Ch2. Integration Theory (Ex.01 ~ Ex.11)

1. Given a collection of sets \(F_1, F_2, \cdots, F_n\), construct another collection \(E_1, E_2, \cdots, E_N\) \((N = 2^n - 1)\) so that \(E_i \cap E_j = \varnothing\) \((i \neq j)\), and \(F_k = \bigcup_{i \in I_k} E_i\).

proof

(1) construction of \(\{E_i\}_{i=1}^N\)

For \(i = 1, 2, \dots, 2^n - 1\), write \(i\) as an \(n\)-digit binary number :
\(i = (\hat{i}_n, \dots, \hat{i}_1)_2\)

(ex) \(n = 3 \Rightarrow N = 2^3 - 1 = 7 \Rightarrow 5 = 101_{(2)}\)
Next, for \(k = 1, \dots, n\), let \(G_{i,k} = F_k\) if \(\hat{i}_k = 1\) and \(G_{i,k} = F_k^c\) if \(\hat{i}_k = 0\).
Then, let \(E_i = \bigcap_{k=1}^n G_{i,k}\).
Note that there is at least one \(F_k\) such that \(E_i \subset F_k\) (if not, \(E_i = \bigcap_k F_k^c\) so \(\hat{i} = 0 \Rightarrow\) contradiction).

(2) \(E_i\), \(E_j\) are disjoint (\(i \neq j\))

If \(i \neq j\), so there is at least one digit in binary number such that \(\hat{i}_k \neq \hat{j}_k\) (\(k = 1, \dots, n\)).
Let \(\hat{i}_k = 0\) and \(\hat{j}_k = 1\) w.o.l.g. then
\(E_i \subset F_k^c\) and \(E_j \subset F_k\).
Each \(E_i\) and \(E_j\) are included in disjoint sets \((F_k^c, F_k)\) respectively, so \(E_i \cap E_j = \varnothing\).

(3) \(F_k = \bigcup_{i: \hat{i}_k = 1} E_i\) (\(k = 1, \dots, n\))

Let the \(E_i\) included in \(F_k\) be denoted by \(E_j^k\) (\(j = 1, \dots, 2^{n-1}\))

  1. \(\Leftarrow\)
    Since \(E_j^k \subset F_k\) for all \(j\), \(\bigcup_j E_j^k \subset F_k\) (trivial)

  2. \(\Rightarrow\)
    \(x \in F_k\)
    Check whether \(x \in E_i\) (\(1 \le i \le 2^n - 1\)), then \(x \in E_I = \bigcap_{r=1}^n G_{I,r}\) for some \(I\).
    Since \(G_{I,k} = F_k\), \(E_I \subset F_k\) and \(E_I = E_j^k\) for some \(j\).
    Thus, \(x \in \bigcup_j E_j^k\).

(4) \(\bigcup_{k=1}^n F_k = \bigcup_{i=1}^N E_i\)

  1. \(\Leftarrow\)
    \(x \in \bigcup_i E_i\), then there exists \(I \in N\) such that \(x \in E_I\) \((1 \le I \le N)\).
    Then, there is \(K \in N\) such that \(1 \le K \le n\) and \(E_I \subset F_K\).
    So \(x \in F_K\) and thus \(x \in \bigcup_{k=1}^n F_k\).

  2. \(\Rightarrow\)
    \(y \in \bigcup_{k=1}^n F_k\), so there exists \(K \in N\) such that \(y \in F_K\).
    Due to (3), \(F_K\) can be written as \(\bigcup_{i \in I_K} E_i\).
    Then, \(y \in E_i\) for some \(i\) \((1 \le i \le N)\).
    This leads to \(y \in \bigcup_{i=1}^N E_i\).

(5) conclusion

The collection \(\{E_i\}_{i=1}^N\) satisfies
\[ E_i \cap E_j = \varnothing \ (i \ne j), \quad F_k = \bigcup_{i \in I_k} E_i, \quad \text{and} \quad \bigcup_{k=1}^n F_k = \bigcup_{i=1}^N E_i. \]

2. If \(f\) is integrable on \(\mathbb{R}^d\) and \(\delta > 0\), then show that \(\|f(\delta x) - f(x)\|_1 \to 0\) as \(\delta \to 1\). (Let \(F(x) = f(\delta x)\))

proof

(1) continuous function \(g\) of compact support

For given \(\varepsilon > 0\), there is a continuous function \(g\) of compact support \(K\) such that \(\|f - g\|_1 < \varepsilon\).
Using this function, \(f^{(\delta)} - f\) can be written as \((f^{(\delta)} - g^{(\delta)}) + (g^{(\delta)} - g) + (g - f)\).
Then, \[ \|f^{(\delta)} - f\|_1 \le \|f^{(\delta)} - g^{(\delta)}\|_1 + \|g^{(\delta)} - g\|_1 + \|g - f\|_1 \]

(2) \(\|f^{(\delta)} - g^{(\delta)}\|_1\)

\[ \|f(\delta x) - g(\delta x)\|_1 = \delta^d \|f(x) - g(x)\|_1 \]

\(\delta^d\) is a continuous real function, so there is \(\beta_0 > 0\) such that \(|\delta - 1| < \beta_0\) implies \(\delta^d < 1\).
For such \(\delta\), \(\|f^{(\delta)} - g^{(\delta)}\|_1 < \|f - g\|_1\).

