Existence of subset with given Hausdorff dimensionQuestion on geometric measure theoryHausdorff measure on the sphere is well defined?Subsets of sets of positive Hausdorff dimension with controlled upper Minkowski dimensionHow can dimension depend on the point?Multiplicity of a subcovering in spaces of given Hausdorff dimensionExistence of a measurable map between metric spacesHausdorff dimension of boundaries of open sets diffeomorphic to $mathbbR^n$Hausdorff approximating measures and Borel setsWhen is Hausdorff measure locally finite?Existence of a discrete subset

Existence of subset with given Hausdorff dimension


Question on geometric measure theoryHausdorff measure on the sphere is well defined?Subsets of sets of positive Hausdorff dimension with controlled upper Minkowski dimensionHow can dimension depend on the point?Multiplicity of a subcovering in spaces of given Hausdorff dimensionExistence of a measurable map between metric spacesHausdorff dimension of boundaries of open sets diffeomorphic to $mathbbR^n$Hausdorff approximating measures and Borel setsWhen is Hausdorff measure locally finite?Existence of a discrete subset













2












$begingroup$


Let $Asubseteq mathbbR$ be Lebesgue-measurable and let $0<alpha<1$ be its Hausdorff dimension.




For a given $0<beta <alpha$ can we find a subset $Bsubset A$ with Hausdorff dimension $beta$?




In case this is true, could you provide a reference for this statement?



Added: Actually I am happy if $A$ is borel and compact.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$
















    2












    $begingroup$


    Let $Asubseteq mathbbR$ be Lebesgue-measurable and let $0<alpha<1$ be its Hausdorff dimension.




    For a given $0<beta <alpha$ can we find a subset $Bsubset A$ with Hausdorff dimension $beta$?




    In case this is true, could you provide a reference for this statement?



    Added: Actually I am happy if $A$ is borel and compact.










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$














      2












      2








      2





      $begingroup$


      Let $Asubseteq mathbbR$ be Lebesgue-measurable and let $0<alpha<1$ be its Hausdorff dimension.




      For a given $0<beta <alpha$ can we find a subset $Bsubset A$ with Hausdorff dimension $beta$?




      In case this is true, could you provide a reference for this statement?



      Added: Actually I am happy if $A$ is borel and compact.










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      Let $Asubseteq mathbbR$ be Lebesgue-measurable and let $0<alpha<1$ be its Hausdorff dimension.




      For a given $0<beta <alpha$ can we find a subset $Bsubset A$ with Hausdorff dimension $beta$?




      In case this is true, could you provide a reference for this statement?



      Added: Actually I am happy if $A$ is borel and compact.







      reference-request geometric-measure-theory






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited 17 mins ago







      Severin Schraven

















      asked 3 hours ago









      Severin SchravenSeverin Schraven

      1947




      1947




















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2












          $begingroup$

          Here is a partial answer. First of all, $dim_H (A) = alpha$ iff $ H^k(A)=infty$ for all $k<beta$ and $H^k(A) = 0$ for all $k>beta$. Then $H^alpha(A) = infty$ for all $alpha in (0,beta)$. If $A$ is closed then by Theorem 5.4 from The Geometry of Fractal Sets by Falconer there is a compact $Ksubset A$ such that $0<H^alpha(K)<infty$.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            That's exactly what I was looking for, thanks very much.
            $endgroup$
            – Severin Schraven
            12 mins ago


















          2












          $begingroup$

          The answer is yes under the additional assumption that the set is compact and I do not know what happens in the general case. The result is a consequence of the following one, see [1] and references therein.




          Theorem. If a compact set $AsubsetmathbbR^n$ has non-$sigma$-finite measure $mathcalH^beta$, then there us a
          subset $Bsubset A$ such that $0<mathcalH^beta<infty$.




