The Banach-Tarski paradox
|
|
- Pierce George
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 The Banach-Tarski paradox 1 Non-measurable sets In these notes I want to present a proof of the Banach-Tarski paradox, a consequence of the axiom of choice that shows us that a naive understanding of the concept of volume can lead to contradictions. A good reference for this topic is the very nice book The Banach-Tarski paradox by Stan Wagon. The result is one of a family of theorems indicating limitations of any reasonable notion of measure on the real numbers or in Euclidean space, and in this section I include a few examples. We will work with Lebesgue measure. The version of this measure for R n we denote λ n. Actually, we do not need to know much about Lebesgue measure. It suffices that λ n has the following properties (and, really, we will only look at n = 1, 2, or 3): λ n is a measure, so λ n is a function with domain a σ-algebra of subsets of R n and range [0, ], λ n ( ) = 0, and λ n is σ-additive, i.e., if (A k k < ω) is a sequence of pairwise disjoint elements of the domain of λ n (i.e., measurable sets), then ( ) λ n A k = λ n (A k ). k k If I n is the unit n-cube, i.e., I n = {(a 1,..., a n ) R n 0 a i 1 for all i}, then λ n (I n ) = 1. (Other than λ n (I n ) 0, we do not really need this fact.) λ n is non-atomic, in the sense that each singleton is measurable, and λ n ({a}) = 0 for all a R n. λ n is invariant under the group of isometries of R n. For example, if n = 1, for A R measurable and r R, let A + r = {a + r a A}. Then A + r is measurable, and λ 1 (A) = λ 1 (A + r). We say that λ 1 is translation invariant. Also, if A = { a a A}, then A is measurable, and λ 1 (A) = λ 1 ( A). In R 2, λ 2 is not only translation invariant but also invariant under rotations and reflections. In fact, if ra = {ra a A} for r R and A R n measurable, then ra is measurable, and λ n (ra) = r n λ n (A), but we won t be needing this fact. 1
2 λ 1 is our formalization of the notion of length, similarly, λ 2 and λ 3 formalize the notions of area and volume. Theorem 1 There is a subset of R that is not measurable. Proof: We present an argument due to Vitali. On [0, 1], say that r s iff r s Q. This is an equivalence relation. Let M be a choice set, so M A is a singleton for each -equivalence class A. Then [0, 1] = (M + q) [0, 1]. q Q This is a countable union of disjoint measurable sets. By translation invariance (and monotonicity, a consequence of σ-additivity), if λ 1 (M) = 0, then each of the sets in the union has measure zero as well, which leads to the contradiction λ 1 ([0, 1]) = 0. Similarly, q Q [0,1] (M + q) [0, 2], and therefore, if λ 1 (M) > 0, then λ 1 ([0, 2]) =, again a contradiction. It follows that M is not Lebesgue measurable. Remark 2 Translation invariance is essential here. It is consistent with ZFC that Lebesgue measure can be extended to a measure defined on all subsets of R. The example above used the axiom of choice explicitly, guaranteeing the existence of the set M. Another typical use of choice is the existence of a well-ordering of R. A set of measure zero is called null. Otherwise, it is non-null. Note that a non-null set needs not be measurable. The example below uses a bit more of the properties of λ 1 and λ 2, namely, Fubini s theorem. Theorem 3 No well-ordering of a non-null sets of reals is measurable (as a subset of R 2 ). Proof: We claim that whenever S R is non-null and W R 2 is a well-ordering of S, then W is non-measurable. We proceed by contradiction. Say that τ is the least ordinal for which there is an enumeration (r α α < τ) of a non-null set S R such that W = {(r α, r β ) α < β < τ} is measurable. For α < τ let S α = {r β β < α} and S α = {r β α < β}. For x S let r 1 x denote the unique α < τ such that x = r α. Note that S is measurable: By Fubini s theorem, for almost all x S and almost all y S, both S r 1x and S r 1 y are measurable. Since S = S α+1 S γ for any α γ < τ, then S must be measurable as well. 2
3 It suffices to show that for some γ < τ, S γ is non-null and measurable. If so, W (S γ S γ ) is a measurable well-ordering of S γ is order-type γ < τ, contradicting the minimality of τ. Now, for almost all y S, S r 1 y is measurable. Thus if no S γ is as claimed, then for almost all y S we have that S r 1 y is null. Hence, 0 = λ 2 (W ) = λ 1 (S r 1 y) dy = λ 1 (S r 1x ) dx. S But for almost all x S, we have S r 1x = S \ (S r 1 x {x}) has positive measure. Contradiction. S Remark 4 The argument shows that, even if there is an extension µ 1 of Lebesgue measure to all subsets of R, the completion of µ 1 µ 1 is not defined on all of P(R 2 ). 2 Tarski s circle-squaring problem In order to understand the statement of the Banach-Tarski result, it is convenient to first explain why it is stated for R 3 rather than the plane. Theorem 5 (Banach, von Neumann) For i = 1 or 2, there is a finitely additive measure σ extending Lebesgue measure, defined on all of P(R i ), and invariant under isometries. I won t prove this result here. It is a consequence of a more general extension theorem, related to the fact that the group of isometries of the plane is amenable. Its proof requires choice. An obvious consequence of this result is that if a (measurable) figure A in the plane has some area a, and it is cut out into finitely many pieces that are then rearranged into another measurable figure B, then λ 2 (A) = λ 2 (B). In contrast, the Banach-Tarski paradox allows us to divide a sphere the size of a pea into pieces that, when rearranged, make up a sphere the size of the sun. Clearly, this precludes the existence of an extension of Lebesgue measure in R 3 as in the Banach-von Neumann result. On the other hand, a version of the paradox can be obtained for R 2. In order to discuss this, I need a few notions. Definition 6 Two sets in R n are equidecomposable if one can be partitioned into finitely many disjoint sets (called pieces) that can be rearranged (via isometries) to form a partition of the other. There is a well-known particular instance of equidecomposability that has been studied in some detail in the context of classical Euclidean geometry. Definition 7 Two polygons in R 2 are equidissectable if, allowing overlap on boundaries, one can be split into finitely many triangles that can be rearranged (via isometries) into the other. 3
