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[reply]

WikiProject iconMathematics C‑class Low‑priority
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
 Low This article has been rated as Low-priority on the project's priority scale.

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[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[reply]