(3) \(\|g^{(\delta)} - g\|_1\)

1) Continuous \(g^{(\delta)}\)

Let \(\{x_n\}\) be a sequence in \(\mathbb{R}^d\) such that \(\lim_{n \to \infty} x_n = x\).
\(g\) is continuous on \(K\), so \(\lim_{n \to \infty} g(x_n) = g(x)\) by definition.
Then, \(\lim_{n \to \infty} g^{(\delta)}(x_n) = g^{(\delta)}(x)\) as well (PMA 4.2).
Note that \(g\) is supported on some \(B_R\), where \(K \subset B_R\).

2) \(g^{(\delta)}\) is supported on \(\overline{B_{DR}}\)

\(g^{(\delta)}(x) = g(\delta x)\) is continuous on a compact set \(\frac{1}{\delta} K \subset \overline{B_R}\).
Since \(\frac{1}{\delta} \to 1\) as \(\delta \to 1\), there is \(D > 1\) such that \(|\delta| \le D\) for all \(\delta\) near 1.
Then, \(g^{(\delta)}\) is supported on \(D \cdot \overline{B_R} = \overline{B_{DR}}\).

3) \(\|g_n - g\|_1 \to 0\)

\(g_n\) is a multiplication of measurable functions (\(g, \chi_{B_{R_n}}\)), so it is measurable.
\(|g_n| \le |g|\) and \(g\) is continuous on \(K\), so \(\exists M > 0\) such that \(|g| \le M\) and thus \(|g_n| \le M\).
\(g_n\) is supported on \(\overline{B_R}\) with finite measure.
\[ \lim_{n \to \infty} g_n = g \]
Thus, \(\lim_{n \to \infty} \|g_n - g\|_1 = 0\) (BCT).

4) \(\|g^{(\delta)} - g\|_1 \to 0\)

\(\lim_{\delta \to 1} g^{(\delta)} = g\) holds for all \(\{x_n\}\) such that \(\lim_{n \to \infty} \delta_n = 1\).
So, \(\lim_{\delta \to 1} \|g^{(\delta)} - g\|_1 = 0\).
For given \(\varepsilon > 0\), there is \(\beta_\varepsilon > 0\) s.t. \(|\delta - 1| < \beta_\varepsilon\) implies \(\|g^{(\delta)} - g\|_1 < \varepsilon\).

(4) \(\lim_{\delta \to 1} \|f^{(\delta)} - f\|_1 = 0\), conclusion

Let \(\beta = \min(\beta_0, \beta_\varepsilon)\).
Then, \[ \|f^{(\delta)} - f\|_1 \le \|f^{(\delta)} - g^{(\delta)}\|_1 + \|g^{(\delta)} - g\|_1 + \|f - g\|_1 < 3\varepsilon \quad \text{for } |\delta - 1| < \beta, \] and this holds for all \(\varepsilon > 0\).
Thus, \[ \lim_{\delta \to 1} \|f^{(\delta)} - f\|_1 = 0. \]

3. \(f\) is integrable on \([-\pi, \pi]\) and extended to \(\mathbb{R}\) by making it periodic of \(2\pi\). Then, show that \(\int_I f(x)\,dx = \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} f(x)\,dx\), where \(I\) is any interval of length \(2\pi\).

proof

(1)

\[\begin{align*} \int_0^{2\pi} f(x)\,dx - \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} f(x)\,dx &= \left\{ \int_0^{\pi} f(x)\,dx + \int_{\pi}^{2\pi} f(x)\,dx \right\} - \left\{ \int_{-\pi}^0 f(x)\,dx + \int_0^{\pi} f(x)\,dx \right\} \\ &= \int_{\pi}^{2\pi} f(x)\,dx - \int_{-\pi}^0 f(x)\,dx \\ &= \int_0^{\pi} f(x+\pi)\,dy - \int_0^{\pi} f(x)\,dx \quad (x = T + y) \\ &= \int_0^{\pi} f(y)\,dy - \int_0^{\pi} f(x)\,dx = 0 \end{align*}\]

(2)

Let \(T = 2\pi\). Then \[ \int_0^{2\pi} f(x)\,dx = \int_a^{a+2\pi} f(x)\,dx \] for all \(a \in \mathbb{R}\), and in particular \[ \int_0^{2\pi} f(x)\,dx = \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} f(x)\,dx \quad (a = -\pi). \] Thus, \[ \int_I f(x)\,dx = \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} f(x)\,dx \] for all intervals \(I\) with length \(2\pi\).

