ε > 0 then, by the Urysohn lemma, there exists g ∈ C00 with kg − f kp < ε/3, so 2 kτy f − f kp ≤ kτy (f − g)kp + kτy g − gkp + kg − f kp < ε + kτy g − gkp , 3 and kτy g − gkp < ε/3 if y is small enough accordingly to (4.1.2). 2

86

CHAPTER 4.

Let f and g be measurable functions on Rn . The convolution of f and g is the function f ∗ g defined by Z (f ∗ g)(x) := f (x − y)g(y) dy Rn

for all x ∈ Rn such that the integral exists. Various conditions can be imposed on f and g to guarantee that f ∗ g is defined at least almost everywhere. For exR ample, if f ∈ C00 , g can be any locally integrable function i.e. A |g| dµ < ∞ for any compact A. 4.1.3.◦ Basic properties of convolutions. The elementary properties of convolutions are summarized in the following proposition. Proposition 4.1.3 Assuming that all integrals below exist, we have: (a) f ∗ g = g ∗ f ; (b) (f ∗ g) ∗ h = f ∗ (g ∗ h); (c) For z ∈ Rn , τz (f ∗ g) = (τz f ) ∗ g = f ∗ (τz g); (d) If A is the closure of {x + y : x ∈ supp(f ), y ∈ supp(g)} then supp(f ∗ g) ⊆ A. Proof:

(a): is proved by the substitution z = x − y: Z Z f ∗ g(x) = f (x − y)g(y) dy = f (z)g(x − z) dz = g ∗ f (x).

(b): follows from (a) and Fubini’s theorem. (c): Z Z τz (f ∗ g)(x) = f (x − z − y)g(y) dy = τz f (x − y)g(y) dy = ((τz f ) ∗ g)(x) and, by (a), τz (f ∗ g) = τz (g ∗ f ) = (τz g) ∗ f = f ∗ (τz g). (d): Observe that if x 6∈ A then, for any y ∈ supp(g), we have x − y 6∈ supp(f ); hence f (x − y)g(y) = 0 for all y, so (f ∗ g)(x) = 0. 2 Theorem 4.1.1 (Young’s inequality) If f ∈ L1 and g ∈ Lp (1 ≤ p ≤ ∞) then (f ∗ g)(x) exists almost everywhere, f ∗ g ∈ Lp , and kf ∗ gkp ≤ kf k1 kgkp .


87

Proof:

By Minkowski’s inequality for integrals (see Exercise 3.2.10), Z

Z

kf ∗ gkp = f (y) · g(·, −y) dy ≤ |f (y)| · kτy gkp dy = kf k1 · kgkp . 2 p

Rn

Rn

Proposition 4.1.4 If p−1 + q −1 = 1, f ∈ Lp , and g ∈ Lq then f ∗ g(x) exists for every x ∈ Rn , f ∗ g is bounded and uniformly continuous, and kf ∗ gk∞ ≤ kf kp kgkq . If 1 < p < ∞ then f ∗ g ∈ C0 (Rn ). Proof: The existence of f ∗ g and the estimate for kf ∗ gk∞ follow immediately from Hölder’s inequality. In view of Propositions 4.1.2 and 4.1.3, so does the uniform continuity of f ∗ g: If 1 ≤ p < ∞, kτy (f ∗ g) − f ∗ gk∞ = k(τy f − f ) ∗ g)k∞ ≤ kτy f − f kp kgkq → 0 as y → 0. (If p = ∞, interchange the roles of f and g.) Finally, if 1 < p, q < ∞, choose ∞ sequences (fn )∞ n=1 and (gn )n=1 of continuous functions with compact supports such that kfn − f kp → 0 & kgn − f kq → 0. By Proposition 4.1.3 (d), fn ∗ gn ∈ C00 . But kfn ∗ gn − f ∗ gk∞ ≤ kfn − f kp kgn kq + kf kp kgn − gkq → 0, so f ∗ g ∈ C0 by Exercise 4.1.1. 2 4.1.4.◦ Approximate identity. The following theorem underlies many important applications of convolutions on Rn . If φ is any function on Rn and t > 0, we set φt (x) = t−n φ(t−1 x). (4.1.3) R Remark that if φ ∈ L1 then Rn φt (x) dx is independent on t, thus, Z Z Z −n −1 φ(y) dy . φt (x) dx = t φ(t x) dx = Rn

