0

I was reading the solution to this problem

Problem about limit of Lebesgue integral over a measurable set integral-over-a-measurable-set?noredirect=1&lq=1

And I did not understand why in the fifth line he substituted $\lim f_{n}$ by $\lim \inf f$ .... could anyone explain this for me?

  • 2
    Because if a sequence has a limit then this limit equals to the $\liminf$. – Mark Oct 15 '19 at 12:37
  • If a $\lim$ of a sequence exists, it equals the $\liminf$. – Hans Engler Oct 15 '19 at 12:38
  • but in my question the $\lim \inf$ is of $f$ but the limit is of $f_{n}$ @HansEngler –  Oct 15 '19 at 12:56
  • I know that $\lim \inf$ is the smallest accumulation point is this the reason of the correctness of your first equality ? Also why it is not equal $\lim \sup$? or it is also equal to it? @Mark –  Oct 15 '19 at 12:57
  • 1
    It also equals to the $\limsup$. But to use Fatou's lemma you need $\liminf$, that's why it was used in that answer. – Mark Oct 15 '19 at 13:00

1 Answers1

0

The equality $\lim_nf_n=\liminf_nf_n$ is trivially true. And then one can apply Fatou's lemma:$$\int_E\liminf_nf_n\leqslant\liminf_n\int_Ef_n.$$