4. \(f\) is integrable on \([0,b]\) and \(g(x) = \int_0^x f(t)\,dt\) \((x \in (0,b])\). Show that \(g\) is integrable on \([0,b]\) and \(\int_0^b g(x)\,dx = \int_0^b f(t)(b-t)\,dt\).

proof

(1) \(h(t) = b - t\) is measurable \((t > 0)\)

If \(a \le 0\), \(\{t \mid h(t) < a\} = \varnothing\).
If \(a > 0\), \(\{t \mid h(t) < a\} = \{t \in \mathbb{R} : t > b - a\}\), which is open and consequently measurable.
Since \(\{t \mid h(t) < a\}\) is a measurable set for all \(a \in \mathbb{R}\), \(h\) is a measurable function.

(2) \(g\) is integrable on \([0,b]\)

\[\begin{align*} \int_0^b |g(x)|\,dx &= \int_0^b \left| \int_0^x f(t)\,dt \right| dx \le \int_0^b \int_0^x |f(t)|\,dt\,dx. \end{align*}\]

\(h(x,t) = |f(t)| \, \chi_{t < x}\) is measurable, and \(|f(t)|\) is measurable (since \(f\) is measurable),
so the sequence of the last integral can be changed (Thm 2.3.2(iii)):

\[\begin{align*} \int_0^b \int_0^x |f(t)|\,dt\,dx &= \int_0^b \int_t^b |f(t)|\,dx\,dt = \int_0^b |f(t)|(b - t)\,dt < \infty \end{align*}\]

(since \(f\) is integrable).
Thus, \(\int_0^b |g(x)|\,dx < \infty\), so \(g\) is integrable on \([0,b]\).

(3) conclusion

\[\begin{align*} \int_0^b g(x)\,dx &= \int_0^b \int_0^x f(t)\,dt\,dx \quad \text{(note that $0 \le t \le x \le b$)} \\ &= \int_0^b \int_t^b f(t)\,dx\,dt \quad (\text{since } f, h \text{ are measurable, Thm 2.3.2}) \\ &= \int_0^b f(t)(b - t)\,dt. \end{align*}\]

5. \(F\) is a closed set in \(\mathbb{R}\), where \(m(F) < \infty\). Let \(\delta(x) = d(x, F) = \inf\{|x - z| : z \in F\}\), and \(I(x) = \int_{\mathbb{R}} \frac{\delta(y)}{|x - y|^2} \, dy\).

(a) Show that \(\delta\) is continuous

proof

\(|\delta(x) - \delta(y)| \le |x - y|\) for \(x, y \in \mathbb{R}\)

For given \(\eta > 0\), there is \(z \in F\) such that \(|x - z| < \delta(x) + \eta\) (by definition of \(\delta\)).
Then, \[ \delta(x) \le |x - z| \le |x - y| + |y - z| < |x - y| + \delta(y) + \eta. \] So, \(\delta(x) - \delta(y) < |x - y| + \eta\).
Switching \(x\) and \(y\) yields \(\delta(y) - \delta(x) < |x - y| + \eta\).
Then, \(|\delta(x) - \delta(y)| < |x - y| + \eta\) holds for all \(\eta > 0\),
so \(|\delta(x) - \delta(y)| \le |x - y| \quad (x, y \in \mathbb{R})\).

\(\delta\) is continuous

Then, for every \(\varepsilon > 0\), \(|\delta(x) - \delta(y)| < \varepsilon\) holds if \(|x - y| < \varepsilon\).
Thus, \(\delta\) is (uniformly) continuous on \(\mathbb{R}\).

(b) Show that \(I(x) = \infty\) for \(x \in F^c\)

proof

\(\delta(x) = 2\varepsilon > 0\)

\(d(x, F) = 0\) implies \(x \in \overline{F} = F\).
So, \(d(x, F) > 0\) if \(x \notin F\).
Let \(\delta(x) = 2\varepsilon > 0\).

\(\delta(y) > \varepsilon\)

Consider the interval \(|y - x| < \varepsilon\): \(x - \varepsilon < y < x + \varepsilon\).
This leads to \(|\delta(y) - \delta(x)| < \varepsilon\) due to (a).
Then, \(\delta(y) > \delta(x) - \varepsilon = \varepsilon\) holds.

\(I(x) = \infty\), conclusion

Then, \[ I(x) = \int_{\mathbb{R}} \frac{\delta(y)}{|x - y|^2} \, dy \ge \int_{x - \varepsilon}^{x + \varepsilon} \frac{\delta(y)}{|x - y|^2} \, dy \ge \varepsilon \int_{x - \varepsilon}^{x + \varepsilon} \frac{1}{|x - y|^2} \, dy. \] (Let \(y - x = t \Rightarrow dy = dt\))

\[\begin{align*} I(x) &\ge \varepsilon \int_{-\varepsilon}^{\varepsilon} \frac{dt}{t^2} = \varepsilon \left[ -\frac{1}{t} \right]_{-\varepsilon}^{\varepsilon} = \varepsilon \left( \frac{1}{\varepsilon} + \frac{1}{\varepsilon} \right) = \infty. \end{align*}\]

Thus, \(I(x) = \infty\) for \(x \notin F\).