4 Sometimes one says that the polygons are congruent by dissection. Theorem 8 (Bolyai-Gerwien) Two polygons are equidissectable iff they have the same area. Proof: I only present a sketch. One direction is obvious. For the other, first one argues that a polygon is dissectable into triangles. Then, that any triangle is equidissectable with a square. This is done in two stages. First, one easily shows that a triangle is equidissectable with a rectangle. Some care is then needed to see that a rectangle is equidissectable with a square; but this is classical, it only goes a bit beyond constructing the geometric mean of two given numbers. Finally, one shows that two squares are equidissectable with a single square, and then induction completes the proof. The argument for two squares amounts to one of the well-known proofs of the Pythagorean theorem. The version of the Banach-Tarski paradox in R 2 is a generalization of the following strengthening of the Bolyai-Gerwien result: Theorem 9 (Banach-Tarski) Two polygons in R 2 are equidecomposable iff they have the same area. The proof (that I omit) follows the same outline as the paradox in R 3. Tarski then asked for the possibility of extending Theorem 9 to other regions. In particular, he asked whether the circle and a square of the same area are equidecomposable. This question remained open until 1990, when M. Laczkovich solved it affirmatively, in his paper Equidecomposability and discrepancy; a solution of Tarski s circle-squaring problem, Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik, 404 (1990), Among his results, I highlight: Theorem 10 (Laczkovich) 1. Any two polygons of the same area are equidecomposable using only translations. 2. Let J be a piecewise smooth Jordan curve for which there are two positive constants a < b such that the curvature at each point of J is between a and b. Then the domain enclosed by J is equidecomposable to a square via translations alone. The number of pieces required in the decomposition is rather large. Laczkovich computes that about pieces are required in the equidecomposition of an arbitrary isosceles right triangle and a square. In contrast, 5 pieces are required for the Banach-Tarski paradox in R 3. The pieces of the decomposition are also not explicitly definable; in particular, Dubins,Hirsch, and Karush showed that if only Jordan domains are used, then the circle and the square are not equidecomposable. 4
5 3 Paradoxical group actions The full statement of the Banach-Tarski paradox in R 3 is as follows: Theorem 11 Any two bounded subsets of R 3 with nonempty interior are equidecomposable. We will prove a weaker result, namely, that a sphere is equidecomposable with two copies of itself. Recall that S 2 denotes the unit sphere in R 3. The argument takes three steps. First, we talk about paradoxical group actions and show that F 2, the free group on two generators, acts paradoxically on itself. This is then used to show Hausdorff s paradox, that there is a countable set D such that F 2 acts paradoxically on S 2 \ D. We conclude by showing the Banach-Tarski paradox itself, that F 2 acts paradoxically on S 2. Recall that a group action is a map ϕ from a group G into the group Bij(X) of bijections of a set X into itself, ϕ : G Bij(X), such that: ϕ(e) = id, where e is the identity of G. For all g, h G and x X, ϕ(g h)(x) = (ϕ(g) ϕ(h))(x). To ease readability, we will follow the usual convention of writing g rather than ϕ(g), and g x or even gx rather than ϕ(g)(x) = g(x). Also, given g G and A X, write g A or ga for {ga a A}. Definition 12 Let the group G act on the set X. We say that G acts paradoxically on E X iff there are pairwise disjoint subsets of E, and corresponding elements of G, A 1,..., A n, B 1,..., B m, g 1,..., g n, h 1,..., h m, such that E = i g i A i = j h j B j. It is easy to check that if G acts paradoxically on E, we can assume moreover that the pieces A i, B j satisfy that E = i A i j B j, see Fact 13. This explains the name: Note that then we have that E is equidecomposable with two copies of itself, since i A i and j B j are both equidecomposable with E, where we are abusing notation, using subsets of X rather than of R n and elements of G rather than isometries. Given a group G acting on a set X, write A G B to denote that A, B X, that A can be partitioned into finitely many pieces, A = i<n A i, 5
