How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
Lebesgue Measure on Euclidean Space — Examples
1 · Prerequisites
- Areas of Elementary Plane Figures
- Binary Operations, Monoids, Groups and Subgroups
- Cardinal Arithmetic, Cofinality and the Alephs
- Compactness
- Compactness in Metric Spaces
- Completeness, Completion, and Uniform Continuity
- Construction of the Natural Numbers
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Cauchy Sequences
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Dedekind Cuts
- Continuity, IVT, EVT, and Uniform Continuity
- Cosets, Index and Lagrange's Theorem
- Countability and Uncountability
- Determinants of Matrices over a Commutative Ring
- Divisibility, Euclidean Domains, Principal Ideal Domains and Unique Factorisation
- Dual Spaces, Bilinear and Quadratic Forms, and Sylvester's Law of Inertia
- Filters and Ultrafilters
- Finite Counting, Factorials and Binomial Coefficients
- Foundations of the Real Numbers for Analysis
- Gaussian Elimination, Elementary Matrices and Reduced Row Echelon Form
- Group Actions, Orbits, Stabilisers and Cayley's Theorem
- Ideals, Quotient Rings and the Isomorphism Theorems for Rings
- Inner Product Spaces, Gram-Schmidt, Projections and Adjoints
- Lebesgue Measure on Euclidean Space
- Limits of Real Functions
- limsup, liminf, and Subsequential Limits
- Linear Independence, Bases and Dimension
- Linear Transformations, Rank-Nullity and Quotient Spaces
- Matrices, the Matrix of a Linear Map, and Change of Basis
- Measures and Their Basic Properties
- Metric Spaces
- Monotone Functions, Discontinuities, and Continuity Sets
- Monotone Sequences, Bolzano-Weierstrass, and Cauchy Completeness
- Normal Subgroups and Quotient Groups
- Order, Zorn's Lemma, and the Axiom of Choice
- Ordinal Arithmetic and the First Uncountable Ordinal
- Ordinals, Cardinals, and Transfinite Recursion
- Outer Measure and the Caratheodory Extension Theorem
- Polynomial Rings, the Division Algorithm and Roots
- Relations, Functions, and Quotients
- Rings, Subrings, Integral Domains and Fields
- Rⁿ as a Normed Space; Vector-Valued Functions
- Roots, Rational Powers, and Classical Inequalities
- Separation Axioms: the Hierarchy
- Sequences and Limits
- Series: Convergence and the Nonnegative Tests
- Set Theory Beyond Choice: Recorded, Not Proved Here
- Sigma Algebras and Borel Sets
- Simple Field Extensions and the Construction of the Complex Numbers
- Subspaces, Products, and Quotients
- Suprema and Infima
- Symmetric Groups, Cycle Decomposition and the Sign Homomorphism
- The Cantor Set, Baire Category, and Measure Zero in ℝ
- The Riemann Integral in Rᵐ and Jordan Content
- The Riemann Integral: Definition and Integrability
- The Topology of Euclidean Space
- The Total Derivative in ℝᵐ → ℝⁿ
- The ZFC Axioms and the Basic Set Constructions
- Topological Spaces and Continuity
- Topology of ℝ
- Vector Spaces, Linear Subspaces, Span and Direct Sums
2 · Summary
3 · Logical flowchart
4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs
None yet.
5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements
The Lebesgue measure of an interval, of a box, of and of the irrationals in
Example
Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice. Then every bounded interval in has Lebesgue measure equal to its length, every box in has Lebesgue measure equal to the product of its side lengths, , and
In particular a degenerate interval and the empty box both have measure .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Axiom of Countable Choice.
Assuming countable choice, a box in with parameters is Lebesgue measurable of measure (A box in with parameters is Lebesgue measurable of measure , whichever of its faces are included).
Every at most countable subset of is Lebesgue null; in particular (Every at most countable subset of is Lebesgue null; in particular ).
Assuming countable choice, is a complete measure (Assuming countable choice, is a sigma-algebra containing every elementary set and is a complete measure extending elementary volume).
