Measure Theory

V. Liskevich

1998

1 Introduction
We always denote by X our universe, i.e. all the sets we shall consider are subsets of X.
Recall some standard notation. 2X everywhere denotes the set of all subsets of a given
set X. If A ∩ B = ∅ then we often write A t B rather than A ∪ B, to underline the
disjointness. The complement (in X) of a set A is denoted by Ac . By A4B the symmetric
difference of A and B is denoted, i.e. A 4 B = (A \ B) ∪ (B \ A). Letters i, j, k always
denote positive integers. The sign ¹ is used for restriction of a function (operator etc.) to
a subset (subspace).

1.1 The Riemann integral

Recall how to construct the Riemannian integral. Let f : [a, b] → R. Consider a partition
π of [a, b]:
a = x0 < x1 < x2 < . . . < xn−1 < xn = b
and set ∆xk = xk+1 − xk , |π| = max{∆xk : k = 0, 1, . . . , n − 1}, mk = inf{f (x) : x ∈
[xk , xk+1 ]}, Mk = sup{f (x) : x ∈ [xk , xk+1 ]}. Define the upper and lower Riemann—
Darboux sums
n−1
X n−1
X
s(f, π) = mk ∆xk , s̄(f, π) = Mk ∆xk .
k=0 k=0

One can show (the Darboux theorem) that the following limits exist
Z b
lim s(f, π) = sup s(f, π) = f dx
|π|→0 π a

Z b
lim s̄(f, π) = inf s̄(f, π) = f dx.
|π|→0 π a

1
Clearly,
Z b Z b
s(f, π) ≤ f dx ≤ f dx ≤ s̄(f, π)
a a

for any partition π.

The function f is said to be Riemann integrable on [a, b] if the upper and lower integrals
are equal. The common value is called Riemann integral of f on [a, b].
The functions cannot have a large set of points of discontinuity. More presicely this
will be stated further.

1.2 The Lebesgue integral

It allows to integrate functions from a much more general class. First, consider a very
useful example. For f, g ∈ C[a, b], two continuous functions on the segment [a, b] = {x ∈
R : a 6 x 6 b} put
ρ1 (f, g) = max |f (x) − g(x)|,
66
a x b

Z b
ρ2 (f, g) = |f (x) − g(x)|dx.
a

Then (C[a, b], ρ1 ) is a complete metric space, when (C[a, b], ρ2 ) is not. To prove the latter
statement, consider a family of functions {ϕn }∞ n=1 as drawn on Fig.1. This is a Cauchy
sequence with respect to ρ2 . However, the limit does not belong to C[a, b].

2
 6

 L
 L
 L
 L
 L
 L
 L
 L
 L -
− 12 − 12 + 1
n
1
2
− 1
n
1
2

Figure 1: The function ϕn .

2 Systems of Sets
Definition 2.1 A ring of sets is a non-empty subset in 2X which is closed with respect
to the operations ∪ and \.

Proposition. Let K be a ring of sets. Then ∅ ∈ K.

Proof. Since K 6= ∅, there exists A ∈ K. Since K contains the difference of every two
its elements, one has A \ A = ∅ ∈ K. ¥
Examples.

1. The two extreme cases are K = {∅} and K = 2X .

2. Let X = R and denote by K all finite unions of semi-segments [a, b).

Definition 2.2 A semi-ring is a collection of sets P ⊂ 2X with the following properties:

1. If A, B ∈ P then A ∩ B ∈ P;

3
 2. For every A, B ∈ P there exists a finite disjoint collection (Cj ) j = 1, 2, . . . , n of
sets (i.e. Ci ∩ Cj = ∅ if i 6= j) such that
n
G
A\B = Cj .
j=1

Example. Let X = R, then the set of all semi-segments, [a, b), forms a semi-ring.

Definition 2.3 An algebra (of sets) is a ring of sets containing X ∈ 2X .

Examples.

1. {∅, X} and 2X are the two extreme cases (note that they are different from the
corresponding cases for rings of sets).

2. Let X = [a, b) be a fixed interval on R. Then the system of finite unions of subin-
tervals [α, β) ⊂ [a, b) forms an algebra.

3. The system of all bounded subsets of the real axis is a ring (not an algebra).

Remark. A is algebra if (i) A, B ∈ A =⇒ A ∪ B ∈ A, (ii) A ∈ A =⇒ Ac ∈ A.

Indeed, 1) A ∩ B = (Ac ∪ B c )c ; 2) A \ B = A ∩ B c .

Definition 2.4 A σ-ring (a σ-algebra) is a ring (an algebra) of sets which is closed with
respect to all countable unions.

Definition 2.5 A ring (an algebra, a σ-algebra) of sets, K(U) generated by a collection
of sets U ⊂ 2X is the minimal ring (algebra, σ-algebra) of sets containing U.

In other words, it is the intersection of all rings (algebras, σ-algebras) of sets containing
U.

4
3 Measures
Let X be a set, A an algebra on X.

Definition 3.1 A function µ: A −→ R+ ∪ {∞} is called a measure if

1. µ(A) > 0 for any A ∈ A and µ(∅) = 0;

2. if
F∞ (Ai )i>1 is a disjoint family of sets in A ( Ai ∩ Aj = ∅ for any i 6= j) such that
i=1 Ai ∈ A, then
G∞ X∞
µ( Ai ) = µ(Ai ).
i=1 i=1

The latter important property, is called countable additivity or σ-additivity of the measure
µ.
Let us state now some elementary properties of a measure. Below till the end of this
section A is an algebra of sets and µ is a measure on it.

1. (Monotonicity of µ) If A, B ∈ A and B ⊂ A then µ(B) 6 µ(A).

Proof. A = (A \ B) t B implies that

µ(A) = µ(A \ B) + µ(B).

Since µ(A \ B) ≥ 0 it follows that µ(A) ≥ µ(B).

2. (Subtractivity of µ). If A, B ∈ A and B ⊂ A and µ(B) < ∞ then µ(A \ B) =
µ(A) − µ(B).
Proof. In 1) we proved that

µ(A) = µ(A \ B) + µ(B).

If µ(B) < ∞ then

µ(A) − µ(B) = µ(A \ B).

3. If A, B ∈ A and µ(A ∩ B) < ∞ then µ(A ∪ B) = µ(A) + µ(B) − µ(A ∩ B).

Proof. A ∩ B ⊂ A, A ∩ B ⊂ B, therefore

A ∪ B = (A \ (A ∩ B)) t B.

Since µ(A ∩ B) < ∞, one has

µ(A ∪ B) = (µ(A) − µ(A ∩ B)) + µ(B).

5
 S∞
4. (Semi-additivity of µ). If (Ai )i≥1 ⊂ A such that i=1 Ai ∈ A then
∞
[ ∞
X
µ( Ai ) 6 µ(Ai ).
i=1 i=1

Proof. First let us proove that

n
[ n
X
µ( Ai ) 6 µ(Ai ).
i=1 i=1

Note that the family of sets

B1 = A 1
B2 = A 2 \ A 1
B3 = A3 \ (A1 ∪ A2 )
...
n−1
[
Bn = A n \ Ai
i=1
Fn Sn
is disjoint and i=1 Bi = i=1 Ai . Moreover, since Bi ⊂ Ai , we see that µ(Bi ) ≤
µ(Ai ). Then
n
[ n
G n
X n
X
µ( Ai ) = µ( Bi ) = µ(Bi ) ≤ µ(Ai ).
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

Now we can repeat the argument for the infinite family using σ-additivity of the
measure.

