
Real Analysis Real Analysis Math Forum 
 LinkBack  Thread Tools  Display Modes 
December 26th, 2016, 01:21 AM  #1 
Newbie Joined: Oct 2016 From: Netherlands Posts: 3 Thanks: 0  kdim manifold, measure 0
Could someone explain to me why: if M is a kdim manifold in R^n and k<n , then M has measure 0. 
December 26th, 2016, 12:58 PM  #2 
Senior Member Joined: Aug 2012 Posts: 824 Thanks: 140 
Step 1. Can you see that the unit circle has measure zero in the plane?

December 28th, 2016, 04:14 PM  #3 
Member Joined: Oct 2016 From: New York Posts: 44 Thanks: 11 Math Focus: Analysis and Differential Geometry 
I can't wait until I'm at this level of math! I can't wait to learn measure theory! The end of Rudin's book starts it, but I'm only on Chapter 2 so far.

December 28th, 2016, 05:36 PM  #4  
Member Joined: Sep 2016 From: USA Posts: 73 Thanks: 27 Math Focus: Dynamical systems, analytic function theory, numerics  Quote:
1. One sufficient condition for a set to have measure (with respect to $n$ dimensional Lebesgue measure) zero is that you can cover it by a set of arbitrarily small measure. Convince yourself that any $k$ dimesional affine subset of $\mathbb{R}^n$ must have measure zero. 2. An intuitive way of thinking about a manifold is as "locally" Euclidean subset. This means that for any point there is a neighborhood on which the topology is locally homeomorphic to a ball in $\mathbb{R}^n$. Combining the above 2 ideas should hopefully give you an intuitive idea about why the theorem must be true.  

Tags 
kdim, manifold, measure 
Thread Tools  
Display Modes  

Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Parametrization of a manifold  Robert Lownds  Real Analysis  3  June 18th, 2013 09:21 AM 
Manifold  darth_coder  Real Analysis  2  October 30th, 2012 08:07 AM 
manifold  hadis  Math Events  1  June 8th, 2010 12:50 PM 
manifold  hadis  Math Events  0  July 11th, 2009 12:31 AM 
manifold  hadis  Math Events  0  July 11th, 2009 12:23 AM 