Consider the measure &#x03BC;<!-- μ --> on R such that &#x03BC;<!-- μ --> ( [

glycleWogry 2022-06-25 Answered
Consider the measure μ on R such that μ ( [ r , r ] ) > 0 for all r > 0.
Can we construct a (smooth) function f satisfying μ f d x 0 in a measure sense? If μ has a continuous density g, then it seems easy. But what conditions are needed for the existence of f for a measure μ? or is it possible always?
You can still ask an expert for help

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

Solve your problem for the price of one coffee

  • Available 24/7
  • Math expert for every subject
  • Pay only if we can solve it
Ask Question

Answers (1)

popman14ee
Answered 2022-06-26 Author has 19 answers
I suppose you want f to be a non-negative smooth function.
If ( r n ) is an evaluation of rational numbers and μ = 1 2 n δ r n then the only function f satsfying your conditioin is f=0 (up to a Lebesgue null set). This becasue E f ( x ) d x m ( E ) = 0 for any Borel set E contained in R Q and this implies E f = 0 for all Borel sets E.
Note: If a smooth function is 0 a.e. [Lebesgue] then it is 0 at every point.
The same conclusin holds for any μ singualr w.r.t. Lebesgue measure. If μ is concentared on S and m (Lebesgue measure) on it complement then μ ( E ) E f = 0 for all E in side S c and E f ( x ) x d = 0 for E inside S also. So f = 0 a.e. [Lebesgue].

We have step-by-step solutions for your answer!

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

You might be interested in

asked 2022-05-21
We know when ( X , S , μ ) is a measure space, M R ( S ) consists signed (or real) measures on ( X , S ) is Banach space. The set V consists of the measures satisfying d v = h d μ for h L 1 ( μ ) is closed but how we can show that when μ is Lebesgue measure and S would be the cllections of Borel sets, the set V is not separable.
asked 2022-05-23
I know how to use least square for estimating a constant value given a bunch of measurements. It is the average assuming measurements have same weight of variance.
x ^ = ( H T H ) 1 H T z
where H = 1 in the case of estimating a constant value and z are a bunch of measurements. Now I would like to simulate a sensor that provides the range and the angle to a point < x , y > with some Gaussian noise. From the sensor, we can get < x , y > as follows
z 1 = r c o s θ z 2 = r s i n θ
How can I apply least square to filter z 1 and z 2 . Is H as follows
H = [ c o s θ r s i n θ s i n θ r c o s θ ]
then I apply the least square formula since I have я and H? This gives me wrong results.
asked 2022-08-18
How many cups are left in a half-gallon carton of orange juice after 3 cups are used?
asked 2022-05-21
I need to include measurement uncertainties in this testing process. So I have a theoretical value A that is stated without uncertainty. My measured data gives me this rate value B with uncerainty ΔB. It used to be validated (B was stated without uncertainty) as if B < const*A then test passes.
I found this consistensy check that is used for comparing values with uncertainties (if ∣A - B∣ ΔA + ΔB∣ is true, then the compared values are consistent with each other within experimental uncertainty), so that would mean that in my situation, I just need to make sure that the difference ∣A-B∣ is smaller than ΔB. 1st question - if it doesn't pass this consistency test, are there two not comparable?
And second, what should I do next? How do I compare const*A and B ± ΔB? I guess the core of the answer will be in overlaping errors, but couldn't have found much on it.
asked 2022-07-05
Show, that if f n f and f n g is μ-convergent, then f = g almost everywhere on X
Hint
Use the fact, that:
{ x X : f ( x ) g ( x ) } = m = 1 { x X : | f ( x ) g ( x ) | 1 m }
So, I don't know how to use that hint. μ convergent means (correct me if I'm wrong), that
f n f  is  μ  convergent μ ( { x X : ε lim n | f n ( x ) f ( x ) | > ε } ) = 0
So I don't see it how the hint should be used.
It is not written what kind of measure our μ is though, usually when there's nothing written we assume it's a Lebesgue measure, but I don't know if that has to be the case here
asked 2022-03-26
Determine which of the four levels of measurement​ (nominal, ordinal,​ interval, ratio) is most appropriate for the data below.
Brain volumes measured in cubic cm
asked 2022-07-09
I just started studying measure theory.The introduction starts with the failure of limit of integral not equal to integral of limit in Riemann integration.I want to know why this problem
lim n a b f n ( x ) d x = a b lim n f n ( x )

is so important in analysis or what are benefits of limit of integral being equal to integral of limit.
Also, is this only drawback of Riemann integral?Is there any other problem with Riemann integration which leads to generalisation of Riemann to lebesgue integration?please clearly explain the motivation behind lebegue integral so that I could develop intrest in subject.

New questions