3.1 Continuity of a measure

Theorem 3.1 Let A be an Salgebra, (Ai )i≥1 ⊂ A a monotonically increasing sequence of
sets (Ai ⊂ Ai+1 ) such that i≥1 ∈ A. Then
∞
[
µ( Ai ) = lim µ(An ).
n→∞
i=1

S∞
Proof. 1). If for some n0 µ(An0 ) = +∞ then µ(An ) = +∞ ∀n ≥ n0 and µ( i=1 Ai ) = +∞.
2). Let now µ(Ai ) < ∞ ∀i ≥ 1.

6
 Then
∞
[
µ( Ai ) = µ(A1 t (A2 \ A1 ) t . . . t (An \ An−1 ) t . . .)
i=1
∞
X
= µ(A1 ) + µ(Ak \ Ak−1 )
k=2
n
X
= µ(A1 ) + lim (µ(Ak ) − µ(Ak−1 )) = lim µ(An ).
n→∞ n→∞
k=2

3.2 Outer measure

Let a be an algebra of subsets of X and µ a measure on it. Our purpose now is to extend
µ to as many elements of 2X as possible.
An arbitrary set A ⊂ XScan be always covered by sets from A, i.e. one can always find
E1 , E2 , . . . ∈ A such that ∞
i=1 Ei ⊃ A. For instance, E1 = X, E2 = E3 = . . . = ∅.

Definition 3.2 For A ⊂ X its outer measure is defined by

∞
X
µ∗ (A) = inf µ(Ei )
i=1

where the
S infimum is taken over all A-coverings of the set A, i.e. all collections (Ei ), Ei ∈
A with i Ei ⊃ A.

Remark. The outer measure always exists since µ(A) > 0 for every A ∈ A.
Example. Let X = R2 , A = K(P), -σ-algebra generated by P, P = {[a, b) × R1 }.
Thus A consists of countable unions of strips like one drawn on the picture. Put µ([a, b) ×
R1 ) = b − a. Then, clearly, the outer measure of the unit disc x2 + y 2 6 1 is equal to 2.
The same value is for the square |x| 6 1, |y| 6 1.

Theorem 3.2 For A ∈ A one has µ∗ (A) = µ(A).

In other words, µ∗ is an extension of µ.

Proof. 1. A is its own covering. This implies µ∗ (A) 6 µ(A).

P 2. By definition
∗
of infimum, for any ε > 0 there exists a A-covering (Ei ) of A such that
i µ(E i ) < µ (A) + ε. Note that
[ [
A = A ∩ ( Ei ) = (A ∩ Ei ).
i i

7
 6 ¡¡¡¡¡¡¡ ¡¡¡¡¡
¡¡ ¡ ¡¡¡ ¡ ¡¡
¡¡ ¡
¡¡¡ ¡ ¡ ¡¡
¡¡ ¡ ¡¡ ¡¡ ¡
¡¡ ¡ ¡ ¡
¡¡ ¡ ¡¡ ¡ ¡¡
¡¡ ¡ ¡¡¡ ¡ ¡¡
¡¡ ¡
¡ ¡¡ ¡¡ ¡¡
¡¡ ¡ ¡¡ ¡¡ ¡
¡¡ ¡ ¡ ¡
¡¡ ¡ ¡¡ ¡ ¡¡
¡¡ ¡ ¡¡¡ ¡ ¡¡
¡¡ ¡
¡ ¡¡ ¡¡ ¡¡
¡¡ ¡ ¡¡ ¡¡ ¡
¡¡ ¡ ¡ ¡
¡¡ ¡ ¡¡ ¡ ¡¡
¡¡ ¡ ¡¡¡ ¡ ¡¡
¡¡ ¡
¡ ¡¡ ¡¡ ¡¡
¡¡ ¡ ¡¡ ¡¡ ¡ -
¡¡ ¡ ¡
¡ ¡ ¡¡ ¡ ¡¡
a¡
¡¡ ¡¡ ¡
¡ b
¡
¡ ¡ ¡
¡¡ ¡
¡ ¡¡ ¡¡ ¡
¡
¡¡ ¡ ¡ ¡
¡¡ ¡ ¡¡ ¡ ¡
¡
¡¡ ¡ ¡¡ ¡ ¡
¡
¡¡ ¡ ¡¡¡ ¡ ¡
¡
¡¡ ¡
¡ ¡¡ ¡¡ ¡
¡
¡¡ ¡ ¡ ¡
¡¡ ¡ ¡¡ ¡
¡ ¡¡
¡¡ ¡¡ ¡
¡¡ ¡ ¡¡¡¡¡
¡¡ ¡ ¡¡¡ ¡¡¡
¡¡ ¡¡¡¡¡¡¡
¡¡ ¡
¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡ ¡
¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡

Using consequently σ-semiadditivity and monotonicity of µ, one obtains:

X X
µ(A) 6 µ(A ∩ Ei ) 6 µ(Ei ) < µ∗ (A) + ε.
i i

Since ε is arbitrary, we conclude that µ(A) 6 µ∗ (A). ¥

It is evident that µ∗ (A) > 0, µ∗ (∅) = 0 (Check !).
Lemma. Let A be an algebra of sets (not necessary σ-algebra), µ a measure on A. If
there exists a set A ∈ A such that µ(A) < ∞, then µ(∅) = 0.
Proof. µ(A \ A) = µ(A) − µ(A) = 0. ¥
Therefore the property µ(∅) = 0 can be substituted with the existence in A of a set
with a finite measure.

Theorem 3.3 (Monotonicity of outer measure). If A ⊂ B then µ∗ (A) 6 µ∗ (B).

Proof. Any covering of B is a covering of A. ¥

S P∞ ∗
Theorem 3.4 (σ-semiadditivity of µ∗ ). µ∗ ( ∞j=1 Aj ) 6 j=1 µ (Aj ).

8
Proof. If the series in the right-hand side diverges, there is nothing to prove. So assume
that it is convergent.

S By the definition of outer measur for any ε > 0 and for any j there exists an A-covering
k Ekj ⊃ Aj such that
X∞
ε
µ(Ekj ) < µ∗ (Aj ) + j .
k=1
2
Since ∞ ∞
[ [
Ekj ⊃ Aj ,
j,k=1 j=1
∗
the definition of µ implies
∞
[ ∞
X
∗
µ( Aj ) 6 µ(Ekj )
j=1 j,k=1

and therefore ∞ ∞
[ X
µ∗ ( Aj ) < µ∗ (Aj ) + ε.
j=1 j=1

3.3 Measurable Sets

Let A be an algebra of subsets of X, µ a measure on it, µ∗ the outer measure defined in
the previous section.

Definition 3.3 A ⊂ X is called a measurable set (by Carathèodory) if for any E ⊂ X

the following relation holds:

µ∗ (E) = µ∗ (E ∩ A) + µ∗ (E ∩ Ac ).

Denote by à the collection of all set which are measurable by Carathèodory and set
µ̃ = µ∗ ¹ Ã.
Remark Since E = (E ∩ A) ∪ (E ∩ Ac ), due to semiadditivity of the outer measure

µ∗ (E) ≤ µ∗ (E ∩ A) + µ∗ (E ∩ Ac ).