(c) Show that \(I(x) < \infty\) for a.e. \(x \in F\): \(\int_F I(x)\,dx < \infty\).

proof

\(\delta(y)\) is a measurable function

We’ve shown in Ch1 Ex13 that \(\{y \in \mathbb{R} : d(y,F) < a\} = \{y \in \mathbb{R} : \delta(y) < a\}\) is an open set in \(\mathbb{R}\) for \(a > 0\).
\(\{y \mid \delta(y) < a\} = \varnothing\) when \(a \le 0\), so \(\{y \mid \delta(y) < a\}\) is a measurable set for all \(a \in \mathbb{R}\).
So, \(\delta\) is a measurable function on \(\mathbb{R}\).

\(h(y) = \frac{1}{|x - y|^2}\) is a measurable function on \(\mathbb{R}\)

\(\{y \mid h(y) < a\} = \varnothing\) when \(a \le 0\).
When \(a > 0\), \(\{y \mid h(y) < a\} = \{y \in \mathbb{R} : \frac{1}{|x - y|^2} < a\} = \{y \in \mathbb{R} : |x - y| > \frac{1}{\sqrt{a}}\} = (x - \infty, x - \frac{1}{\sqrt{a}}) \cup (x + \frac{1}{\sqrt{a}}, \infty)\),
a union of open sets, which is open.
Since \(\{y \mid h(y) < a\}\) is measurable for all \(a \in \mathbb{R}\), \(h(y) = \frac{1}{|x - y|^2}\) is a measurable function.

③ If \(f(x)\) is measurable, then \(f(x + b)\) is measurable (\(b \in \mathbb{R}\))

\(f_b(x) = f(x + b)\).
\(\{x \mid f_b(x) < a\} = \{x \in \mathbb{R} : f(x + b) < a\} = \{y \in \mathbb{R} : f(y) < a\} - b = b + \{f(x) < a\}\).
Since \(\{f(x) < a\}\) is measurable, \(f_b(x)\) is measurable (translation invariance).
This holds for all \(a > 0\), so \(f_b\) is measurable.

\(\int_F I(x)\,dx = \iint_{F \times \mathbb{R}} \frac{\delta(y)}{|x - y|^2} \, dy\,dx\)

Then, \[ \int_F I(x)\,dx = \int_F \int_{\mathbb{R}} \frac{\delta(y)}{|x - y|^2} \, dy\,dx. \] \(\delta(y)\) is measurable (by ①), \(\frac{1}{|x - y|^2}\) is also measurable (by ②, ③),
so their multiplication \(\frac{\delta(y)}{|x - y|^2}\) is measurable and non-negative.
Hence, by Tonelli’s Theorem,
\[ \int_F \int_{\mathbb{R}} \frac{\delta(y)}{|x - y|^2} \, dy\,dx = \int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_F \frac{\delta(y)}{|x - y|^2} \, dx\,dy. \]

\(\int_F \int_{\mathbb{R}} \frac{\delta(y)}{|x - y|^2} \, dy\,dx= \int_F \delta(y) \int_{\mathbb{R}} \frac{1}{|x - y|^2} \, dx\,dy\)

When \(y \in F\), \(\delta(y) = 0\). So, \[ \int_F \int_{\mathbb{R}} \frac{\delta(y)}{|x - y|^2} \, dy\,dx = \int_F \delta(y) \int_{\mathbb{R}} \frac{1}{|x - y|^2} \, dx\,dy. \]

6.

(a) Show that there is a positive continuous function \(f\) on \(\mathbb{R}\) such that \(f\) is integrable on \(\mathbb{R}\) but \(\limsup_{x \to \infty} f(x) = \infty\).

proof

\(f(x)\) is defined as follows:

\[ f(x) = \begin{cases} e^x, & (-\infty < x < 0) \\ 1, & (0 \le x < 1) \\ \text{straight line from } (n - \frac{1}{n^2}, 1) \text{ to } (n, n), & (n - \frac{1}{n^2} \le x < n), \, n \ge 2 \\ \text{straight line from } (n, n) \text{ to } (n + \frac{1}{n^2}, 1), & (n \le x < n + \frac{1}{n^2}), \, n \ge 2 \\ \frac{1}{x^2}, & \text{(otherwise)} \end{cases} \]

It is obvious that \(f\) is continuous on \(\mathbb{R}\) (by construction).
\(\int_{-\infty}^0 f(x)\,dx = \int_{-\infty}^0 e^x\,dx = 1\), and \(\int_0^1 f(x)\,dx = 1\),
so it is enough to consider the case \(x \ge 1\) for integrability.

The area between \(f(x)\) and the \(x\)-axis when \(x \ge 1\) is overlaid by two regions:
one of them is made by \(y = \frac{1}{x^2}\), and the other is a triangle centered at \(n \in \mathbb{N}\)
with height \(n\) and base \(\frac{2}{n^2}\).
The area of each triangle is \(\frac{1}{n^3}\), so

\[ \int_1^\infty f(x)\,dx \le \int_1^\infty \frac{1}{x^2}\,dx + \sum_{n=2}^\infty \frac{1}{n^3} < \infty. \]

To sum up, \(\int_{-\infty}^\infty |f(x)|\,dx\) is finite, so \(f\) is integrable.

