Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I am trying to solve the following problem:

Let $(\Omega, \mathbb{A}, \mathbb{P})$ be a probability space and $X_1, X_2, \ldots, X_n$ independent real random variables. Prove that the sum $X_1 + X_2 + ... + \ldots X_n$ is $\mathbb{P}$-almost surely constant iff each $X_i$ is $\mathbb{P}$-almost surely constant.

Do you have any ideas or hints how to tackle with this problem? Thanks.

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

up vote 2 down vote accepted

It suffices to show: $X+Y=c$ almost surely $\Rightarrow X$ constant almost surely where $X,Y$ are independent random variables.

Let $\xi,\eta \in \mathbb{R}$. By the independence we have

$$\mathbb{E}e^{\imath \, (X,X+Y) \cdot (\xi,\eta)} = \mathbb{E}e^{\imath \, \xi \cdot X} \cdot \mathbb{E}e^{\imath \, (X+Y) \cdot \eta} = \mathbb{E}e^{\imath \, \xi \cdot X} \cdot \mathbb{E}e^{\imath \, \eta \cdot X} \cdot \mathbb{E}e^{\imath \, \eta \cdot Y}$$

On the other hand

$$\mathbb{E}e^{\imath \, (X,X+Y) \cdot (\xi,\eta)} = \mathbb{E}e^{\imath \, (\xi+\eta) \cdot X} \cdot \mathbb{E}e^{\imath \, \eta \cdot Y}$$

Since $$\mathbb{E}e^{\imath \, \eta \cdot X} \cdot \mathbb{E}e^{\imath \, \eta \cdot Y} = \mathbb{E}e^{\imath \, (X+Y) \cdot \eta} = e^{\imath \, \eta \cdot c} (\not=0)$$ we have $\mathbb{E}e^{\imath \, \eta \cdot Y} \not= 0$ for all $\eta$. Hence we obtain from the first two equations

$$\mathbb{E}e^{\imath \, (X,X) \cdot (\eta,\xi)} = \mathbb{E}e^{\imath \, (\xi+\eta) \cdot X} = \mathbb{E}e^{\imath \, X \cdot \eta} \cdot \mathbb{E}e^{\imath \, X \cdot \xi}$$

This means that $X$ is independent of $X$ and therefore almost surely constant.

Remark In the last step we used the following theorem: Two random variables $U,V$ are independent $$\Leftrightarrow \forall \xi,\eta: \mathbb{E}e^{\imath (U,V) \cdot (\xi,\eta)} = \mathbb{E}e^{\imath \, U \cdot \xi} \cdot \mathbb{E}e^{\imath \, V \cdot \eta}$$


Another approach: Let $S_n := \sum_{j=1}^n X_j$. We have $0=\mathbb{V}S_n= \sum_{j=1}^n \mathbb{V}X_j$. This implies $\mathbb{V}X_j=0$ and therefore $X_j = \mathbb{E}X_j$ a.s.. The problem is that one has to show $X_j \in L^2$ (to do these calculations).

share|improve this answer
    
I suppose $\mathbb{V}$ indicates variance? –  Nate Eldredge Nov 25 '12 at 13:53
    
Exactly... totally forgot to mention it. –  saz Nov 25 '12 at 15:39

I will prove the $\implies$ part. Assume that $X+Y$ is a constant a.s now since $\mathbb{R}=\cup_n[n,n+1]$ so we can find an interval $I_1$ such that $P(X\in I_1)>0$ by the same idea we can divide $I_1$ into two parts so we can find an interval $I_2\subset I_1$ such that $P(X\in I_2)>0$. By induction we can find a nested sequence of intervals $I_n$ such that $P(X\in I_n)>0$. Since $\cap_nI_n$ is a single point by our construction call it $a$ so $P(X=a)=\lim_nP(X\in I_n)$ so if $X$ is not a constant a.s then we can find $n_0$ such that $0<P(X\in I_{n_0})<1$. now since $X+Y$ is equal to a constant $c$ a.s so $P(X\in I_{n_0}\cap Y\notin c-I_{n_0})=0$ and since $X,Y$ are independent so $P(Y\notin c-I_{n_0})=0$ also using that $P(X\notin I_{n_0}\cap Y\in c-I_{n_0})=0$ we get $P(Y\in c-I_{n_0} )=0$ contradiction.

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks a lot for your comments. Got it. –  eugen1806 Nov 25 '12 at 19:50

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.