Theorem 3.5 Ã is a σ-algebra containing A, and µ̃ is a measure on Ã.

9
Proof. We devide the proof into several steps.
1. If A, B ∈ Ã then A ∪ B ∈ Ã.
By the definition one has

µ∗ (E) = µ∗ (E ∩ B) + µ∗ (E ∩ B c ). (1)

Take E ∩ A instead of E:

µ∗ (E ∩ A) = µ∗ (E ∩ A ∩ B) + µ∗ (E ∩ A ∩ B c ). (2)

Then put E ∩ Ac in (1) instead of E

µ∗ (E ∩ Ac ) = µ∗ (E ∩ Ac ∩ B) + µ∗ (E ∩ Ac ∩ B c ). (3)

Add (2) and (3):

µ∗ (E) = µ∗ (E ∩ A ∩ B) + µ∗ (E ∩ A ∩ B c ) + µ∗ (E ∩ Ac ∩ B) + µ∗ (E ∩ Ac ∩ B c ). (4)

Substitute E ∩ (A ∪ B) in (4) instead of E. Note that

1) E ∩ (A ∪ B) ∩ A ∩ B = E ∩ A ∩ B
2) E ∩ (A ∪ B) ∩ Ac ∩ B = E ∩ Ac ∩ B
3) E ∩ (A ∪ B) ∩ A ∩ B c = E ∩ A ∩ B c
4) E ∩ (A ∪ B) ∩ Ac ∩ B c = ∅.

One has

µ∗ (E ∩ (A ∪ B)) = µ∗ (E ∩ A ∩ B) + µ∗ (E ∩ Ac ∩ B) + µ∗ (E ∩ A ∩ B c ). (5)

From (4) and (5) we have

µ∗ (E) = µ∗ (E ∩ (A ∪ B)) + µ∗ (E ∩ (A ∪ B)c ).

2. If A ∈ Ã then Ac ∈ Ã.
The definition of measurable set is symmetric with respect to A and Ac .
Therefore à is an algebra of sets.
3.
Let A, B ∈ A, A ∩ B = ∅. From (5)

µ∗ (E ∩ (A t B)) = µ∗ (E ∩ Ac ∩ B) + µ∗ (E ∩ A ∩ B c ) = µ∗ (E ∩ B) + µ∗ (E ∩ A).

10
 4. Ã is a σ-algebra.
From the previous step, by induction, for any finite disjoint collection (Bj ) of sets:
n
G n
X
∗
µ (E ∩ ( Bj )) = µ∗ (E ∩ Bj ). (6)
j=1 j=1

S S∞ Sj−1
Let A = ∞ j=1 Aj , Aj ∈ A. Then A = j=1 Bj , Bj = Aj \ k=1 Ak and
Bi ∩ Bj = ∅ (i 6= j). It suffices to prove that
∞
G ∞
G
∗ ∗ ∗
µ (E) > µ (E ∩ ( Bj )) + µ (E ∩ ( Bj )c ). (7)
j=1 j=1

Indeed, we have already proved that µ∗ is σ-semi-additive.

F
Since à is an algebra, it follows that nj=1 Bj ∈ Ã(∀n ∈ N) and the following inequality
holds for every n:
n
G n
G
∗ ∗ ∗
µ (E) > µ (E ∩ ( Bj )) + µ (E ∩ ( Bj )c ). (8)
j=1 j=1
F Fn
Since E ∩ ( ∞j=1 B j )c
⊂ E ∩ ( c
j=1 Bj ) , by monotonicity of the mesasure and (8)

n
X
∗
µ (E) ≥ µ∗ (E ∩ Bj ) + µ∗ (E ∩ Ac ). (9)
j=1

Passing to the limit we get

∞
X
∗
µ (E) ≥ µ∗ (E ∩ Bj ) + µ∗ (E ∩ Ac ). (10)
j=1

Due to semiadditivity
∞
G ∞
G ∞
X
µ∗ (E ∩ A) = µ∗ (E ∩ ( Bj )) = µ∗ ( (E ∩ Bj )) ≤ µ∗ (E ∩ Bj ).
j=1 j=1 j=1

Compare this with (10):

µ∗ (E) ≥ µ∗ (E ∩ A) + µ∗ (E ∩ Ac ).

Thus, A ∈ Ã, which means that à is a σ-algebra.

5. µ̃ = µ∗ ¹ Ã is a measure.

11
 F∞
We need to prove only σ-additivity. Let E = j=1 Aj . From(10) we get
∞
G ∞
X
∗
µ( Aj ) > µ∗ (Aj ).
j=1 j=1

The oposite inequality follows from σ-semiadditivity of µ∗ .

6. Ã ⊃ A.
Let A ∈ A, E ⊂ X. We need to prove:
µ∗ (E) > µ∗ (E ∩ A) + µ∗ (E ∩ Ac ). (11)
If E ∈ A then (11) is clear since E ∩ A and E ∩ Ac are disjoint and both belong to A
where µ∗ = µ and so is additive.
For E ⊂ X for ∀ε > 0 there exists a A-covering (Ej ) of E such that
∞
X
µ∗ (E) + ε > µ(Ej ). (12)
j=1

Now, since Ej = (Ej ∩ A) ∪ (Ej ∩ Ac ), one has

µ(Ej ) = µ(Ej ∩ A) + µ(Ej ∩ A)
and also
∞
[
E∩A⊂ (Ej ∩ A)
j=1
∞
[
E ∩ Ac ⊂ (Ej ∩ Ac )
j=1

By monotonicity and σ-semiadditivity

∞
X
µ∗ (E ∩ A) 6 µ(Ej ∩ A),
j=1
∞
X
µ∗ (E ∩ Ac ) 6 µ(Ej ∩ Ac ).
j=1

Adding the last two inequalities we obtain

∞
X
µ∗ (E ∩ A) + µ∗ (E ∩ Ac ) ≤ µ∗ (Ej ) < µ∗ (E) + ε.
j=1

Since ε > 0 is arbitrary, (11) is proved. ¥

The following theorem is a direct consequence of the previous one.

12
Theorem 3.6 Let A be an algebra of subsets of X and µ be a measure on it. Then there
exists a σ-algebra A1 ⊃ A and a measure µ1 on A1 such that µ1 ¹ A = µ.

Remark. Consider again an algebra A of subsets of X. Denot by Aσ the generated

σ-algebra and construct the extension µσ of µ on Aσ . This extension is called minimal
extension of measure.
Since à ⊃ A therefore Aσ ⊂ Ã. Hence one can set µσ = µ̃ ¹ Aσ . Obviously µσ is a
minimal extension of µ. It always exists. On can also show (see below) that this extension
is unique.

Theorem 3.7 Let µ be a measure on an algebra A of subsets of X, µ∗ the corresponding

outer measure. If µ∗ (A) = 0 for a set A ⊂ X then A ∈ Ã and µ̃(A) = 0.

Proof. Clearly, it suffices to prove that A ∈ Ã. Further, it suffices to prove that µ∗ (E) >
µ∗ (E ∩ A) + µ∗ (E ∩ Ac ). The latter statement follows from monotonicity of µ∗ . Indeed,
one has µ∗ (E ∩ A) 6 µ∗ (A) = 0 and µ∗ (E ∩ Ac ) 6 µ∗ (E). ¥

Definition 3.4 A measure µ on an algebra of sets A is called complete if conditions

B ⊂ A, A ∈ A, µ(A) = 0 imply B ∈ A and µ(B) = 0.

