Skip to main content
12 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jan 30, 2020 at 3:39 vote accept James Baxter
Jan 29, 2020 at 14:58 answer added Iosif Pinelis timeline score: 2
Jan 29, 2020 at 14:17 comment added Nate Eldredge Note, however, that under your assumptions the Radon-Nikodym derivatives in fact converge to 1 in $L^1(\mu)$. If I'm not mistaken, that is equivalent to convergence in total variation.
Jan 29, 2020 at 14:10 comment added Nate Eldredge Wikipedia's "strong convergence" is called "setwise convergence" in Bogachev's measure theory. It'd be helpful to have the definition in your question.
Jan 29, 2020 at 10:45 history edited James Baxter CC BY-SA 4.0
deleted 17 characters in body
Jan 29, 2020 at 10:41 comment added James Baxter It seems like it is indeed true, if I didn’t make any mistakes.
Jan 29, 2020 at 10:38 history edited James Baxter CC BY-SA 4.0
added 17 characters in body
Jan 29, 2020 at 10:38 comment added James Baxter If it’s meant in the other sense is it true?
Jan 29, 2020 at 10:37 comment added James Baxter I did indeed mean convergence in the sense stated by wiki..
Jan 29, 2020 at 10:34 comment added R W @ Fedor Petrov - it depends on what the OP meant by strong convergence of measures. I was surprised to learn that wiki (apparently this is the article you quote) introduces a rather artificial notion of "strong convergence" of measures (I have never come across it in real life) and distinguishes it from the convergence in total variation ($\equiv$ convergence in the strong topology on the space of measures). This is not the first time I come across highly dubious claims in wiki.
Jan 29, 2020 at 10:04 comment added Fedor Petrov From wiki: "For example, as a consequence of the Riemann–Lebesgue lemma, the sequence μ_n of measures on the interval [−1, 1] given by μ_n(dx) = (1+ sin(nx))dx converges strongly to Lebesgue measure."
Jan 29, 2020 at 9:58 history asked James Baxter CC BY-SA 4.0