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.

In our lecture on probability, my professor made the comment that "a random variable X is not independent from itself." (Here he was specifically talking about discrete random variables.) I asked him why that was true. (My intuition for two counterexamples are $X \equiv 0$ and $X$ s.t. $$m_X(x) = \begin{cases}1, &\text{ if } x = x_0\\ 0, &\text{ if }x \neq x_0.)\end{cases}$$

In these cases, it seems that $\mathbb{P}(X \leq x_1 , X \leq x_2) = \mathbb{P}(X \leq x_1) \cdot \mathbb{P}(X \leq x_2)$.

My professor's response was, "The independence from or dependence of $X$ on itself depends on the definition of the joint distribution function $m_{X,X}$, which is essentially arbitrary."

Can someone help me to understand this?

share|improve this question
If I remember correctly, a random variable is independent of itself if and only if it is a constant, i.e., $X = E[X]$. –  user38355 Oct 2 '13 at 23:37
$X \equiv 0$ (or $X \equiv a$ for a constant $a$) is definitely a valid counterexample. –  Trevor Wilson Oct 2 '13 at 23:37

1 Answer 1

up vote 4 down vote accepted

The only events that are independent of themselves are those with probability either $0$ or $1$. That follows from the fact that a number is its own square if and only if it's either $0$ or $1$. The only way a random variable $X$ can be independent of itself is if for every measurable set $A$, either $\Pr(X\in A)=1$ or $\Pr(X\in A)=0$. That happens if and only if $X$ is essentially constant, meaning there is some value $x_0$ such that $\Pr(X=x_0)=1$.

share|improve this answer

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.