Corollary. µ̃ is a complete measure.

Definition 3.5 A measure µ on an algebra A is called finite if µ(X) S < ∞. It is called

σ-finite if the is an increasing sequence (Fj )j≥1 ⊂ A such that X = j Fj and µ(Fj ) < ∞
∀j.

Theorem 3.8 Let µ be a σ-finite measure on an algebra A. Then there exist a unique
extension of µ to a measure on Ã.

Proof. It suffices to sjow uniqueness. Let ν be another extension of µ (ν ¹ A = µ ¹ A).

∗
First,
S let µ (and therefore ν, µ ) be finite. Let A ∈ Ã. Let (Ej ) ⊂ A such that
A ⊂ j Ej . We have
∞
[ ∞
X ∞
X
ν(A) ≤ ν( Ej ) ≤ ν(Ej ) = µ(Ej ).
j=1 j=1 j=1

Therefore
ν(A) ≤ µ∗ (A) ∀A ∈ Ã.

13
Since µ∗ and ν are additive (on Ã) it follows that

µ∗ (A) + µ∗ (Ac ) = ν(A) + ν(Ac ).

The terms in the RHS are finite and ν(A) ≤ µ∗ (A), ν(Ac ) ≤ µ∗ (Ac ). From this we infer
that
ν(A) = µ∗ (A) ∀A ∈ Ã.

Now let µ be S
σ-finite, (Fj ) be an increasing sequence of sets from A such that µ(Fj ) <
∞ ∀j and X = ∞ j=1 Fj . From what we have already proved it follows that

µ∗ (A ∩ Fj ) = ν(A ∩ Fj ) ∀A ∈ Ã.

Therefore
µ∗ (A) = lim µ∗ (A ∩ Fj ) = lim ν(A ∩ Fj ) = ν(A). ¥
j j

Theorem 3.9 (Continuity of measure). Let A be a σ-algebra with a measure µ, {Aj } ⊂

A a monotonically increasing sequence of sets. Then
∞
[
µ( Aj ) = lim µ(Aj ).
j→∞
j=1

Proof. One has:

∞
[ ∞
G
A= Aj = (Aj+1 \ Aj ) t A1 .
j=1 j=2

Using σ-additivity and subtractivity of µ,

∞
X
µ(A) = (µ(Aj+1 ) − µ(Aj )) + µ(A1 ) = lim µ(Aj ). ¥
j→∞
j=1

Similar assertions for a decreasing sequence of sets in A can be proved using de Morgan
formulas.

Theorem 3.10 Let A ∈ Ã. Then for any ε > 0 there exists Aε ∈ A such that µ∗ (A 4
Aε ) < ε.
S
Proof. 1. For any ε > 0 there exists an A cover Ej ⊃ A such that
X ε ε
µ(Ej ) < µ∗ (A) + = µ̃(A) + .
j
2 2

14
On the other hand, X [
µ(Ej ) > µ̃( EJ ).
j j

The monotonicity of µ̃ implies

∞
[ n
[
µ̃( EJ ) = lim µ̃( Ej ),
n→∞
j=1 j=1

hence there exists a positive integer N such that

∞
[ N
[ ε
µ̃( Ej ) − µ̃( Ej ) < . (13)
j=1 j=1
2

2. Now, put
N
[
Aε = Ej
j=1

and prove that µ∗ (A 4 Aε ) < ε.

2a. Since ∞
[
A⊂ Ej ,
j=1

one has ∞
[
A \ Aε ⊂ Ej \ Aε .
j=1

Since ∞
[
Aε ⊂ Ej ,
j=1

one can use the monotonicity and subtractivity of µ̃. Together with estimate (13), this
gives
[∞
ε
µ̃(A \ Aε ) ≤ µ̃( Ej \ Aε ) < .
j=1
2

2b. The inclusion ∞

[
Aε \ A ⊂ Ej \ A
j=1

implies
∞
[ ∞
[ ε
µ̃(Aε \ A) 6 µ̃( Ej \ A) = µ̃( Ej ) − µ̃(A) < .
j=1 j=1
2

15
Here we used the same properties of µ̃ as above and the choice of the cover (Ej ).
3. Finally,
µ̃(A 4 Aε ) 6 µ̃(A \ Aε ) + µ̃(Aε \ A).
¥

16
4 Monotone Classes
and Uniqueness of Extension of Measure
Definition 4.1 A collection of sets, M is called a monotone class if together with any
monotone sequence of sets M contains the limit of this sequence.

Example. Any σ-ring. (This follows from the Exercise 1. below).

Exercises.

1. Prove that any σ-ring is a monotone class.

2. If a ring is a monotone class, then it is a σ-ring.

We shall denote by M(K) the minimal monotone class containing K.

Theorem 4.1 Let K be a ring of sets, Kσ the σ-ring generated by K. Then M(K) = Kσ .

Proof. 1. Clearly, M(K) ⊂ Kσ . Now, it suffices to prove that M(K) is a ring. This follows
from the Exercise (2) above and from the minimality of Kσ .
2. M(K) is a ring.
2a. For B ⊂ X, set

KB = {A ⊂ X : A ∪ B, A ∩ B, A \ B, B \ A ∈ M(K)}.

This definition is symmetric with respect to A and B, therefore A ∈ KB implies B ∈ KA .

2b. KB is a monotone class.
S
Let (Aj ) ⊂ KB be a monotonically increasing sequence. Prove that the union, A = Aj
belongs to KB .
Since Aj ∈ KB , one has Aj ∪ B ∈ KB , and so
∞
[
A∪B = (Aj ∪ B) ∈ M(K).
j=1

In the same way,

∞
[ ∞
[
A\B =( Aj ) \ B = (Aj \ B) ∈ M(K);
j=1 j=1

17
 ∞
[ ∞
\
B\A=B\( Aj ) = (B \ Aj ) ∈ M(K).
j=1 j=1

Similar proof is for the case of decreasing sequence (Aj ).

2c. If B ∈ K then M(K) ⊂ KB .
Obviously, K ⊂ KB . Together with minimality of M(K), this implies M(K) ⊂ KB .
2d. If B ∈ M(K) then M(K) ⊂ KB .
Let A ∈ K. Then M(K) ⊂ KA . Thus if B ∈ M(K), one has B ∈ KA , so A ∈ KB .
Hence what we have proved is K ⊂ KB . This implies M(K) ⊂ KB .
2e. It follows from 2a. — 2d. that if A, B ∈ M(K) then A ∈ KB and so A ∪ B, A ∩ B,
A \ B and B \ A all belong to M(K). ¥

Theorem 4.2 Let A be an algebra of sets, µ and ν two measures defined on the σ-
algebra Aσ generated by A. Then µ ¹ A = ν ¹ A implies µ = ν.

Proof. Choose A ∈ Aσ , then A = limn→∞ An , An ∈ A, for Aσ = M(A). Using continuity

of measure, one has

µ(A) = lim µ(An ) = lim ν(An ) = ν(A).

n→∞ n→∞

Theorem 4.3 Let A be an algebra of sets, B ⊂ X such that for any ε > 0 there exists
Aε ∈ A with µ∗ (B 4 Aε ) < ε. Then B ∈ Ã.

