Ben Carriel Math 6110 Problem Set 1 September 4, 2012

Problem 1.6.4 P∞
(a) We begin by showing that we can choose the `j such that k=0 2k−1 `k < 1.
This is clear if we choose lk ≤ (2 + )−(k−1) for any  > 0 because then
∞ ∞  k−1
X
k−1
X 2
2 `k ≤
2+
k=0 k=0

and the sum on the right converges and is less than 1 for `0 < 1/2. Next, we
follow a process similar to the construction of the Cantor set in defining
∞
\
Cˆ = Ik
k=0

where I0 = [0, 1], I1 = [0, (1 − `0 )/2] ∪ [(1 + `0 )/2, 1] and each subsequent Ik
is obtained by taking each of the pieces in the union of Ik−1 and removing
the middle `k . As before, repeating this procedure yields a sequence of nested
compact sets I0 ⊃ I1 ⊃ I2 ⊃ . . . and hence their intersection Cˆ 6= ∅. It
then follows that Cˆ is measurable. To find its measure, we instead compute
the measure of Cˆc , which is also measurable because it is the complement of a
measurable set. We can see that
∞
[
Cˆc = Ikc
k=0

The complement of each Ik is precisely the 2k−1 intervals of length `k . Hence,

the measure of each of these m(Ik ) = 2k−1 `k . And so
∞
[ ∞
X ∞
X
m(Cˆc ) = m( Ikc ) = m(Ikc ) = 2k−1 `k
k=0 k=0 k=0

Noting that [0, 1] = Cˆ ∪ Cˆc and so

∞
X
ˆ =1−
m(C) 2k−1 `k
k=0

Problem 1.6.6
Let B be a ball of radius r sitting in Rd . We want to find the measure of this
ball in terms of that of B1 , the unit ball centered at the origin. It is shown in
the book that the measure of a set is translation invariant. Hence, we need only
worry about dilating B1 to a ball of S
radius r. Consider the representation
P∞of the
∞
ball by almost disjoint cubes B1 = k=1 Qk and note that m(B1 ) = k=1 Qk .
We then scale each set by r to see that
∞ ∞
!
[ [
rB1 = r Qk = rQk
k=1 k=1

1
Ben Carriel Math 6110 Problem Set 1 September 4, 2012

where the last equality holds because the Qk are disjoint. We then note that if
Q is a cube of side length ` then rQ is a cube with side length r` and therefore
the volume (or measure in the case of cubes) of v(rQ) = rd v(Q). We then see
that
∞ ∞
! !
[ [
m(rB1 ) = m r Qk = m rQk
k=1 k=1

Because the Qk are almost disjoint we can write

∞
X ∞
X ∞
X
m(rB1 ) m(rQk ) = rd m(Qk ) = rd m(Qk ) = vd rd
k=1 k=1 k=1

where vd is the measure of B1 . This completes the proof.

Problem 1.6.7
We begin by proving the result in the special case of cubes with

Lemma. For any cube Q ⊂ Rn we have that m∗ (δQ) = δ1 δ2 . . . δn m∗ (Q)

Proof. This is similar to the preceding problem. Choose any p ∈ Q and note
that δp = (δ1 p1 , δ2 p2 , . . . , δn pn ). So this scales the kth coordinate (side of the
cube) by a factor of δk . Letting ` be the length of a side of Q and using the
formula for the area of a rectangle gives
n
Y
m∗ (δQ) = δk ` = δ1 δ2 · · · δn `n = δ1 δ2 · · · δn m∗ (Q)
k=1

Now suppose that E is a measurable set and recall from Observation 3 that
 
∞
[
m∗ (E) < m∗  |Qj | + 
j=1

S∞ S∞
Where j=1 Qj is any covering of E by cubes. Then δE ⊂ δ j=1 and so by
monotonicity we get that
 
∞
[
m∗ (δE) ≤ m∗ δ Qj  + /2
j=1

Now we need to cover each rectangle δQj by cubes Qj,k with

∞
X
|Qj,k | < |Qj | + /2j−1
k=1

2
Ben Carriel Math 6110 Problem Set 1 September 4, 2012

Then
∞
[
m∗ (δE) ≤ m∗ ( δQj ) + /2
j=1
[
≤ m∗ ( |Qj,k |) + /2
j,k
∞ X
X ∞
≤ |Qj,k | + /2
j=1 k=1

Using the above estimate and and the lemma we get

∞ X
X ∞ ∞
X
|Qj,k | ≤ (|δQj | + /2j−1 ) + /2
j=1 k=1 j=1
∞
X
= δ1 δ2 · · · δn |Qj | + 
j=1

= δ1 δ2 · · · δn m∗ (E) + 

So now we need just establish that δE is measurable and we are done. The
measurability of E gives us an O ⊃ E open such that

m∗ (O − E) < (δ1 δ2 · · · δn )−1 

To cover δE we propose to use the open set δO. This set is open because for
any p ∈ O we have that Bδ (p) ⊂ δO when δ = min{δ1 , δ2 , . . . , δn }. The above
coupled with the fact that δ(O − E) = δO − δE with δO open gives

m∗ (δO − δE) = m∗ (δ(O − E)) < δ1 δ2 · · · δn m∗ (O − E) < 

So δE is measurable with measure m∗ (δE) = δ1 δ2 · · · δn m∗ (E).