Rn

Rn

The proof of the following theorem is left to the reader as an exercise. R Theorem 4.1.2 Suppose φ ∈ L1 and Rn φ(x) dx = 1. (a) If f ∈ Lp , where 1 ≤ p < ∞ then lim kf ∗ φt − f kp = 0 . t→0

(b) If f is bounded and uniformly continuous then lim kf ∗ φt − f k∞ = 0. t→0

(c) If f ∈ L∞ and f is continuous on an open set U then f ∗ φt → f uniformly on compact subsets of U as t → 0. 2

88

CHAPTER 4.

The family {φt }t≥0 as in Theorem 4.1.2 is called an approximate identity. In some sense, an approximate identity plays the role of an identity operator whenever we are working with convolution as a multiplication operation. ∞ Proposition 4.1.5 C00 (and hence also S) is dense in Lp (for 1 ≤ p < ∞) and in C0 .

Proof: Given f ∈ Lp and ε > 0, there exists g ∈ CR00 with kf − gkp < ε/2 by ∞ Exercise 4.2.5. Let φ be a function in C00 such that Rn φ dµ = 1 (for example, R ∞ take φ = ( Rn ψ dµ)−1 ψ as in (4.1.1)). Then g ∗ φt ∈ C00 by Proposition 4.1.3(d) and Exercise 4.1.9, and kg ∗ φt − gkp < ε/2 for sufficiently small t by Theorem 4.1.2. The same argument works if Lp is replaced by C0 , and k · kp , by k · k∞ . 2 Theorem 4.1.3 (The C ∞ -Urysohn lemma) If K ⊆ Rn is compact and U is ∞ such that 0 ≤ f ≤ 1, f = 1 on an open set containing K, there exists f ∈ C00 K, and supp(f ) ⊆ U . Proof: and let

Let δ be the distance from K to U c (δ is positive since K is compact)

V = {x ∈ Rn : ρ(x, K) < δ/3}. R ∞ such that φ dx = 1 and φ(x) = 0 for kxk > Choose a nonnegative φ ∈ C 00 Rn R −1 δ/3 (for example, ( Rn ψ dx) · ψδ/3 with ψ as in (4.1.1)), and set f = χV ∗ φ. ∞ Then f ∈ C00 by Proposition 4.1.3 (d) and Exercise 4.1.9. It is easy to see that 0 ≤ f ≤ 1, f = 1 on K, and supp(f ) ⊆ {x : ρ(x, K) ≤ 2δ/3} ⊆ U. 2 Theorem 4.1.2 does not say anything about the pointwise convergence f ∗ φt to f . Indeed, the situation with the pointwise convergence is much more delicate. To illustrate problems which arise here, we give without a proof the following theorem. Theorem 4.1.4 Suppose |φ(x)| ≤ C(1 + kxk)−n−ε for some C, ε > 0. Then R φ ∈ L1 and Rn φ(x) dx = 1. If f ∈ Lp (1 ≤ p < ∞) then f ∗ φt (x) → f (x) as t → 0 for every x in the Lebesgue set of f . In particular, for almost every x and for every x at which f is continuous. 2


89

By the Lebesgue set Lf of a locally integrable function f : Rn → R (for short f ∈ Lloc (Rn )) we understood here Z n o 1 n Lf := x ∈ R : lim |f (y) − f (x)|dy = 0 . t→∞ µ(B(x, t−1 )) B(x,t−1 )

4.1.5.◦ Exercises to Section 4.1. Exercise 4.1.1 Show that the space C0 (Rn ) of functions vanishing at infinity is uniform ∞ closure of C00 . Exercise 4.1.2 Show that any f ∈ C0 (Rn ) is uniformly continuous. Exercise 4.1.3

∗

Show that for x, y ∈ R: X k! (x + y)k = xα1 y α2 α!