6 and that there are (not necessarily distinct) elements g 0,..., g n 1 of G such that, letting B i = ga i for i < n, then the B i are pairwise disjoint and partition B. It is easy to verify that G is an equivalence relation. Fact 13 Given a group G acting on a set X, we have that G acts paradoxically on E X iff there are disjoint sets A, B E such that E = A B and A G E G B. Proof: Verify that the argument for the Schröder-Bernstein theorem gives that if A G B C A, then A G C. A trivial example of a paradoxical action is given by the group G = Bij(X) acting on X via the action fx = f(x) for X an infinite set. This action is paradoxical, since any infinite X is in bijection with two copies of itself. A more interesting example, essential to the argument, is as follows: Theorem 14 F 2 acts paradoxically on itself by left multiplication. Proof: Let σ, τ be generators of F 2, and consider the following 4 subsets: A 1 = τf 2, A 2 = τ 1 F 2, A 3 = σf 2 {σ n n ω}, and A 4 = σ 1 F 2 \ {σ n 0 < n ω}. Note that A 1,..., A 4 are disjoint and partition F 2. Moreover, and σa 2 = A 2 A 3 A 4, τa 4 = A 1 A 2 A 4. This gives the result, as F 2 = A 1 σa 2 = A 3 τa 4. The key tool we use to show that F 2 acts paradoxically on the sets in R 3 that interest us is the following result. Say that an action of a group G on a set X is without nontrivial fixed points iff the only element of G that fixes a point of X is the identity e. Theorem 15 If F 2 acts on X without nontrivial fixed points, then F 2 acts paradoxically on X. Proof: Fix an action of F 2 on X without nontrivial fixed points. Using the axiom of choice, let M be a choice set picking an element of each orbit F 2 a. Note that for any y X there is a (unique) m M such that y F 2 m, and therefore there is a g F 2 such that 6
7 y gm. In fact, there is a unique such g. Otherwise, there are g 1, g 2 G and m 1, m 2 M such that g 1 m 1 = y = g 2 m 2, and therefore m 1 = g 1 1 g 2m 2 F 2 m 2. Since M is a choice set, then m 1 = m 2. But then g 1 = g 2, since the action of F 2 is without nontrivial fixed points. Let A B be a paradoxical partition of F 2, so A F2 F 2 F2 B. Let A = g A gm and B = g B gm. By our observation on the paragraph above, A B = and A B = X. Since A F2 F 2 F2 B, we immediately get A F2 X F2 B. 4 The Hausdorff paradox In this section, I prove the following result: Theorem 16 There is a countable set D such that the natural action of the group of isometries of R 3 on S 2 \ D is paradoxical. In light of the results from last section, it suffices to find two isometries ρ, φ such that the group they generate is free, and acts on S 2 \ D without nontrivial fixed points, for some appropriate countable set D. There are many ways of doing this. Following Wagon s suggestion, let φ be the counterclockwise rotation around the z-axis by an angle of cos 1 (1/3). The matrix associated to φ is easily found to be: φ = Note that φ 1 = φ T is the transpose of φ. Now let ρ be the counterclockwise rotation around the x-axis by an angle of cos 1 (1/3). As with φ, it is easy to see that the matrix associated to ρ is: As with φ, ρ 1 = ρ T ρ = Lemma 17 The group generated by ρ, φ is free. 7
8 Proof: I sketch the argument. Let w be a reduced word in the alphabet {ρ, ρ 1, φ, φ 1. We need to show that if w is nontrivial (as a word), then it is not the identity (as an isometry). Since w = id iff φwφ 1 = id, we may assume that w ends in either φ or φ 1. We say that w is valid. I claim that 1 a w 0 = b 2 /3 k 0 c for some integers a, b, c, k with k 0 and b 0 (mod 3). In particular, this shows that w does not map ( ) T into itself, so w id. The claim is proved by induction on the length lh(w) of w. The result is clear if lh(w) = 1, since w = φ ±1 and w ( ) T is just the first column of φ ±1, that has the required form with a = 1, b = ±2, c = 0, and k = 1. Suppose now lh(w) > 1 and we know the result for all shorter lengths. We have that w = φ ±1 w or w = ρ ±1 w for some valid word w. We have that for some appropriate integers a, b, c, k, 1 a w 0 = b 2 /3 k. 0 c Then 1 a w 0 = b 2 /3 k, 0 c where a = a 4b, b = b ± 2a, c = 3c, and k = k + 1 in the first case, or a = 3a, b = b 2c, c = c ± 4b, and k = k + 1 in the second case. In both cases, we have that a, b, c, k are integers, and that k > 0. All that remains is to argue that b is not divisible by 3. For this, we consider the word v such that w = φ ±1 ρ ±1 v, or φ ±1 φ ±1 v, or φ ±2 v, or ρ ±2 v. Note that v is valid in the first and fourth cases. In the second and third cases, v is valid unless it is the empty word. In any case, note that for some integers a, b, c, k with k 0, we have 1 v 0 = 0 a b 2 c /3 k, and b 0 (mod 3) unless v is the empty word, in which case a = 1, b = c = k = 0. From the formulas above, we see respectively that b = b 2c with c 0 (mod 3), or b = b ± 2a with a 0 (mod 3), or b = b ± 2a = b ± 2(a 4b ) = b + b ± 2a 9b = 2b 9b, or b = b 2c = b 2(c ± 4b ) = b + b 2c 9b = 2b 9b. In all cases, that b 0 (mod 3) now follows from the induction hypothesis, and we are done. The Hausdorff paradox follows immediately: It suffices to show that there is a countable set D such that the natural action of the group G = φ, ρ on S 2 \ D is without nontrivial 8
9 fixed points. But for any matrix w G other than the identity, either w fixes no vector in S 2, or else it fixes exactly two, of the form v and v. This is because either 1 is not an eigenvalue of w, or else it is an eigenvalue of multiplicity 1: Note that if 1 has multiplicity 3 as an eigenvalue, w = id, and it cannot have multiplicity 2, because det(w) = 1 is the product of the eigenvalues of w. Now take as D the set of all vectors in S 2 that are fixed by some w G \ {id}. Since G is countable, and each w G \ {id} contributes at most two vectors to D, D is countable. 5 The Banach-Tarski paradox We now conclude the proof of the following result: Theorem 18 (Banach-Tarski) The group of isometries of R 3 acts paradoxically on S 2. As mentioned earlier, there is a stronger form of the paradox where any two bounded sets with nonempty interior and equidecomposable. Several additional strengthenings are possible. For example, only 5 pieces are needed to witness the equidecomposition (and 4 do not suffice). Let G be the group of isometries of R 3. Very recently, Trevor Wilson, then an undergraduate at Caltech, showed that the equidecomposition can be carried out continuously, i.e., say that A and B are bounded and with nonempty interior. Then there is a partition A = A i i<5 and continuous functions for i < 5, such that γ i (0) = id, γ i : [0, 1] G whenever i < j < 5 and t [0, 1], and γ i (t)a i γ j (t)a j = B = i<5 γ i (1)A i. For the strong version of the Banach-Tarski paradox and the fact that precisely 5 pieces are needed, see Wagon s book. For the continuous version, see Trevor Wilson, A continuous movement version of the Banach-Tarski paradox: A solution to de Groot s problem, The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 70 (3), 2005, Proof: In view of the Hausdorff paradox, it suffices to show that, with G the group of isometries of R 3, we have that S 2 G S 2 \D whenever D is countable. To see this, it suffices to check that there is a rotation ρ such that D, ρd, ρ 2 D,... are pairwise disjoint. because if that s the case, letting D = n ω ρ n D, 9
