4
$\begingroup$

For a Polish space $X$, let $K(X)$ be the set of compact subsets of $X$. Given the topology with basis $\{K\in K(X):K\subset U_0, K\cap U_1\neq\emptyset,\ldots,K\cap U_n\neq\emptyset\}$ for open sets $U_i$, $K(X)$ is also Polish. A compatible metric is the Hausdorff metric

I was wondering if in cases where there is a natural measure on $X$, say Lebesgue measure on $[0,1]$ or the uniform measure on $2^{\omega}$, if there is a natural measure on $K(X)$? By natural I suppose I mean that it can somehow be described in terms of the measure on $X$.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

In some cases a "natural" measure may be a Hausdorff measure (if it exists) that is positive and finite. So we want not just a Polish topology, but a specific metric. Given a metric for $X$ itself, use the Hausdorff metric on $\mathcal{K}(X)$.

In some cases ($X$ countable, with box dimension zero) it may happen that $\mathcal{K}(X)$ has positive, finite Hausdorff dimension. Then use the Hausdorff measure in that dimension.

But typically $\mathcal{K}(X)$ has infinite Hausdorff dimension. There still may be a gauge function $\phi$ so that the Hausdorff measure $\mathcal{H}^\phi$ is positive and finite on $\mathcal{K}(X)$. But it may happen that you always get measure zero or infinity. You can still try to classify $\phi$ into these two classes.

Given a good gauge function for $X$, how is that related to a good gauge function for $\mathcal{K}(X)$?

My student Mark McClure worked out a few of these in his thesis. Also see his references:

McClure, Mark, "The Hausdorff dimension of the hyperspace of compact sets". Real Anal. Exchange 22 (1996/97), no. 2, 611–625.

McClure, Mark, "Entropy dimensions of the hyperspace of compact sets". Real Anal. Exchange 21 (1995/96), no. 1, 194–202.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

You know by the measurable isomorphism's theorem that between Polish probability spaces without atoms there is a measurable bijection that takes one probability measure into the other. Therefore, any probability measure without atoms you take in $K(X)$ can be somehow described in terms of the measure on $X.$

$\endgroup$
-1
$\begingroup$

$X$ embeds into $K(X)$ (with the topology you have defined) by $x\mapsto\{x\}$, so any measure you have on $K(X)$ restricts to $\{\{x\}: x\in X\} \subseteq K(X)$ which is a homeomorphic copy of $X$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I think the question was not how to get a measure on $X$ if you have a measure on $K(X)$ but the other way around. $\endgroup$ – Tom Nov 8 '16 at 13:26

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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