Proof. 1. Since any outer measure is semi-additive, it suffices to prove that for any E ⊂ X
one has
µ∗ (E) > µ∗ (E ∩ B) + µ∗ (E ∩ B c ).

2a. Since A ⊂ Ã, one has

µ∗ (E ∩ Aε ) + µ∗ (E ∩ Acε ) 6 µ∗ (E). (14)

2b. Since A ⊂ B ∪ (A 4 B) and since the outer measure µ∗ is monotone and semi-
additive, there is an estimate |µ∗ (A) − µ∗ (B)| 6 µ∗ (A 4 B) for any A, B ⊂ X. (C.f. the
proof of similar fact for measures above).
2c. It follows from the monotonicity of µ∗ that

|µ∗ (E ∩ Aε ) − µ∗ (E ∩ B)| 6 µ∗ ((E ∩ Aε ) 4 (E ∩ B)) 6 µ(Aε ∩ B) < ε.

18
Therefore, µ∗ (E ∩ Aε ) > µ∗ (E ∩ B) − ε.
In the same manner, µ∗ (E ∩ Acε ) > µ∗ (E ∩ B c ) − ε.
2d. Using (14), one obtains

µ∗ (E) > µ∗ (E ∩ B) + µ∗ (E ∩ B c ) − 2ε.

19
5 The Lebesgue Measure on the real line R1

5.1 The Lebesgue Measure of Bounded Sets of R1

Put A for the algebra of all finite unions of semi-segments (semi-intervals) on R1 , i.e. all
sets of the form
k
[
A= [aj , bj ).
j=1

Define a mapping µ : A −→ R by:

k
X
µ(A) = (bj − aj ).
j=1

Theorem 5.1 µ is a measure.

Proof. 1. All properties including the (finite) additivity are obvious. The only thing to
be proved is the σ-additivity.
Let (Aj ) ⊂ A be such a countable disjoint family that
∞
G
A= Aj ∈ A.
j=1
F
The condition A ∈ A means that Aj is a finite union of intervals.
2. For any positive integer n,
n
[
Aj ⊂ A,
j=1

hence n
X
µ(Aj ) 6 µ(A),
j=1

and ∞ n
X X
µ(Aj ) = lim µ(Aj ) 6 µ(A).
n→∞
j=1 j=1

3. Now, let Aε a set obtained from A by the following construction. Take a connected
component of A. It is a semi-segment of the form [s, t). Shift slightly on the left its
right-hand end, to obtain a (closed) segment. Do it with all components of A, in such a
way that
µ(A) < µ(Aε ) + ε. (15)

20
 Apply a similar procedure to each semi-segment shifting their left end point to the left
Aj = [aj , bj ), and obtain (open) intervals, Aεj with
ε
µ(Aεj ) < µ(Aj ) + . (16)
2j

4. By the construction, Aε is a compact set and (Aεj ) its open cover. Hence, there exists
a positive integer n such that
[n
Aεj ⊃ Aε .
j=1

Thus n
X
µ(Aε ) 6 µ(Aεj ).
j=1

The formulas (15) and (16) imply

n
X n
X Xn
ε
µ(A) < µ(Aεj ) +ε6 µ(Aj ) + + ε,
j=1 j=1 j=1
2j

thus ∞
X
µ(A) < µ(Aj ) + 2ε.
j=1

¥
Now, one can apply the Carathèodory’s scheme developed above, and obtain the mea-
sure space (Ã, µ̃). The result of this extension is called the Lebesgue measure. We shall
denote the Lebesgue measure on R1 by m.
Exercises.

1. A one point set is measurable, and its Lebesgue measure is equal to 0.

2. The same for a countable subset in R1 . In particular, m(Q ∩ [0, 1]) = 0.
3. Any open or closed set in R1 is Lebesgue measurable.

Definition 5.1 Borel algebra of sets, B on the real line R1 is a σ-algebra generated by
all open sets on R1 . Any element of B is called a Borel set.

Exercise. Any Borel set is Lebesgue measurable.

Theorem 5.2 Let E ⊂ R1 be a Lebesgue measurable set. Then for any ε > 0 there
exists an open set G ⊃ E such that m(G \ E) < ε.

21
Proof. Since E is measurable, m∗ (E) = m(E). S According the definition of an outer
measure, for any ε > 0 there exists a cover A = [ak , bk ) ⊃ E such that
ε
m(A) < m(E) + .
2
Now, put [ ε
G= (ak − , bk ).
2k+1
¥
Problem. Let E ⊂ R1 be a bounded Lebesgue measurable set. Then for any ε > 0
there exists a compact set F ⊂ E such that m(E \ F ) < ε. (Hint: Cover E with a
semi-segment and apply the above theorem to the σ-algebra of measurable subsets in this
semi-segment).
Corollary. For any ε > 0 there exist an open set G and a compact set F such that
G ⊃ E ⊃ F and m(G \ F ) < ε.
Such measures are called regular.

5.2 The Lebesgue Measure on the Real Line R1

We now abolish the condition of boundness.

Definition 5.2 A set A on the real numbers line R1 is Lebesgue measurable if for any
positive integer n the bounded set A ∩ [−n, n) is a Lebesgue measurable set.

Definition 5.3 The Lebesgue measure on R1 is

m(A) = lim m(A ∩ [−n, n)).
n→∞

Definition 5.4 A measure is called σ-finite if any measurable set can be represented as
a countable union of subsets each has a finite measure.

Thus the Lebesgue measure m is σ-finite.

Problem. The Lebesgue measure on R1 is regular.

5.3 The Lebesgue Measure in Rd

Definition 5.5 We call a d-dimensional rectangle in Rd any set of the form
{x : x ∈ Rd : ai 6 xi < bi }.

22
Using rectangles, one can construct the Lebesque measure in Rd in the same fashion as
we deed for the R1 case.

23
6 Measurable functions
Let X be a set, A a σ-algebra on X.

Definition 6.1 A pair (X, A) is called a measurable space.

Definition 6.2 Let f be a function defined on a measurable space (X, A), with values in
the extended real number system. The function f is called measurable if the set

{x : f (x) > a}

is measurable for every real a.

Example.

Theorem 6.1 The following conditions are equivalent

{x : f (x) > a} is measurable for every real a. (17)

{x : f (x) ≥ a} is measurable for every real a. (18)
{x : f (x) < a} is measurable for every real a. (19)
{x : f (x) ≤ a} is measurable for every real a. (20)

Proof. The statement follows from the equalities

∞
\ 1
{x : f (x) ≥ a} = {x : f (x) > a − }, (21)
n=1
n
{x : f (x) < a} = X \ {x : f (x) ≥ a}, (22)
\∞
1
{x : f (x) ≤ a} = {x : f (x) < a + }, (23)
n=1
n
{x : f (x) > a} = X \ {x : f (x) ≤ a} (24)

Theorem 6.2 Let (fn ) be a sequence of measurable functions. For x ∈ X set

g(x) = sup fn (x)(n ∈ N)

n

h(x) = lim sup fn (x).

n→∞

Then g and h are measurable.

24
Proof.
∞
\
{x : g(x) ≤ a} = {x : fn (x) ≤ a}.
n=1
Since the LHS is measurable it follows that the RHS is measurable too. The same proof
works for inf.
Now
h(x) = inf gm (x),
where
gm (x) = sup fn (x).
n≥m

Theorem 6.3 Let f and g be measurable real-valued functions defined on X. Let F be

real and continuous function on R2 . Put
h(x) = F (f (x), g(x)) (x ∈ X).
Then h is measurable.