          [1] R.O. Davies,
          A theorem on the existence of non-σ-finite subsets.
          Mathematika 15 (1968), 60–62.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$








          • 2




            $begingroup$
            I actually have a question (which is the reason why I wrote that my answer is partial): in the OP it is assumed that $A$ is Lebesgue measurable. Strictly saying this does not imply that $A$ is Borel, so it is not immediate that the result we both eventually refer to can be used (if $A$ were Borel or at least Souslin then yes).
            $endgroup$
            – Skeeve
            1 hour ago







          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Skeeve Good point. I do not know what happens in general, but perhaps the compact case is sufficient for the needs of OP. Let's hear from him. I will changes my answer to emphasize that it only answers the compact case. By the way you know a lot of geometric measure theory so you should be more active :) There are not too many of us.
            $endgroup$
            – Piotr Hajlasz
            50 mins ago











          • $begingroup$
            @PiotrHajlasz Indeed, the compact case is fine for me. Thanks for the answer.
            $endgroup$
            – Severin Schraven
            13 mins ago










          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          );
          );
          , "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "504"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f325532%2fexistence-of-subset-with-given-hausdorff-dimension%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes








          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          2












          $begingroup$

          Here is a partial answer. First of all, $dim_H (A) = alpha$ iff $ H^k(A)=infty$ for all $k<beta$ and $H^k(A) = 0$ for all $k>beta$. Then $H^alpha(A) = infty$ for all $alpha in (0,beta)$. If $A$ is closed then by Theorem 5.4 from The Geometry of Fractal Sets by Falconer there is a compact $Ksubset A$ such that $0<H^alpha(K)<infty$.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            That's exactly what I was looking for, thanks very much.
            $endgroup$
            – Severin Schraven
            12 mins ago















          2












          $begingroup$

          Here is a partial answer. First of all, $dim_H (A) = alpha$ iff $ H^k(A)=infty$ for all $k<beta$ and $H^k(A) = 0$ for all $k>beta$. Then $H^alpha(A) = infty$ for all $alpha in (0,beta)$. If $A$ is closed then by Theorem 5.4 from The Geometry of Fractal Sets by Falconer there is a compact $Ksubset A$ such that $0<H^alpha(K)<infty$.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            That's exactly what I was looking for, thanks very much.
            $endgroup$
            – Severin Schraven
            12 mins ago













          2












          2








          2





          $begingroup$

          Here is a partial answer. First of all, $dim_H (A) = alpha$ iff $ H^k(A)=infty$ for all $k<beta$ and $H^k(A) = 0$ for all $k>beta$. Then $H^alpha(A) = infty$ for all $alpha in (0,beta)$. If $A$ is closed then by Theorem 5.4 from The Geometry of Fractal Sets by Falconer there is a compact $Ksubset A$ such that $0<H^alpha(K)<infty$.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          Here is a partial answer. First of all, $dim_H (A) = alpha$ iff $ H^k(A)=infty$ for all $k<beta$ and $H^k(A) = 0$ for all $k>beta$. Then $H^alpha(A) = infty$ for all $alpha in (0,beta)$. If $A$ is closed then by Theorem 5.4 from The Geometry of Fractal Sets by Falconer there is a compact $Ksubset A$ such that $0<H^alpha(K)<infty$.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered 1 hour ago









          SkeeveSkeeve

          1744




          1744











          • $begingroup$
            That's exactly what I was looking for, thanks very much.
            $endgroup$
            – Severin Schraven
            12 mins ago
















          • $begingroup$
            That's exactly what I was looking for, thanks very much.
            $endgroup$
            – Severin Schraven
            12 mins ago















          $begingroup$
          That's exactly what I was looking for, thanks very much.
          $endgroup$
          – Severin Schraven
          12 mins ago




          $begingroup$
          That's exactly what I was looking for, thanks very much.
          $endgroup$
          – Severin Schraven
          12 mins ago











          2












          $begingroup$

          The answer is yes under the additional assumption that the set is compact and I do not know what happens in the general case. The result is a consequence of the following one, see [1] and references therein.




          Theorem. If a compact set $AsubsetmathbbR^n$ has non-$sigma$-finite measure $mathcalH^beta$, then there us a
          subset $Bsubset A$ such that $0<mathcalH^beta<infty$.




