Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let $X$ be a compact Hausdorff space and $\mu$ a finite Borel measure without atoms which is outer regular with respect to open sets and inner regular with respect to compact sets. Can such measure be complete?

share|improve this question
I understand the question as, whether such a measure can be complete on the $\sigma$ algebra of Borel sets. If $X$ is metrizable, the answer is no for cardinality reasons exactly as for the Lebesgue measure -there is a $\mu$-null perfect set, thus with more subsets than there are Borel sets in $X$. The case of a non-metrizable $X$ is the point of the question. If we want to use the same cardinality argument in the latter case, the question is: can we still find a $\mu$-null Borel set $C\subset X$ of cardinality $\tau(X)$? (here $\tau(X)$ = card. of the open sets = card. of Borel sets) –  Pietro Majer Feb 9 '12 at 13:22
Suppose you have such a measure. The problem then would be to construct a compact set $K$ of measure zero, with a subset that is not a Borel set. Certainly this can be done in compact metric space, but what about in exotic compact Hausdorff spaces? –  Gerald Edgar Feb 9 '12 at 13:23
@Pietro: Is it always (i.e. for any $T_2$ space) true that there are as many Borel sets as open sets? Making a rough estimate, apparently one needs that $|\tau|^{\aleph_0}=|\tau|$ (which is true for compact $X$ by a non-trivial result of Shelah, but not true in general). –  Ramiro de la Vega Feb 9 '12 at 15:13
Wouldn't it be enough to have a continuous function from a closed subset $C$ of $X$ onto the Cantor set $\Delta$? You have a subset $D$ f $\Delta$ s.t. neither $D$ nor its complement contains an uncountable closed subset. And can't you build such a function by doing the usual tree construction of a Cantor set in $X$ and identifying to points the branches in the tree? (Or maybe this is a suggestion I should post under the nom de plume unknown (google).) –  Bill Johnson Feb 9 '12 at 16:58
@Bill: I don´t quite understand why that would be enough. Can you explain a bit more how would you finish the argument? –  Ramiro de la Vega Feb 10 '12 at 12:56
show 6 more comments

1 Answer

No, it is not possible for $\mu$ to be complete.

  1. There exists a closed subset $K$ of $X$ with $\mu(K)=0$ and a continuous onto map $f\colon K\to2^\omega$.
  2. With $K,f$ as above, if $A\subseteq 2^\omega$ is any set not in the universal completion of the Borel sigma-algebra on $2^\omega$, then $f^{-1}(A)$ is not Borel measurable.

In particular, taking $A$ to be something like a Vitali set (e.g., let $\sim$ be the equivalence relation on Cantor space $2^\omega$ where $x\sim y$ iff $x_i=y_i$ for all but finitely many $i$ and choose $A$ such that it contains one element from each equivalence class) then $f^{-1}(A)$ is a $\mu$-null set which is not Borel. This does require the Axiom of choice.

Proof of 1: Start by letting $S$ be the support of $\mu$. That is, $S$ is the smallest closed subset of $X$ for which $\mu(S)=\mu(X)$. The existence of $S$ follows from compactness of $X$ and regularity of $\mu$; if $S$ is taken to be the intersection of all closed sets of full measure then, for any open $U$ containing $S$, compactness implies that $X$ is the union of $U$ and finitely many open $\mu$-null sets, so $\mu(U)=\mu(X)$. Outer regularity gives $\mu(S)=\mu(X)$ as required.

As $X$ is not atomic, there exists distinct points $x\not=y$ in $S$ and, choosing disjoint closed neighbourhoods $K_0,K_1$ of $x,y$ we have $\mu(K_0)\gt0$ and $\mu(K_1)\gt0$. Furthermore, we have $\mu(\{x\})=\mu(\{y\})=0$ so, by outer regularity, $\mu(K_0)$ and $\mu(K_1)$ can be made as small as possible.

Applying this process inductively gives nonempty compact sets $K_{i_1,i_2,\ldots,i_n}$ for $(i_1,\ldots,i_n)\in2^n$ of positive measure such that $K_{i_1,\ldots,i_n}\cap K_{j_1,\ldots,j_n}=\emptyset$ whenever $(i_1,\ldots,i_n)\not=(j_1,\ldots,j_n)$ and $K_{i_1,\ldots,i_n}\subset K_{i_1,\ldots,i_{n-1}}$. Furthermore, they can be chosen such that $\mu(K_{i_1,\ldots,i_n})\lt4^{-n}$. We can now define $K_x=\bigcap_{n\ge1}K_{x_1,\ldots,x_n}$ for each $x\in2^\omega$, which is nonempty by compactness of $X$ with zero measure (by countable additivity of $\mu)$, and $K\equiv\bigcup_{x\in2^\omega}K_x$ is closed. Defining $f\colon K\to2^\omega$ by setting $f(a)=x$ for $a\in K_x$ satisfies the requied properties. QED

Proof of 2: Suppose that $A\subseteq2^\omega$ is not in the universal completion of the Borel sigma-algebra. Then, there exists a finite Borel measure $\nu$ on $2^\omega$ such that $A$ is not in the completion of the Borel sigma-algebra with respect to $\nu$. The Hahn-Banach theorem gives a regular finite measure $\lambda$ on $X$ such that $\nu=f^\ast\circ\lambda$. If $f^{-1}(A)$ was in the Borel sigma-algebra on $X$ then, by regularity, there would exist sequences of compact sets $B_n\subseteq f^{-1}(A)$, $C_n\subseteq f^{-1}(A^c)$ with $\lambda(B_n)\to\lambda(f^{-1}(A))$ and $\lambda(C_n)\to\lambda(f^{-1}(A^c))$. It follows that $f(B_n)\subseteq A$ and $f(C_n)\subseteq A^c$ are compact sets with $\nu(f(B_n))\to\nu(A)$ and $\nu(f(C_n))\to\nu(A^c)$ from which it follows that $A$ is in the completion of the Borel sigma-algebra wrt $\nu$, contradicting the assumption. QED

share|improve this answer
"Compactness implies that $X$ is the union of $U$ and finitely many open $\mu$-null sets": I don't quite follow this step. Could you elaborate? –  Nate Eldredge Sep 10 '13 at 2:23
@ Nate Eldredge: I follow. Let $\mathscr A$ be the set complements of all closed sets $B$ with $\mu(B)=\mu(X)$. Then $\mu(A)=0$ for all $A\in\mathscr A$ and $\{U\}\cup\mathscr A$ is an open cover of $X$ which is assumed to be compact. So there is a finite $\mathscr B\subseteq\mathscr A$ with $X\subseteq U\cup\bigcup\mathscr B$. Now, do you too follow? –  TaQ Sep 10 '13 at 11:26
@TaQ: Got it, thanks. –  Nate Eldredge Sep 13 '13 at 16:48
add comment

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.