« first day (1216 days earlier)      last day (2096 days later) » 

11:57 AM
37 mins ago, by user193319
2
Q: Vitali Covering Lemma Proof

user193319 Why may we assume that each interval in $\mathcal{F}$ is contained in $\mathcal{O}$? What warrants this reduction? Why is statement (4) true? If $x \in E - \bigcup_{k=1}^n I_k$, then $x \in E$ and $x \notin I_k$ for every $k=1,...,n$. Given some $\epsilon > 0$, there exists $I \in \mathcal{...

11 secs ago, by Secret
1 min ago, by Secret
37 mins ago, by user193319
2
Q: Vitali Covering Lemma Proof

user193319 Why may we assume that each interval in $\mathcal{F}$ is contained in $\mathcal{O}$? What warrants this reduction? Why is statement (4) true? If $x \in E - \bigcup_{k=1}^n I_k$, then $x \in E$ and $x \notin I_k$ for every $k=1,...,n$. Given some $\epsilon > 0$, there exists $I \in \mathcal{...

10 secs ago, by Secret
11 secs ago, by Secret
1 min ago, by Secret
37 mins ago, by user193319
2
Q: Vitali Covering Lemma Proof

user193319 Why may we assume that each interval in $\mathcal{F}$ is contained in $\mathcal{O}$? What warrants this reduction? Why is statement (4) true? If $x \in E - \bigcup_{k=1}^n I_k$, then $x \in E$ and $x \notin I_k$ for every $k=1,...,n$. Given some $\epsilon > 0$, there exists $I \in \mathcal{...

23 secs ago, by Secret
10 secs ago, by Secret
11 secs ago, by Secret
1 min ago, by Secret
37 mins ago, by user193319
2
Q: Vitali Covering Lemma Proof

user193319 Why may we assume that each interval in $\mathcal{F}$ is contained in $\mathcal{O}$? What warrants this reduction? Why is statement (4) true? If $x \in E - \bigcup_{k=1}^n I_k$, then $x \in E$ and $x \notin I_k$ for every $k=1,...,n$. Given some $\epsilon > 0$, there exists $I \in \mathcal{...

11 secs ago, by Secret
28 secs ago, by Secret
23 secs ago, by Secret
10 secs ago, by Secret
11 secs ago, by Secret
1 min ago, by Secret
37 mins ago, by user193319
2
Q: Vitali Covering Lemma Proof

user193319 Why may we assume that each interval in $\mathcal{F}$ is contained in $\mathcal{O}$? What warrants this reduction? Why is statement (4) true? If $x \in E - \bigcup_{k=1}^n I_k$, then $x \in E$ and $x \notin I_k$ for every $k=1,...,n$. Given some $\epsilon > 0$, there exists $I \in \mathcal{...

 
@Secret Thanks for the advertising...
 
:)
 
22 secs ago, by user193319
@Secret Thanks for the advertising...
 
fierce advertising
@Secret oh come on
 
 
2 hours later…
2:28 PM
11 messages moved from Mathematics
 
 
6 hours later…
8:32 PM
5 messages moved from Charcoal HQ
 

« first day (1216 days earlier)      last day (2096 days later) »