Verification
By [L1], every interval with endpoints and every box with real side parameters has Lebesgue measure equal to its geometric length or volume, whatever choice of open and closed faces is made.
The rationals form a Lebesgue null subset of , so .
Since and by step 1.1, step 1.2 and [L3] give .
Step 1.1 also covers the boundary cases: if then the interval has measure , and the empty box has measure .
The complement of the Cantor set in has Lebesgue measure one, computed from the removed intervals
Example
Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice and let be the Cantor set. Then the open intervals removed in its construction form a countable pairwise disjoint family whose total Lebesgue measure is
so the complement has Lebesgue measure one.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Axiom of Countable Choice and the Cantor set with stages .
The Cantor set is an uncountable subset of of Lebesgue measure zero (The Cantor set is an uncountable subset of of Lebesgue measure zero).
There is a unique family of subsets of with and for every (The Cantor middle-thirds set as the intersection of the sets obtained by removing open middle thirds).
If then the series converges (For , , and for the series diverges).
Assuming countable choice, a box in with parameters is Lebesgue measurable of measure (A box in with parameters is Lebesgue measurable of measure , whichever of its faces are included).
Verification
By induction from [F1], the -th stage removes exactly pairwise disjoint open intervals, each of length ; the case is the single interval .
By [L2], the union removed at stage has Lebesgue measure , so the full removed set has measure by [F2].
The complement of in is exactly the union of those removed intervals, so step 2.1 computes ; this agrees with [L1], which already gives .
The Smith-Volterra-Cantor set has Lebesgue measure exactly
Example
Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice and let be the Smith-Volterra-Cantor set. Then
This is the exact value behind the published statement that is not null.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Axiom of Countable Choice and the stage lengths and stage sets of The Smith-Volterra-Cantor set: the same construction removing, at stage , an open middle interval of length from each of the remaining intervals.
Assuming countable choice, a box in with parameters is Lebesgue measurable of measure (A box in with parameters is Lebesgue measurable of measure , whichever of its faces are included).
Let be a decreasing sequence of measurable sets for a measure . If for some , then (Continuity from above when one set has finite measure).
is closed and bounded, hence compact (The Smith-Volterra-Cantor set is compact, perfect and nowhere dense, and does not have measure zero).
If then the series converges (For , , and for the series diverges).
Verification
At stage , the set is a disjoint union of closed intervals of common length , so .
Put . Then and by [F1], so an induction together with [F4] gives for every .
The sets decrease to , and , so [F2] yields .
For every positive there is a dense open subset of of Lebesgue measure below
Example
Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice. For every real there is an open set such that is dense in and .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Axiom of Countable Choice and a real .
Assuming countable choice, a box in with parameters is Lebesgue measurable of measure (A box in with parameters is Lebesgue measurable of measure , whichever of its faces are included).
Let be a measure and let be measurable. Then (Finite and countable subadditivity of measures).
The rationals are countably infinite ( is countably infinite).
If then the series converges (For , , and for the series diverges).
Verification
Since the rationals in are countably infinite, fix an enumeration of .
Put . This set is open, and [L1], [F1] and [F3] give .
Every rational point of lies in , so is dense in .
A dense subset of of Lebesgue measure zero containing every rational, and its meager complement of full measure
Example
Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice. Then there is a dense set with and . Consequently is meager and has full measure on every bounded interval.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Axiom of Countable Choice.
Every subset of has a measurable hull of the same outer measure (Every subset of has a measurable hull of the same outer measure).
Every at most countable subset of is Lebesgue null (Every at most countable subset of is Lebesgue null; in particular ).
is a set of when there is a sequence of open subsets of with ( and subsets of a topological space, agreeing with the real-line notion).
is nowhere dense when the interior of its closure is empty, and a set is meager when it is a countable union of nowhere dense sets (Nowhere dense, meager (first category), residual, and second category subsets of ).
Assuming countable choice, a box in with parameters is Lebesgue measurable of measure (A box in with parameters is Lebesgue measurable of measure , whichever of its faces are included).