Proof. Let Ga = {(u, v) : F (u, v) > a}. Then Ga is an open subset of R2 , and thus
∞
[
Ga = In
n=1

where (In ) is a sequence of open intervals

In = {(u, v) : an < u < bn , cn < v < dn }.
The set {x : an < f (x) < bn } is measurable and so is the set
{x : (f (x), g(x)) ∈ In } = {x : an < f (x) < bn } ∩ {x : cn < g(x) < dn }.
Hence the same is true for
∞
[
{x : h(x) > a} = {x : (f (x), g(x)) ∈ Ga } = {x : (f (x), g(x)) ∈ In }.
n=1

Corollories. Let f and g be measurable. Then the following functions are measurable
(i)f + g (25)
(ii)f · g (26)
(iii)|f | (27)
f
(iv) (ifg 6= 0) (28)
g
(v) max{f, g}, min{f, g} (29)
(30)
since max{f, g} = 1/2(f + g + |f − g|), min{f, g} = 1/2(f + g − |f − g|).

25
6.1 Step functions (simple functions)
Definition 6.3 A real valued function f : X → R is called simple function if it takes
only a finite number of distinct values.

We will use below the following notation

½
1 if x ∈ E
χE (x) =
0 otherwise
Pn
Theorem 6.4 A simple function f = j=1 cj χEj is measurable if and only if all the
sets Ej are measurable.

Exercise. Prove the theorem.

Theorem 6.5 Let f be real valued. There exists a sequence (fn ) of simple functions such
that fn (x) −→ f (x) as n → ∞, for every x ∈ X. If f is measurable, (fn ) may be chosen
to be a sequence of measurable functions. If f ≥ 0, (fn ) may be chosen monotonically
increasing.

Proof. If f ≥ 0 set
P n i−1
fn (x) = n·2i=1 2n χEni + nχFn

where
i−1 i
Eni = {x : 2n
≤ f (x) < 2n
}, Fn = {x : f (x) ≥ n}.
The sequence (fn ) is monotonically increasing, fn is a simple function. If f (x) < ∞ then
f (x) < n for a sufficiently large n and |fn (x) − f (x)| < 1/2n . Therefore fn (x) −→ f (x).
If f (x) = +∞ then fn (x) = n and again fn (x) −→ f (x).
In the general case f = f + − f − , where
f + (x) := max{f (x), 0}, f − (x) := − min{f (x), 0}.
Note that if f is bounded then fn −→ f uniformly.

26
7 Integration
Definition 7.1 A triple (X, A, µ), where A is a σ-algebra of subsets of X and µ is a
measure on it, is called a measure space.

Let (X, A, µ) be a measure space. Let f : X 7→ R be a simple measurable function.

n
X
f (x) = ci χEi (x) (31)
i=1

and n
[
Ei = X, Ei ∩ Ej = ∅ (i 6= j).
i=1

There are different representations of f by means of (31). Let us choose the represen-
tation such that all ci are distinct.

Definition 7.2 Define the quantity

n
X
I(f ) = ci µ(Ei ).
i=1

First, we derive some properties of I(f ).

Fk
Theorem 7.1 Let f be a simple measurable function. If X = j=1 Fj and f takes the
constant value bj on Fj then
k
X
I(f ) = bj µ(Fj ).
j=1

F
Proof. Clearly, Ei = j: bj =ci Fj .

X n
X G n
X X k
X
ci µ(Ei ) = ci µ( Fj ) = ci µ(Fj ) = bj µ(Fj ).
i i=1 j: bj =ci i=1 j: bj =ci j=1

¥
This show that the quantity I(f ) is well defined.

27
Theorem 7.2 If f and g are measurable simple functions then
I(αf + βg) = αI(f ) + βI(g).
Pn Fn Pm Fn
Proof. Let f (x) = j=1 bj χFj (x), X= j=1 Fj , g(x) = k=1 ck χGk (x), X= k=1 Gk .
Then n X
m
X
αf + βg = (αbj + βck )χEjk (x)
j=1 k=1

where Ejk = Fj ∩ Gk .
Exercise. Complete the proof.

Theorem 7.3 Let f and g be simple measurable functions. Suppose that f ≤ g every-
where except for a set of measure zero. Then
I(f ) ≤ I(g).

Proof. If f ≤ g everywhere then in the notation of the previous proof bj ≤ ck on Ejk and
I(f ) ≤ I(g) follows.
Otherwise we can assume that f ≤ g + φ where φ is non-negative measurable simple
function which is zero every exept for a set N of measure zero. Then I(φ) = 0 and
I(f ) ≤ I(g + φ) = I(f ) + I(φ) = I(g).

Definition 7.3 If f : X 7→ R1 is a non-negative measurable function, we define the

Lebesgue integral of f by Z
f dµ := sup I(φ)

where sup is taken over the set of all simple functions φ such that φ ≤ f .
R
Theorem 7.4 If f is a simple measurable function then f dµ = I(f ).
R
Proof. Since f ≤ f it follows that f dµ ≥ I(f ).
On the other hand, if φ ≤ f then I(φ) ≤ I(f ) and also
sup I(φ) ≤ I(f )
φ≤f

which leads to the inequality Z

f dµ ≤ I(f ).

28
Definition 7.4 1. If A is a measurable subset of X (A ∈ A)and f is a non-negative
measurable function then we define
Z Z
f dµ = f χA dµ.
A

2. Z Z Z
+
f dµ = f dµ − f − dµ

if at least one of the terms in RHS is finite. If both are finite we call f integrable.
R R
Remark. Finiteness of the integrals f + dµ and f − dµ is equivalent to the finitenes of
the integral Z
|f |dµ.

If it is the case we write f ∈ L1 (X, µ) or simply f ∈ L1 if there is no ambiguity.

The following properties of the Lebesgue integral are simple consequences of the defi-
nition. The proofs are left to the reader.

• If f is measurable and bounded on A and µ(A) < ∞ then f is integrable on A.

• If a ≤ f (x) ≤ b (x ∈ A)), µ(A) < ∞ then

Z
aµ(A) ≤ f dµ ≤ bµ(a).
A

• If f (x) ≤ g(x) for all x ∈ A then

Z Z
f dµ ≤ gdµ.
A A

• Prove that if µ(A) = 0 and f is measurable then

Z
f dµ = 0.
A

The next theorem expresses an important property of the Lebesgue integral. As a con-
sequence we obtain convergence theorems which give the main advantage of the Lebesgue
approach to integration in comparison with Riemann integration.

29
Theorem 7.5 Let f be measurable on X. For A ∈ A define
Z
φ(A) = f dµ.
A

Then φ is countably additive on A.

Proof. It is enough to consider the case f ≥ 0. The general case follows from the
decomposition f = f + − f − .
If f = χE for some E ∈ A then
Z
µ(A ∩ E) = χE dµ
A

and σ-additivity of φ is the same as this property of µ.