10 we have S 2 = D (S 2 \ D) G ρ D (S 2 \ D) = S 2 \ D. To find ρ, note that there is a line l that goes through the origin and misses D. Let A be the set of angles θ such that for some n > 0 there is a point P D such that ρ nθ P D, where ρ α is the rotation around l of α radians. Clearly, A is countable, so there is an angle θ not in A, and we can take ρ = ρ θ. In effect, we have that D ρ nθ D = for all n > 0. But then ρ mθ D ρ nθ D = for all n < m as well, and we are done. Typeset using LaTeX2WP. 10
A CONTINUOUS MOVEMENT VERSION OF THE BANACH TARSKI PARADOX: A SOLUTION TO DE GROOT S PROBLEM
The Journal of Symbolic Logic Volume 70, Number 3, Sept. 2005 A CONTINUOUS MOVEMENT VERSION OF THE BANACH TARSKI PARADOX: A SOLUTION TO DE GROOT S PROBLEM TREVOR M. WILSON Abstract. In 1924 Banach and
More informationLebesgue Measure on R n
CHAPTER 2 Lebesgue Measure on R n Our goal is to construct a notion of the volume, or Lebesgue measure, of rather general subsets of R n that reduces to the usual volume of elementary geometrical sets
More information= ϕ r cos θ. 0 cos ξ sin ξ and sin ξ cos ξ. sin ξ 0 cos ξ
8. The Banach-Tarski paradox May, 2012 The Banach-Tarski paradox is that a unit ball in Euclidean -space can be decomposed into finitely many parts which can then be reassembled to form two unit balls
More informationThe Axiom of Choice and the Banach-Tarski Paradox
The Axiom of Choice and the Banach-Tarski Paradox Department of Mathematical Sciences Lakehead University March 2011 The Axiom of Choice Axiom of Choice (Suppes 1960) For any set A there is a function
More informationLebesgue Measure on R n
8 CHAPTER 2 Lebesgue Measure on R n Our goal is to construct a notion of the volume, or Lebesgue measure, of rather general subsets of R n that reduces to the usual volume of elementary geometrical sets
More informationBorel circle squaring
Borel circle squaring Andrew Marks, joint with Spencer Unger UCLA Tarski s circle squaring problem The theory of amenability can be used to show that Lebesgue measure on R 2 can be extended to a finitely
More informationMeasure Theory. John K. Hunter. Department of Mathematics, University of California at Davis
Measure Theory John K. Hunter Department of Mathematics, University of California at Davis Abstract. These are some brief notes on measure theory, concentrating on Lebesgue measure on R n. Some missing
More informationMATH 13 SAMPLE FINAL EXAM SOLUTIONS
MATH 13 SAMPLE FINAL EXAM SOLUTIONS WINTER 2014 Problem 1 (15 points). For each statement below, circle T or F according to whether the statement is true or false. You do NOT need to justify your answers.
More informationTHE BANACH TARSKI PARADOX. Introduction. There are things that seem incredible to most men who have not studied Mathematics Aristotle
THE BANACH TARSKI PARADOX DHRUVA RAMAN Introduction There are things that seem incredible to most men who have not studied Mathematics Aristotle Mathematics, in its earliest form, was an array of methods
More informationEconomics 204 Fall 2011 Problem Set 1 Suggested Solutions
Economics 204 Fall 2011 Problem Set 1 Suggested Solutions 1. Suppose k is a positive integer. Use induction to prove the following two statements. (a) For all n N 0, the inequality (k 2 + n)! k 2n holds.
More informationarxiv: v2 [math.gr] 4 Nov 2015
arxiv:1511.01019v2 [math.gr] 4 Nov 2015 A Paradoxical Decomposition of the Real Line Shelley Kandola and Sam Vandervelde Abstract. In this paper we demonstrate how to partition the real number line into
More informationDissections: How to cut things up
Dissections: How to cut things up Matt Booth PG Colloquium, University of Edinburgh September 2017 What is a dissection? What is a dissection? MathWorld Scissors-congruence Definition Two polygons P, Q
More informationMath 455 Some notes on Cardinality and Transfinite Induction
Math 455 Some notes on Cardinality and Transfinite Induction (David Ross, UH-Manoa Dept. of Mathematics) 1 Cardinality Recall the following notions: function, relation, one-to-one, onto, on-to-one correspondence,
More informationNotes on the Banach-Tarski Paradox
Notes on the Banach-Tarski Paradox Donald Brower May 6, 2006 The Banach-Tarski paradox is not a logical paradox, but rather a counter intuitive result. It says that a ball can be broken into a finite number
More information5 Set Operations, Functions, and Counting
5 Set Operations, Functions, and Counting Let N denote the positive integers, N 0 := N {0} be the non-negative integers and Z = N 0 ( N) the positive and negative integers including 0, Q the rational numbers,
More informationMeasures and Measure Spaces
Chapter 2 Measures and Measure Spaces In summarizing the flaws of the Riemann integral we can focus on two main points: 1) Many nice functions are not Riemann integrable. 2) The Riemann integral does not
More informationAfter taking the square and expanding, we get x + y 2 = (x + y) (x + y) = x 2 + 2x y + y 2, inequality in analysis, we obtain.