Assuming countable choice, is a complete measure on the sigma-algebra (Assuming countable choice, is a sigma-algebra containing every elementary set and is a complete measure extending elementary volume).
Verification
The rational line is countable, hence null by [L2]. Applying [L1] to gives a set with .
Because is dense in and , the set is dense; and [F1] records that it is .
Write with each open, as in [F1]. Since is dense and , every is dense, so each is closed with empty interior; hence is meager by [F2]. Now let be any bounded interval in . Step 1.1 gives because , while [L3] makes Lebesgue measurable with finite measure equal to its length; therefore [L4] applied to the disjoint union gives , so the complement has full measure on every bounded interval.
The graph of a continuous function is Lebesgue null in
Example
Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice and let be continuous. Then its graph
is Lebesgue null in .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Axiom of Countable Choice and a continuous function .
A subset of has Lebesgue outer measure zero if and only if it is null in the sense of countable closed-cube covers (A subset of has Lebesgue outer measure zero if and only if it is null in the sense of countable closed-cube covers).
Assuming countable choice, a box in with parameters is Lebesgue measurable of measure (A box in with parameters is Lebesgue measurable of measure , whichever of its faces are included).
Let be a measure and let be measurable. Then (Finite and countable subadditivity of measures).
Then is continuous at when every neighbourhood of contains the image of some neighbourhood of (Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point).
A subset is compact exactly when it is closed and bounded (Heine-Borel in : with the Euclidean metric a subset of is compact if and only if it is closed and bounded, and the proof by bisection uses no choice principle; the same holds on the real line).
A continuous real function on a compact subset of is uniformly continuous (Heine-Cantor in : a continuous real function on a compact subset of is uniformly continuous, proved -natively from sequential compactness).
For every real there is a natural number with (For every in a complete ordered field there is a natural with ).
If then the series converges; in particular (For , , and for the series diverges).
Verification
Fix a real . For each integer , the interval is compact by [F3], so [L3] gives a real such that and imply . By [F4] choose a natural number with , and put for . Then for every with and every one has , hence .
For each such subinterval, the corresponding graph piece lies in the closed box , whose width is and whose height is . Therefore [L2] gives a box cover of whose total area is .
Summing these covers over all integers and using [F1], the whole graph is covered by countably many closed boxes with total area at most , the geometric-series identity coming from [F5]. Since was arbitrary, [L1] gives that is Lebesgue null.
The Lebesgue measure of the image of the unit cube under an explicit linear map of the plane and of three-space
Example
Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice. Let
Then the image of the unit square under has Lebesgue measure , the image of the unit cube under has Lebesgue measure , and the image of under the singular map is Lebesgue null.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Axiom of Countable Choice and the three linear maps , and above.
Assuming countable choice, a linear map of sends Lebesgue measurable sets to Lebesgue measurable sets, with when is invertible and Lebesgue null when it is not (A linear map of sends Lebesgue measurable sets to Lebesgue measurable sets, with when is invertible and Lebesgue null when it is not).
Its determinant is the Leibniz sum over permutations (For , the determinant over a commutative ring by the Leibniz formula, and for a real matrix).
If is upper or lower triangular over a commutative ring, then (The determinant of a triangular matrix is the product of its diagonal entries).
Every affine hyperplane of , and hence every proper linear subspace, is Lebesgue null (Every affine hyperplane of , and hence every proper linear subspace, is Lebesgue null).
Verification
The matrix of is , so [F1] gives ; therefore [L1] gives .
The matrix of is the upper triangular matrix , so [F2] gives ; hence [L1] gives .
The matrix of is , so [F1] gives , and lies in the proper linear subspace ; therefore [L1] and [L2] give that is Lebesgue null.
Every Lebesgue measurable proper subgroup of is null, and and are instances
Example
Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice. If is Lebesgue measurable and proper, then . In particular both and are Lebesgue null subgroups of the line.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Axiom of Countable Choice.
A Lebesgue measurable subgroup of of positive measure is all of (A Lebesgue measurable subgroup of of positive measure is all of ).
