Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

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

Just as the title suggests, this is my problem:

Let $Z_t$ be a strictly stationary sequence. Define $X_t = Z_t + \theta Z_{t-1}$. Show that this sequence is also strictly stationary.

Here's my problem. My definition of strictly stationary is that we have the distribution of $(Z_t,Z_{t+1},\dots,Z_{t+h})$ is independent of $t$ for all $t \in \mathbb{Z}$ and all $h \in \mathbb{N}$.

But how I see it we have $(X_t,X_{t+1},\dots,X_{t+h}) = (Z_t + \theta Z_{t-1},\dots,Z_{t+h} + \theta Z_{t+h-1})$ which would be independent of $t-1$ by how $Z_t$ is assumed to be. How do we shift this to independence of $t$?

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 2 down vote accepted

I dont think that that's a real problem: independence from $t-1$ is the same as independence from $t$ and you see it clearly by writing it more explicitely: for $h=1$ you simply get $Z_t+\theta Z_{t-1}\sim Z_{t+1}+\theta Z_t\quad\forall t\in\mathbb Z$ which is the same $\forall (t-1)\in\mathbb Z$. Do not get confused by dependence of the variables, stationarity is about their distribution; in fact a constant serie has dependent variables whose distribution is independent of $t$.

Or did I misunderstand your question?

share|cite|improve this answer
Haha, silly me. You're totally right. – BallzofFury Feb 12 '13 at 20:37

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.