However, \(f(n) = n\) for \(n \in \mathbb{N}\) while \(f(x) = \frac{1}{x^2}\) for \(x \in [n + \frac{1}{n^2}, n + \frac{1}{(n+1)^2})\) \((x \ge 1, n \ge 2)\).
So, \(\limsup_{x \to \infty} f(x) = \infty\), while \(\liminf_{x \to \infty} f(x) = 0\).

(b) \(f\) is uniformly continuous on \(\mathbb{R}\) and integrable, then show that \(\lim_{|x| \to \infty} f(x) = 0\).

proof

① Assume \(\limsup_{x \to \infty} f(x) \ne 0\)

This proof will cover the case \(\limsup_{x \to \infty} f(x) = 0\) first,
and then the other case \(\liminf_{x \to \infty} f(x) = 0\) can be proved similarly.
To start with, let us assume that \(\limsup_{x \to \infty} f(x) \ne 0\).

\(|f(x_k)| \ge 2\varepsilon\) for \(k \in \mathbb{N}\)

Since \(\limsup_{x \to \infty} f(x) \ne 0\), for every non-negative sequence \(\{y_n\}\) with \(y_n \to \infty\),
there is \(\varepsilon > 0\) such that for every \(k \in \mathbb{N}\) there is \(n_k \ge k\) with \(|f(y_{n_k})| > 2\varepsilon\) (PMA 3.1).

Among those \(n_k\)’s with \(y_{n_k} > 1\), choose \(\{n_k\}\) with \(y_{n_k} > y_{n_{k+1}} + 1\).
(If such \(n_k\) does not exist, \(y_{n_k} \le y_{n_{k+1}}\) for all \(k\) so \(\{y_{n_k}\}\) becomes a bounded sequence,
which is a contradiction to \(y_n \to \infty\).)
Let \(x_k = y_{n_k}\), then \(|f(x_k)| \ge 2\varepsilon\) for \(k \in \mathbb{N}\).

\(|f(x)| > \varepsilon\)

\(f\) is uniformly continuous, so there is \(\delta_\varepsilon > 0\) such that \(|t - s| < \delta_\varepsilon\) implies \(|f(t) - f(s)| < \varepsilon\).
Let \(\delta = \min(\frac{1}{2}, \delta_\varepsilon)\). Then \(|x - x_k| < \delta\) implies
\(|f(x_k)| - |f(x)| < \varepsilon\), so \(|f(x)| > |f(x_k)| - \varepsilon \ge 2\varepsilon - \varepsilon = \varepsilon\).

\(\int_0^\infty |f(x)|\,dx = \infty\), conclusion.

Then, \[\int_0^\infty |f(x)|\,dx \ge \sum_{k=1}^\infty \int_{x_k - \delta}^{x_k + \delta} |f(x)|\,dx > \sum_{k=1}^\infty \varepsilon \cdot \int_{x_k - \delta}^{x_k + \delta} dx = \sum_{k=1}^\infty \varepsilon \cdot 2\delta = \infty.\]

This means \(f\) is not integrable, so it is a contradiction.
Thus, \(\lim_{x \to \infty} f(x) = 0\) for such \(f\).

7. Let \(\Gamma = \{(x, f(x)) : x \in \mathbb{R}^d\}\) be a graph of measurable function \(f\) on \(\mathbb{R}^d\). Show that \(\Gamma\) is a measurable set and \(m(\Gamma) = 0\).

proof

① Definition of \(Q_n\), \(G_n\), and \(F_{k,n}\), with \(f: Q_n \to \mathbb{R}\)

Let \(Q_n\) be a closed cube in \(\mathbb{R}^d\) centered at the origin with side length \(n \in \mathbb{N}\),
\[ G_n = \{(x, f(x)) : x \in Q_n\} \subset \Gamma, \] and \[ F_{k,n} = G_n \cap (Q_n \times [k, k+1)) = \{(x, f(x)) : x \in Q_n, \, k \le f(x) < k+1\} \subset G_n. \]

This proof starts with \(F_{n,0} = G_n \cap (Q_n \times [0,1))\) to show that \(m(F_{n,0}) = 0\).
Also, \(f\) is restricted to a measurable function on \(Q_n\) (\(f: Q_n \to \mathbb{R}\)).

