1

1st question This question is the subsequent one from the link. This question is asking about $E_\gamma$ more in detail. Let me post the proof of theorem 3.4

enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here

(1) In the last part of the proof is the expression $\{D^+F(x) < \infty\}$. Assuming this to be same as $E_{\infty} = \{x \in \mathbb R | D^+F(x) < \infty\}$, I don't understand why $E_{\infty} \subset E_\gamma$ for all $\gamma$. If such inequality is valid, then my interpretation is that there is no such point $x \in \mathbb R$ that $D^+F(x) \le \gamma$. I'm not sure whether this interpretation is correct, and if so, how can I guarantee the absence of such point? In other words, why there is no possibility that a $\limsup$ of a function can be a value less than or equal to $\gamma > 0$?

(2) The proof says $E_\gamma$ is measurable, which is same as $D^+(F)$ is measurable function, without any proof. Is the set $E_\gamma$ measurable because it's open set? If so, how should I associate this with $\limsup \Delta_{h}(F)(x)?$ The proof would be easy if the function $D^+(F)$ is countinuous, but there is no conditions that makes the function continuous. The only hint about this is in the exercise 14(a) : The continuity of $F$ allows one to restrict to countably many h in taking the limsup (I guess this is consistent with PMA's theorem 4.2).

Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

jason 1
  • 727

1 Answers1

1

For (1), there appears to be a typo. The argument is consistent with $\{x:D^+F(x)\color{red}{=}\infty\}$. Indeed, if you consider this set, then $\{x:D^+F(x)=\infty\}\subset \{x:D^+F(x)>\gamma\},\,\forall \gamma$. Then we would have, by measure monotonicity, $$m(\{x:D^+F(x)=\infty\})\leq m(\{x:D^+F(x)>\gamma\})\to 0$$ and therefore $m(\{x:D^+F(x)=\infty\})=0$, yielding $D^+F(x)<\infty$, $m$-a.e, which yields the author's conclusion.

For (2), a quick search yields many results, such as this one.

Snoop
  • 15,214