          [1] R.O. Davies,
          A theorem on the existence of non-σ-finite subsets.
          Mathematika 15 (1968), 60–62.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$








          • 2




            $begingroup$
            I actually have a question (which is the reason why I wrote that my answer is partial): in the OP it is assumed that $A$ is Lebesgue measurable. Strictly saying this does not imply that $A$ is Borel, so it is not immediate that the result we both eventually refer to can be used (if $A$ were Borel or at least Souslin then yes).
            $endgroup$
            – Skeeve
            1 hour ago







          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Skeeve Good point. I do not know what happens in general, but perhaps the compact case is sufficient for the needs of OP. Let's hear from him. I will changes my answer to emphasize that it only answers the compact case. By the way you know a lot of geometric measure theory so you should be more active :) There are not too many of us.
            $endgroup$
            – Piotr Hajlasz
            50 mins ago











          • $begingroup$
            @PiotrHajlasz Indeed, the compact case is fine for me. Thanks for the answer.
            $endgroup$
            – Severin Schraven
            13 mins ago















          2












          $begingroup$

          The answer is yes under the additional assumption that the set is compact and I do not know what happens in the general case. The result is a consequence of the following one, see [1] and references therein.




          Theorem. If a compact set $AsubsetmathbbR^n$ has non-$sigma$-finite measure $mathcalH^beta$, then there us a
          subset $Bsubset A$ such that $0<mathcalH^beta<infty$.




          [1] R.O. Davies,
          A theorem on the existence of non-σ-finite subsets.
          Mathematika 15 (1968), 60–62.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$








          • 2




            $begingroup$
            I actually have a question (which is the reason why I wrote that my answer is partial): in the OP it is assumed that $A$ is Lebesgue measurable. Strictly saying this does not imply that $A$ is Borel, so it is not immediate that the result we both eventually refer to can be used (if $A$ were Borel or at least Souslin then yes).
            $endgroup$
            – Skeeve
            1 hour ago







          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Skeeve Good point. I do not know what happens in general, but perhaps the compact case is sufficient for the needs of OP. Let's hear from him. I will changes my answer to emphasize that it only answers the compact case. By the way you know a lot of geometric measure theory so you should be more active :) There are not too many of us.
            $endgroup$
            – Piotr Hajlasz
            50 mins ago











          • $begingroup$
            @PiotrHajlasz Indeed, the compact case is fine for me. Thanks for the answer.
            $endgroup$
            – Severin Schraven
            13 mins ago













          2












          2








          2





          $begingroup$

          The answer is yes under the additional assumption that the set is compact and I do not know what happens in the general case. The result is a consequence of the following one, see [1] and references therein.




          Theorem. If a compact set $AsubsetmathbbR^n$ has non-$sigma$-finite measure $mathcalH^beta$, then there us a
          subset $Bsubset A$ such that $0<mathcalH^beta<infty$.




          [1] R.O. Davies,
          A theorem on the existence of non-σ-finite subsets.
          Mathematika 15 (1968), 60–62.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          The answer is yes under the additional assumption that the set is compact and I do not know what happens in the general case. The result is a consequence of the following one, see [1] and references therein.




          Theorem. If a compact set $AsubsetmathbbR^n$ has non-$sigma$-finite measure $mathcalH^beta$, then there us a
          subset $Bsubset A$ such that $0<mathcalH^beta<infty$.




          [1] R.O. Davies,
          A theorem on the existence of non-σ-finite subsets.
          Mathematika 15 (1968), 60–62.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited 49 mins ago

























          answered 1 hour ago









          Piotr HajlaszPiotr Hajlasz

          9,72843873




          9,72843873







          • 2




            $begingroup$
            I actually have a question (which is the reason why I wrote that my answer is partial): in the OP it is assumed that $A$ is Lebesgue measurable. Strictly saying this does not imply that $A$ is Borel, so it is not immediate that the result we both eventually refer to can be used (if $A$ were Borel or at least Souslin then yes).
            $endgroup$
            – Skeeve
            1 hour ago







          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Skeeve Good point. I do not know what happens in general, but perhaps the compact case is sufficient for the needs of OP. Let's hear from him. I will changes my answer to emphasize that it only answers the compact case. By the way you know a lot of geometric measure theory so you should be more active :) There are not too many of us.
            $endgroup$
            – Piotr Hajlasz
            50 mins ago











          • $begingroup$
            @PiotrHajlasz Indeed, the compact case is fine for me. Thanks for the answer.
            $endgroup$
            – Severin Schraven
            13 mins ago