Lecture 1: August 25 Introduction. Topology grew out of certain questions in geometry and analysis about 100 years ago. As Wikipedia puts it, the motivating insight behind topology is that some geometric
More informationDescriptive graph combinatorics
Prague; July 2016 Introduction This talk is about a relatively new subject, developed in the last two decades or so, which is at the interface of descriptive set theory and graph theory but also has interesting
More informationAxioms of separation
Axioms of separation These notes discuss the same topic as Sections 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, and also 7, 10 of Munkres book. Some notions (hereditarily normal, perfectly normal, collectionwise normal, monotonically
More informationMATH41011/MATH61011: FOURIER SERIES AND LEBESGUE INTEGRATION. Extra Reading Material for Level 4 and Level 6
MATH41011/MATH61011: FOURIER SERIES AND LEBESGUE INTEGRATION Extra Reading Material for Level 4 and Level 6 Part A: Construction of Lebesgue Measure The first part the extra material consists of the construction
More informationTopology. Xiaolong Han. Department of Mathematics, California State University, Northridge, CA 91330, USA address:
Topology Xiaolong Han Department of Mathematics, California State University, Northridge, CA 91330, USA E-mail address: Xiaolong.Han@csun.edu Remark. You are entitled to a reward of 1 point toward a homework
More informationExercises for Unit VI (Infinite constructions in set theory)
Exercises for Unit VI (Infinite constructions in set theory) VI.1 : Indexed families and set theoretic operations (Halmos, 4, 8 9; Lipschutz, 5.3 5.4) Lipschutz : 5.3 5.6, 5.29 5.32, 9.14 1. Generalize
More informationThe constructible universe
The constructible universe In this set of notes I want to sketch Gödel s proof that CH is consistent with the other axioms of set theory. Gödel s argument goes well beyond this result; his identification
More information4 Choice axioms and Baire category theorem
Tel Aviv University, 2013 Measure and category 30 4 Choice axioms and Baire category theorem 4a Vitali set....................... 30 4b No choice....................... 31 4c Dependent choice..................
More information5 Measure theory II. (or. lim. Prove the proposition. 5. For fixed F A and φ M define the restriction of φ on F by writing.
5 Measure theory II 1. Charges (signed measures). Let (Ω, A) be a σ -algebra. A map φ: A R is called a charge, (or signed measure or σ -additive set function) if φ = φ(a j ) (5.1) A j for any disjoint
More informationMeasures. 1 Introduction. These preliminary lecture notes are partly based on textbooks by Athreya and Lahiri, Capinski and Kopp, and Folland.
Measures These preliminary lecture notes are partly based on textbooks by Athreya and Lahiri, Capinski and Kopp, and Folland. 1 Introduction Our motivation for studying measure theory is to lay a foundation
More information1.1. MEASURES AND INTEGRALS
CHAPTER 1: MEASURE THEORY In this chapter we define the notion of measure µ on a space, construct integrals on this space, and establish their basic properties under limits. The measure µ(e) will be defined
More informationDefinitions. Notations. Injective, Surjective and Bijective. Divides. Cartesian Product. Relations. Equivalence Relations
Page 1 Definitions Tuesday, May 8, 2018 12:23 AM Notations " " means "equals, by definition" the set of all real numbers the set of integers Denote a function from a set to a set by Denote the image of
More information1/12/05: sec 3.1 and my article: How good is the Lebesgue measure?, Math. Intelligencer 11(2) (1989),
Real Analysis 2, Math 651, Spring 2005 April 26, 2005 1 Real Analysis 2, Math 651, Spring 2005 Krzysztof Chris Ciesielski 1/12/05: sec 3.1 and my article: How good is the Lebesgue measure?, Math. Intelligencer
More informationFilters in Analysis and Topology
Filters in Analysis and Topology David MacIver July 1, 2004 Abstract The study of filters is a very natural way to talk about convergence in an arbitrary topological space, and carries over nicely into
More informationConsequences of Continuity
Consequences of Continuity James K. Peterson Department of Biological Sciences and Department of Mathematical Sciences Clemson University October 4, 2017 Outline 1 Domains of Continuous Functions 2 The
More informationFootnotes to Linear Algebra (MA 540 fall 2013), T. Goodwillie, Bases
Footnotes to Linear Algebra (MA 540 fall 2013), T. Goodwillie, Bases November 18, 2013 1 Spanning and linear independence I will outline a slightly different approach to the material in Chapter 2 of Axler
More informationMH 7500 THEOREMS. (iii) A = A; (iv) A B = A B. Theorem 5. If {A α : α Λ} is any collection of subsets of a space X, then
MH 7500 THEOREMS Definition. A topological space is an ordered pair (X, T ), where X is a set and T is a collection of subsets of X such that (i) T and X T ; (ii) U V T whenever U, V T ; (iii) U T whenever
More informationStat 451: Solutions to Assignment #1
Stat 451: Solutions to Assignment #1 2.1) By definition, 2 Ω is the set of all subsets of Ω. Therefore, to show that 2 Ω is a σ-algebra we must show that the conditions of the definition σ-algebra are
More informationThus, X is connected by Problem 4. Case 3: X = (a, b]. This case is analogous to Case 2. Case 4: X = (a, b). Choose ε < b a
Solutions to Homework #6 1. Complete the proof of the backwards direction of Theorem 12.2 from class (which asserts the any interval in R is connected). Solution: Let X R be a closed interval. Case 1:
More informationMath 4603: Advanced Calculus I, Summer 2016 University of Minnesota Notes on Cardinality of Sets
Math 4603: Advanced Calculus I, Summer 2016 University of Minnesota Notes on Cardinality of Sets Introduction In this short article, we will describe some basic notions on cardinality of sets. Given two
More informationFUNDAMENTAL GROUPS AND THE VAN KAMPEN S THEOREM
FUNDAMENTAL GROUPS AND THE VAN KAMPEN S THEOREM ANG LI Abstract. In this paper, we start with the definitions and properties of the fundamental group of a topological space, and then proceed to prove Van-
More informationMeasure Theory and Lebesgue Integration. Joshua H. Lifton
Measure Theory and Lebesgue Integration Joshua H. Lifton Originally published 31 March 1999 Revised 5 September 2004 bstract This paper originally came out of my 1999 Swarthmore College Mathematics Senior
More informationConstruction of a general measure structure
Chapter 4 Construction of a general measure structure We turn to the development of general measure theory. The ingredients are a set describing the universe of points, a class of measurable subsets along
More informationWe are going to discuss what it means for a sequence to converge in three stages: First, we define what it means for a sequence to converge to zero
Chapter Limits of Sequences Calculus Student: lim s n = 0 means the s n are getting closer and closer to zero but never gets there. Instructor: ARGHHHHH! Exercise. Think of a better response for the instructor.
