Borel measurable function (Hausdorff dimension)












0














Let $sgeq0$ be a real number and $f:mathbb{R^n} to [0,infty)$ a Borel measurable function.



How to show:



$0<int_{mathbb{R^n}}f dmathcal{H^s}<infty Rightarrow$ dim$_mathcal{H}(mathbb{R^n}$ $f^{-1}(0))=s$.



To show this implication I tried:



Since $int_{mathbb{R^n}}f dmathcal{H^s}$ is finite there is a $A>0$ and for every countable cover $mathcal{B}$ of $mathbb{R}^n$ it's $text{diam}(A)>deltaforall Ainmathcal{B}$.



So: $sumlimits_{Ainmathcal{B}}text{diam}(A)^s=infty Rightarrow dim_mathcal{H}(mathbb{R}^n)=0$



I'm not sure if this is correct so far and how to conclude that the Hausdorff Dimension is



dim$_mathcal{H}(mathbb{R^n}$ $f^{-1}(0))=s$ from here.










share|cite|improve this question



























    0














    Let $sgeq0$ be a real number and $f:mathbb{R^n} to [0,infty)$ a Borel measurable function.



    How to show:



    $0<int_{mathbb{R^n}}f dmathcal{H^s}<infty Rightarrow$ dim$_mathcal{H}(mathbb{R^n}$ $f^{-1}(0))=s$.



    To show this implication I tried:



    Since $int_{mathbb{R^n}}f dmathcal{H^s}$ is finite there is a $A>0$ and for every countable cover $mathcal{B}$ of $mathbb{R}^n$ it's $text{diam}(A)>deltaforall Ainmathcal{B}$.



    So: $sumlimits_{Ainmathcal{B}}text{diam}(A)^s=infty Rightarrow dim_mathcal{H}(mathbb{R}^n)=0$



    I'm not sure if this is correct so far and how to conclude that the Hausdorff Dimension is



    dim$_mathcal{H}(mathbb{R^n}$ $f^{-1}(0))=s$ from here.










    share|cite|improve this question

























      0












      0








      0







      Let $sgeq0$ be a real number and $f:mathbb{R^n} to [0,infty)$ a Borel measurable function.



      How to show:



      $0<int_{mathbb{R^n}}f dmathcal{H^s}<infty Rightarrow$ dim$_mathcal{H}(mathbb{R^n}$ $f^{-1}(0))=s$.



      To show this implication I tried:



      Since $int_{mathbb{R^n}}f dmathcal{H^s}$ is finite there is a $A>0$ and for every countable cover $mathcal{B}$ of $mathbb{R}^n$ it's $text{diam}(A)>deltaforall Ainmathcal{B}$.



      So: $sumlimits_{Ainmathcal{B}}text{diam}(A)^s=infty Rightarrow dim_mathcal{H}(mathbb{R}^n)=0$



      I'm not sure if this is correct so far and how to conclude that the Hausdorff Dimension is



      dim$_mathcal{H}(mathbb{R^n}$ $f^{-1}(0))=s$ from here.










      share|cite|improve this question













      Let $sgeq0$ be a real number and $f:mathbb{R^n} to [0,infty)$ a Borel measurable function.



      How to show:



      $0<int_{mathbb{R^n}}f dmathcal{H^s}<infty Rightarrow$ dim$_mathcal{H}(mathbb{R^n}$ $f^{-1}(0))=s$.



      To show this implication I tried:



      Since $int_{mathbb{R^n}}f dmathcal{H^s}$ is finite there is a $A>0$ and for every countable cover $mathcal{B}$ of $mathbb{R}^n$ it's $text{diam}(A)>deltaforall Ainmathcal{B}$.



      So: $sumlimits_{Ainmathcal{B}}text{diam}(A)^s=infty Rightarrow dim_mathcal{H}(mathbb{R}^n)=0$



      I'm not sure if this is correct so far and how to conclude that the Hausdorff Dimension is



      dim$_mathcal{H}(mathbb{R^n}$ $f^{-1}(0))=s$ from here.







      measure-theory






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Nov 28 '18 at 16:42









      Olsgur

      444




      444






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          0














          You'll find it's easier to proceed if you work using general measure theory techniques for this problem, rather than trying to work from first principles. This is especially because we are given some information about $f$ in terms of the $mathcal{H}^s$ measure, so you want to exploit that.