\(m(G_n \cap (Q_n \times I_{i,\ell})) = \frac{1}{\ell} m(f^{-1}(I_{i,\ell}))\)

For fixed \(\ell \in \mathbb{N}\), let \(I_{i,\ell} = [\frac{i}{\ell}, \frac{i+1}{\ell})\) \((i = 0, 1, \dots, \ell - 1)\).
This is a partition of \([0,1)\).

\[ f^{-1}(I_{i,\ell}) = \{x \in Q_n : f(x) \in I_{i,\ell}\}, \] and \[ G_n \cap (Q_n \times I_{i,\ell}) = \{(x, f(x)) : x \in Q_n, \, f(x) \in I_{i,\ell}\} = f^{-1}(I_{i,\ell}) \times I_{i,\ell}. \]

\(f^{-1}(I_{i,\ell})\) is measurable, so \(m(f^{-1}(I_{i,\ell}) \times I_{i,\ell}) = \frac{1}{\ell} m(f^{-1}(I_{i,\ell}))\) (Prop 2.3.6).
Thus, \[ m(G_n \cap (Q_n \times I_{i,\ell})) = \frac{1}{\ell} m(f^{-1}(I_{i,\ell})). \]

\(m(F_{n,0}) = \frac{1}{\ell} m\left(\bigcup_{i=0}^{\ell-1} f^{-1}(I_{i,\ell})\right)\)

\[ \bigcup_{i=0}^{\ell-1} (G_n \cap (Q_n \times I_{i,\ell})) = G_n \cap \bigcup_{i=0}^{\ell-1} (Q_n \times I_{i,\ell}) = G_n \cap (Q_n \times [0,1)) = F_{n,0}, \] and each \(G_n \cap (Q_n \times I_{i,\ell})\) is disjoint w.r.t. \(i\).
So, \[\begin{align*} m(F_{n,0}) &= \sum_{i=0}^{\ell-1} m(G_n \cap (Q_n \times I_{i,\ell})) \\ &= \frac{1}{\ell} \sum_{i=0}^{\ell-1} m(f^{-1}(I_{i,\ell})). \end{align*}\]

Each \(f^{-1}(I_{i,\ell})\) is disjoint w.r.t. \(i\) and measurable,
so \[ \frac{1}{\ell} \sum_{i=0}^{\ell-1} m(f^{-1}(I_{i,\ell})) = \frac{1}{\ell} m\left(\bigcup_{i=0}^{\ell-1} f^{-1}(I_{i,\ell})\right). \]

\(A = \bigcup_i A_i\) (\(A_i \subset \mathbb{R}\)), then \(f^{-1}(A) = \bigcup_i f^{-1}(A_i)\)

\(x \in f^{-1}(A) \Leftrightarrow f(x) \in A \Leftrightarrow \exists i \in \mathbb{N}\) s.t. \(f(x) \in A_i \Leftrightarrow x \in f^{-1}(A_i) \Leftrightarrow x \in \bigcup_i f^{-1}(A_i)\).

\(m(F_{n,k}) = 0\) for all \(k \in \mathbb{Z}\)

Using the result of ④,

\[ \frac{1}{\ell} m\left(\bigcup_{i=0}^{\ell-1} f^{-1}(I_{i,\ell})\right) = \frac{1}{\ell} m(f^{-1}([0,1))) \le \frac{1}{\ell} m(Q_n) \quad (\because f^{-1}([0,1)) = \{x \in Q_n : f(x) \in [0,1)\} \subset Q_n) = \frac{1}{\ell} n^d. \]

To sum up, \(m(F_{n,0}) \le \frac{1}{\ell} n^d\) and this holds for all \(\ell \in \mathbb{N}\).
So \(m(F_{n,0}) = 0\).
Using the same logic, \(F_{n,k}\) has measure 0 for all \(k \in \mathbb{Z}\).

\(\bigcup_{k \in \mathbb{Z}} F_{n,k} = G_n\)

\[ \bigcup_{k \in \mathbb{Z}} F_{n,k} = \bigcup_{k \in \mathbb{Z}} G_n \cap (Q_n \times [k, k+1)) = G_n \cap (Q_n \times \mathbb{R}) = G_n. \]

\(\Gamma = \bigcup_{n=1}^{\infty} G_n\)

\(x \in \bigcup_{n=1}^{\infty} G_n\):
\(x \in G_n\) for some \(n \in \mathbb{N}\).
Since \(G_n \subset \Gamma\) for all \(n \in \mathbb{N}\), \(x \in \Gamma\).

Conversely, \(x = (x, f(x)) \in \Gamma\), there is \(N \in \mathbb{N}\) such that \(-N < |x| < N\).
Hence \(x \in G_N\), thus \(x \in \bigcup_{n=1}^{\infty} G_n\).

\(m(G_n) = 0 \Rightarrow m(\Gamma) = 0\)

\(F_{n,k}\) is disjoint w.r.t. \(k\), so \(m(G_n) = \sum_{k \in \mathbb{Z}} m(F_{n,k}) = 0\).

Thus, \[ m(\Gamma) = \lim_{n \to \infty} m(G_n) = \lim_{n \to \infty} 0 = 0 \quad (\because G_n \subset G_{n+1}, \, \forall n). \]

8. \(f\) is integrable on \(\mathbb{R}\), then show that \(F(x) = \int_{-\infty}^x f(t)\,dt\) is uniformly continuous.

proof

For given \(\varepsilon > 0\), there is \(\delta > 0\) such that \(m(E) < \delta\) implies \(\int_E |f(t)|\,dt < \varepsilon\)
(Prop 2.1.12(ii), absolute continuity).