Every at most countable subset of is Lebesgue null (Every at most countable subset of is Lebesgue null; in particular ).
The rationals are countably infinite ( is countably infinite).
The real numbers are uncountable ( is uncountable (Cantor's nested intervals, 1874)).
Verification
If is measurable and proper, then the contrapositive of [L1] gives .
The integers and rationals are at most countable subgroups of , so [L2] gives them Lebesgue measure zero; they are proper because [F1] and [F2] show , and .
Step 1.1 uses measurability in an essential way: it says nothing about subgroups of that are not Lebesgue measurable.
is Lebesgue null and has Jordan outer content one
Statement refuted
A Lebesgue null subset of must have Jordan outer content .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Axiom of Countable Choice and the set .
Every at most countable subset of is Lebesgue null (Every at most countable subset of is Lebesgue null; in particular ).
Its Jordan outer content is the infimum of over finite axis-parallel rectangle covers of the set (Jordan inner and outer content and Jordan measurable bounded sets in ).
The same lower bound on total length holds for a finite cover of an interval by bounded intervals of any of the four bounded forms (If finitely many intervals cover a closed bounded interval , the sum of their lengths is at least ).
The rationals are countably infinite ( is countably infinite).
Counterexample
The witness set is countable, hence Lebesgue null by [L1].
Let finitely many bounded intervals cover . Their union is closed in , and because it contains the dense subset of , [F3] makes it contain all of .
Therefore [F2] gives total covering length at least .
The single interval realises total length , so [F1] gives Jordan outer content exactly . Thus is Lebesgue null and still has Jordan outer content one.
Lebesgue outer measure agrees with Jordan outer content on every bounded subset of
Statement
Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice. Every bounded subset of has Lebesgue outer measure equal to its Jordan outer content.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Axiom of Countable Choice.
Lebesgue outer measure is at most Jordan outer content, and a bounded Jordan measurable set is Lebesgue measurable with Lebesgue measure equal to its Jordan content (Lebesgue outer measure is at most Jordan outer content, and a bounded Jordan measurable set is Lebesgue measurable with Lebesgue measure equal to its Jordan content).
Every at most countable subset of is Lebesgue null; in particular (Every at most countable subset of is Lebesgue null; in particular ).
The Jordan outer content is defined through finite rectangle covers (Jordan inner and outer content and Jordan measurable bounded sets in ).
The same lower bound on total length holds for a finite cover of an interval by bounded intervals of any of the four bounded forms (If finitely many intervals cover a closed bounded interval , the sum of their lengths is at least ).
Refutation
What is true is [L1]: one inequality holds for every bounded set, and equality holds when the set is Jordan measurable.
The witness has Lebesgue outer measure by [L2]; and if finitely many bounded intervals cover , their union is closed and contains the dense subset of , so it contains all of , and [F2] forces total length at least , while the single interval realises , so [F1] gives Jordan outer content .
So the false statement drops the Jordan measurability hypothesis from the true theorem [L1], and the witness of step 1.2 refutes it.
A Lebesgue measurable subset of with empty interior has measure zero
Statement
Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice. Every Lebesgue measurable subset of with empty interior has measure zero.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Axiom of Countable Choice and the Smith-Volterra-Cantor set .
is nowhere dense and does not have measure zero (The Smith-Volterra-Cantor set is compact, perfect and nowhere dense, and does not have measure zero).
is nowhere dense when the interior of its closure is empty (Nowhere dense, meager (first category), residual, and second category subsets of ).
A subset of has Lebesgue outer measure zero if and only if it is null in the sense of countable closed-interval covers (A subset of has Lebesgue outer measure zero if and only if it has measure zero in the sense of countable closed-interval covers).
Refutation
The Smith-Volterra-Cantor set is nowhere dense by [L1], so [F1] gives that it has empty interior.
The same source item [L1] says that is not null, so [L2] gives ; since Lebesgue measure is nonnegative, this means .
So a measurable set can have empty interior and still have positive Lebesgue measure; the Smith-Volterra-Cantor set refutes the statement.