Problem 1.6.9
We begin with a Cantor-like set Cˆ as described in Exercise 4. Our plan is to
construct an open set whose closure has boundary C. ˆ At the k th stage of the
k−1
construction we remove 2 intervals each of length `j with the property that
k
X
2j−1 `j < 1
j=1

for each k. We now consider the set

k
∞ [
[ 2
I= I2j−1,k
k=1 j=1

which is the union of those intervals Ik that are removed at odd numbered steps
in the construction. We have the following

3
Ben Carriel Math 6110 Problem Set 1 September 4, 2012

Claim. Every x ∈ Cˆ is a limit point of a sequence in I

Proof. We construct Cˆ iteratively as described in problem 4. Let Cj denote the

remaining set after j iterations of the removal step and Rj the set of elements
removed. Recall that
∞
\
Cˆ = Cj
j=1

Next, we note that each of the Cj is the disjoint union of 2j intervals which we
denote Cj,k . Because the intervals are centrally situated we know that after n
iterations x lies no further than 1/2n from an element of Rn . For each n, choose
such an element, x0n , of Rj . This yields a convergent sequence x0n → x because
for any  > 0 we simply choose n large enough that 1/2n < . Next, note that
the subsequence xn of odd numbered terms in x0n must also converge and each
xn ∈ I. Then xn → x and so x is a limit point of a sequence in I.

Now we observe that I and Cˆ are disjoint so we apply the claim to get that
Cˆ ⊆ ∂I. Then by monotonicity of the measure and the results of Problem 4.a
we have
m(I) ≥ Cˆ > 0
Verifying that I satisfies the requirements.

Problem 1.6.11
We can construct this Cantor-like set C 0 iteratively. We begin with the interval
[0, 1] and remove 1/10 of it. This leaves nine intervals of length 1/10. At the
next step we remove the last 1/10 of each of these intervals, giving 81 intervals
of length 1/100. In general, after k iterations we are left with the union Ck0 of
9k intervals each of length 10−k . Taking the limit as k → ∞ gives

m(C 0 ) = lim m(Ck0 ) = lim (9/10)k = 0

k→∞ k→∞

Problem 1.6.15
Let E be some subset of Rn .PFirst we begin by considering the outer measure
∞
of E, given by m∗ (E) = inf j=1 |Qj |. Consider any covering of E by closed
S∞
cubes E ⊂ j=1 Qj . For each Qj with side length `j we can pick the rectangle
Rj whose sides have length r1 = ` + /2j `n−1 and rk = ` for every other side.
Then Rj ⊃ Ej and
|Rj | = |Qj | + /2j
So
∞
X ∞
X ∞
X
|Qj | < |Rj | = |Qj | + 
j=1 j=1 j=1

4
Ben Carriel Math 6110 Problem Set 1 September 4, 2012

Passing to the infimum gives

∞
X
mR
∗ (E) ≤ |Rj | ≤ m∗ (E) + 
j=1

Then letting  → 0 gives mR ∗ ≤ m∗ (E).

Now begin with a covering of E by rectangles Rj . Then we divide Rn into
a grid of cubes with side length 1/k. Then we can define Qj,k to be the set
of rectangles that have non-empty intersection with Rj . We need to be precise
about how much extra measure these cubes add. We know that there are Ck d−1
that could intersect partially intersect Rj (cubes not fully contained in Rj ) for
some suitably large C. The total volume these add is C/k and so if k ≥ 2j C
then the total volume is less than /2j . That is
X
|Qj,k | ≤ |Rj | + /2j
k

Then X XX X
|Rj | ≤ |Qj,k | ≤ |Rj | + 
j j k j

As we did before, we pass to the infimum yielding

XX
m∗ (E) ≤ |Qj,k | < mR
∗ +
j k

Letting  → 0 again gives m∗ (E) ≤ mR

∗ . This completes the proof.

Problem 1.6.16
(a) We need to formalize
S the notion of being in infinitely many of the Ek . To
do this let Xn = k≥n Ek . Then x ∈ E is equivalent to x ∈ Xn for each n. We
can then rephrase
\∞ ∞ [
\
E= Xn = Ek
n=1 n=1 k≥n

Each Xn is a countable union of measurable sets, and hence measurable. Then

E is a countable intersection of measurable sets, and so it is also measurable.
(b) The convergence of m(Ek ) is equivalent to
∞
X
m(Ek ) < 
k=N

for sufficiently large N and any  > 0. This means that for m > n
 
[ ∞
X
m(Bm ) = m  Ek  ≤ m(Ek ) < 
k≥m k=N

5
Ben Carriel Math 6110 Problem Set 1 September 4, 2012

T∞
which holds by sub-additivity. We then note that E = n=1 Bn ⊂ Bk for every
k, means that we can use monotonicity to get

m(E) ≤ m(BN ) < 

So m(E) = 0.