More informationMeasures. Chapter Some prerequisites. 1.2 Introduction
Lecture notes Course Analysis for PhD students Uppsala University, Spring 2018 Rostyslav Kozhan Chapter 1 Measures 1.1 Some prerequisites I will follow closely the textbook Real analysis: Modern Techniques
More informationShort Introduction to Admissible Recursion Theory
Short Introduction to Admissible Recursion Theory Rachael Alvir November 2016 1 Axioms of KP and Admissible Sets An admissible set is a transitive set A satisfying the axioms of Kripke-Platek Set Theory
More informationarxiv: v1 [math.fa] 14 Jul 2018
Construction of Regular Non-Atomic arxiv:180705437v1 [mathfa] 14 Jul 2018 Strictly-Positive Measures in Second-Countable Locally Compact Non-Atomic Hausdorff Spaces Abstract Jason Bentley Department of
More informationII - REAL ANALYSIS. This property gives us a way to extend the notion of content to finite unions of rectangles: we define
1 Measures 1.1 Jordan content in R N II - REAL ANALYSIS Let I be an interval in R. Then its 1-content is defined as c 1 (I) := b a if I is bounded with endpoints a, b. If I is unbounded, we define c 1
More informationDiscrete Mathematics: Lectures 6 and 7 Sets, Relations, Functions and Counting Instructor: Arijit Bishnu Date: August 4 and 6, 2009
Discrete Mathematics: Lectures 6 and 7 Sets, Relations, Functions and Counting Instructor: Arijit Bishnu Date: August 4 and 6, 2009 Our main goal is here is to do counting using functions. For that, we
More informationIntroduction to Dynamical Systems
Introduction to Dynamical Systems France-Kosovo Undergraduate Research School of Mathematics March 2017 This introduction to dynamical systems was a course given at the march 2017 edition of the France
More informationPart V. 17 Introduction: What are measures and why measurable sets. Lebesgue Integration Theory
Part V 7 Introduction: What are measures and why measurable sets Lebesgue Integration Theory Definition 7. (Preliminary). A measure on a set is a function :2 [ ] such that. () = 2. If { } = is a finite
More information1 Topology Definition of a topology Basis (Base) of a topology The subspace topology & the product topology on X Y 3
Index Page 1 Topology 2 1.1 Definition of a topology 2 1.2 Basis (Base) of a topology 2 1.3 The subspace topology & the product topology on X Y 3 1.4 Basic topology concepts: limit points, closed sets,
More informationNotes on ordinals and cardinals
Notes on ordinals and cardinals Reed Solomon 1 Background Terminology We will use the following notation for the common number systems: N = {0, 1, 2,...} = the natural numbers Z = {..., 2, 1, 0, 1, 2,...}
More informationJónsson posets and unary Jónsson algebras
Jónsson posets and unary Jónsson algebras Keith A. Kearnes and Greg Oman Abstract. We show that if P is an infinite poset whose proper order ideals have cardinality strictly less than P, and κ is a cardinal
More informationThe Axiom of Choice and Zorn s Lemma
The Axiom of Choice and Zorn s Lemma Any indexed family of sets A ={Ai: i I} may be conceived as a variable set, to wit, as a set varying over the index set I. Each Ai is then the value of the variable
More informationNotes on the Dual Ramsey Theorem
Notes on the Dual Ramsey Theorem Reed Solomon July 29, 2010 1 Partitions and infinite variable words The goal of these notes is to give a proof of the Dual Ramsey Theorem. This theorem was first proved
More informationFUNDAMENTALS OF REAL ANALYSIS by. II.1. Prelude. Recall that the Riemann integral of a real-valued function f on an interval [a, b] is defined as
FUNDAMENTALS OF REAL ANALYSIS by Doğan Çömez II. MEASURES AND MEASURE SPACES II.1. Prelude Recall that the Riemann integral of a real-valued function f on an interval [a, b] is defined as b n f(xdx :=
More informationReport 1 The Axiom of Choice
Report 1 The Axiom of Choice By Li Yu This report is a collection of the material I presented in the first round presentation of the course MATH 2002. The report focuses on the principle of recursive definition,
More informationUniquely Universal Sets
Uniquely Universal Sets 1 Uniquely Universal Sets Abstract 1 Arnold W. Miller We say that X Y satisfies the Uniquely Universal property (UU) iff there exists an open set U X Y such that for every open
More informationMath 3T03 - Topology
Math 3T03 - Topology Sang Woo Park April 5, 2018 Contents 1 Introduction to topology 2 1.1 What is topology?.......................... 2 1.2 Set theory............................... 3 2 Functions 4 3
More informationChapter 2 Metric Spaces
Chapter 2 Metric Spaces The purpose of this chapter is to present a summary of some basic properties of metric and topological spaces that play an important role in the main body of the book. 2.1 Metrics
More informationBAIRE MEASURABLE PARADOXICAL DECOMPOSITIONS VIA MATCHINGS
BAIRE MEASURABLE PARADOXICAL DECOMPOSITIONS VIA MATCHINGS ANDREW MARKS AND SPENCER UNGER Abstract. We show that every locally finite bipartite Borel graph satisfying a strengthening of Hall s condition
More informationDefinable Extension Theorems in O-minimal Structures. Matthias Aschenbrenner University of California, Los Angeles
Definable Extension Theorems in O-minimal Structures Matthias Aschenbrenner University of California, Los Angeles 1 O-minimality Basic definitions and examples Geometry of definable sets Why o-minimal
More informationarxiv: v4 [math.mg] 2 Sep 2016 Abstract
Annals of Mathematics 00 (XXXX), 1 40 http://dx.doi.org/10.4007/annals.xxxx.00.0.0000 Measurable circle squaring By Lukasz Grabowski, András Máthé, and Oleg Pikhurko arxiv:1501.06122v4 [math.mg] 2 Sep
More informationMeasure and Category. Marianna Csörnyei. ucahmcs
Measure and Category Marianna Csörnyei mari@math.ucl.ac.uk http:/www.ucl.ac.uk/ ucahmcs 1 / 96 A (very short) Introduction to Cardinals The cardinality of a set A is equal to the cardinality of a set B,
More information2. Prime and Maximal Ideals
18 Andreas Gathmann 2. Prime and Maximal Ideals There are two special kinds of ideals that are of particular importance, both algebraically and geometrically: the so-called prime and maximal ideals. Let
More informationFORCING WITH SEQUENCES OF MODELS OF TWO TYPES
FORCING WITH SEQUENCES OF MODELS OF TWO TYPES ITAY NEEMAN Abstract. We present an approach to forcing with finite sequences of models that uses models of two types. This approach builds on earlier work
More informationConnectedness. Proposition 2.2. The following are equivalent for a topological space (X, T ).
