1
$\begingroup$

Let $\rho_1$, $\rho_2$ be two measures(not necessarily nonnegative) on $(\Omega,\mathcal{F})$, where $\Omega$ is a set, and $\mathcal{F}$ is a $\sigma$-field in $\Omega$. Let $\mathcal{F}_0$ be a field in $\Omega$ and assume that $\mathcal{F}$ is the $\sigma$-field generated by $\mathcal{F}_0$. Suppose that $\rho_1$, $\rho_2$ are $\sigma$-finite over $\mathcal{F}_0$. (Namely, we can find a countable partition $\cup\Omega_j$ of $\Omega$, where each $\Omega_j\in\mathcal{F}_0$ and $\rho_1(\Omega_j)<\infty$, $\rho_2(\Omega_j)<\infty$.)

If $\rho_1(A)\le \rho_2(A)$ for any $A\in \mathcal{F}_0$, then do we have $\rho_1(A)\le \rho_2(A)$ for any $A\in \mathcal{F}$?

$\endgroup$
4
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Consider the set of all $A$ that satisfy $\rho_1(A)\le\rho_2(A)$ and show that it is a $\sigma$-algebra. $\endgroup$
    – user1688
    Nov 4, 2017 at 5:00
  • $\begingroup$ @Corbennick: In general, this set is not a $\sigma$-algebra. However, I think it is a monotone class (at least when you restrict to the case of finite measures, and then the $\sigma$-finite case follows easily). $\endgroup$ Nov 4, 2017 at 14:33
  • $\begingroup$ I took away the probability-measures tag since you said you want $\sigma$-finite signed measures. $\endgroup$ Nov 4, 2017 at 14:39
  • $\begingroup$ Also, I am guessing the $\sigma$-finite assumption should say that $|\rho_i|(\Omega_j) < \infty$, etc? $\endgroup$ Nov 4, 2017 at 14:40

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

This is tailor-made for the monotone class theorem.

Suppose first that $\rho_1, \rho_2$ are finite signed measures. Then the collection $\mathcal{M} = \{A \in \mathcal{F} : \rho_1(A) \le \rho_2(A)\}$ is easily seen to be a monotone class (because countably additive finite signed measures are continuous from above and from below). By the monotone class theorem, since $\mathcal{F}_0 \subset \mathcal{M}$ by assumption, we conclude $\mathcal{F} = \sigma(\mathcal{F}_0) \subset \mathcal{M}$, which is the desired statement.

In the $\sigma$-finite case, consider the finite measures $\rho_i^j(A) = \rho_i(A \cap \Omega_j)$ which are, in effect, the restriction of $\rho_i$ to $\Omega_j$. By applying the above to $\rho_i^j$, conclude that $$\rho_1(A \cap \Omega_j) = \rho_1^j(A) \le \rho_2^j(A) = \rho_2(A \cap \Omega_j)$$ for all $A \in \mathcal{F}$. Now use continuity from below once more.

(I assume $\sigma$-finite here means that the positive parts of $\rho_i$ are $\sigma$-finite and the negative parts are finite, or vice versa. If both parts are potentially non-finite then you have problems with additivity because you can get $\infty - \infty$.)

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks! But in the $\sigma$-finite case, I don't know how to conclude that $\rho_1(A\cap\Omega_j)\le \rho_2(A\cap\Omega_j)$, though we know that $\rho_1(A)\le \rho_2(A)$ and $\rho_1(\Omega_j)\le \rho_2(\Omega_j)$. Could you add some details? Thanks! $\endgroup$ Nov 4, 2017 at 16:26
  • $\begingroup$ @mygreatwall: See edit. $\endgroup$ Nov 4, 2017 at 16:30

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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