Every translation-invariant measure on the Borel sets of is a nonnegative multiple of Lebesgue measure
Statement
Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice. Every translation-invariant measure on the Borel sets of is a nonnegative multiple of Lebesgue measure.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Axiom of Countable Choice and counting measure on , restricted to the Borel sigma-algebra.
Assuming countable choice, a translation-invariant measure on the Borel sets of giving the unit cube measure one is the restriction of Lebesgue measure (A translation-invariant measure on the Borel sets of giving the unit cube measure one is the restriction of Lebesgue measure).
The counting set function on is the map sending a finite subset to its cardinality and an infinite subset to (Counting measure on an arbitrary set).
For every set , the counting set function is a measure on (Counting measure is a measure).
Assuming countable choice, a box in with parameters is Lebesgue measurable of measure (A box in with parameters is Lebesgue measurable of measure , whichever of its faces are included).
Refutation
By [F1] and [F2], counting measure restricted to the Borel sets of is a measure. It is translation invariant because for every real the map is a bijection of , so a Borel set and its translate have the same finite cardinality or are both infinite.
It gives the singleton the value and the unit interval the value , while [L2] gives Lebesgue measure for and for ; so no nonnegative scalar multiple of Lebesgue measure equals counting measure.
This does not contradict [L1], because [L1] fixes the value of the unit cube and thereby forces finiteness on bounded sets, which the false statement omits.
Assuming the Axiom of Choice, every Lebesgue measurable subset of is a Borel set
Statement
Assume the Axiom of Choice. Every Lebesgue measurable subset of is a Borel set.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Axiom of Choice.
Assuming countable choice, the Cantor set is an uncountable subset of of Lebesgue measure zero (The Cantor set is an uncountable subset of of Lebesgue measure zero).
is a bijection from onto the Cantor set (The Cantor set is exactly the set of with every , and this gives a bijection with ).
Assuming choice, for every set , and for every cardinal (Assuming the Axiom of Choice, , and Cantor's theorem in cardinal form: , clauses (a) and (b)).
Assuming countable choice, is a complete measure (Assuming countable choice, is a sigma-algebra containing every elementary set and is a complete measure extending elementary volume).
Every family of nonempty sets has a choice function (The Axiom of Choice).
Refutation
By [F4], the Axiom of Choice gives countable choice, so [L1] applies and the Cantor set has Lebesgue measure zero.
By [F1], the Cantor set is in bijection with , hence with , so its power set has cardinality .
Since [F4] gives countable choice and [L2] says Lebesgue measure is complete under that hypothesis, every subset of the Cantor set is Lebesgue measurable.
Assuming the Axiom of Choice, [F2] gives only Borel subsets of , while [F3] gives ; therefore not every Lebesgue measurable subset of can be Borel.
The refutation is purely cardinal: it produces no particular measurable non-Borel set, only shows that one must exist.
Sources
- John K. Hunter, Measure Theory (UC Davis lecture notes), Chapter 2
- T. Tao, An Introduction to Measure Theory (GSM 126), Section 1.2
- John K. Hunter, Measure Theory (UC Davis lecture notes), Example 2.14
- T. Tao, An Introduction to Measure Theory (GSM 126), Exercise 1.2.9
- T. Tao, An Introduction to Measure Theory (GSM 126), Exercise 1.1.7
- J. Ye, L. Yu, X. Zhao, When is $A+xA=\mathbb{R}$?, Corollary 1.2
- T. Tao, An Introduction to Measure Theory (GSM 126), Exercise 1.6.8
- T. Tao, An Introduction to Measure Theory (GSM 126), Exercise 1.2.1
- T. Tao, An Introduction to Measure Theory (GSM 126), Exercises 1.2.1 and 1.2.8
- A. Jin, Cantor sets in topology, analysis, and financial markets
- T. Tao, An Introduction to Measure Theory (GSM 126), Exercise 1.2.23
- John K. Hunter, Measure Theory (UC Davis lecture notes), Example 2.22