Show that it is metric and the measurable is 0

In summary: Therefore $\mu\{|f_n - f| > c\} \to 0$, and consequently $f_n$ converges in $\mu$-measure to $f$.Could you explain it further to me?? (Wondering)Hi mathmari,Recall that a positive measure $\mu$ satisfies subadditivity: If $A$ and $B$ are measurable and $A \subset B$, then $\mu(A) \le \mu(B)$. Since $F$ is strictly increasing on $[0,\infty)$, $|f_n - f| > c$ implies $F(|f_n - f|) > F(c)$, i.e
  • #1
mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
5,049
7
Hey! :eek:

In a space of finite measure, if $f$ and $g$ are measurable we set $\rho (f,g)=\int \frac{|f-g|}{1+|f-g|}d \mu$.

Show that $\rho$ is metric and that $f_n \rightarrow f$ as for $\rho$ if and only if $\forall c>0$ we have that $\mu(\{|f_n-f|>c\})\rightarrow 0$.What does "$f_n \rightarrow f$ as for $\rho$" mean ?? (Wondering)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
"$f_n \rightarrow f$ as for $\rho$" is not idiomatic English. But it must surely mean "$\rho(f_n,f) \to0$".
 
  • #3
To prove that $\rho$ is a metric, first show that the function $D$ given by

\(\displaystyle D(f,g) = \frac{|f - g|}{1 + |f - g|}\)

is a metric.

Suppose $\rho(f_n,f) \to 0$. Fix $c > 0$. Since the function $F(x) = \frac{x}{1 + x}$ is strictly increasing on $[0, \infty)$,

\(\displaystyle \mu\{|f_n - f| > c\} \le \mu\left\{D(f_n,f) > \frac{c}{1 + c}\right\}.\)

By Chebyshev's inequality, it follows that

\(\displaystyle \mu\left\{D(f_n,f) > \frac{c}{1 + c}\right\} \le \frac{1 + c}{c} \int D(f_n, f)\, d\mu = \frac{1+c}{c}\rho(f_n,f) \to 0.\)

Therefore $\mu\{|f_n - f| > c\} \to 0$, and consequently $f_n$ converges in $\mu$-measure to $f$.

To prove the converse, I'll let $X$ be the common domain of $f$ and the $f_n$. This is where the hypothesis $\mu(X) < \infty$ is essential. Suppose $f_n$ converges in $\mu$-measure to $f$. Given $\varepsilon > 0$, set $E_n(\varepsilon) = \{|f_n - f| > \varepsilon\}$, $n = 1, 2, 3,\ldots.$ Then

\(\displaystyle \rho(f_n,f) = \int_{E_n(\varepsilon)} D(f_n,f)\, d\mu + \int_{X\setminus E_n(\varepsilon)} D(f_n,f)\, d\mu.\)

Since $D(f_n,f) < 1$,

\(\displaystyle \int_{E_n(\varepsilon)} D(f_n,f)\, d\mu < \mu(E_n(\varepsilon)).\)

On $X\setminus E_n(\varepsilon)$, $D(f_n,f) \le \frac{\varepsilon}{1 + \varepsilon}$. Thus

\(\displaystyle \int_{X\setminus E_n(\varepsilon)} D(f_n,f)\, d\mu \le \frac{\varepsilon}{1 + \varepsilon}\mu(X\setminus E_n(\varepsilon)) \le \frac{\varepsilon}{1 + \varepsilon}\mu(X). \)

Hence

\(\displaystyle \limsup_{n\to \infty}\rho(f_n,f) \le \limsup_{n\to \infty} \left(\mu(E_n(\varepsilon)) + \frac{\varepsilon}{1 + \varepsilon}\mu(X)\right) \le \frac{\varepsilon}{1 + \varepsilon}\mu(X),\)

since $\mu(E_n(\varepsilon)) \to 0$ by hypothesis. As $\mu(X) < \infty$ and $\varepsilon$ was arbitrary positive number, $\rho(f_n,f) \to 0$.
 
  • #4
Euge said:
To prove that $\rho$ is a metric, first show that the function $D$ given by

\(\displaystyle D(f,g) = \frac{|f - g|}{1 + |f - g|}\)

is a metric.