          • 2




            $begingroup$
            I actually have a question (which is the reason why I wrote that my answer is partial): in the OP it is assumed that $A$ is Lebesgue measurable. Strictly saying this does not imply that $A$ is Borel, so it is not immediate that the result we both eventually refer to can be used (if $A$ were Borel or at least Souslin then yes).
            $endgroup$
            – Skeeve
            1 hour ago







          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Skeeve Good point. I do not know what happens in general, but perhaps the compact case is sufficient for the needs of OP. Let's hear from him. I will changes my answer to emphasize that it only answers the compact case. By the way you know a lot of geometric measure theory so you should be more active :) There are not too many of us.
            $endgroup$
            – Piotr Hajlasz
            50 mins ago











          • $begingroup$
            @PiotrHajlasz Indeed, the compact case is fine for me. Thanks for the answer.
            $endgroup$
            – Severin Schraven
            13 mins ago







          2




          2




          $begingroup$
          I actually have a question (which is the reason why I wrote that my answer is partial): in the OP it is assumed that $A$ is Lebesgue measurable. Strictly saying this does not imply that $A$ is Borel, so it is not immediate that the result we both eventually refer to can be used (if $A$ were Borel or at least Souslin then yes).
          $endgroup$
          – Skeeve
          1 hour ago





          $begingroup$
          I actually have a question (which is the reason why I wrote that my answer is partial): in the OP it is assumed that $A$ is Lebesgue measurable. Strictly saying this does not imply that $A$ is Borel, so it is not immediate that the result we both eventually refer to can be used (if $A$ were Borel or at least Souslin then yes).
          $endgroup$
          – Skeeve
          1 hour ago





          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          @Skeeve Good point. I do not know what happens in general, but perhaps the compact case is sufficient for the needs of OP. Let's hear from him. I will changes my answer to emphasize that it only answers the compact case. By the way you know a lot of geometric measure theory so you should be more active :) There are not too many of us.
          $endgroup$
          – Piotr Hajlasz
          50 mins ago





          $begingroup$
          @Skeeve Good point. I do not know what happens in general, but perhaps the compact case is sufficient for the needs of OP. Let's hear from him. I will changes my answer to emphasize that it only answers the compact case. By the way you know a lot of geometric measure theory so you should be more active :) There are not too many of us.
          $endgroup$
          – Piotr Hajlasz
          50 mins ago













          $begingroup$
          @PiotrHajlasz Indeed, the compact case is fine for me. Thanks for the answer.
          $endgroup$
          – Severin Schraven
          13 mins ago




          $begingroup$
          @PiotrHajlasz Indeed, the compact case is fine for me. Thanks for the answer.
          $endgroup$
          – Severin Schraven
          13 mins ago

















          draft saved

          draft discarded
















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to MathOverflow!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f325532%2fexistence-of-subset-with-given-hausdorff-dimension%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Isabella Eugénie Boyer Biographie | Références | Menu de navigationmodifiermodifier le codeComparator to Compute the Relative Value of a U.S. Dollar Amount – 1774 to Present.

          Join wedge with single bond in chemfigHow to make only one part of double bond bold with chemfig?Crossing bonds in chemfigjoining atoms in chemfig. Two adjacent molculesHow do I selectively change bond length in chemfig?Ugly bond joints in chemfigchemfig: reaction above arrowUsing the mhchem and chemfig packages in conjunctionBonding to specific element letter using chemfigResonance hybrids in chemfigScale chemfig molecule in beamer with tikzWhy does this chemfig bond with a hook start in the middle of the atom?

          Are small insurances worth itIs insurance worth it if you can afford to replace the item? If not, when is it?Is accident insurance worth it for my kids who play sportsIs insuring property for more than it is worth allowed?At what point does it become worth it to file an insurance claim?Are wage loss insurance programs worth the cost compared to having an emergency fund?When is an event worth insuring against?Is insurance worth it if you can afford to replace the item? If not, when is it?FHA loan just commenced : Any way to get any of the up-front mortgage insurance back?Which types of insurances do I need to buy?Should I carry less renter's insurance if I can self-insure?Mortgage Adviser Signed Me Up For Multiple Home and Life Insurances (UK)Why many travel insurances don't cover country of nationality?