Connectedness 1 Motivation Connectedness is the sort of topological property that students love. Its definition is intuitive and easy to understand, and it is a powerful tool in proofs of well-known results.
More informationMaths 212: Homework Solutions
Maths 212: Homework Solutions 1. The definition of A ensures that x π for all x A, so π is an upper bound of A. To show it is the least upper bound, suppose x < π and consider two cases. If x < 1, then
More informationSELF-DUAL UNIFORM MATROIDS ON INFINITE SETS
SELF-DUAL UNIFORM MATROIDS ON INFINITE SETS NATHAN BOWLER AND STEFAN GESCHKE Abstract. We extend the notion of a uniform matroid to the infinitary case and construct, using weak fragments of Martin s Axiom,
More informationSolutions to Tutorial 8 (Week 9)
The University of Sydney School of Mathematics and Statistics Solutions to Tutorial 8 (Week 9) MATH3961: Metric Spaces (Advanced) Semester 1, 2018 Web Page: http://www.maths.usyd.edu.au/u/ug/sm/math3961/
More informationDef. A topological space X is disconnected if it admits a non-trivial splitting: (We ll abbreviate disjoint union of two subsets A and B meaning A B =
CONNECTEDNESS-Notes Def. A topological space X is disconnected if it admits a non-trivial splitting: X = A B, A B =, A, B open in X, and non-empty. (We ll abbreviate disjoint union of two subsets A and
More informationB 1 = {B(x, r) x = (x 1, x 2 ) H, 0 < r < x 2 }. (a) Show that B = B 1 B 2 is a basis for a topology on X.
Math 6342/7350: Topology and Geometry Sample Preliminary Exam Questions 1. For each of the following topological spaces X i, determine whether X i and X i X i are homeomorphic. (a) X 1 = [0, 1] (b) X 2
More information2 Metric Spaces Definitions Exotic Examples... 3
Contents 1 Vector Spaces and Norms 1 2 Metric Spaces 2 2.1 Definitions.......................................... 2 2.2 Exotic Examples...................................... 3 3 Topologies 4 3.1 Open Sets..........................................
More informationLocally convex spaces, the hyperplane separation theorem, and the Krein-Milman theorem
56 Chapter 7 Locally convex spaces, the hyperplane separation theorem, and the Krein-Milman theorem Recall that C(X) is not a normed linear space when X is not compact. On the other hand we could use semi
More informationAustin Mohr Math 730 Homework. f(x) = y for some x λ Λ
Austin Mohr Math 730 Homework In the following problems, let Λ be an indexing set and let A and B λ for λ Λ be arbitrary sets. Problem 1B1 ( ) Show A B λ = (A B λ ). λ Λ λ Λ Proof. ( ) x A B λ λ Λ x A
More informationUMASS AMHERST MATH 300 SP 05, F. HAJIR HOMEWORK 8: (EQUIVALENCE) RELATIONS AND PARTITIONS
UMASS AMHERST MATH 300 SP 05, F. HAJIR HOMEWORK 8: (EQUIVALENCE) RELATIONS AND PARTITIONS 1. Relations Recall the concept of a function f from a source set X to a target set Y. It is a rule for mapping
More informationEilenberg-Steenrod properties. (Hatcher, 2.1, 2.3, 3.1; Conlon, 2.6, 8.1, )
II.3 : Eilenberg-Steenrod properties (Hatcher, 2.1, 2.3, 3.1; Conlon, 2.6, 8.1, 8.3 8.5 Definition. Let U be an open subset of R n for some n. The de Rham cohomology groups (U are the cohomology groups
More informationANALYSIS QUALIFYING EXAM FALL 2017: SOLUTIONS. 1 cos(nx) lim. n 2 x 2. g n (x) = 1 cos(nx) n 2 x 2. x 2.
ANALYSIS QUALIFYING EXAM FALL 27: SOLUTIONS Problem. Determine, with justification, the it cos(nx) n 2 x 2 dx. Solution. For an integer n >, define g n : (, ) R by Also define g : (, ) R by g(x) = g n
More information2.23 Theorem. Let A and B be sets in a metric space. If A B, then L(A) L(B).
