Throughout, (X,F,μ) and the [0,∞] conventions are as in the statement. We use repeatedly that F is closed under differences: for A,B∈F we have B∖A=X∖((X∖B)∪A), which lies in F by the closure properties recorded in Sigma-Algebra and Measurable Space.
Claim 1. Define a sequence (Dm)m∈N in F by Dm=Am for m≤r and Dm=∅ for m>r. Its members are pairwise disjoint and ⋃m∈NDm=⋃i=1rAi, so countable additivity in Measure, Measure Space, and Probability Measure gives
μ(i=1⋃rAi)=m∈N∑μ(Dm).
Since μ(∅)=0, the k-th partial sum of (μ(Dm))m∈N equals ∑i=1min{k,r}μ(Ai), and in particular equals ∑i=1rμ(Ai) for every k≥r.
If every μ(Ai) with i≤r is real, then every μ(Dm) is real and the partial sums form a nondecreasing sequence that is constant with value ∑i=1rμ(Ai) from index r on; that value is therefore an upper bound for the partial sums and is itself a partial sum, hence it is their least upper bound. By the definition of the sum of a sequence in [0,∞], the displayed sum equals ∑i=1rμ(Ai).
If μ(Ai)=∞ for some i≤r, then not every term of (μ(Dm)) is real, so by that same definition ∑mμ(Dm)=∞; and the finite sum ∑i=1rμ(Ai), formed in [0,∞] with the convention a+∞=∞+a=∞, is also ∞. In either case the two sides agree, and the finite sum is ∞ precisely when some term is ∞, since a finite sum of nonnegative real numbers is real.
Claim 2. The sets A and B∖A are disjoint members of F whose union is B, so claim 1 with r=2 gives
μ(B)=μ(A)+μ(B∖A).
If μ(A)=∞ or μ(B∖A)=∞, then μ(B)=∞ and μ(A)≤μ(B) holds, because every element of [0,∞] is at most ∞ by the convention a<∞ for real a≥0. Otherwise both are nonnegative real numbers and μ(A)≤μ(A)+μ(B∖A)=μ(B) by the order of the ordered field of real numbers.
Claim 3. By claim 2, μ(A)≤μ(B)<∞ and μ(B∖A)≤μ(B)<∞, so both μ(A) and μ(B∖A) are real. The identity μ(B)=μ(A)+μ(B∖A) of claim 2 is then an identity between real numbers, and subtracting μ(A) gives μ(B∖A)=μ(B)−μ(A). If μ is finite, apply this with B=X, which is permitted since μ(X)<∞ and A⊆X.
Claim 4. Set B1=A1 and, for m≥2,
Bm=Am∖i=1⋃m−1Ai.
Each Bm lies in F, and Bm⊆Am. They are pairwise disjoint: if m<m′ then Bm⊆Am⊆⋃i=1m′−1Ai, while Bm′ is disjoint from that union. An induction on k shows ⋃m=1kBm=⋃m=1kAm: this is clear for k=1, and if it holds for k then
m=1⋃k+1Bm=(m=1⋃kAm)∪(Ak+1∖m=1⋃kAm)=m=1⋃k+1Am.
Consequently ⋃m∈NBm=⋃m∈NAm, and countable additivity gives
μ(m∈N⋃Am)=m∈N∑μ(Bm),
while μ(Bm)≤μ(Am) for every m by claim 2.
If some μ(Am)=∞, or if every μ(Am) is real but the partial sums of (μ(Am)) are not bounded above, then ∑mμ(Am)=∞ and the asserted inequality holds. Otherwise every μ(Am) is real with partial sums bounded above; then every μ(Bm) is real, and comparing the sums term by term, the k-th partial sum of (μ(Bm)) is at most the k-th partial sum of (μ(Am)), hence at most ∑mμ(Am). Thus ∑mμ(Am) is an upper bound for the partial sums of (μ(Bm)), and their least upper bound ∑mμ(Bm) is at most ∑mμ(Am).
Claim 5. Set C1=A1 and Cm=Am∖Am−1 for m≥2; these lie in F. They are pairwise disjoint: if m<m′ then Cm⊆Am⊆Am′−1 by the nesting hypothesis, while Cm′ is disjoint from Am′−1. An induction on k shows ⋃m=1kCm=Ak: this is clear for k=1, and if it holds for k then ⋃m=1k+1Cm=Ak∪(Ak+1∖Ak)=Ak+1, using Ak⊆Ak+1. Hence ⋃m∈NCm=A, and countable additivity gives μ(A)=∑m∈Nμ(Cm), while by claim 1 the k-th partial sum of (μ(Cm)) is
m=1∑kμ(Cm)=μ(m=1⋃kCm)=μ(Ak).
Suppose first that every μ(Am) is real and that S={μ(Am):m∈N} is bounded above. Each μ(Cm) is then real, since μ(Cm)≤μ(Am)<∞ by claim 2, and the partial sums of (μ(Cm)) are exactly the members of S, which are bounded above. By the definition of the sum of a sequence in [0,∞], μ(A) is the least upper bound σ of S. The sequence (μ(Ak))k∈N is nondecreasing by claim 2 and the nesting hypothesis. Given a real ε>0, the number σ−ε is not an upper bound of S, so there is K∈N with σ−ε<μ(AK); for every k≥K we then have σ−ε<μ(AK)≤μ(Ak)≤σ, whence ∣μ(Ak)−σ∣<ε. Thus (μ(Ak)) converges to σ=μ(A) in the sense of Limit of a Sequence of Real Numbers.
Suppose instead that some μ(Am0)=∞. Then Am0⊆A and claim 2 give μ(A)=∞. Finally, suppose every μ(Am) is real but S is not bounded above. The partial sums of (μ(Cm)) are the members of S and are therefore not bounded above, so by the definition of the sum of a sequence in [0,∞] we again get μ(A)=∑mμ(Cm)=∞.