Extension of measures by adding one extra set












1














Suppose that $mu$ is a measure on a measurable set $(X,mathcal{B})$.
And suppose that $Asubseteq X$ is not in $mathcal{B}$.



Is there a measure $mu'$ on the $sigma$-algebra generated by $mathcal{B}cup {A}$ that coincide with $mu$ on $mathcal{B}$ and is such that $mu'(A)=0$ ?










share|cite|improve this question






















  • See here: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1181869/…
    – Robson
    Nov 19 '18 at 1:46






  • 1




    Thanks for the link, but it seems the question there doesn't require the value zero on $A$. The answer there also doesn't show why the "K" must exist.
    – Phil-W
    Nov 19 '18 at 1:55










  • It is possible if $inf{mu(B):Asubset B, Binmathcal{B}}=0$.
    – d.k.o.
    Nov 19 '18 at 1:57
















1














Suppose that $mu$ is a measure on a measurable set $(X,mathcal{B})$.
And suppose that $Asubseteq X$ is not in $mathcal{B}$.



Is there a measure $mu'$ on the $sigma$-algebra generated by $mathcal{B}cup {A}$ that coincide with $mu$ on $mathcal{B}$ and is such that $mu'(A)=0$ ?










share|cite|improve this question






















  • See here: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1181869/…
    – Robson
    Nov 19 '18 at 1:46






  • 1




    Thanks for the link, but it seems the question there doesn't require the value zero on $A$. The answer there also doesn't show why the "K" must exist.
    – Phil-W
    Nov 19 '18 at 1:55










  • It is possible if $inf{mu(B):Asubset B, Binmathcal{B}}=0$.
    – d.k.o.
    Nov 19 '18 at 1:57














1












1








1


0





Suppose that $mu$ is a measure on a measurable set $(X,mathcal{B})$.
And suppose that $Asubseteq X$ is not in $mathcal{B}$.



Is there a measure $mu'$ on the $sigma$-algebra generated by $mathcal{B}cup {A}$ that coincide with $mu$ on $mathcal{B}$ and is such that $mu'(A)=0$ ?










share|cite|improve this question













Suppose that $mu$ is a measure on a measurable set $(X,mathcal{B})$.
And suppose that $Asubseteq X$ is not in $mathcal{B}$.



Is there a measure $mu'$ on the $sigma$-algebra generated by $mathcal{B}cup {A}$ that coincide with $mu$ on $mathcal{B}$ and is such that $mu'(A)=0$ ?







measure-theory






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Nov 19 '18 at 1:33









Phil-W

28417




28417












  • See here: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1181869/…
    – Robson
    Nov 19 '18 at 1:46






  • 1




    Thanks for the link, but it seems the question there doesn't require the value zero on $A$. The answer there also doesn't show why the "K" must exist.
    – Phil-W
    Nov 19 '18 at 1:55










  • It is possible if $inf{mu(B):Asubset B, Binmathcal{B}}=0$.
    – d.k.o.
    Nov 19 '18 at 1:57


















  • See here: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1181869/…
    – Robson
    Nov 19 '18 at 1:46






  • 1




    Thanks for the link, but it seems the question there doesn't require the value zero on $A$. The answer there also doesn't show why the "K" must exist.
    – Phil-W
    Nov 19 '18 at 1:55










  • It is possible if $inf{mu(B):Asubset B, Binmathcal{B}}=0$.
    – d.k.o.
    Nov 19 '18 at 1:57
















See here: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1181869/…
– Robson
Nov 19 '18 at 1:46




See here: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1181869/…
– Robson
Nov 19 '18 at 1:46




1




1




Thanks for the link, but it seems the question there doesn't require the value zero on $A$. The answer there also doesn't show why the "K" must exist.
– Phil-W
Nov 19 '18 at 1:55




Thanks for the link, but it seems the question there doesn't require the value zero on $A$. The answer there also doesn't show why the "K" must exist.
– Phil-W
Nov 19 '18 at 1:55












It is possible if $inf{mu(B):Asubset B, Binmathcal{B}}=0$.
– d.k.o.
Nov 19 '18 at 1:57




It is possible if $inf{mu(B):Asubset B, Binmathcal{B}}=0$.
– d.k.o.
Nov 19 '18 at 1:57










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















0














Borrowing from the above link:



Let $a := sup{mu(B) : B subseteq A, B in mathcal{B}}$. There exists $K$ satisfying $K subseteq A$ and $K in mathcal{B}$ and $mu(K) = a$,
(namely, $K := bigcup_{B in mathcal{B} : B subseteq A} B)$.



Note that the new $sigma$-algebra can be expressed as ${(B_1 cap A) cup (B_2 cap A^c) : B_1, B_2 in mathcal{B}}$.