To show that $D(f,g)$ is metric I have done the following:
  1. $$D(f,g)\geq 0, \forall f,g$$
  2. $$D(f,g)=0\Leftrightarrow |f-g|=0\Leftrightarrow f=g$$
  3. $$D(g,f)=\frac{|g-f|}{1+|g-f|}=\frac{|f-g|}{1+|f-g|}=D(f,g)$$
  4. $$D(f,g)=\frac{|f-g|}{1+|f-g|}=\frac{|f-z+z-g|}{1+|f-g|}\leq \frac{|f-z|+|z-g|}{1+|f-g|}=\frac{|f-z|}{1+|f-g|}+\frac{|z-g|}{1+|f-g|}$$ How can I continue to show the triangle inequality?? (Wondering)
 
  • #5
mathmari said:
To show that $D(f,g)$ is metric I have done the following:
  1. $$D(f,g)\geq 0, \forall f,g$$
  2. $$D(f,g)=0\Leftrightarrow |f-g|=0\Leftrightarrow f=g$$
  3. $$D(g,f)=\frac{|g-f|}{1+|g-f|}=\frac{|f-g|}{1+|f-g|}=D(f,g)$$
  4. $$D(f,g)=\frac{|f-g|}{1+|f-g|}=\frac{|f-z+z-g|}{1+|f-g|}\leq \frac{|f-z|+|z-g|}{1+|f-g|}=\frac{|f-z|}{1+|f-g|}+\frac{|z-g|}{1+|f-g|}$$ How can I continue to show the triangle inequality?? (Wondering)

Hi mathmari,

To prove the triangle inequality, consider the function $\phi(x) := \frac{x}{1 + x}$ on $[0, \infty)$. Show that $\phi$ is increasing and satisfies the inequality $\phi(x + y) \le \phi(x) + \phi(y)$ for all $x, y \in [0,\infty)$. Then you may establish the inequalities

\(\displaystyle D(f,g) = \phi(|f - g|) \le \phi(|f - z| + |z - g|) \le \phi(|f - z|) + \phi(|z - g|) = D(f,z) + D(z,g)\)

for all $f, g, z$.
 
  • #6
Euge said:
Hi mathmari,

To prove the triangle inequality, consider the function $\phi(x) := \frac{x}{1 + x}$ on $[0, \infty)$. Show that $\phi$ is increasing and satisfies the inequality $\phi(x + y) \le \phi(x) + \phi(y)$ for all $x, y \in [0,\infty)$. Then you may establish the inequalities

\(\displaystyle D(f,g) = \phi(|f - g|) \le \phi(|f - z| + |z - g|) \le \phi(|f - z|) + \phi(|z - g|) = D(f,z) + D(z,g)\)

for all $f, g, z$.

Ok! (Smile)

Having shown that $D$ is metric, how do we conclude that $\rho$ is metric?? (Wondering)
 
  • #7
mathmari said:
Ok! (Smile)

Having shown that $D$ is metric, how do we conclude that $\rho$ is metric?? (Wondering)

The only property you really need from $D$ is the triangle inequality, so that you can prove the triangle inequality for $\rho$. Symmetry and positive definiteness of $\rho$ follow directly from the definition of $\rho$ and integral properties. Moreover, since $\rho(f,g)$ is an integral over a space of finite measure and $f$ and $g$ are measurable, $\rho(f,g)$ is finite.
 
  • #8
Euge said:
Suppose $\rho(f_n,f) \to 0$. Fix $c > 0$. Since the function $F(x) = \frac{x}{1 + x}$ is strictly increasing on $[0, \infty)$,

\(\displaystyle \mu\{|f_n - f| > c\} \le \mu\left\{D(f_n,f) > \frac{c}{1 + c}\right\}.\)

By Chebyshev's inequality, it follows that

\(\displaystyle \mu\left\{D(f_n,f) > \frac{c}{1 + c}\right\} \le \frac{1 + c}{c} \int D(f_n, f)\, d\mu = \frac{1+c}{c}\rho(f_n,f) \to 0.\)

Therefore $\mu\{|f_n - f| > c\} \to 0$, and consequently $f_n$ converges in $\mu$-measure to $f$.