α = (α1 , α2 ).

|α|=k

Exercise 4.1.4

∗

Show that for x ∈ Rn : (x1 + x2 + ... + xn )k =

X k! xα . α!

|α|=k

Exercise 4.1.5

∗

Show that for x, y ∈ Rn : X

(x + y)α =

β+γ=α

Exercise 4.1.6

α! xβ · y γ . β! · γ!

∗

Prove the product rule for partial derivatives: X X ∂ α (xβ f ) = xβ ∂ α f + cγδ xδ ∂ γ f, xβ ∂ α f = ∂ α (xβ f ) + c0γδ ∂(xδ f ),

where cγδ = c0γδ = 0 unless |γ| < |α| and |δ| < |β|. Exercise 4.1.7 ∗∗ Let f ∈ L1 (R) and f be nonnegative. Use the result of Exercise 2.1.19 to show that: (a) if f ∗ f = 0 then f (t) = 0 a.e. on R; (b) if f ∗ f = f then f (t) = 0 for all t ∈ R; (c) the equality (f ∗ f )(t) = 1 a.e. is impossible. Exercise 4.1.8

∗∗


Exercise 4.1.9 ∗∗ Let f ∈ L1 , g ∈ C k and let ∂ α g be bounded for |α| ≤ k. Show that f ∗ g ∈ C k and ∂ α (f ∗ g) = f ∗ (∂ α g) for |α| ≤ k. Exercise 4.1.10

∗∗∗


90

4.2

CHAPTER 4. The Riesz Representation Theorem

In this section, we study the structure of the dual space to the spaces of continuous functions on a locally compact Hausdorff space. We treat only the R-valued case. The complex case is essentially the same. 4.2.1.◦ The space C00 (X) and positive functionals. Let X be a locally compact Hausdorff space (LCH-space, for short). This means that, for every x 6= y in X, there exist open neighborhoods U of x and V of y such that U¯ and V¯ are compact and U¯ ∩ V¯ = ∅. From the point-set topology, it is known that any LCH-space is normal, so we may use the Urysohn lemma in its investigation. We denote by C00 (X) the space of continuous functions on X with compact support, i.e. f ∈ C00 (X) if f is continuous and supp(f ) = cl{x : f (x) 6= 0} is compact. A linear functional Ψ on C00 (X) is called positive if Ψ(f ) ≥ 0 whenever f ≥ 0. It is an important fact that every positive linear functional on C00 (X) is continuous with respect to the uniform convergence on compact subsets of X. There are many ways for proving this, one of them is given below. Lemma 4.2.1 If Ψ is a positive linear functional on C00 (X). Then, for each compact K ⊆ X, there is CK < ∞ such that |Ψ(f )| ≤ CK kf k∞ for all f ∈ C00 (X) with supp(f ) ⊆ K. Proof: Given a compact K, choose φ ∈ C00 (X) with values in [0, 1] such that φ|K ≡ 1 by Urysohn’s lemma. If supp(f ) ⊆ K, we have kf k∞ φ − f ≥ 0 & kf k∞ φ + f ≥ 0. Thus kf k∞ Ψ(φ) − Ψ(f ) ≥ 0 & kf k∞ Ψ(φ) + Ψ(f ) ≥ 0, so |Ψ(f )| ≤ CK kf k∞ with CK = Ψ(φ). 2 If µ is a Borel measure on X such that µ(K) < ∞ for every compact K ⊆ X, then C00 (X) ⊆ L1 (µ), so Z f→ f dµ X

4.2. THE RIESZ REPRESENTATION THEOREM

91

is a positive linear functional on C00 (X). The main result of this section says that every positive linear functional on C00 (X) arises in this way. Moreover, we give some regularity conditions on µ, under which µ is unique. Let µ be a Borel measure on X and let E be a Borel subset of X. The measure µ is called outer regular on E if µ(E) = inf{µ(U ) : E ⊆ U, U open}; µ is called inner regular on E if µ(E) = sup{µ(K) : K ⊆ E, K compact}. If µ is outer and inner regular on all Borel sets, µ is called regular (compare with 2.1.5). The regularity of a Borel measure sometimes is too strong condition. Definition 4.2.1 A Borel measure that is finite on compact sets, outer regular on Borel sets, and inner regular on open sets is called a Radon measure.