We define $mu'((B_1 cap A) cup (B_2 cap A^c)) := mu(B_1 cap K) + mu(B_2 cap K^c)$. One can check that $mu'$ is a measure, that $mu'(B) = mu(B)$ for $B in mathcal{B}$, and that $mu'(A) = mu(K) = a$. So if $a$ (as defined above) is zero (which I believe is equivalent to the condition in d.k.o.'s comment above), then this construction gives you what you want.






share|cite|improve this answer





















    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3004400%2fextension-of-measures-by-adding-one-extra-set%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    0














    Borrowing from the above link:



    Let $a := sup{mu(B) : B subseteq A, B in mathcal{B}}$. There exists $K$ satisfying $K subseteq A$ and $K in mathcal{B}$ and $mu(K) = a$,
    (namely, $K := bigcup_{B in mathcal{B} : B subseteq A} B)$.



    Note that the new $sigma$-algebra can be expressed as ${(B_1 cap A) cup (B_2 cap A^c) : B_1, B_2 in mathcal{B}}$.



    We define $mu'((B_1 cap A) cup (B_2 cap A^c)) := mu(B_1 cap K) + mu(B_2 cap K^c)$. One can check that $mu'$ is a measure, that $mu'(B) = mu(B)$ for $B in mathcal{B}$, and that $mu'(A) = mu(K) = a$. So if $a$ (as defined above) is zero (which I believe is equivalent to the condition in d.k.o.'s comment above), then this construction gives you what you want.






    share|cite|improve this answer


























      0














      Borrowing from the above link:



      Let $a := sup{mu(B) : B subseteq A, B in mathcal{B}}$. There exists $K$ satisfying $K subseteq A$ and $K in mathcal{B}$ and $mu(K) = a$,
      (namely, $K := bigcup_{B in mathcal{B} : B subseteq A} B)$.



      Note that the new $sigma$-algebra can be expressed as ${(B_1 cap A) cup (B_2 cap A^c) : B_1, B_2 in mathcal{B}}$.



      We define $mu'((B_1 cap A) cup (B_2 cap A^c)) := mu(B_1 cap K) + mu(B_2 cap K^c)$. One can check that $mu'$ is a measure, that $mu'(B) = mu(B)$ for $B in mathcal{B}$, and that $mu'(A) = mu(K) = a$. So if $a$ (as defined above) is zero (which I believe is equivalent to the condition in d.k.o.'s comment above), then this construction gives you what you want.






      share|cite|improve this answer
























        0












        0








        0






        Borrowing from the above link:



        Let $a := sup{mu(B) : B subseteq A, B in mathcal{B}}$. There exists $K$ satisfying $K subseteq A$ and $K in mathcal{B}$ and $mu(K) = a$,
        (namely, $K := bigcup_{B in mathcal{B} : B subseteq A} B)$.



        Note that the new $sigma$-algebra can be expressed as ${(B_1 cap A) cup (B_2 cap A^c) : B_1, B_2 in mathcal{B}}$.



        We define $mu'((B_1 cap A) cup (B_2 cap A^c)) := mu(B_1 cap K) + mu(B_2 cap K^c)$. One can check that $mu'$ is a measure, that $mu'(B) = mu(B)$ for $B in mathcal{B}$, and that $mu'(A) = mu(K) = a$. So if $a$ (as defined above) is zero (which I believe is equivalent to the condition in d.k.o.'s comment above), then this construction gives you what you want.






        share|cite|improve this answer












        Borrowing from the above link:



        Let $a := sup{mu(B) : B subseteq A, B in mathcal{B}}$. There exists $K$ satisfying $K subseteq A$ and $K in mathcal{B}$ and $mu(K) = a$,
        (namely, $K := bigcup_{B in mathcal{B} : B subseteq A} B)$.



        Note that the new $sigma$-algebra can be expressed as ${(B_1 cap A) cup (B_2 cap A^c) : B_1, B_2 in mathcal{B}}$.



        We define $mu'((B_1 cap A) cup (B_2 cap A^c)) := mu(B_1 cap K) + mu(B_2 cap K^c)$. One can check that $mu'$ is a measure, that $mu'(B) = mu(B)$ for $B in mathcal{B}$, and that $mu'(A) = mu(K) = a$. So if $a$ (as defined above) is zero (which I believe is equivalent to the condition in d.k.o.'s comment above), then this construction gives you what you want.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Nov 19 '18 at 3:58









        angryavian

        39k23180




        39k23180






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3004400%2fextension-of-measures-by-adding-one-extra-set%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            AnyDesk - Fatal Program Failure

            How to calibrate 16:9 built-in touch-screen to a 4:3 resolution?

            QoS: MAC-Priority for clients behind a repeater