Results 1 to 2 of 2

Math Help - Set of measure zero-can't pinpoint my mistake

  1. #1
    Newbie ajskim's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2010
    From
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    13

    Set of measure zero-can't pinpoint my mistake

    I think I am being confused by the definition of this(in a differential geometry sense) and was curious what I was getting wrong. The definition I have seen is that a set has measure zero if for any delta>0 there exists a countable cover of the set by open cubes s.t. the volume of the cubes is less than delta. Now, I have run into a strange conclusion from this; If I take a countable cover of R^1 by taking an interval of positive length around every rational number(does this work? I think it should as Q is dense), we can choose intervals of length (delta/2)*(1/2^n) for the nth rational number, we can sum these intervals to get a cover of R^1 with size delta/2<delta, which implies R^1 has measure zero in R^1. I know that this is very very wrong. However, I'm failing to see where in my thought process I made an error. Please help me find my mistake.
    Thanks
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    Newbie ajskim's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2010
    From
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    13
    Nevermind, I'm being very stupid today. How do I delete a thread?
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. Showing that a specific outer measure is a measure
    Posted in the Differential Geometry Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: August 16th 2011, 11:50 AM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: September 27th 2009, 11:13 AM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: September 27th 2009, 09:28 AM
  4. i don't see my mistake
    Posted in the Algebra Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: October 12th 2008, 07:39 AM
  5. Was it my mistake?
    Posted in the Math Topics Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: December 12th 2007, 05:09 AM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum