REAL ANALYSIS I - HOMEWORK 4 - Spring 2015 - Selected Solutions (1.) R-F, page 28, Number 50 Show that a Lipschitz function is uniformly continuous but there are uniformly continuous functions that are not Lipschitz. (i.) Show that a Lipschitz function is uniformly continuous. Proof. Suppose that f is Lipschitz. Then there exists M > 0 such that |f (x) − f (y)| ≤ M |x − y| for all x, y. Let > 0, and choose δ = M . Then if |x − y| < δ, we have |f (x) − f (y)| ≤ M |x − y| < M · δ = M · M = . Therefore f is uniformly continuous. (ii.) Let us give a function that is uniformly continuous but not Lipschitz. √ Example: Let f (x) = 3 x on [−1, 1]. This function is continuous on [−1, 1], a compact subset of R. Thus, f is uniformly continuous on [−1, 1]. Now, let n ∈ N and choose x1 = n13 , x2 = − n13 . Note: |f (x1 ) − f (x2 )| = |x1 − x2 | q q | 3 n13 − 3 − n13 | | n13 − − n13 | = 2 n 2 n3 = n2 . Clearly there is no M for which M > n2 for all n. (2.) R-F, page 34, Number 5 By using properties of outer measure, prove that the interval [0, 1] is not countable. (3.) R-F, page 34, Number 6 Let A be the set of irrational numbers in the interval [0, 1]. Prove that m∗ (A) = 1. (4.) R-F, page 34, Number 7 (This solution is to a problem stated a little differently than in the fourth edition) Prove: Given any set A and any > 0, there is an open set O such that A ⊆ O and m∗ (O) ≤ m∗ (A) + . Also, there is a G ∈ Gδ such that A ⊆ G and m∗ (A) = m ∗ (G). Proof: Case 1: Suppose m∗ (A) = ∞. Then, taking O = R, we get O ⊇ A and ∞ = m∗ (R) = m∗ (A) + . Case 2: Suppose m∗ (A) < ∞. By definition of outer measure and infimum, for any S > 0, there is a countable collection of open intervals {In }n≥1 such that n≥1 In ⊇ A X S and l(In ) < m∗ (A) + . Now, take O = n≥1 In . Then O is open and A ⊆ O, and n≥1 we have m∗ (O) = m∗ [ n≥1 In ≤ X n≥1 m∗ (In ) = X l(In ) < m∗ (A) + . n≥1 So, we have an open set O such that A ⊆ O and m∗ (O) < m∗ (A) + . To prove the second part of the proposition, first recall that a Gδ set is an intersection of countably many open sets. Take the first part of this proof with = n1 . For each n ∈ N, we can find an open set On with A ⊆ On such that m∗ (On ) ≤ m∗ (A) + Let G= ∞ \ 1 . n On . n=1 Clearly G is a Gδ set. Since each On ⊇ A, we have G ⊇ A. Then by the monotone property of outer measure, m∗ (G) ≥ m∗ (A). It remains to show that m∗ (G) ≤ m∗ (A). But, for every n, G ⊆ On , so that for every n ∈ N, m∗ (G) ≤ m∗ (On ) ≤ m∗ (A) + 1 . n Letting n go to ∞, we get m∗ (G) ≤ m∗ (A). Therefore m∗ (G) = m∗ (A) and we are done. (5.) R-F, page 34, Number 8 Let A be the set of rational numbers P between 0 and 1. Let {In } be a finite collection of open intervals covering A. Then l(In ) ≥ 1. Proof: Q, and let {In }N n=1 be a finite collection of open intervals covering A. N N [ [ This means that In ⊇ A, so that O = In is an open set containing A. We Let A = (0, 1) T n=1 n=1 know that O can be written as the union of a countable collection of pairwise disjoint open intervals (Proposition 