Talk:Riesz representation theorem

From Encyclopedia of Mathematics
Jump to: navigation, search
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

"Combined with the Radon-Nikodým theorem, this amounts to the following..." — really? In order to apply the Radon-Nikodým theorem we must have two measures, one absolutely continuous w.r.t. the other. But here we have only one measure $\nu$. What is the point of $\mu$ if we cannot choose it once and serve all $L$ by it? --Boris Tsirelson 21:03, 21 July 2012 (CEST)

You derive the last statement from the previous as follows. Let $L\in C(X)'$. By the first statement there is a $\mathbb R$-valued measure $\nu$ with finite total variation such that $L (f) = \int f d\nu$. You denote by $\mu$ the total variation measure of $\nu$, which is then a usual measure (i.e. taking values in $\mathbb R^+$) and hence it is Radon in the sense of Radon measure. The Radon-Nykodim theorem is applied to get the existence of a measurable $g$ such that $\nu = g\mu$, from which you get the last statement. The point of $\mu$ is that we got rid of the sign changes, which are instead now pushed to the $g$ (which in fact takes only the values $\pm 1$). It has certain advantages. Of course in this context we could also phrase it as: Any $L\in C(X)'$ can be written as the difference of integrals against two Radon measures. But the way I stated easily generalizes to characterize the dual of $C(X, V)$ where $V$ is a finite vector space (or even a general Banach space). Camillo 22:49, 21 July 2012 (CEST)
Maybe it is just my upbringing: in geometric measure theory it is customary to take into account vector valued measures and the Radon-Nykodim is phrased in general terms, so to derive from it that any vector-valued measure can be written as a measurable vector function times its total variation. In this case the $g$ is less silly: it has $|g|=1$, so you factored the direction from the size of the measure. Just to give you an example why we are so fond about it. Take a smooth open set $A$ in $\mathbb R^n$ and consider its indicator function. The distributional derivative is a vector-valued measure. The above $g\mu$ decompoisition gives you the surface measure on the $\partial A$ as $\mu$ and the outward unit normal to the boundary as $g$. In this way you got a purely functional-analytic object encoding the geometry of a surface. It is easy to generalize it to much rougher objects, but retaining some functional analytic structure. When I will deal with the Radon-Nykodim and with finer entries in Geometric measure theory I will then get to this somewhere. Camillo 22:49, 21 July 2012 (CEST)
Yes, I see, you are right. I just did not note the turn from positive to signed; sorry. --Boris Tsirelson 08:09, 22 July 2012 (CEST)
How to Cite This Entry:
Riesz representation theorem. Encyclopedia of Mathematics. URL: