A problem in Billingsley's Probability and Measure says that if f : [ 0 , 1 ]

Hector Petersen

Hector Petersen

Answered question

2022-06-20

A problem in Billingsley's Probability and Measure says that if f : [ 0 , 1 ] R is finite-valued and Borel-measurable, then f may be assumed integrable, and even bounded.

I don't see how this is true though. For example define f as
f = 0  on  [ 0 , 1 / 2 )
f = 1  on  [ 1 / 2 , 3 / 4 )
f = 2  on  [ 3 / 4 , 7 / 8 )

f = n  on  [ 2 n 1 2 n , 2 n + 1 2 n + 1 )
Then f ( x ) < for all x [ 0 , 1 ] and f is measurable since it is a step function and takes only discrete values. However f is not bounded on [0,1].
What's wrong with this attempted counterexample? How would the statement be proven?

Answer & Explanation

Marlee Guerra

Marlee Guerra

Beginner2022-06-21Added 25 answers

As I suspected, you left out context. The problem is about proving Lusin's theorem for functions on [0,1]. When part (a) says "Show that f may be assumed to be integrable [or bounded]", what Billingsley means is that
"Show that if Lusin's theorem is true for all integrable [or bounded] functions f : [ 0 , 1 ] R , then it is true for all Borel functions f : [ 0 , 1 ] R ."

Do you have a similar question?

Recalculate according to your conditions!

Ask your question.
Get an expert answer.

Let our experts help you. Answer in as fast as 15 minutes.

Didn't find what you were looking for?