On finite measure, a.e. convergence is "almost" uniform — squeeze the bad set's measure below ε and convergence is uniform on the rest.
m(E∖F)<ε⇒fn→f uniformly on F
Examples & Exercises
Let fn(x)=1[1/(n+1),1/n](x) (0≤x≤1). For 0<δ≤1, show that the bad set En,δ={x:∣fk(x)∣≥δ for some k≥n} equals (0,1/n], and prove completely that for every ε>0, choosing n>1/ε gives m(En,δ)<ε while fk→0 uniformly on [1/n,1] — Egorov's theorem for this sequence.
En,δ=k≥n⋃[k+11,k1]=(0,n1],m(En,δ)=n1
x∈[1/n,1]sup∣fk(x)∣=0(k≥n+1)
δ=0.5, n=6: the bad set (0,61] has measure 61≈0.1667. On the good set [61,1], fk≡0 for k≥7 — uniform convergence you can see.Show proof
Since 0<δ≤1, ∣fk(x)∣≥δ is equivalent to fk(x)=1, i.e. to x∈[k+11,k1]. Hence En,δ=⋃k≥n[k+11,k1]. If x lies in this union, then for some k≥n, 0<x≤k1≤n1, so x∈(0,n1]. Conversely, if 0<x≤n1, the intervals (k+11,k1] partition (0,1], so exactly one k contains x; from k+11<x≤n1 we get k+1>n, i.e. k≥n. (At x=0 every fk is 0, so 0 is not in the bad set.) Thus En,δ=(0,n1] with measure n1.
Given ε>0, pick n>1/ε (e.g. n=⌊1/ε⌋+1). Then m(En,δ)=1/n<ε — the bad set can be made arbitrarily small.
Now check uniform convergence on F=[n1,1]. If k≥n+1 and x≥n1, then x≥n1>n+11≥k1, so x lies strictly above the right endpoint of the bump [k+11,k1] — hence fk(x)=0. So supx∈F∣fk(x)∣=0 for every k≥n+1, and fk→0 uniformly on F (the single term fn equals 1 at the point n1, but one term never affects the tail).
In summary: fn→0 pointwise on all of [0,1] (but not uniformly, since supfn=1 on [0,1]), yet deleting the single bad set (0,n1] of measure below ε leaves uniform convergence. That is Egorov's theorem for this sequence, visible in the scene as the red region shrinking at rate n1.
Fix δ≤1 and let Bn=En,δ be the bad sets. Show they form a decreasing sequence (Bn+1⊆Bn) with m(Bn)=1/n→0, by directly proving continuity of measure from above (m(An)↓m(⋂nAn)) for finite measure.
From problem 1, Bn=(0,n1], so Bn+1=(0,n+11]⊆(0,n1]=Bn is immediate (it also follows from the definition: the union over k≥n+1 sits inside the union over k≥n). Hence {Bn} is decreasing with m(B1)=1<∞.
Now prove continuity from above directly. Let An be decreasing with m(A1)<∞. Decompose A1 into disjoint pieces: A1=(⋂nAn)⊔⨆k≥1(Ak∖Ak+1). By countable additivity, m(A1)=m(⋂nAn)+∑k≥1(m(Ak)−m(Ak+1)) (the difference of measures needs m(Ak+1)≤m(A1)<∞). The partial sums telescope: ∑k=1N(m(Ak)−m(Ak+1))=m(A1)−m(AN+1), and bounded above by m(A1) they converge. Hence m(A1)=m(⋂nAn)+m(A1)−limN→∞m(AN), i.e. limN→∞m(AN)=m(⋂nAn) — finiteness m(A1)<∞ is what lets us cancel m(A1) from both sides.
Apply this to Bn: ⋂nBn=∅. Indeed, if x belonged to every Bn, then 0<x≤n1 for all n, forcing x=0 — contradicting x>0. Hence m(Bn)→m(∅)=0, matching the direct computation m(Bn)=1/n. The bad sets can shrink to empty intersection precisely because the total measure is finite — and that is the heart of Egorov's theorem.
Let fn=1[n,n+1] (functions on R). Prove that for every set F⊆R on which fn→0 uniformly, m(R∖F)=∞ — the counterexample showing why the finite-measure hypothesis is essential.
x∈Fsup∣fn(x)∣<21(n≥N)⇒F∩[n,n+1]=∅
[N,∞)⊆R∖F⇒m(R∖F)=∞
This problem is about the "escaping spike" 1[n,n+1] on R, not the scene's sequence — the preset is the scene default δ=0.5, n=6.Show proof
First, fixing any point x, fn(x)=0 for n>x, so fn→0 pointwise on all of R. But no finite-measure deletion can restore uniform convergence.
Suppose fn→0 uniformly on F⊆R. Then some N has supx∈F∣fn(x)∣<21 for all n≥N. But fn takes only the values 0 and 1, so a supremum below 21 forces fn≡0 on F — i.e. F∩[n,n+1]=∅ for every n≥N (otherwise fn=1 at that point and the supremum would be 1).
Hence [N,∞)=⋃n≥N[n,n+1]⊆R∖F, and m(R∖F)≥m([N,∞))=∞. Any set with uniform convergence must miss all but finitely many spikes, so the discarded set always has infinite measure — which is why Egorov's theorem cannot drop the hypothesis m(X)<∞. Contrast the scene's sequence: there the bumps pile up at the single point 0, so deleting a neighborhood of that point suffices.