— Assume that the directed preordered set I has a countable cofinal subset. Let T=(Ti,pij) be an inverse system of topological spaces, T=lim←Ti and pi the canonical mapping of T into Ti. Then every inverse system (μi)i∈I of measures on T admits an inverse limit.
We shall first treat the case that I=N and set qn=pn,n+1. Let ε>0. Define recursively a sequence of compact sets Ln⊂Tn as follows: L0 is a compact subset of T0 such that μ0∙(T0−L0)≤ε/2, and for n≥0 the compact set Ln+1 is contained in qn−1(Ln) and satisfies
μn+1∙(qn−1(Ln)−Ln+1)≤ε/2n+2. This construction is possible by virtue of
Remark 3 of §1, No. 2. We have
μn+1∙(Tn+1−Ln+1)=μn+1∙(Tn+1−qn−1(Ln))+μn+1∙(qn−1(Ln)−Ln+1)≤μn+1∙(Tn+1−qn−1(Ln))+ε/2n+2=μn∙(Tn−Ln)+ε/2n+2 because
μn=qn(μn+1); by induction on
p, one deduces that
μp∙(Tp−Lp)≤ε(1−1/2p+1)≤ε. Since
T is a closed subspace of
∏n∈NTn and the product space
∏n∈NLn is compact, the subset
L=T∩∏n∈NLn=⋂n∈Npn−1(Ln) of
T is compact. Let
n∈N; we have
pn(L)=⋂m≥npnm(Lm) (GT, I, §9, No. 6, Prop. 8) and
pnm(Lm)⊃pnm′(Lm′) for
m′≥m≥n, whence
μn∙(Tn−pn(L))=m→∞limμn∙(Tn−pnm(Lm)).
But, for m≥n, the measure μn is the image of μm under pnm, whence
μn∙(Tn−pnm(Lm))=μm∙(Tm−pnm(pnm(Lm)))≤μm∙(Tm−Lm)≤ε;
passing to the limit with respect to m, we obtain μn∙(Tn−pn(L))≤ε. In other words, Prokhorov’s condition (P) is satisfied, and there exists a bounded measure μ on T such that μn=pn(μ) for all n∈N (No. 2, Th. 1).
Let us pass to the general case: there exists in I an increasing cofinal sequence (in)n∈N. The mapping t↦(pin(t))n∈N is a homeomorphism of T onto the inverse limit of the inverse system (Tin,pinim) (GT, I, §4, No. 4). By the first part of the proof, there exists therefore a bounded measure μ on T such that μin=pin(μ) for all n∈N. Let i∈I; there exists an n∈N with i≤in, whence
pi(μ)=piin(pin(μ))=piin(μin)=μi.
Q.E.D.
Theorem 2 is often used in the following situation: let D be a countable set and (Xt)t∈D a family of topological spaces. Let F be the set of finite subsets of D, ordered by inclusion. For J in F, set XJ=∏t∈JXt, and for J⊂J′ let pJJ′ be the canonical projection of XJ′ onto the partial product XJ. Also set X=∏t∈DXt and denote by pJ the canonical projection of X onto the partial product XJ. One shows easily (cf. S, III, §7, No. 2, Remark 3) that the family (pJ)J∈F defines a homeomorphism of X onto lim←XJ. An inverse system of measures is then a family of bounded measures μJ on XJ such that μJ=pJJ′(μJ′) for J⊂J′. There exists one and only one bounded measure μ on X such that μJ=pJ(μ) for every finite subset J of D (Kolmogoroff’s theorem). One sometimes says that μ is the measure on ∏t∈DXt having margins μJ.
In particular, suppose given, for every t∈D, a measure νt on Xt of total mass 1. Set μJ=⨂t∈Jνt for every finite subset J of D. Let J⊂J′ be two finite subsets of D and let K=J′−J; identifying XJ′ with XJ×XK, one has μJ′=μJ⊗μK, and since the measure μK has total mass 1, the projection of μJ⊗μK on XJ is equal to μJ. The measure on X admitting the margins μJ is denoted ⨂t∈Dνt and is called the product of the family (νt)t∈D. When the spaces Xt are compact, we recover the construction of Ch. III, §4, No. 6.
Bourbaki puts the proof directly after the statement, so what is above is the statement and its proof together.