Denote $A=\{0\}, B=\{0,1\}$. Then any subset of $\Omega:=\{A,B\}^{\mathbb N}$ is a continuum provided the number of $B$'s is infinite. We treat these as binary expansions of numbers in $[0,1]$.

For instance, $(AB)^\omega$ is the set $\left\{\sum_{n=1}^\infty a_n4^{-n}\mid a_n\in\{0,1\}\right\}$, which is a Cantor set of Hausdorff dimension $\frac12$. Similarly, it is easy to show that $(AB^N)^\infty$ has Hausdorff dimension $\frac{N}{N+1}$.

Now, suppose the sequence of $A$'s and $B$'s is random: i.i.d. with distribution $\bigl(\frac1{N+1}, \frac{N}{N+1}\bigr)$. It is obvious that a generic sequence will be a Cantor set.

Question. Is it true that a subset of $\Omega$ has Hausdorff dimension $\frac{N}{N+1}$ almost surely? A weaker version: is this a null set almost surely?

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Weaker version: The finite version of the set to level $k$ is a collection of intervals with Lebesgue measure that falls by a factor of two for each $A$. The sequence has infinitely many $A$s a.s., so the measure of the limiting set is bounded by a sequence tending to zero. Or am I missing something? $\endgroup$ – user25199 Jul 20 '16 at 13:24
  • $\begingroup$ Fat Cantor sets? $\endgroup$ – Nikita Sidorov Jul 20 '16 at 13:27
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Just to clarify. For any infinite word $w$ in the alphabet $\{A,B\}$ the associated subset of $\{0,1\}^{\mathbb N}$ is obtained from $w$ by replacing $A$ with $0$ and $B$ with either $0$ or $1$. Is this what you mean? $\endgroup$ – R W Jul 20 '16 at 14:51
  • $\begingroup$ This is what I mean, yes. $\endgroup$ – Nikita Sidorov Jul 20 '16 at 15:08

Like the classical Cantor set, your set has a natural representation $C=\bigcap C_n$, where $C_1\supseteq C_2\supseteq C_3\supseteq\ldots$, and each $C_n$ is a disjoint union of $2^{n-X_n}$ intervals of length $2^{-n}$, with $X_n$ denoting the number of $A$'s in your sequence up to position $n$.

So, covering by intervals of that length, we have that $H_{2^{-n}}^d(C_n)=2^{n(1-d)-X_n}$. If we write $p=P(A)$, then $X_n/n\to p$ almost surely, so $\dim C\le 1-p$ almost surely.

For the lower bound, we observe that $C$ will contain at least one point from each of the $2^{n-X_n}$ intervals of length $2^{-n}$ whose union is $C_n$. This means that we cannot find a $2^{-n}$ covering of $C$ that decreases the number of intervals needed by more than a fixed factor, compared to the one of $C_n$ from above.

So $\dim C=1-p$ almost surely, as claimed.

| cite | improve this answer | |

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.