(1) for any $a\in\mathcal{F}$ , $m(a)\geq 0$ ,
(2) $m(\phi)=0$ ,
(3) if $a_1,a_2,\cdots\in\mathcal{F}$ , $a_i\cap a_j=\phi (i\ne j)$ , then $m(\cup a_i)=\sum m(a_i)$ ($i,j=1,2,\cdots $) .
Here, we will weaken the condition (3) to
(3'-1) if $a_1\subset a_2 (\in \mathcal{F})$ , then $m(a_1)\leq m(a_2)$ ,
(3'-2) if $a_1,a_2,\cdots\in\mathcal{F}$ , $a_i\cap a_j=\phi (i\ne j)$ , then $m(\cup a_i)\leq \sum m(a_i)$ ($i,j=1,2,\cdots $) .
This means that we will accept to measure a set to large.
(This means to allow measurement of a given set by approximating it from the outside of its perimeter.)
Such a ruler is called an outer measure $m^o$.
An outer measure $m^o$ is more natural than the preceding measure $m$ satisfying (3).
Using the outer measure $m^o$ , we will define the family of sets such that
$\left\{ a\subset\Omega | \mbox{any } e\subset\Omega, m^o(e)=m^o(e\cap a)+m^o(e\cap a^c) \right\}$ ,
where $a^c$ is the complementary set of $a$ in $\Omega$.
C.Caratheodory proved these sets were measurable. Hence, it is called Lebesgue measurable sets.
Here, we will weaken the condition (3) to
(3'-1) if $a_1\subset a_2 (\in \mathcal{F})$ , then $m(a_1)\leq m(a_2)$ ,
(3'-2) if $a_1,a_2,\cdots\in\mathcal{F}$ , $a_i\cap a_j=\phi (i\ne j)$ , then $m(\cup a_i)\leq \sum m(a_i)$ ($i,j=1,2,\cdots $) .
This means that we will accept to measure a set to large.
(This means to allow measurement of a given set by approximating it from the outside of its perimeter.)
Such a ruler is called an outer measure $m^o$.
An outer measure $m^o$ is more natural than the preceding measure $m$ satisfying (3).
Using the outer measure $m^o$ , we will define the family of sets such that
$\left\{ a\subset\Omega | \mbox{any } e\subset\Omega, m^o(e)=m^o(e\cap a)+m^o(e\cap a^c) \right\}$ ,
where $a^c$ is the complementary set of $a$ in $\Omega$.
C.Caratheodory proved these sets were measurable. Hence, it is called Lebesgue measurable sets.
0 件のコメント:
コメントを投稿