Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with measure-theory
Search options not deleted
user 52833
Questions about abstract measure and Lebesgue integral theory. Also concerns such properties as measurability of maps and sets.
2
votes
Function is almost everywhere 1 w.r.t. sequence of regular Borel probability measures
The statement you want to prove seems wrong: for instance on $K=[0,1]$ with $U=]0,1[$ let $(q_n)$ be countable dense in $U$, and let $\mu_n$ be the Dirac measure on $q_n$. Because the measures are Dir …