P F F
Let f (x) = nk=1 ck χEk (x), nk=1 Ek = X. Then for A = ∞ i=1 Ai , Ai ∈ A we have
Z Z Xn
φ(A) = f dµ = f χA dµ = ck µ(Ek ∩ A)
A k=1
n
X ∞
G n
X ∞
G
= ck µ(Ek ∩ ( Ai )) = ck µ( (Ek ∩ Ai ))
k=1 i=1 k=1 i=1
Xn ∞
X ∞ X
X n
= ck µ(Ek ∩ Ai ) = ck µ(Ek ∩ Ai )
k=1 i=1 i=1 k=1
(the series of positive numbers)
X∞ Z X∞
= f dµ = φ(Ai ).
i=1 Ai i=1

Now consider general positive f ’s. Let ϕ be a simple measurable function and ϕ ≤ f .
Then Z ∞ Z ∞
X X
ϕdµ = ϕdµ ≤ φ(Ai ).
A i=1 Ai i=1
Therefore the same inequality holds for sup, hence
∞
X
φ(A) ≤ φ(Ai ).
i=1

Now if for some i φ(Ai ) = +∞ then φ(A) = +∞ since φ(A) ≥ φ(An ). So assume that
φ(Ai ) < ∞∀i. Given ε > 0 choose a measurable simple function ϕ such that ϕ ≤ f and
Z Z Z Z
ϕdµ ≥ f dµ − ε, ϕdµ ≥ f − ε.
A1 A1 A2 A2

30
Hence Z Z Z
φ(A1 ∪ A2 ) ≥ ϕdµ = + ϕdµ ≥ φ(A1 ) + φ(A2 ) − 2ε,
A1 ∪A2 A1 A2

so that φ(A1 ∪ A2 ) ≥ φ(A1 ) + φ(A2 ).

By induction
n
[ n
X
φ( Ai ) ≥ φ(Ai ).
i=1 i=1
Sn
Since A ⊃ i=1 Ai we have that
n
X
φ(A) ≥ φ(Ai ).
i=1

Passing to the limit n → ∞ in the RHS we obtain

∞
X
φ(A) ≥ φ(Ai ).
i=1

This completes the proof.¥

Corollary. If A ∈ A, B ⊂ A and µ(A \ B) = 0 then
Z Z
f dµ = f dµ.
A B

Proof. Z Z Z Z
f dµ = f dµ + f dµ = f dµ + 0.
A B A\B B

Definition 7.5 f and g are called equivalent (f ∼ g in writing) if µ({x : f (x) 6=

g(x)}) = 0.

It is not hard to see that f ∼ g is relation of equivalence.

(i) f ∼ f , (ii) f ∼ g, g ∼ h ⇒ f ∼ h, (iii) f ∼ g ⇔ g ∼ f.

Theorem 7.6 If f ∈ L1 then |f | ∈ L1 and

¯Z ¯ Z
¯ ¯
¯ f dµ¯ ≤ |f |dµ
¯ ¯
A A

31
Proof.
−|f | ≤ f ≤ |f |

Theorem 7.7 (Monotone Convergence Theorem)

Let (fn ) be nondecreasing sequence of nonnegative measurable functions with limit f. Then
Z Z
f dµ = lim fn dµ, A ∈ A
A n→∞ A

Proof. First, note that fn (x) ≤ f (x) so that

Z Z
lim fn dµ ≤ f dµ
n A

It is remained to prove the opposite inequality.

For this it is enough to show that for any simple ϕ such that 0 ≤ ϕ ≤ f the following
inequality holds Z Z
ϕdµ ≤ lim fn dµ
A n A
Take 0 < c < 1. Define
An = {x ∈ A : fn (x) ≥ cϕ(x)}
S∞
then An ⊂ An+1 and A = n=1 An .
Now observe
Z Z Z
c ϕdµ = cϕdµ = lim cϕdµ ≤
A A n→∞ An

(this is a consequence of σ-additivity of φ proved above)

Z Z
≤ lim fn dµ ≤ lim fn dµ
n→∞ An n→∞ A

Pass to the limit c → 1.¥

Theorem 7.8 Let f = f1 + f2 , f1 , f2 ∈ L1 (µ). Then f ∈ L1 (µ) and

Z Z Z
f dµ = f1 dµ + f2 dµ

32
Proof. First, let f1 , f2 ≥ 0. If they are simple then the result is trivial. Otherwise, choose
monotonically increasing sequences (ϕn,1 ), (ϕn,2 ) such that ϕn,1 → f1 and ϕn,2 → f2 .
Then for ϕn = ϕn,1 + ϕn,2
Z Z Z
ϕn dµ = ϕn,1 dµ + ϕn,2 dµ

and the result follows from the previous theorem.

If f1 ≥ 0 and f2 ≤ 0 put

A = {x : f (x) ≥ 0}, B = {x : f (x) < 0}

Then f, f1 and −f2 are non-negative on A.

R R R
Hence f = A f dµ + A (−f2 )dµ
A 1

Similarly Z Z Z
(−f2 )dµ = f1 dµ + (−f )dµ
B B B
The result follows from the additivity of integral. ¥

Theorem 7.9 Let A ∈ A, (fn ) be a sequence of non-negative measurable functions and

∞
X
f (x) = fn (x), x ∈ A
n=1

Then Z ∞ Z
X
f dµ = fn dµ
A n=1 A

Exercise. Prove the theorem.

Theorem 7.10 (Fatou’s lemma)

If (fn ) is a sequence of non-negative measurable functions defined a.e. and

f (x) = limn→∞ fn (x)

then Z Z
f dµ ≤ limn→∞ fn dµ
A A
A∈A

33
Proof. Put gn (x) = inf i≥n fi (x)
Then by definition of the lower limit limn→∞ gn (x) = f (x).
Moreover, gn ≤ gn+1 , gn ≤ fn . By the monotone convergence theorem
Z Z Z Z
f dµ = lim gn dµ = limn gn dµ ≤ limn fn dµ.
A n A A A

Theorem 7.11 (Lebesgue’s dominated convergence theorem)

Let A ∈ A, (fn ) be a sequence of measurable functions such that fn (x) → f (x) (x ∈ A.)
Suppose there exists a function g ∈ L1 (µ) on A such that

|fn (x)| ≤ g(x)

Then Z Z
lim fn dµ = f dµ
n A A

Proof. From |fn (x)| ≤ g(x) it follows that fn ∈ L1 (µ). Sinnce fn + g ≥ 0 and f + g ≥ 0,
by Fatou’s lemma it follows
Z Z
(f + g)dµ ≤ limn (fn + g)
A A

or
Z Z
f dµ ≤ limn fn dµ.
A A

Since g − fn ≥ 0 we have similarly

Z Z
(g − f )dµ ≤ limn (g − fn )dµ
A A

so that Z Z
− f dµ ≤ −limn fn dµ
A A
which is the same as Z Z
f dµ ≥ limn fn dµ
A A
This proves that Z Z Z
limn fn dµ = limn fn dµ = f dµ.
A A A

34
8 Comparison of the Riemann
and the Lebesgue integral
Rb
To distinguish we denote the Riemann integral by (R) f (x)dx and the Lebesgue integral
Rb a
by (L) a f (x)dx.

Theorem 8.1 If a finction f is Riemann integrable on [a, b] then it is also Lebesgue

integrable on [a, b] and
Z b Z b
(L) f (x)dx = (R) f (x)dx.
a a

Proof. Boundedness of a function is a necessary condition of being Riemann integrable.