4.2.2.◦ The Riesz representation theorem for C00 (X). This theorem historically is one of the first results in functional analysis. Originally it was stated by F. Riesz in 1909 for C[0, 1]. Then it was generalized by several authors for C(K), where K is a compact Hausdorff space, and for C00 (X), where X is an LCH-space. Here we begin with the general case and derive from it the Riesz representation theorem for C(K). We use the following notation. If U is open in X and f ∈ C00 (X), 0 ≤ f ≤ 1, and supp(f ) ⊆ U , then we write f ≺ U . Theorem 4.2.1 If Ψ is a positive linear functional on C00 (X), where X is an LCH-space. Then there exists a unique Radon measure µ on X such that Z Ψ(f ) = f dµ (∀f ∈ C00 (X)) . (4.2.1) X

Moreover, µ(U ) = sup{Ψ(f ) : f ∈ C00 (X), f ≺ U } for all open U ⊆ X

(4.2.2)

µ(K) = inf{Ψ(f ) : f ∈ C00 (X), f ≥ χK } for all compact K ⊆ X.

(4.2.3)

and

92

CHAPTER 4.

Sketch of the proof: First, we prove uniqueness. Let µ be a Radon measure satisfying (4.2.1). Let U ⊆ X be an open subset of X. Then Ψ(f ) ≤ µ(U ) whenever f ≺ U . If K is a compact subset of U , by Urysohn’s lemma, there is f ∈ C00 (X) such that f ≺ U and f |K ≡ 1. Thus Z µ(K) ≤ f dµ = Ψ(f ) ≤ µ(U ) . X

This proves (4.2.2) since µ is inner regular on U . Thus µ is uniquely determined by Ψ on open sets, and hence on all Borel sets because of outer regularity. This proves the uniqueness of µ and suggests how to prove existence. We define ν(U ) := sup{Ψ(f ) : f ∈ C00 (X), f ≺ U } for any open U , and we define ν ∗ (E) for an arbitrary E ⊆ X by ν ∗ (E) := inf{ν(U ) : U ⊇ E, U open}. Clearly, ν(U ) ≤ ν(V ) if U ⊆ V , and hence ν ∗ (U ) = ν(U ) if U is open. The outline of the proof is now as follows. We only fix several important steps and leave the proofs of them to the reader. (1) Show that ν ∗ is an outer measure on P(X). (2) Show that every open set is ν ∗ -measurable. Now it follows from Caratheodory’s theorem that every Borel set is ν ∗ -measurable and µ := ν ∗ |BX is a Borel measure (note that µ(U ) = ν ∗ (U ) = ν(U )) for any open U ). Moreover, µ is outer regular and satisfies (4.2.2) by the definition. (3) Show that µ satisfies (4.2.3). Since X is an LCH-space, µ is finite on compact sets. Prove the inner regularity on open sets. Let U be an open set and µ(U ) > α. Fix ε > 0, µ(U ) > α + ε. Choose f ∈ C00 (X) such that f ≺ U and Ψ(f ) > α + ε, and let K := supp(f ) ⊆ U . If g ∈ C00 (X) and g ≥ χK then g ≥ f and hence Ψ(g) ≥ Ψ(f ) > α + ε. But then µ(K) ≥ α + ε > α by (4.2.3), so µ is inner regular on U . (4) Show that µ satisfies (4.2.1).


