Doctrine:Measure theory terminology/Proposals

From Maths
Jump to: navigation, search

This is a sub page for making proposals to the measure theory terminology doctrine. New requests only must be placed here. Queries and suggestions must not be put here unless there is a consensus (and thus proposal) on how to deal with it.

  • Be sure to sign any proposals.

Proposals

Splicing sets

I propose that rather than mu*-measurable sets we instead use outer splicing sets or just splicing sets. Currently:

  • For an outer-measure, μ:H¯R0 we call a set, XH, μ-measurable if:
    • YH[μ(Y)=μ(YX)+μ(YX)]

μ-measurable must be said with respect to an outer measure (μ) and is very close to "outer measurable set" which would just be an set the outer measure assigns a measure to[Note 1]. However if we call X a splicing set then all ambiguity goes away and the name reflects what it does. In a sense:

  • X is a set that allows you to "splice" (the measures of) YX and YX together in a way which preserves the measure of Y. That is, the sum of the measures of the spliced parts is the measure of Y.

If there is such a thing as μ-measurable sets for the inner-measure they can simply be called "inner splicing sets" although I doubt that'll be needed. Alec (talk) 21:14, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Inner vs outer splicing sets=

I propose that when we speak of just a splicing set it be considered as an outer one (unless the context implies otherwise, for example if only inner-measures are in play) Alec (talk) 21:29, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Standard symbols

  • S for the set of all (outer) splicing sets with respect to the outer-measure μ say, of the context.
  • S for the set of all inner splicing sets with respect to the inner-measure μ say, of the context. Caution:Should such a definition make sense.

Points to address

  1. Is there such a thing as "inner splicing sets"?
    • There does not appear to be a corresponding notion for inner-measures however there are similar things (see page 61 of Halmos' measure theory) in play
  2. Does "splicing set" arise anywhere else?
    • Yes, but in a niche area to do with a proper subset of regular languages and used with string splicing. So "splicing set" would not be ambiguous. Alec (talk) 21:14, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Notes

  1. Jump up Not every set is outer-measurable unless H is the powerset of the "universal set" in question

References