2.23 Theorem. Let A and B be sets in a metric space. If A B, then L(A) L(B). 2.24 Theorem. Let A and B be sets in a metric space. Then L(A B) = L(A) L(B). It is worth noting that you can t replace union
More informationConsequences of Continuity
Consequences of Continuity James K. Peterson Department of Biological Sciences and Department of Mathematical Sciences Clemson University October 4, 2017 Outline Domains of Continuous Functions The Intermediate
More information3 COUNTABILITY AND CONNECTEDNESS AXIOMS
3 COUNTABILITY AND CONNECTEDNESS AXIOMS Definition 3.1 Let X be a topological space. A subset D of X is dense in X iff D = X. X is separable iff it contains a countable dense subset. X satisfies the first
More informationMath 541 Fall 2008 Connectivity Transition from Math 453/503 to Math 541 Ross E. Staffeldt-August 2008
Math 541 Fall 2008 Connectivity Transition from Math 453/503 to Math 541 Ross E. Staffeldt-August 2008 Closed sets We have been operating at a fundamental level at which a topological space is a set together
More information18.175: Lecture 2 Extension theorems, random variables, distributions
18.175: Lecture 2 Extension theorems, random variables, distributions Scott Sheffield MIT Outline Extension theorems Characterizing measures on R d Random variables Outline Extension theorems Characterizing
More informationTangent spaces, normals and extrema
Chapter 3 Tangent spaces, normals and extrema If S is a surface in 3-space, with a point a S where S looks smooth, i.e., without any fold or cusp or self-crossing, we can intuitively define the tangent
More informationExistence and Uniqueness
Chapter 3 Existence and Uniqueness An intellect which at a certain moment would know all forces that set nature in motion, and all positions of all items of which nature is composed, if this intellect
More informationMeasure Theory on Topological Spaces. Course: Prof. Tony Dorlas 2010 Typset: Cathal Ormond
Measure Theory on Topological Spaces Course: Prof. Tony Dorlas 2010 Typset: Cathal Ormond May 22, 2011 Contents 1 Introduction 2 1.1 The Riemann Integral........................................ 2 1.2 Measurable..............................................
More informationIntroduction to Topology
Introduction to Topology Randall R. Holmes Auburn University Typeset by AMS-TEX Chapter 1. Metric Spaces 1. Definition and Examples. As the course progresses we will need to review some basic notions about
More informationThe Banach-Tarski Paradox
Saint Mary s College of California In fulfillment of the Bachelors of Science in Mathematics A senior thesis The Banach-Tarski Paradox Author: Alex Lowen Supervisor: Professor Conner May 7, 206 The good
More informationRose-Hulman Undergraduate Mathematics Journal
Rose-Hulman Undergraduate Mathematics Journal Volume 17 Issue 1 Article 5 Reversing A Doodle Bryan A. Curtis Metropolitan State University of Denver Follow this and additional works at: http://scholar.rose-hulman.edu/rhumj
More informationChapter 1 Preliminaries
Chapter 1 Preliminaries 1.1 Conventions and Notations Throughout the book we use the following notations for standard sets of numbers: N the set {1, 2,...} of natural numbers Z the set of integers Q the
More informationCHAPTER 6. Differentiation
CHPTER 6 Differentiation The generalization from elementary calculus of differentiation in measure theory is less obvious than that of integration, and the methods of treating it are somewhat involved.
More informationDO FIVE OUT OF SIX ON EACH SET PROBLEM SET
DO FIVE OUT OF SIX ON EACH SET PROBLEM SET 1. THE AXIOM OF FOUNDATION Early on in the book (page 6) it is indicated that throughout the formal development set is going to mean pure set, or set whose elements,
More informationReal Analysis Notes. Thomas Goller
Real Analysis Notes Thomas Goller September 4, 2011 Contents 1 Abstract Measure Spaces 2 1.1 Basic Definitions........................... 2 1.2 Measurable Functions........................ 2 1.3 Integration..............................
More informationSeminaar Abstrakte Wiskunde Seminar in Abstract Mathematics Lecture notes in progress (27 March 2010)
http://math.sun.ac.za/amsc/sam Seminaar Abstrakte Wiskunde Seminar in Abstract Mathematics 2009-2010 Lecture notes in progress (27 March 2010) Contents 2009 Semester I: Elements 5 1. Cartesian product
More informationHence, the sequence of triangular numbers is given by., the. n th square number, is the sum of the first. S n
Appendix A: The Principle of Mathematical Induction We now present an important deductive method widely used in mathematics: the principle of mathematical induction. First, we provide some historical context
More informationMATH 220 (all sections) Homework #12 not to be turned in posted Friday, November 24, 2017
MATH 220 (all sections) Homework #12 not to be turned in posted Friday, November 24, 2017 Definition: A set A is finite if there exists a nonnegative integer c such that there exists a bijection from A
More informationHausdorff Measure. Jimmy Briggs and Tim Tyree. December 3, 2016
Hausdorff Measure Jimmy Briggs and Tim Tyree December 3, 2016 1 1 Introduction In this report, we explore the the measurement of arbitrary subsets of the metric space (X, ρ), a topological space X along
More informationSTRONGLY CONNECTED SPACES
Undergraduate Research Opportunity Programme in Science STRONGLY CONNECTED SPACES Submitted by Dai Bo Supervised by Dr. Wong Yan-loi Department of Mathematics National University of Singapore Academic
More informationMASTERS EXAMINATION IN MATHEMATICS SOLUTIONS
MASTERS EXAMINATION IN MATHEMATICS PURE MATHEMATICS OPTION SPRING 010 SOLUTIONS Algebra A1. Let F be a finite field. Prove that F [x] contains infinitely many prime ideals. Solution: The ring F [x] of
More informationIntroduction to Real Analysis Alternative Chapter 1
Christopher Heil Introduction to Real Analysis Alternative Chapter 1 A Primer on Norms and Banach Spaces Last Updated: March 10, 2018 c 2018 by Christopher Heil Chapter 1 A Primer on Norms and Banach Spaces
More information2. The Concept of Convergence: Ultrafilters and Nets
2. The Concept of Convergence: Ultrafilters and Nets NOTE: AS OF 2008, SOME OF THIS STUFF IS A BIT OUT- DATED AND HAS A FEW TYPOS. I WILL REVISE THIS MATE- RIAL SOMETIME. In this lecture we discuss two
More informationPart II. Logic and Set Theory. Year
Part II Year 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2018 60 Paper 4, Section II 16G State and prove the ǫ-recursion Theorem. [You may assume the Principle of ǫ- Induction.]
More information(x, y) = d(x, y) = x y.
1 Euclidean geometry 1.1 Euclidean space Our story begins with a geometry which will be familiar to all readers, namely the geometry of Euclidean space. In this first chapter we study the Euclidean distance
More information