A question on a proof of the existence of non-measurable sets

125 Views Asked by At

This is an excerpt of Rosenthal's book: "A First look at Rigorous Probability Theory" and contains an important theorem in the development of measure theory. While I generally understand the proof well, there is a point that I find confusing, namely why does he take out $0$ from $H$. Could you please enlighten me as to the reason? Thank you.

enter image description here

The r-shifts are defined as,

enter image description here