          Recall that for any $A subset mathbb R^n,$
          $$ dim_{mathcal{H}} A = inf{s>0 : mathcal{H}^s(A) = 0 }. $$
          It is known that if $dim_{mathcal{H}} A = s,$ then $mathcal{H}^{s+varepsilon}(A) = 0$ and $mathcal{H}^{s-varepsilon}(A) = +infty.$ So if it happens that $mathcal{H}^s(A) in (0,infty),$ then we can conclude that $dim_{mathcal{H}} A = s.$ This is the key property of the Hausdorff dimension that we will use here.



          The lower bound is quite easy, using the fact that the given integral is positve. If we set $A = mathbb R^n setminus f^{-1}(0),$ then since $f$ vanishes outside $A$ by definition we get,
          $$ int_A f,mathrm{d}mathcal{H}^s = int_{mathbb R^n} f,mathrm{d}mathcal{H}^s > 0. $$
          Then we get that $f$ is not $mathcal{H}^s$-almost everywhere zero, so we get $mathcal{H}^s(A) > 0.$ Note that we did not use any special property of the Hausdorff measure; this argument goes through for a general measure $mu.$ We conclude that $dim_{mathcal H} A geq s.$



          The upper bound requires a bit more work. We can first try to estimate the $mathcal{H}^s$ measure of $A = mathbb R^n setminus f^{-1}(0),$ but this might not be finite in general. We can however consider
          $$ A_k = { x in mathbb R^n : f(x) > 1/k },$$
          so then $A = bigcup_{k geq 1} A_k.$ By Markov's inequality, for each $k$ we have,
          $$ frac1k mathcal{H}^s(A_k) leq int_{mathbb R^n} f,mathrm{d}mathcal{H}^s < infty. $$
          So $dim_{mathcal{H}} A_k leq s$ for each $k.$ Then for each $varepsilon > 0,$ we have $mathcal{H}^{s+varepsilon}(A_k) = infty$ so we conclude that each $mathcal{H}^{s+varepsilon}(A) = infty$ by countable subadditivity. Hence $dim_{mathcal{H}} A leq s$ so the result follows.






          share|cite|improve this answer





















            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            });
            });
            }, "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "69"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3017360%2fborel-measurable-function-hausdorff-dimension%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            0














            You'll find it's easier to proceed if you work using general measure theory techniques for this problem, rather than trying to work from first principles. This is especially because we are given some information about $f$ in terms of the $mathcal{H}^s$ measure, so you want to exploit that.



            Recall that for any $A subset mathbb R^n,$
            $$ dim_{mathcal{H}} A = inf{s>0 : mathcal{H}^s(A) = 0 }. $$
            It is known that if $dim_{mathcal{H}} A = s,$ then $mathcal{H}^{s+varepsilon}(A) = 0$ and $mathcal{H}^{s-varepsilon}(A) = +infty.$ So if it happens that $mathcal{H}^s(A) in (0,infty),$ then we can conclude that $dim_{mathcal{H}} A = s.$ This is the key property of the Hausdorff dimension that we will use here.



            The lower bound is quite easy, using the fact that the given integral is positve. If we set $A = mathbb R^n setminus f^{-1}(0),$ then since $f$ vanishes outside $A$ by definition we get,
            $$ int_A f,mathrm{d}mathcal{H}^s = int_{mathbb R^n} f,mathrm{d}mathcal{H}^s > 0. $$
            Then we get that $f$ is not $mathcal{H}^s$-almost everywhere zero, so we get $mathcal{H}^s(A) > 0.$ Note that we did not use any special property of the Hausdorff measure; this argument goes through for a general measure $mu.$ We conclude that $dim_{mathcal H} A geq s.$



