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.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I´m not sure why this theorem is right, how can i prove it?

Let $X_1,X_2.... $ and $Y_1,Y_2...$ be random variables such that $X_n,Y_n$ are independent for every $n∈\mathbb N$ and such that X, resp Y, are the almost sure limits of $(X_n)$ and $(Y_n)$. Then also X and Y are independant.

Thanks for advice

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 6 down vote accepted

For every continuous bounded functions $u$ and $v$, $u(X_n)\to u(X)$, $v(Y_n)\to v(Y)$ and $u(X_n)v(Y_n)\to u(X)v(Y)$ almost surely. All these random variables are uniformly bounded hence $$ \mathbb E(u(X_n))\to\mathbb E(u(X)),\quad \mathbb E(v(Y_n))\to\mathbb E(v(Y)), $$ and $$ \mathbb E(u(X_n)v(Y_n))\to\mathbb E(u(X)v(Y)). $$ By independence of $X_n$ and $Y_n$, for each $n$, $\mathbb E(u(X_n)v(Y_n))=\mathbb E(u(X_n))\mathbb E(v(Y_n))$. By identification of the limits, $$ \mathbb E(u(X)v(Y))=\mathbb E(u(X))\mathbb E(v(Y)). $$ This holds for every continuous bounded functions $u$ and $v$, hence the distribution of $(X,Y)$ is the product of their distributions, QED.

share|cite|improve this answer
thank you, i can work with that – nordmann Jan 31 '13 at 0:28

Be careful with this answer: it's very possible I messed something up Yes, I did! See comments. Here goes: we want $$\mathbb{P}(X \leqslant a, Y \leqslant b) = \mathbb{P}(X \leqslant a)\mathbb{P}(Y \leqslant a)$$

Suppose first we have sequences of real numbers $a_j \rightarrow a, b_j \rightarrow b$. Then I claim first that $$a \leqslant A, b \leqslant B \Longleftrightarrow \forall n, \exists i | \forall j > i: a_j \leqslant A + \frac{1}{n}, b_j \leqslant B + \frac{1}{n}$$

Applying this criterion to $X_i(\omega) \rightarrow X(\omega), Y_i(\omega) \rightarrow Y(\omega)$ for each $\omega$ (throwing away a set of measure 0), we get $$\{ X \leqslant a, Y \leqslant b \} = \bigcap_n \bigcup_{i \geqslant 0} \bigcap_{j \geqslant i} \{ X_j \leqslant a + \frac{1}{n}, Y_j \leqslant b + \frac{1}{n} \}$$

When evaluating the probability of this, we can drag the $\mathbb{P}$ across each $\cap$ and $\cup$ since the relevant events (everything to the right of said operation) are nested, hence we get $$\mathbb{P}(X \leqslant a, Y \leqslant b) = \lim_n \lim_i \lim_{j \geqslant i} \mathbb{P}(X_j \leqslant a + \frac{1}{n}, Y_j \leqslant b + \frac{1}{n})$$By independence of $X_j$ and $Y_j$, we can rewrite this as $$\lim_n \lim_i \lim_{j \geqslant i} \mathbb{P}(X_j \leqslant a + \frac{1}{n})\mathbb{P}(Y_j \leqslant b + \frac{1}{n}) $$$$= (\lim_n \lim_i \lim_{j \geqslant i} \mathbb{P}(X_j \leqslant a + \frac{1}{n}))(\lim_n \lim_i \lim_{j \geqslant i} \mathbb{P}(Y_j \leqslant b + \frac{1}{n})) = \mathbb{P}(X \leqslant a)\mathbb{P}(Y \leqslant b) $$

share|cite|improve this answer
Unfortunately the events $[X_j\leqslant a+1/n,Y_j\leqslant b+1/n]$ are not nested with respect to $j$. – Did Jan 30 '13 at 11:02
@Did absolutely - a good point! – uncookedfalcon Jan 30 '13 at 17:46

Your Answer


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.