Choose \(x, y \in \mathbb{R}\) with \(x < y\) and \(x - y < \delta\). Then, \[ |F(y) - F(x)| = \left|\int_x^y f(t)\,dt\right| \le \int_x^y |f(t)|\,dt < \varepsilon \quad (\because |x - y| < \delta). \] This holds for all \(\varepsilon > 0\), so \(F(x)\) is uniformly continuous on \(\mathbb{R}\).

9. (Chebyshev inequality) Let \(f \ge 0\) and integrable. If \(\alpha > 0\) and \(E_\alpha = \{x : f(x) > \alpha\}\), show that \(m(E_\alpha) \le \frac{1}{\alpha} \int f\).

proof

\(\alpha \cdot \chi_{E_\alpha}(x) \le f(x)\)

If \(x \in E_\alpha\), then \(f(x) > \alpha\).
Since \(\chi_{E_\alpha}(x) = 1\), \(\alpha \chi_{E_\alpha}(x) < f(x)\).
If \(x \notin E_\alpha\), then \(\chi_{E_\alpha}(x) = 0\).
Since \(f\) is non-negative, \(f(x) \ge 0 = \alpha \cdot \chi_{E_\alpha}(x)\).

Conclusion

Then, \[ \alpha \int \chi_{E_\alpha} = \alpha \cdot m(E_\alpha) \le \int f. \] Thus, \[ m(E_\alpha) \le \frac{1}{\alpha} \int f. \]

10. \(f \ge 0\), \(E_k = \{x : f(x) \ge 2^k\}\), and \(F_k = \{x : 2^k < f(x) \le 2^{k+1}\}\) on \(\mathbb{R}^d\).

(1) If \(f < \infty\) a.e., then show that \(\bigcup_{k=-\infty}^{\infty} F_k = \{x : 0 < f(x) < \infty\}\).

proof

\(\Rightarrow\) (trivial)

\(\exists k \in \mathbb{Z}\) s.t. \(x \in F_k\), then \(2^k < f(x) \le 2^{k+1}\).
So \(x \in \{x : 0 < f(x) < \infty\}\).

\(\Leftarrow\)

There uniquely exists \(y \in \mathbb{R}\) s.t. \(f(y) = 2^x\), since \(y \mapsto 2^y\) is 1–1 correspondence.
Then, there is \(k \in \mathbb{Z}\) such that \(k < x \le k+1\).
Thus, \(y \in F_k\) and \(y \in \bigcup_k F_k\).

(2) Show that \(f\) is integrable iff \(\sum_{k=-\infty}^{\infty} 2^k m(F_k) < \infty\).

proof

\(g \le f \le h\) for some \(g, h\).

Let \(g(x) = \sum_{k=-\infty}^{\infty} 2^k \chi_{F_k}(x)\).
When \(x \in F_k\) (\(k \in \mathbb{Z}\)), \(g(x) = 2^k\), while \(2^k < f(x) \le 2^{k+1}\).
So \(g(x) < f(x)\) and this holds for all \(k \in \mathbb{Z}\).

Let \(h(x) = \sum_{k=-\infty}^{\infty} 2^{k+1} \chi_{F_k}(x)\).
When \(x \in F_k\), \(h(x) = 2^{k+1}\) and \(2^k < f(x) \le 2^{k+1}\).
So \(f(x) \le h(x)\) and this holds for all \(k \in \mathbb{Z}\).

② conclusion

When \(\int f(x)\,dx < \infty\), \[ \int g(x)\,dx = \sum 2^k m(F_k) < \int f(x)\,dx < \infty. \] In reverse, \[ \sum 2^k m(F_k) \le \int g(x)\,dx = \frac{1}{2} \int h(x)\,dx < \infty \] means \(\int f(x)\,dx < \infty\).
So \(f\) is integrable.

(3) Show that \(f\) is integrable iff \(\sum_{k=-\infty}^{\infty} 2^k m(E_k) < \infty\).

proof

\(\phi\) with \(f \le \phi \le 2f\)

Let \(\phi(x) = \sum_{k=-\infty}^{\infty} 2^k \chi_{E_k}(x)\).
When \(2^k < f(x) \le 2^{k+1}\),
\[ \phi(x) = \sum_{i=-\infty}^k 2^i = 2^{k+1} - 1 < 2^{k+1}. \] So \(f(x) \le \phi(x)\).
Since \(2^k < 2f(x)\), \(\phi(x) \le 2f(x)\).

② conclusion

If \(\int f(x)\,dx < \infty\), then \(\int \phi(x)\,dx < \infty\) (\(\because \phi \le 2f\)).
So \(\sum 2^k m(E_k) = \sum 2^k \int \chi_{E_k}(x)\,dx < \infty\).
Conversely, \(\sum 2^k m(E_k) < \infty\) means \(\phi(x) < \infty\) and \(f \le \phi\),
so \(\int f(x)\,dx < \infty\).

(4) Let \(f(x) = \begin{cases} |x|^{-\alpha}, & |x| \le 1 \\0, & \text{o.w.} \end{cases}\) Then \(f\) is integrable on \(\mathbb{R}^d\) if \(\alpha < d\).

proof The case \(\alpha \le 0\) is trivial, so the following will cover \(\alpha > 0\).

