My Math Forum Random Variables

 October 22nd, 2017, 03:35 PM #1 Member   Joined: Nov 2016 From: Kansas Posts: 73 Thanks: 1 Random Variables Let X: $\omega$ ->R be a real-valued random variable which is not almost surely constant, that is, for every c that belongs to R,we have P [X = c] < 1. Prove: (a) The distribution function of X takes a value in the interval (0, 1). (b) There exist a< b such that 0 < P [X $\leq$ a] < 1 and 0 < P [X $\leq$ b] < 1
 October 22nd, 2017, 05:32 PM #2 Senior Member   Joined: Aug 2012 Posts: 2,047 Thanks: 585 Is $\omega$ the natural numbers? Or does it have some other meaning here? I have another question. The phrase "not almost surely constant" is puzzling. By way of context I don't know any probability theory but I know a little measure theory, so I'm trying to translate your terminology to what I know. Now if you tell me a function $f$ is "almost surely constant," that means that it is constant except for a set of measure $0$. For example if $f(x) = 0$ on the irrationals and $f(x) = x$ on the rationals, then $f$ is constant almost everywhere. The set of points where it's not constant, namely the rationals, has measure $0$. In passing this is also problematic for your notation $\omega$, which I know as the set-theoretic notation for what's usually called $\mathbb N$, the set of natural numbers. But you can't mean that here, since "almost surely" refers to the set of exceptions having measure $0$ in the domain. But in $\mathbb N$ everything has measure $0$, it's a countable set. So you must mean something else by $\omega$. Now, we've convinced ourselves that a function $f$ is almost surely constant if the set of exceptions (where it's not constant) has measure zero. So if it's NOT almost surely constant, it must be nonconstant on some set of positive measure. For example if the domain is the unit interval, and $f(x) = x$ for $x < \frac{1}{2}$ and $0$ otherwise, then $f$ fails to be constant on a set of positive measure, hence it's "not almost surely constant." I have the feeling this is not what you mean. I can't correspond it to the other characterization that $P [X = c] < 1$. I wonder if you can explain this for my benefit. I'm just trying to expand my own knowledge by understanding your question in terms of what I know. Last edited by Maschke; October 22nd, 2017 at 05:57 PM.
October 23rd, 2017, 12:49 PM   #3
Global Moderator

Joined: May 2007

Posts: 6,613
Thanks: 617

Quote:
 Originally Posted by ZMD Let X: $\omega$ ->R be a real-valued random variable which is not almost surely constant, that is, for every c that belongs to R,we have P [X = c] < 1. Prove: (a) The distribution function of X takes a value in the interval (0, 1). (b) There exist a< b such that 0 < P [X $\leq$ a] < 1 and 0 < P [X $\leq$ b] < 1
Is p supposed to be a probability density function or a probability distribution function?

 October 25th, 2017, 08:46 AM #4 Member   Joined: Jan 2016 From: Athens, OH Posts: 89 Thanks: 47 I think this is what you want. If you have questions about the proof or facts stated, just post again. Thanks from Maschke

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post georgia19 Advanced Statistics 1 December 6th, 2014 03:33 PM messaoud2010 Probability and Statistics 1 July 18th, 2014 11:26 AM ricardo Advanced Statistics 4 December 27th, 2013 12:24 AM womp3 Advanced Statistics 1 December 3rd, 2013 12:42 PM gama Advanced Statistics 1 November 3rd, 2013 10:36 AM

 Contact - Home - Forums - Cryptocurrency Forum - Top