## Extensions of Measures

Oops, forgot to post this this earlier…

We can put together what we’ve been doing recently to state the following theorem:

If is a -finite measure on the ring , then there is a unique measure on the -ring extending . That is, if , then . Further, the extended measure is also -finite.

The existence is straightforward. We can induce an outer measure, and then restrict it to get . It’s straightforward to verify from the definitions that . And we know that since is -finite, so is , and thus .

What we need to show is that is unique. To this end, let and be two measures on that both extend . Let be the class of sets on which and agree; this obviously contains .

Now, if one of these two measures — say — is finite, and if is a monotone sequence of sets on which and agree, then the limit of this sequence is again in . Indeed, since measures are continuous, we must have

and similarly for . Since is finite, and agrees with on , we have a sequence of finite measures . The limits of these sequences must then agree, and so as well. Thus is a monotone class. Since it contains , it must contain , and thus .

On the other hand, neither measure may be finite. In this case, let be some fixed set of finite measure. Now — the collection of intersections of sets in with — is again a ring, and is the smallest -ring containing it. Restricting and to gives finite measures, and we can use the argument above.

Now every set can be covered by a countable, pairwise disjoint collection of sets . For each one, we have , and so we must find . From here, countable additivity finishes the theorem.

In light of the uniqueness of this extension, we will just call the extended measure again, rather than .

[...] of Measures We’ve shown that we can uniquely extend a -finite measure on a ring to a unique -finite measure on the -ring . But, of course, we [...]

Pingback by Completions of Measures « The Unapologetic Mathematician | April 6, 2010 |

[...] Sets of Finite Measure So, we’ve got a -finite measure on a ring , and we extend it to a measure on the -ring . But often it’s a lot more convenient to work with itself than [...]

Pingback by Approximating Sets of Finite Measure « The Unapologetic Mathematician | April 7, 2010 |

[...] we can use this method of inner measures as an alternative approach to our extension theorems. If is a -finite measure on a ring , and if is the induced outer measure on , then for [...]

Pingback by Using Measurable Covers and Kernels II « The Unapologetic Mathematician | April 13, 2010 |

[...] a measure on the ring of finite disjoint unions of semiclosed intervals. Now we want to apply our extension and completion [...]

Pingback by Lebesgue Measure « The Unapologetic Mathematician | April 19, 2010 |

[...] the two measures agree on . But our extension theorem tells us that a measure on is uniquely determined by its values on . And thus our assertion holds [...]

Pingback by Lebesgue Measure and Affine Transformations « The Unapologetic Mathematician | April 22, 2010 |