93

With this last step, the proof of the theorem is completed. 2 4.2.3.◦ The Riesz representation theorem for C(K) . Let K be a compact Hausdorff space and let C(K) be a vector space of all continuous R-valued functions on K. It is well known that C(K) is a Banach space with respect to the sup-norm. The following theorem, which is historically also called the Riesz representation theorem describes the structure of its dual space space C(K)∗ . We prove this theorem by using of Theorem 4.2.1. Theorem 4.2.2 Let K be a compact Hausdorff space and let ψ ∈ C(K)∗ . Then there are two unique Radon measures µ1 and µ2 on X such that Z Z ψ(f ) = f dµ1 − f dµ2 (∀f ∈ C(K)) . K

K

Moreover, µ1 = µ+ and µ2 = µ− for some signed measure µ of bounded variation on the Borel algebra B(K). Proof: Let ψ ∈ C(K)∗ . Then the function ϑ : C+ (K) → R+ , which is defined by the formula ϑ(f ) := sup{ψ(g) : 0 ≤ g ≤ f } (f ∈ C+ (K)) ,

(4.2.4)

is additive on C+ (K) (see Exercise 4.2.14) . Every such an additive function ϑ : C+ (K) → R+ possesses a unique extension ψ+ on C(K), which is a positive linear functional (see Exercise 4.2.15) . This extension is given by the formula: ψ+ (f ) := ϑ(f+ ) − ϑ(f− ) (f ∈ C(K)). Let ψ− be the positive functional correspondent to −ψ, i.e., ψ− := (−ψ)+ . Now we apply Theorem 4.2.1 to ψ+ ∈ C(K)∗ and ψ− ∈ C(K)∗ . Then we have Z f dµ1 (∀f ∈ C(K)) ψ+ (f ) = K

and

Z ψ− (f ) =

f dµ2

(∀f ∈ C(K)),

K

where µ1 and µ2 are unique Radon measures on X. It is routine to show that µ1 = µ+

& µ2 = µ−

for a signed Borel measure µ := µ1 − µ2 . 2

(4.2.5)

94

CHAPTER 4.

4.2.4.◦ Exercises to Section 4.2. Exercise 4.2.1 ∗∗ Let X be a locally compact Hausdorff space. Show that, for any compact K ⊆ X such that K = ∩∞ n=1 Un and Un is open for any n ∈ N, there exists f ∈ C00 (X) such that K = f −1 ({1}). Exercise 4.2.2 Let fn (t) = t2n be the sequence of R-valued functions on R. These functions define Borel measures µn on R as follows Z µn (A) := t2n dt (∀A ∈ B(R)). A

(a)

Show that µn is a Radon measure for each n.

(b)

Show that µk is µj -continuous for every k, j ∈ N.

(c)

Find the Radon – Nikodym derivative of µk with respect to µj .

(d) Let A ∈ B(R) with the Lebesgue measure µ(A) 6= 0. Show that there is no constant M ∈ R such that µn (A) ≤ M for all n. Exercise 4.2.3 Show that any Radon measure µ is inner regular on each σ-finite subset of X, where A is called σ-finite if there exists a sequence An of measurable sets such that µ(An ) < ∞ for any n and A = ∪∞ n=1 An . Exercise 4.2.4 Let Y be the one-point compactification of a set X with the discrete topology and let µ be a Radon measure on Y . Show that supp(µ) is countable, where supp(µ) = Y \ [∪{U ⊆ Y : µ(U ) = 0}] . Exercise 4.2.5 ∗ Show that C00 (X) is dense in any Lp (µ) for any 1 ≤ p < ∞ and any Radon measure µ on X. Exercise 4.2.6 Prove the properties (1) − (4) in the proof of Theorem 4.2.1. Exercise 4.2.7 ∗∗ Show that a sequence (fn )∞ n=1 in C0 (X) converges weakly to 0 iff sup kfn k∞ < ∞ and fn → 0 pointwise. Exercise 4.2.8 Let µ be a Radon measure on X such that µ({x}) = 0 for all x ∈ X and a Borel set A ∈ B(X) satisfies µ(A) < ∞. Show that, for any α, 0 ≤ α ≤ µ(A), there exists B ∈ B(X), B ⊆ A, such that µ(B) = α.