Could you explain it further to me?? (Wondering)
 
  • #9
Hi mathmari,

Recall that a positive measure $\mu$ satisfies subadditivity: If $A$ and $B$ are measurable and $A \subset B$, then $\mu(A) \le \mu(B)$. Since $F$ is strictly increasing on $[0,\infty)$, $|f_n - f| > c$ implies $F(|f_n - f|) > F(c)$, i.e., $D(f_n, f) > \frac{c}{1 + c}$. Hence $\{x \in X : |f_n(x) - f(x)| > c\} \subset \{x\in X : D(f_n(x),f(x)) > \frac{c}{1 + c}\}$. Consequently by subadditivity, $\mu\{|f_n - f| > c\} \le \mu\{D(f_n,f) > \frac{c}{1 + c}\}$.

For the next part, Chebyshev's inequality was used -- for any $g \in L^1(X,\mu)$, $\mu\{|g| > \alpha\} \le \alpha^{-1} \int_X |g|\, d\mu$. Now set $g = D(f_n,f)$ and $\alpha = \frac{c}{1 + c}$ to get

\(\displaystyle \mu\left\{D(f_n,f) > \frac{c}{1 + c}\right\} \le \frac{1 + c}{c} \int_X D(f_n,f)\, d\mu = \frac{1 + c}{c}\rho(f_n,f).\)
 
  • #10
Euge said:
Since $F$ is strictly increasing on $[0,\infty)$, $|f_n - f| > c$ implies $F(|f_n - f|) > F(c)$, i.e., $D(f_n, f) > \frac{c}{1 + c}$.

Could you explain me further this part?? (Wondering)
 
  • #11
Sorry, I may have confused you with the notation. Since $F$ is strictly increasing on $[0,\infty)$, $F(x) > F(y)$ whenever $x > y \ge 0$. So for each $x \in X$, $|f_n(x) - f(x)| > c$ implies $F(|f_n(x) - f(x)|) > F(c)$. By definition of $D$, $D(f_n(x), f(x)) = F(|f_n(x) - f(x)|)$. Also, $F(c) = \frac{c}{1 + c}$. So we have that for all $x \in X$, $|f_n(x) - f(x)| > c$ implies $D(f_n(x),f(x)) < \frac{c}{1 + c}$. In terms of sets, this translates to

\(\displaystyle \{x\in X : |f_n(x) - f(x)| > c\} \subset \left\{x \in X : D(f_n(x), f(x)) > \frac{c}{1 + c}\right\}.\)
 
  • #12
Euge said:
Sorry, I may have confused you with the notation. Since $F$ is strictly increasing on $[0,\infty)$, $F(x) > F(y)$ whenever $x > y \ge 0$. So for each $x \in X$, $|f_n(x) - f(x)| > c$ implies $F(|f_n(x) - f(x)|) > F(c)$. By definition of $D$, $D(f_n(x), f(x)) = F(|f_n(x) - f(x)|)$. Also, $F(c) = \frac{c}{1 + c}$. So we have that for all $x \in X$, $|f_n(x) - f(x)| > c$ implies $D(f_n(x),f(x)) < \frac{c}{1 + c}$. In terms of sets, this translates to

\(\displaystyle \{x\in X : |f_n(x) - f(x)| > c\} \subset \left\{x \in X : D(f_n(x), f(x)) > \frac{c}{1 + c}\right\}.\)

Could you explain me the last inclusion?? (Wondering)

Why does it stand that $$\{x\in X : |f_n(x) - f(x)| > c\} \subset \left\{x \in X : D(f_n(x), f(x)) > \frac{c}{1 + c}\right\}$$ (Wondering)
 

FAQ: Show that it is metric and the measurable is 0

What does it mean for something to be "metric"?

"Metric" refers to a system of measurement that uses standardized units, such as meters, grams, and liters, to quantify physical quantities.

How can you prove that something is metric?

To prove that something is metric, you must show that it follows the principles of the metric system, such as using base units and prefixes, and that its measurements are consistent and reproducible.

What does it mean for something to be "measurable"?

"Measurable" means that a physical quantity can be quantified or expressed in numerical terms using a specific unit of measurement.

How can you show that something is measurable?

To show that something is measurable, you must demonstrate that it can be quantified using a valid unit of measurement and that its value can be determined with precision and accuracy.

What does it mean for something to have a measurable value of 0?

A measurable value of 0 means that the quantity being measured has no magnitude or amount, and therefore has no impact or influence on the system or phenomenon being studied.

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
474
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
783
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Back
Top