Reason: Initial publication. Proof organized around a Step 0 of limit-inferior and limit-superior facts derived directly from their definitions, and a Step 1 deriving the lower semicontinuous limit-inferior inequality from Lipschitz testing via inf-convolution and monotone convergence; the four claims then follow from Step 1.
Proof
Throughout, dR is the absolute-value metric on R, and measurable means measurable with respect to B(X) and the Borel σ-algebraB(R) of the real line. Every bounded continuous and every bounded lower semicontinuous f:X→R is measurable, by claims 3 and 5 of Borel Measurability and Bounded Integration on a Metric Space, and if ∣f(x)∣≤M for every x then f is integrable with respect to every probability measure ν on (X,B(X)) with ∫Xfdν≤M, by claim 6 of that lemma. In particular every sequence of integrals occurring below is bounded, so its limit inferior and limit superior are defined.
(i) If c≤am for every m≥N, then c is a lower bound of AN, so c≤infAN; and infAN belongs to {infAk:k∈N}, whose least upper bound is liminfnan. Hence c≤liminfnan.
(ii) If am≤c for every m≥N, then c is an upper bound of AN, so supAN≤c; and limsupnan, being the greatest lower bound of {supAk:k∈N}, satisfies limsupnan≤supAN≤c.
(iii) For every real c, liminfn(an+c)=(liminfnan)+c. Indeed, if S⊆R is nonempty and bounded below and c is real, write S+c={s+c:s∈S}; then infS+c is a lower bound of S+c, and every lower bound t of S+c makes t−c a lower bound of S, so t−c≤infS, that is t≤infS+c; hence inf(S+c)=infS+c. The same argument with upper bounds gives sup(S+c)=supS+c for nonempty S bounded above. Applying the first identity to each Ak gives inf(Ak+c)=infAk+c, and applying the second to {infAk:k∈N} gives the assertion.
(iv) If a,b are real and a≤b+ε for every real ε>0, then a≤b; for otherwise b<a, and ε=(a−b)/2 is positive with a≤b+(a−b)/2, that is (a−b)/2≤0, contradicting b<a.
Step 1.Assume that (∫Xgdμn)n∈N converges to ∫Xgdμ for every bounded Lipschitz g:X→R. Then for every bounded lower semicontinuous f:X→R,
Apply Bounded Lower Semicontinuous Functions are Increasing Limits of Lipschitz Functions to h with the bound 2M: there are functions hk:X→R, k∈N, each Lipschitz and continuous on X (claim 2 there), with 0≤hk(x)≤h(x)≤2M (claim 1), hk(x)≤hk+1(x) (claim 3), and h(x) the least upper bound of {hk(x):k∈N} (claim 4), for every x∈X. In particular each hk is bounded and Lipschitz.
Fix k∈N. For every n, monotonicity of the integral (claim 2 of Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral) gives ∫Xhkdμn≤∫Xhdμn. By the assumption of Step 1, (∫Xhkdμn)n converges to ∫Xhkdμ, so for a real ε>0 there is N∈N with ∫Xhkdμ−ε<∫Xhkdμn for every n≥N, and therefore ∫Xhkdμ−ε≤∫Xhdμn for every n≥N. Step 0(i) gives ∫Xhkdμ−ε≤liminfn∫Xhdμn, and Step 0(iv), applied with a=∫Xhkdμ and b=liminfn∫Xhdμn, gives
∫Xhkdμ≤nliminf∫Xhdμn.
Each hk and h is nonnegative, real valued and measurable, hence measurable as a [0,∞]-valued function in the sense of Lebesgue Integral of a Nonnegative Measurable Function, since for every real a the set {x∈X:h(x)>a} is the preimage of (a,∞) and so lies in B(X); and by claim 6(c) of Borel Measurability and Bounded Integration on a Metric Space the integrals of hk and of h as nonnegative measurable functions are real and agree with their integrals as integrable functions. The sequence (hk)k∈N is nondecreasing with pointwise least upper bound h, so Monotone Convergence Theorem shows that ∫Xhdμ is the least upper bound of {∫Xhkdμ:k∈N}. By the previous display, liminfn∫Xhdμn is an upper bound of that set, so
Claim 1. Assume the hypothesis of claim 1 and let f:X→R be bounded continuous, with ∣f(x)∣≤M for every x. By claim 2 of Semicontinuity Under Negation and Characterization of Continuity, f is both upper and lower semicontinuous on X, and by claim 1 of that lemma the pointwise negation −f is lower semicontinuous on X; it satisfies ∣−f(x)∣≤M as well. Write bn=∫Xfdμn and b=∫Xfdμ; by claim 2 of Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral, ∫X(−f)dμn=−bn and ∫X(−f)dμ=−b. Step 1, applied to f and to −f, gives
Claim 2. Assume (μn) converges weakly to μ. Every bounded Lipschitz g:X→R is continuous on X by A Lipschitz Map is Uniformly Continuous, hence bounded continuous, so (∫Xgdμn) converges to ∫Xgdμ. Thus the assumption of Step 1 is satisfied, and Step 1 gives the asserted inequality for every bounded lower semicontinuous f. The boundedness of (∫Xfdμn) was noted at the outset.
Claim 3. Let U∈Td and let 1U be its indicator function, so that 0≤1U(x)≤1 for every x and 1U is bounded. It is lower semicontinuous on X: let x∈X and let ε>0 be real. If x∈U, then by Open Subset of a Metric Space there is a real r>0 with Bd(x,r)⊆U; every y∈X with d(x,y)<r then lies in U, so 1U(y)=1>1−ε=1U(x)−ε. If x∈/U, then 1U(x)=0 and every y∈X satisfies 1U(y)≥0>−ε=1U(x)−ε, so any positive δ serves.
Claim 4. Let F be closed in (X,Td) and put U=X∖F, which is open by Closed Subset of a Topological Space. The sequences (μn(F)) and (μn(U)) take values in [0,1] by claim 2 of Basic Properties of a Measure, so they are bounded. Since μ and the μn are probability measures, hence finite, claim 3 of Basic Properties of a Measure gives μn(U)=1−μn(F) for every n and μ(U)=1−μ(F).
Let ε>0 be real. By claim 3 we have μ(U)≤liminfnμn(U), and by claim 3 of Basic Properties of the Limit Inferior and Limit Superior of a Bounded Real Sequence there is N∈N with liminfnμn(U)−ε<μm(U) for every m≥N. Combining, μ(U)−ε<μm(U) for every m≥N, that is 1−μ(F)−ε<1−μm(F), that is μm(F)<μ(F)+ε, for every m≥N. Step 0(ii) gives limsupnμn(F)≤μ(F)+ε, and Step 0(iv) then gives limsupnμn(F)≤μ(F).