            The upper bound requires a bit more work. We can first try to estimate the $mathcal{H}^s$ measure of $A = mathbb R^n setminus f^{-1}(0),$ but this might not be finite in general. We can however consider
            $$ A_k = { x in mathbb R^n : f(x) > 1/k },$$
            so then $A = bigcup_{k geq 1} A_k.$ By Markov's inequality, for each $k$ we have,
            $$ frac1k mathcal{H}^s(A_k) leq int_{mathbb R^n} f,mathrm{d}mathcal{H}^s < infty. $$
            So $dim_{mathcal{H}} A_k leq s$ for each $k.$ Then for each $varepsilon > 0,$ we have $mathcal{H}^{s+varepsilon}(A_k) = infty$ so we conclude that each $mathcal{H}^{s+varepsilon}(A) = infty$ by countable subadditivity. Hence $dim_{mathcal{H}} A leq s$ so the result follows.






            share|cite|improve this answer


























              0














              You'll find it's easier to proceed if you work using general measure theory techniques for this problem, rather than trying to work from first principles. This is especially because we are given some information about $f$ in terms of the $mathcal{H}^s$ measure, so you want to exploit that.



              Recall that for any $A subset mathbb R^n,$
              $$ dim_{mathcal{H}} A = inf{s>0 : mathcal{H}^s(A) = 0 }. $$
              It is known that if $dim_{mathcal{H}} A = s,$ then $mathcal{H}^{s+varepsilon}(A) = 0$ and $mathcal{H}^{s-varepsilon}(A) = +infty.$ So if it happens that $mathcal{H}^s(A) in (0,infty),$ then we can conclude that $dim_{mathcal{H}} A = s.$ This is the key property of the Hausdorff dimension that we will use here.



              The lower bound is quite easy, using the fact that the given integral is positve. If we set $A = mathbb R^n setminus f^{-1}(0),$ then since $f$ vanishes outside $A$ by definition we get,
              $$ int_A f,mathrm{d}mathcal{H}^s = int_{mathbb R^n} f,mathrm{d}mathcal{H}^s > 0. $$
              Then we get that $f$ is not $mathcal{H}^s$-almost everywhere zero, so we get $mathcal{H}^s(A) > 0.$ Note that we did not use any special property of the Hausdorff measure; this argument goes through for a general measure $mu.$ We conclude that $dim_{mathcal H} A geq s.$



              The upper bound requires a bit more work. We can first try to estimate the $mathcal{H}^s$ measure of $A = mathbb R^n setminus f^{-1}(0),$ but this might not be finite in general. We can however consider
              $$ A_k = { x in mathbb R^n : f(x) > 1/k },$$
              so then $A = bigcup_{k geq 1} A_k.$ By Markov's inequality, for each $k$ we have,
              $$ frac1k mathcal{H}^s(A_k) leq int_{mathbb R^n} f,mathrm{d}mathcal{H}^s < infty. $$
              So $dim_{mathcal{H}} A_k leq s$ for each $k.$ Then for each $varepsilon > 0,$ we have $mathcal{H}^{s+varepsilon}(A_k) = infty$ so we conclude that each $mathcal{H}^{s+varepsilon}(A) = infty$ by countable subadditivity. Hence $dim_{mathcal{H}} A leq s$ so the result follows.






              share|cite|improve this answer
























                0












                0








                0






                You'll find it's easier to proceed if you work using general measure theory techniques for this problem, rather than trying to work from first principles. This is especially because we are given some information about $f$ in terms of the $mathcal{H}^s$ measure, so you want to exploit that.



                Recall that for any $A subset mathbb R^n,$
                $$ dim_{mathcal{H}} A = inf{s>0 : mathcal{H}^s(A) = 0 }. $$
                It is known that if $dim_{mathcal{H}} A = s,$ then $mathcal{H}^{s+varepsilon}(A) = 0$ and $mathcal{H}^{s-varepsilon}(A) = +infty.$ So if it happens that $mathcal{H}^s(A) in (0,infty),$ then we can conclude that $dim_{mathcal{H}} A = s.$ This is the key property of the Hausdorff dimension that we will use here.