95

Exercise 4.2.9 Let ν be a non-atomic Radon measure on Rn and let µ be another measure on Rn such that µ is ν-continuous. Show that µ is a Radon measure. Exercise 4.2.10 ∗ Let ν be a Radon measure on Rn and let µ be another measure on Rn such that µ is ν-continuous. Show that µ is a Radon measure. Exercise 4.2.11 ∗ Let ν be a σ-finite Radon measure on a LCH-space and let µ be another measure such that µ is ν-continuous. By using of the Radon – Nikodym theorem, show that µ is a Radon measure. Exercise 4.2.12 ∗∗∗ Let ν be a Radon measure on a LCH-space and let µ be another measure such that µ is ν-continuous. Show that µ is a Radon measure. Exercise 4.2.13 Let X = N with the discrete topology. Show that C0 (X)∗ ∼ = `1 . Exercise 4.2.14 Show that the function ψ+ in (4.2.4) is well defined and additive on C+ (K). Exercise 4.2.15 Show that every additive on C+ (K) R-valued function possesses a unique extension on C(K) which is a positive linear functional. Exercise 4.2.16 Prove the formula (4.2.5).

96

CHAPTER 4.

Bibliography [1]

C.D. Aliprantis; O. Burkinshaw, Principles of real analysis. Third edition, Academic Press, Inc., San Diego, CA, (1998), xii+415 pp.

[2]

Chae, Soo Bong Lebesgue integration. Second edition, Universitext. Springer-Verlag, New York, (1995), xiv+264 pp.

[3]

J. Diestel; J.J.,Jr. Uhl, Vector measures, Math. Surv. No. 15. American Math. Soc., Providence, R.I., (1977), xiii+322 pp.

[4]

G.B. Folland, Real analysis. Modern techniques and their applications. Second edition, Pure and Applied Mathematics (New York). A WileyInterscience Publication. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, (1999), xvi+386 pp.

[5]

P.R. Halmos, Measure Theory, D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., New York, N. Y., (1950), xi+304 pp.

[6]

A. Liapounoff, Sur les fonctions-vecteurs complètement additives, Bull. Acad. Sci. URSS. Sér. Math. 4, (1940), 465–478.

[7]

W.A.J. Luxemburg and A.C. Zaanen, Riesz spaces. Vol.I., NorthHolland Mathematical Library. North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam-London; American Elsevier Publishing Co., New York, (1971), xi+514 pp.

[8]

D.A. Ross, An elementary proof of Lyapunov’s theorem, Amer. Math. Monthly 112 (2005), no. 7, 651–653.

[9]

W. Rudin, Functional analysis. Second edition, International Series in Pure and Applied Mathematics. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, (1991), xviii+424 pp. 97

98

BIBLIOGRAPHY

[10]

A.R. Schep, And still one more proof of the Radon-Nikodym theorem, Amer. Math. Monthly 110 (2003), no. 6, 536–538.

[11]

A.C. Zaanen, Riesz spaces. Vol.II., North-Holland Mathematical Library, 30. North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam, (1983), xi+720 pp.

[12]

A.C. Zaanen, Introduction to operator theory in Riesz spaces, SpringerVerlag, Berlin, (1997), xii+312 pp.

Index (Xn )n -bounded sequence, 10 C ∞ -Urysohn lemma, 88 E-valued measure, 13 L1 -convergence, 24 µ-continuous measure, 58 µ-integrable function, 58 σ-additivity of measure, 7 σ-algebra, 5 σ-algebra generated by G, 6 σ-finite measure, 14 σ-finite measure space, 8 σ-finite premeasure, 43 σ-finite subset, 94 ξ-measurable set, 32 a.e., 21 additive function, 19 adjoint space, 70 algebra of subsets, 34 almost everywhere, 21 almost everywhere convergence, 9 approximate identity, 88 Baire theorem, 51 Banach lattice, 19, 70 block, 39 Borel algebra of X, 6 Borel measure, 8 Cantor like function, 51 Cantor like set, 51

