Talk About Network

Google


Register and Login
Nick
Password
Register create new account Sign up is FREE and you can post replies, new topics, bookmark posts and more!
Recover lost password


Education > Math > Re: sigma rings
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 2 of 6 Topic 4146 of 4349
Post > Topic >>

Re: sigma rings

by magidin@[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Arturo Magidin) Jul 4, 2008 at 02:53 AM

In article <ztWdna8Ga43eGvDVnZ2dnUVZ_gGdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
sto  <sto@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>Let X be a set, and define a (Boolean) sigma-ring _S_ as a non-empty 
>class of subsets of X that is closed under the formation of differences 
>and countable unions.
>
>Let _E_ be any class of subsets of X, and denote by _S_(_E_) the 
>smallest sigma-ring containing _E_.
>
>Let A be a subset of X, and denote by E the generic element of the class 
>_E_.  Denote by intersection(_E_,A) the class of sets 
>{intersection(E,A): E in _E_}.  Denote by _S_(intersection(_E_,A)) the 
>smallest  sigma-ring containing the class of sets intersection(_E_,A).
>
>
>Based on these definitions, create a class of sets _C_ to be {union(B, 
>diff(E,A)): B in _S_(intersection(_E_,A)), E in _S_(_E_)}.  In other 
>words, each element of the class _C_ is the union of an element B of 
>_S_(intersection(_E_,A)) with the difference of an element E of _S_(_E_) 
>and the set A.
>
>
>How do you prove that the class _C_ is a sigma-ring? (this is supposed 
>to be "easy")

You prove that it is closed under differences and under countable
unions, of course.

> I managed to prove that the simpler class {diff(E,A):E in 
>_S_(_E_)} is a sigma-ring, but can't find any way to prove that _C_ 
>itself is a sigma-ring.

An arbitrary element of _C_ is, as you note, the union of B_1 in
_S_(int(_E_,A)) and (E_1-A) for some E_1 in _S_(_E_).

So to show _C_ is closed under differences, you consider

(B_1 \/ (E_1-A)) - (B_2 \/ (E_2-A)

for some B_1, B_2 in _S_(int(_E_,A)), and some E_1,E_2 in
_S_(_E_). Try to express it as the union of something in
_S_(in(_E_,A)) and some (E'-A) for E' in _S_(_E_). You'll want to use
the fact that the elements are in specific sigma rings.

The closure under countable unions is simpler, since if you have a
family {B_i \/ (E_i-A)} i=1,2,3,... then the union of the family is
just (\/ B_i) \/ (\/E_i - A), and now you can use the fact that the
B_i live in a sigma ring and the E_i live in a sigma ring to deduce
this is of the desired form.

-- 
======================================================================
"It's not denial. I'm just very selective about
 what I accept as reality."
    --- Calvin ("Calvin and Hobbes" by Bill Watterson)
======================================================================

Arturo Magidin
magidin-at-member-ams-org
 




 6 Posts in Topic:
sigma rings
sto <sto@[EMAIL PROTEC  2008-07-03 22:13:22 
Re: sigma rings
magidin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]  2008-07-04 02:53:14 
Re: sigma rings
sto <sto@[EMAIL PROTEC  2008-07-03 23:50:01 
Re: sigma rings
magidin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]  2008-07-04 15:28:10 
Re: sigma rings
William Elliot <marsh@  2008-07-04 02:26:42 
Re: sigma rings
sto <sto@[EMAIL PROTEC  2008-07-05 12:12:49 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
tan12V112 Fri Dec 5 4:11:52 CST 2008.