8, page 42). So we may as well assume that we have {In = (an , bn )}N n=1 pairwise disjoint (if not, change the collection into one in which the intervals are pairwise disjoint). Order things so that 0 = b0 ≤ a1 < b1 ≤ a2 < b2 . . . ≤ an−1 < bn−1 ≤ an < bn ≤ an+1 = 1. Suppose that for some k, 1 ≤ k ≤ n + 1, we have bk−1 < ak . Then [bk−1 , ak ] is a closed interval of positive length contained in [0, 1] ∼ O ⊂ [0, 1] ∼ A. But [bk−1 , ak ] must contain a rational number because between any T T two distinct T ˜ real numbers is a rational number. This means that A {[0, 1] ∼ A} = A {[0, 1] A} 6= ∅, which is a contradiction, since T T T ˜ A {[0, 1] ∼ A} = A {[0, 1] A} = ∅. Thus, we have bk−1 = ak for all k, 1 ≤ k ≤ n. It follows that [0, 1] ∼ O is a finite number of points, which has outer measure zero. Then ! N N N X X [ ∗ ∗ l(Ii ) = m (Ii ) ≥ m Ii i=1 i=1 i=1 m∗ (O) = = m∗ (O) + 0 = m∗ (O)S+ m∗ ([0, 1] ∼ O) ≥ m∗ (O [0, 1] ∼ O) = m∗ ([0, 1]) = 1. (6.) R-F, page 34, Number 9 Prove that if m∗ (A) = 0, then m∗ (A ∪ B) = m∗ (B). For this proof, use the properties of monotonicity and countable subadditivity. (7.) R-F, page 34, Number 10 Let A and B be bounded sets for which there is an α > 0 such that |a − b| ≥ α for all a ∈ A, b ∈ B. Prove that m∗ (A ∪ B) = m∗ (A) + m∗ (B). Proof: ∗ ∗ ∗Consider an open cover G of the set A such that G is a collection of bounded, open intervals such that the elements of the union of the sets in G are all within a distance of α2 from the elements of A. Let G be the union of all the sets in the cover G. So |a − c| < α2 when a ∈ A, c ∈ G. Let G1 be the union of the sets in such a cover for A and let G2 be the union of the sets in such a cover for B. We first claim that G1 and G2 are disjoint. Let us show by contradiction that G1 ∩ G2 = ∅. Suppose that c ∈ G1 ∩ G2 . Then c ∈ G1 and c ∈ G2 . Let a ∈ A and b ∈ B. Note: |a − b| = |a − c + c − b| ≤ |a − c| + |c − b| < α α + = α. 2 2 This contradicts the fact that the sets A and B are at least a distance of α from each other, so it must be the case that G1 and G2 are disjoint. Also note that for such sets G1 and G2 , it is clearly true that G1 ∪ G2 ⊃ A ∪ B so that the collection of sets G1 ∪ G2 is a cover of A ∪ B satisfying condition ∗ ∗ ∗. Conversely, a cover G of A ∪ B satisfying condition ∗ ∗ ∗ can be viewed as the disjoint union of such a cover of A and such a cover for B. In the definition of outer measure, we may simply consider all open covers that satisfy condition ∗ ∗ ∗. If we have a cover that doesn’t satisfy such a condition, we can always “do better.” ∗ m (A ∪ B) = inf (∞ X ) l(Ik ) : {Ik }∞ k=1 is a cover of A ∪ B satisfying condition ∗ ∗∗ k=1 = inf and (∞ X l(Ik ) + k=1 {Ii }∞ i=1 (∞ X = inf ∞ X l(Ii ) : {Ik }∞ k=1 is a cover of A satisfying condition ∗ ∗∗ i=1 is a cover of B satisfying condition ∗ ∗∗} l(Ik ) : ) {Ik }∞ k=1 is a cover of A satisfying condition ∗ ∗∗ k=1 + inf (∞ X ) l(Ii ) : {Ii }∞ i=1 is a cover of B satisfying condition ∗ ∗∗ i=1 ∗ = m (A) + m∗ (B).
© Copyright 2025