Caratheodory extension theorem, 31 Caratheodory theorem, 33 Cauchy – Schwarz inequality, 69 Cauchy in measure sequence, 27 Chebyshev inequality, 72 compact support, 90 complete measure, 8 complex measure, 14 continuous linear functional, 70 convergence in measure, 27 convex hull, 30 convolution, 86 counting measure, 8 Dedekind completeness, 19 difference of sets, 5 distribution function, 43 dominated convergence theorem, 26 dual space, 70 Egoroff theorem, 9 elementary Young inequality, 63 exhaustion argument, 10 exhaustion theorem, 10 Fatou lemma, 25 finite measure, 14 finite measure space, 8 Frobenius – Perron operator, 59 Fubini theorem, 31, 40 generalized Cantor function, 51 99

100 generalized Cantor set, 50 h-interval, 36 Hölder inequality, 63 Hahn decomposition theorem, 58 inner regular measure, 91 integrable function, 22 Jordan decomposition theorem, 18 LCH-space, 90 Lebesgue σ-algebra, 36 Lebesgue – Stieltjes Measure, 31 Lebesgue integral, 21 Lebesgue measurable set in Rn , 45 Lebesgue measure, 9, 31 Lebesgue measure on R, 36 Lebesgue measure on Rn , 45 Lebesgue set, 89 Liapounoff, 73, 75 Liapounoff convexity theorem, 76 linear functional, 70 locally compact Hausdorff space, 90 locally integrable function, 86 Lusin theorem, 47 measurable function, 6 measurable set, 7 measurable transformation, 59 measure, 7 measure of bounded variation, 16 measure space, 7 Minkowski inequality, 64, 73 monotone class, 41 monotone convergence theorem, 24 monotone function, 19 monotone function on A, 35 multi-index, 84

INDEX negative set, 58 non-atomic measure, 11, 12, 20 orthogonal functions, 69 orthonormal basis, 69 outer measure, 31 outer regular measure, 91 partial ordering, 17 partially ordered vector space, 17 pointwise convergence, 9 positive linear functional, 90 positive set, 58 premeasure, 34 probabilistic measure space, 8 probability, 8 product measure, 39 product of measure spaces, 39 purely atomic measure, 12 Radon – Nikodym derivative, 58 Radon – Nikodym theorem, 55 Radon measure, 91 regular measure, 91 Riesz representation theorem, 91, 93 Ross, 73 scalar product, 69 Schep, 55 Schwartz space, 84 separable Banach space, 68 separable measure, 8, 14 set of the first category, 51 set of the second category, 51 shift, 47, 85 side of block, 45 signed measure, 14 simple function, 21 standard Cantor function, 51

INDEX standard Cantor set, 49 submeasure, 31 symmetric difference of sets, 5 Tonelli theorem, 42 total variation of measure, 16 totally disconnected set, 49 Uhl, Jr., 74 uniform convergence, 9 Urysohn lemma, 46, 85, 90, 92 variation of measure, 15 vector lattice, 17 vector-valued measure, 13 weak topology on Lp , 71 weakly convergent sequence, 71 Young inequality, 86

101

introduction to measure theory and lebesgue integration

introduction to measure theory and lebesgue integration

Suggest Documents

Measure Theory and Lebesgue Integration

A gentle introduction to Measure Theory

Basic Analysis IV: Measure Theory and Integration

On the Formalization of the Lebesgue Integration Theory ... - CiteSeerX

SPECTRUM OF LEBESGUE MEASURE ZERO FOR ...

Measure and Integration [pdf].

Measure and Integration

TOWARD CATEGORICAL RISK MEASURE THEORY 1. Introduction

measure theory and integration on the levi-civita field

An introduction to measure theory Terence Tao - WordPress.com

A Short Course on the Lebesgue Integral and Measure Theory.pdf ...

On McShane Integrable Sets and Lebesgue Measure 1 ... - m-hikari

Measure theory and probability

On the Lebesgue measure of the Feigenbaum Julia set

New steps to measure local integration - data.unhcr.org

New steps to measure local integration - UNHCR

New steps to measure local integration - UNHCR

Introduction to Automata Introduction to Automata Theory

Does there exist the Lebesgue measure in the infinite-dimensional ...

A construction of Lebesgue measure - pagina personal US

INTRODUCTION TO INFORMATION THEORY

Introduction to Literary Theory

Introduction to Graph Theory

Introduction to Statistics Theory