\(E_k\) (\(k = -1, k \ge 0\))

\(f(x) \ge 1\) for all \(x\) with \(|x| \le 1\),
so \(E_{-1} = \{x : |x| \le 1\}\) for \(k = -1\).
Then \(m(E_{-1}) = v_d\).

When \(k \ge 0\), \(|x|^{-\alpha} > 2^k\) is same as \(|x| < 2^{-k/\alpha}\).
So \(E_k = \{x : |x| < 2^{-k/\alpha}\}\) and
\(m(E_k) = v_d \cdot 2^{-kd/\alpha}\).

Conclusion

\[ \sum_{k=-\infty}^{\infty} 2^k m(E_k) = \sum_{k=-1}^{\infty} 2^k v_d + \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} 2^k v_d 2^{-kd/\alpha}. \]

\(v_d \sum_{k=-1}^{\infty} 2^k = v_d\) is convergent.
The series \(\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} 2^{k(1 - d/\alpha)}\) converges when \(1 - \frac{d}{\alpha} < 0\), i.e. \(\alpha < d\).
So \(\alpha < d\) implies \(\sum 2^k m(E_k)\) converges, so \(f\) is integrable.
Reversely, if \(\int f < \infty\), then \(\sum 2^k m(E_k)\) converges and thus \(\alpha < d\).

(5) Let \(f(x) = \begin{cases}|x|^{-b}, & |x| \ge 1 \ (b > 0) \\0, & \text{o.w.}\end{cases}\) Then \(f\) is integrable iff \(b > d\).

proof

\(E_k\) (\(k \ge 0, k \le -1\))

When \(k \ge 0\), there is no \(x \in \mathbb{R}^d\) such that \(f(x) > 2^k\).
So \(E_k = \varnothing\) and \(m(E_k) = 0\).

When \(k \le -1\), \(|x|^{-b} > 2^k\) means \(|x| < 2^{-k/b}\).
So \(E_k = \{x : |x| < 2^{-k/b}\}\) and
\(m(E_k) = v_d \cdot 2^{-kd/b}\).

Conclusion

\[ \sum_{k=-\infty}^{\infty} 2^k m(E_k) = \sum_{k=-\infty}^{0} 2^k v_d 2^{-kd/b} = v_d \sum_{k=-\infty}^{0} 2^{k(1 - d/b)}. \]

This series converges if \((1 - \frac{d}{b}) > 0\), i.e. \(b > d\).
So \(b > d\) implies \(\int f < \infty\).
Reversely, \(\int f < \infty\) implies \(b > d\).

11.

(1) \(f\) is integrable on \(\mathbb{R}^d\), real-valued, and \(\int_E f \ge 0\) for every measurable set \(E\). Then, show that \(f(x) \ge 0\) a.e. \(x \in \mathbb{R}^d\).

proof We’ll assume that \(m(\{f < 0\}) > 0\) and yield a contradiction.

\(\{f < 0\} = \bigcup_{n=1}^{\infty} \{f \le -\frac{1}{n}\}\)

If \(x \in \{f \le -1\}\), then \(x \in \{f \le -1\}\).
When \(-1 < f(x) < 0\), there is \(N \in \mathbb{N}\) such that \(-\frac{1}{N} < f(x) \le -\frac{1}{N-1}\) \((N \ge 2)\).
Then, \(x \in \{f \le -\frac{1}{N}\}\), so \(x \in \bigcup_{n=1}^{\infty} \{f \le -\frac{1}{n}\}\).
If \(x \in \bigcup_{n=1}^{\infty} \{f \le -\frac{1}{n}\}\), then there is \(N \in \mathbb{N}\) such that \(f(x) \le -\frac{1}{N} < 0\),
so \(x \in \{f < 0\}\).

\(m(E_N) > 0\), conclusion

Using sub-additivity, \[ m(\{f < 0\}) \le \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} m(\{f \le -\tfrac{1}{n}\}) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} m(E_n). \] The measure of \(\{f < 0\}\) is assumed to be positive,
so there is \(N \in \mathbb{N}\) such that \(m(E_N) > 0\).
(If not, \(m(\{f < 0\}) \le \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} m(E_n) = 0\).)
Note that \(E_N\) is a measurable set.

Then, \[ \int_{E_N} f(x)\,dx = \int f(x) \chi_{E_N}(x)\,dx \le -\tfrac{1}{N} \int \chi_{E_N}(x)\,dx = -\tfrac{1}{N} m(E_N) < 0, \] a contradiction.

(2) \(\int_E f(x)\,dx = 0\) for every measurable set \(E\), then show that \(f = 0\) a.e. \(x\).

proof

\(\int_E f = 0\) means \(\int_E f \ge 0\) and \(\int_E f \le 0\) simultaneously.
\(\int_E (-f) \ge 0\) means \((-f) \ge 0\) a.e. \(x\), which is \(f \le 0\) a.e. \(x\).
Since \(f \ge 0\) a.e. \(x\), \(f = 0\) a.e. \(x\).