                The lower bound is quite easy, using the fact that the given integral is positve. If we set $A = mathbb R^n setminus f^{-1}(0),$ then since $f$ vanishes outside $A$ by definition we get,
                $$ int_A f,mathrm{d}mathcal{H}^s = int_{mathbb R^n} f,mathrm{d}mathcal{H}^s > 0. $$
                Then we get that $f$ is not $mathcal{H}^s$-almost everywhere zero, so we get $mathcal{H}^s(A) > 0.$ Note that we did not use any special property of the Hausdorff measure; this argument goes through for a general measure $mu.$ We conclude that $dim_{mathcal H} A geq s.$



                The upper bound requires a bit more work. We can first try to estimate the $mathcal{H}^s$ measure of $A = mathbb R^n setminus f^{-1}(0),$ but this might not be finite in general. We can however consider
                $$ A_k = { x in mathbb R^n : f(x) > 1/k },$$
                so then $A = bigcup_{k geq 1} A_k.$ By Markov's inequality, for each $k$ we have,
                $$ frac1k mathcal{H}^s(A_k) leq int_{mathbb R^n} f,mathrm{d}mathcal{H}^s < infty. $$
                So $dim_{mathcal{H}} A_k leq s$ for each $k.$ Then for each $varepsilon > 0,$ we have $mathcal{H}^{s+varepsilon}(A_k) = infty$ so we conclude that each $mathcal{H}^{s+varepsilon}(A) = infty$ by countable subadditivity. Hence $dim_{mathcal{H}} A leq s$ so the result follows.






                share|cite|improve this answer












                You'll find it's easier to proceed if you work using general measure theory techniques for this problem, rather than trying to work from first principles. This is especially because we are given some information about $f$ in terms of the $mathcal{H}^s$ measure, so you want to exploit that.



                Recall that for any $A subset mathbb R^n,$
                $$ dim_{mathcal{H}} A = inf{s>0 : mathcal{H}^s(A) = 0 }. $$
                It is known that if $dim_{mathcal{H}} A = s,$ then $mathcal{H}^{s+varepsilon}(A) = 0$ and $mathcal{H}^{s-varepsilon}(A) = +infty.$ So if it happens that $mathcal{H}^s(A) in (0,infty),$ then we can conclude that $dim_{mathcal{H}} A = s.$ This is the key property of the Hausdorff dimension that we will use here.



                The lower bound is quite easy, using the fact that the given integral is positve. If we set $A = mathbb R^n setminus f^{-1}(0),$ then since $f$ vanishes outside $A$ by definition we get,
                $$ int_A f,mathrm{d}mathcal{H}^s = int_{mathbb R^n} f,mathrm{d}mathcal{H}^s > 0. $$
                Then we get that $f$ is not $mathcal{H}^s$-almost everywhere zero, so we get $mathcal{H}^s(A) > 0.$ Note that we did not use any special property of the Hausdorff measure; this argument goes through for a general measure $mu.$ We conclude that $dim_{mathcal H} A geq s.$



                The upper bound requires a bit more work. We can first try to estimate the $mathcal{H}^s$ measure of $A = mathbb R^n setminus f^{-1}(0),$ but this might not be finite in general. We can however consider
                $$ A_k = { x in mathbb R^n : f(x) > 1/k },$$
                so then $A = bigcup_{k geq 1} A_k.$ By Markov's inequality, for each $k$ we have,
                $$ frac1k mathcal{H}^s(A_k) leq int_{mathbb R^n} f,mathrm{d}mathcal{H}^s < infty. $$
                So $dim_{mathcal{H}} A_k leq s$ for each $k.$ Then for each $varepsilon > 0,$ we have $mathcal{H}^{s+varepsilon}(A_k) = infty$ so we conclude that each $mathcal{H}^{s+varepsilon}(A) = infty$ by countable subadditivity. Hence $dim_{mathcal{H}} A leq s$ so the result follows.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered Nov 28 '18 at 21:14









                ktoi

                2,2931616




                2,2931616






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                    Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                    Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3017360%2fborel-measurable-function-hausdorff-dimension%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Bundesstraße 106

                    Verónica Boquete

                    Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten