The Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: How WM is cheating - fat Cantor set measure
Replies: 3   Last Post: Jan 3, 2013 8:33 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]

Posts: 2,720
Registered: 2/15/09
Re: How WM is cheating - fat Cantor set measure
Posted: Dec 31, 2012 11:16 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Dec 30, 12:17 am, fom <> wrote:
> ...
> Unlike many other measures, Lebesgue
> measure has an invariance property
> that permits its product measures
> to be defined without the general
> theory of product measures.  To
> see why, consider the binary
> expansions on the interval
> 0<=y<1
> taking the eventually constant
> sequences ending in constant 0
> as the representation for rational
> numbers.  ...

Not all rationals as binary expansions end with zeros, only multiples
of inverse powers of two, for any finite string of zeros and ones
there are expansions of rationals that end with those repeating.

"Thus, the claim that the non-zero
measure of fat Cantor sets arises
from relation with an atomic
measurable space whose atoms are
not singletons has been verified. "

Having measurable, countable, atoms, comprising units of measure:
what would be their character as sets of reals?


Ross Finlayson

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.