On the other hand, every bounded measurable function is Lebesgue integarble. So it is
enough to prove that if a function f is Riemann integrable then it is measurable.
Consider a partition πm of [a, b] on n = 2m equal parts by points a = x0 < x1 < . . . <
xn−1 < xn = b and set
m −1
2X m −1
2X
f m (x) = mk χk (x), f m (x) = Mk χk (x),
k=0 k=0

where χk is a charactersitic function of [xk , xk+1 ) clearly,

f 1 (x) ≤ f 2 (x) ≤ . . . ≤ f (x),

f 1 (x) ≥ f 2 (x) ≥ . . . ≥ f (x).

Therefore the limits

f (x) = lim f m (x), f (x) = lim f m (x)

m→∞ m→∞

exist and are measurable. Note that f (x) ≤ f (x) ≤ f (x). Since f m and f m are simple
measurable functions, we have
Z b Z b Z b Z b
(L) f m (x)dx ≤ (L) f (x)dx ≤ (L) f (x)dx ≤ (L) f m (x)dx.
a a a a

Moreover,
Z b
m −1
2X
(L) f m (x)dx = mk ∆xk = s(f, πm )
a k=0

35
and similarly Z b
(L) f m (x) = s(f, πm ).
a
So Z Z
b b
s(f, πm ) ≤ (L) f (x)dx ≤ (L) f (x)dx ≤ s(f, πm ).
a a
Since f is Riemann integrable,
Z b
lim s(f, πm ) = lim s(f, πm ) = (R) f (x)dx.
m→∞ m→∞ a

Therefore Z b
(L) (f (x) − f (x))dx = 0
a

and since f ≥ f we conclude that

f =f =f almost everywhere.

From this measurability of f follows. ¥

36
9 Lp-spaces
Let (X, A, µ) be a measure space. In this section we study Lp (X, A, µ)-spaces which occur
frequently in analysis.

9.1 Auxiliary facts

1 1
Lemma 9.1 Let p and q be real numbers such that p > 1, p
+ q
= 1 (this numbers are
called conjugate). Then for any a > 0, b > 0 the inequality

ap bq
ab ≤ + .
p q
holds.

tp
Proof. Note that ϕ(t) := p
+ 1q − t with t ≥ 0 has the only minimum at t = 1. It follows
that
tp 1
t≤ + .
p q
1
Then letting t = ab− p−1 we obtain

ap b−q 1 1
+ ≥ ab− p−1 ,
p q
and the result follows.¥

Lemma 9.2 Let p ≥ 1, a, b ∈ R. Then the inequality

|a + b|p ≤ 2p−1 (|a|p + |b|p ).

holds.

Proof. For p = 1 the statement is obvious. For p > 1 the function y = xp , x ≥ 0 is convex
since y 00 ≥ 0. Therefore µ ¶p
|a| + |b| |a|p + |b|p
≤ .¥
2 2

37
9.2 The spaces Lp , 1 ≤ p < ∞. Definition
Recall that two measurable functions are said to be equaivalent (with respect to the
measure µ) if they are equal µ-a;most everywhere.
The space Lp = Lp (X, A, µ) consists of all µ-equaivalence classes of A-measurable
functions f such that |f |p has finite integral over X with respect to µ.
We set µZ ¶1/p
p
kf kp := |f | dµ .
X

9.3 Hölder’s inequality

Theorem 9.3 Let p > 1, p1 + 1q = 1. Let f and g be measurable functions, |f |p and |g|q
be integrable. Then f g is integrable andthe inequality
Z µZ ¶1/p µZ ¶1/q
p q
|f g|dµ ≤ |f | dµ |g| dµ .
X X X

Proof. It suffices to consider the case

kf kp > 0, kgkq > 0.

Let
a = |f (x)|kf k−1 −1
p , b = |g(x)|kgkq .

By Lemma 1
|f (x)g(x)| |f (x)|p |g(x)|q
≤ + .
kf kp kgkq pkf kpp qkgkqq

After integration we obtain

Z
1 1
kf k−1 −1
p kgkq |f g|dµ ≤ + = 1. ¥
X p q

9.4 Minkowski’s inequality

Theorem 9.4 If f, g ∈ Lp , p ≥ 1, then f + g ∈ Lp and

kf + gkp ≤ kf kp + kgkp .

38
 Proof. If kf kp and kgkp are finite then by Lemma 2 |f + g|p is integrable and kf + gkp
is well-defined.

|f (x)+g(x)|p = |f (x)+g(x)||f (x)+g(x)|p−1 ≤ |f (x)||f (x)+g(x)|p−1 +|g(x)||f (x)+g(x)|p−1 .

Integratin the last inequality and using Hölder’s inequality we obtain

Z µZ ¶1/p µZ ¶1/q µZ ¶1/p µZ ¶1/q
p p (p−1)q p (p−1)q
|f +g| dµ ≤ |f | dµ |f + g| dµ + |g| dµ |f + g| dµ .
X X X X X

The result follows. ¥

9.5 Lp , 1 ≤ p < ∞, is a Banach space

It is readily seen from the properties of an integral and Theorem 9.3 that Lp , 1 ≤ p < ∞,
is a vector space. We introduced the quantity kf kp . Let us show that it defines a norm
on Lp , 1 ≤ p < ∞,. Indeed,

1. By the definition kf kp ≥ 0.

2. kf kp = 0 =⇒ f (x) = 0 for µ-almost all x ∈ X. Since Lp consists of µ-eqivalence

classes, it follows that f ∼ 0.

3. Obviously, kαf kp = |α|kf kp .

4. From Minkowski’s inequality it follows that kf + gkp ≤ kf kp + kgkp .

So Lp , 1 ≤ p < ∞, is a normed space.

Theorem 9.5 Lp , 1 ≤ p < ∞, is a Banach space.

Proof. It remains to prove the completeness.

Let (fn ) be a Cauchy sequence in Lp . Then there exists a subsequence (fnk )(k ∈ N)
with nk increasing such that
1
kfm − fnk kp < ∀m ≥ nk .
2k
Then
k
X
kfni+1 − fni kp < 1.
i=1

39
Let
gk := |fn1 | + |fn2 − fn1 | + . . . + |fnk+1 − fnk |.
Then gk is monotonocally increasing. Using Minkowski’s inequality we have
à k
!p
p
X
p
kgk k1 = kgk kp ≤ kfn1 kp + kfni+1 − fni kp < (kfn1 kp + 1)p .
i=1

Put
g(x) := lim gk (x).
k
By the monotone convergence theorem
Z Z
p
lim gk dµ = g p dµ.
k X A
p
Moreover, the limit is finite since kgk k1 ≤ C = (kfn1 kp + 1)p .
Therefore ∞
X
|fn1 | + |fnj+1 − fnj | converges almost everywhere
j=1

and so does ∞
X
fn1 + (fnj+1 − fnj ),
j=1

which means that

N
X
f n1 + (fnj+1 − fnj ) = fnN +1 converges almost everywhere as N → ∞.
j=1

Define
f (x) := lim fnk (x)
k→∞
where the limit exists and zero on the complement. So f is measurable.
Let ² > 0 be such that for n, m > N
Z
kfn − fm kpp = |fn − fm |p dµ < ²/2.
X

Then by Fatou’s lemma

Z Z Z
p p
|f − fm | dµ = lim |fnk − fm | dµ ≤ limk |fnk − fm |p dµ
X X k X

which is less than ² for m > N . This proves that

kf − fm kp → 0 as m → ∞. ¥

40