Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a28b424f29b307d6

Jump to content

Talk:Tightness of measures

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 4 years ago by Malparti in topic Incorrect statement

Conflicting definitions of Tight Measure

[edit]

Definition of Tight Measure given in this article is not the same as Inner Regular Measure. For example, the article says that if we take with its order topology there is a measure that is not tight. But this cannot be so, since is such that for any . André Caldas (talk) 00:48, 26 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

Incorrect statement

[edit]

The section about Polish spaces says: "If is a compact Polish space, then every probability measure on is tight." This is stupid. If is compact, then all sets of probability measures are tight, not just the singletons (see a couple lines above) and Prokhorov's theorem is toothless.

The correct assertion is "If is a compact Polish space, then every probability measure on is tight." This arise from the separability of Polish spaces, btw. For instance see Lemma 3.2 in http://www.math.chalmers.se/~serik/C-space.pdf

69.204.248.106 (talk) 20:57, 8 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi, what you say makes sense but:
1. Striking out text in articles is not the way to make correction. This does not help anyone.
2. Your "correct assertion" is a verbatim copy of the statement you are criticizing, and the document you linked is not accessible. So it is not clear what you are trying to say.
Best, Malparti (talk) 11:24, 14 October 2021 (UTC)Reply