2
$\begingroup$

Let $(X,\Sigma,\mu)$ be a measure space.

The semi-finite version of $\mu$ on $(X,\Sigma)$ is denoted $\mu_{\rm sf}$ and given by $$ \mu_{\rm sf}(E) = \sup\{\mu(A) \mid A \subseteq E \text{ measurable, } \mu(A) \lt \infty\}, \quad \text{for}E \in \Sigma . $$

Consider the map $i: L^2(\mu)\longrightarrow L^2(\mu_{\rm sf}),\;\;f\longmapsto f$. Is $i$ bijective?

$\endgroup$

2 Answers 2

4
$\begingroup$

Yes, it is bijective.

p4sch has already shown the map is well-defined and injective (in fact, an isometry). I claim it is also surjective. (I assume throughout that $\mu$ is a positive measure.)

Note it is an exercise to show that $\newcommand{musf}{\mu_{\rm sf}} \musf$ is indeed a countably additive measure.

Lemma. Suppose $E \in \Sigma$ with $\musf(E) < \infty$. Then there exists a measurable $B \subseteq E$ with $\mu(B) = \musf(E)$.

Proof. By definition of $\musf$, for each $k$ we may find a measurable $A \subseteq E$ with $\infty > \mu(A_k) \ge \musf(E) - 1/k$. Set $B_n = A_1 \cup \dots \cup A_n$. Then $B_n \subseteq E$ and $\mu(B_n) \ge \musf(E) - 1/n$. Moreover, since $\mu(B_n) < \infty$, we have $\mu(B_n) \le \musf(E)$ by the definition of $\musf$. Now set $B = \bigcup_{n=1}^\infty B_n$. Continuity from below shows $\mu(B) \le \musf(E)$ and monotonicity shows $\mu(B) \ge \musf(E)$. So $B$ is as desired. $\Box$

In particular we have $1_B \in L^2(\mu)$. As noted by p2sch, whenever $\mu(B) < \infty$ we have $\mu(B) = \musf(B)$. Hence $\musf(B) = \musf(E)$, so that $\musf(E \setminus B) = 0$ and thus $1_B = 1_E$ $\musf$-a.e. Hence $1_E$ (or, more properly, its equivalence class) is in the image of $i$. By linearity, every $\musf$-simple function is in the image, so the image is dense in $L^2(\musf)$. But we previously showed $i$ is an isometry, so the image is also closed.

$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I have corrected my answer, too! My argument is the same as yours and I also added a proof of the fact that $\mu_{sf}$ is a measure. $\endgroup$
    – p4sch
    Mar 24, 2018 at 17:01
  • $\begingroup$ I don't understand why we assume that $\mu$ is positive? So your idea in your comment here: mathoverflow.net/questions/294621/… works only if $\mu$ is positive. Do you agree with me? Thanks $\endgroup$
    – Student
    Mar 26, 2018 at 15:34
  • $\begingroup$ @Student: You said "measure space" and that typically implies a positive measure. And the spectral theorem asserts the existence of a positive measure space such that blah blah blah, so for that application, only positive measures are relevant. $\endgroup$ Mar 26, 2018 at 17:50
4
$\begingroup$

If $\mu$ is not a positive measure, we cannot say anything about the negative part $\mu^-$ with the help of $\mu_{sf}$: If $\mu$ is a signed-measure, use the Hahn-decomposition to conclude that $\mu_{sf}(E) = \mu_{sf}^+(E)$. Thus, the statement is already false, if there exist a measurable functions $f$ such that $$\int |f|^2 \mathop{d \mu^-} = \infty, \ \ \ \text{but} \ \ \ \ \int |f|^2 \mathop{d \mu^+} < \infty.$$ Assuming that $\mu$ is a positive measure, the statement is true.

In my first answer I have ignored that we only talk about equivalence classes of functions. We may have functions $f \neq g$ $\mu$-almost everywhere with $f \in L^2(\mu)$ and $g \notin L^2(\mu)$, but in this case $f = g$ $\mu_{sf}$-almost everywhere, as we will see below.

One simple example is $\Omega = \{1\}$, $\Sigma = P(\Omega)$, $\mu = \infty \cdot \delta_1$. Here $1_\Omega \notin L^2(\mu)$, but $\mu_{sf} =0$ and thus $1_\Omega =0$ $\mu_{sf}$-almost everywhere.)

We know that any integrable function is already located on a $\sigma$-finite measurable subset (that follows from the Chebyshev's inequality). Note that for any set $E \in \Sigma$ with finite measure, i.e. $\mu(E) < \infty$, we have $\mu_{sf}(E) = \mu(E)$, just by definition and monotonicity. Moreover, if $E$ is $\sigma$-finite (i.e. $E= \bigcup_{n=1}^\infty A_n$ with measurable $A_n$ satisfying $\mu(A_n) <\infty$), then also $\mu(E) = \mu_{sf}(E)$. (Proof: Taking $E_m = \bigcup_{n=1}^m A_n$ and using measure continuity, we get $\mu(E) \leq \mu_{sf}(E)$. On the other hand, we have for any measurable $A \subset E$ already $\mu(A) \leq \mu(E)$ by measure-monotonicity.)

That observation implies for any $f \in L^2(\mu)$ $$\int |f|^2 \mathop{d \mu} = 2 \int_0^\infty x \, \mu(|f| > x) \mathop{dx} = 2 \int_0^\infty x \, \mu_{sf}(|f| > x) \mathop{dx} = \int |f|^2 \mathop{d \mu_{sf}},$$ i.e. the map is well-defined (in the sense that for $f=g$ $\mu$-almost everywhere, we have also $f=g$ $\mu_{sf}$-almost everywhere) and injective.

This map is also surjective.

Proof: First, let us add a proof of the fact that $\mu_{sf}$ is a measure.

  1. Of course, $\mu_{sf}(\emptyset)=0$.
  2. Now, let $(A_n)_{n \in \mathbb{N}} \subset \Sigma$ be disjoint sets. If $\mu_{sf}(A_n) = \infty$ for some $n \in \mathbb{N}$, then we see easily that also $\mu_{sf}(E) = \infty$ for $E:= \bigcup_{n=1}^\infty A_n$. Thus, we can suppose that $\mu_{sf}(A_n) <\infty$ for all $n \in \mathbb{N}$. Taking $B_n \subset A_n$ with $\mu_{sf}(A_n) \leq \mu(B_n) + \frac{\varepsilon}{2^n}$ shows that $$\sum_{k=1}^n \mu_{sf}(A_k) \leq \sum_{k=1}^n (\mu(B_k)+\frac{\varepsilon}{2^k}) \leq \mu(\cup_{k=1}^n B_k) + \varepsilon \leq \mu_{sf}(E) + \varepsilon.$$ Thus $\sum_{k=1}^\infty \mu_{sf}(A_k) \leq \mu_{sf}(E)$. On the other hand, we find for any $A \subset E$ with finite measure that $\mu(A) = \sum_{n=1}^\infty \mu(A \cap A_n) \leq \sum_{k=1}^\infty \mu_{sf}(A_k).$

In order to prove that this map is surjective, first assume that $g = 1_A \in L^2(\mu_{sf})$, i.e. $\mu_{sf}(A) <\infty$. In this case, we can take $A_n \subset A$ with w.l.o.g. $A_n \uparrow$, $\mu(A_n) < \infty$ and $\mu(A_n) \uparrow \mu_{sf}(A)$. Define $B= \bigcup_{n=1}^\infty A_n$, then $\mu(B) = \mu_{sf}(A)$. (Note that it can happen that $\mu(A) = \infty$ as in the previous example.) Because of $\mu(B) = \mu_{sf}(B)$, we get $\mu_{sf}(A \setminus B) =0$ and thus $F(1_B)=1_A$, where $F \colon L^2(\mu) \rightarrow L^2(\mu_{sf})$ denotes the identity map.

Now any $g \in L^2(\mu_{sf})$ can be approximated by simple functions $g_n$. Moreover, by the previous step, we find simple functions $f_n \in L^2(\mu)$ with $F(f_n) =g_n$. Using that $F$ is an isometry, we see that $(f_n)_{n \in \mathbb{N}}$ is a Cauchy-sequence in $L^2(\mu)$, say, with limes $f \in L^2(\mu)$. One can check easily that $F(f) =g$.

$\endgroup$
9
  • $\begingroup$ So, the conclusion is that even for positive measures it is not necessarily bijective? I'm a bit confused... $\endgroup$
    – Amir Sagiv
    Mar 24, 2018 at 10:39
  • $\begingroup$ I don't agree with the counterexample. Since $\mu_{\rm sf} = 0$, we have $1_A = 0$, $\mu_{\rm sf}$-a.e. Indeed, $L^2(\mu_{\rm sf}) = 0$, i.e., its only element is a single equivalence class containing all the $\Sigma$-measurable functions on $\Omega$, and this class certainly is in the image of the map, because the (class of the) zero function in $L^2(\mu)$ maps to it. $\endgroup$ Mar 24, 2018 at 13:53
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ So surjectivity is the following statement: for any $g \in L^2(\mu_{\rm sf})$ there exists $f \in L^2(\mu)$ such that $f=g$, $\mu_{\rm sf}$-a.e. $\endgroup$ Mar 24, 2018 at 13:59
  • $\begingroup$ @YCor: Likewise, in your example of an infinite singleton, $L^2(\mu_{\rm sf})$ is zero-dimensional, not one-dimensional. It does contain all the constants, but they are all a.e. equal to zero. So although a function like $1$ is not in $L^2(\mu)$, we can choose a better representative of its $\mu_{\rm sf}$ equivalence class which is in $L^2(\mu)$ (here, the zero function). If the conjecture is true, the question would be how to make the "right" choice more generally. $\endgroup$ Mar 24, 2018 at 14:19
  • $\begingroup$ Nate, you are right! I have ignored that we only talk about equivalence classes of functions. I will correct my answer ... $\endgroup$
    – p4sch
    Mar 24, 2018 at 15:46

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.