Let $mathcal F=${$emptyset, Omega$} prove that $X : Omega to Bbb R$ is a random variable if $X$ is constant.












1












$begingroup$


I have to prove this:




Let $(Omega, mathcal F)$ be a measurable space, $mathcal F=${$emptyset, Omega$} prove that $X : Omega to Bbb R$ is a random variable if and only if $X$ is constant.




I've tried using that $X$ is a random variable iff $X^{-1}B in mathcal F$ if $B$ is a Borel set but I cannot conclude anything, also I´ve tried with the other definition: $X$ is a random variable iff $(X le x) in mathcal F$ $ forall x in R$.



Any hint or idea about what definition of random variable should I use?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Using the inequality version is the approach I would use.
    $endgroup$
    – Joe
    Jan 11 at 18:54
















1












$begingroup$


I have to prove this:




Let $(Omega, mathcal F)$ be a measurable space, $mathcal F=${$emptyset, Omega$} prove that $X : Omega to Bbb R$ is a random variable if and only if $X$ is constant.




I've tried using that $X$ is a random variable iff $X^{-1}B in mathcal F$ if $B$ is a Borel set but I cannot conclude anything, also I´ve tried with the other definition: $X$ is a random variable iff $(X le x) in mathcal F$ $ forall x in R$.



Any hint or idea about what definition of random variable should I use?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Using the inequality version is the approach I would use.
    $endgroup$
    – Joe
    Jan 11 at 18:54














1












1








1





$begingroup$


I have to prove this:




Let $(Omega, mathcal F)$ be a measurable space, $mathcal F=${$emptyset, Omega$} prove that $X : Omega to Bbb R$ is a random variable if and only if $X$ is constant.




I've tried using that $X$ is a random variable iff $X^{-1}B in mathcal F$ if $B$ is a Borel set but I cannot conclude anything, also I´ve tried with the other definition: $X$ is a random variable iff $(X le x) in mathcal F$ $ forall x in R$.



Any hint or idea about what definition of random variable should I use?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




I have to prove this:




Let $(Omega, mathcal F)$ be a measurable space, $mathcal F=${$emptyset, Omega$} prove that $X : Omega to Bbb R$ is a random variable if and only if $X$ is constant.




I've tried using that $X$ is a random variable iff $X^{-1}B in mathcal F$ if $B$ is a Borel set but I cannot conclude anything, also I´ve tried with the other definition: $X$ is a random variable iff $(X le x) in mathcal F$ $ forall x in R$.



Any hint or idea about what definition of random variable should I use?







probability probability-theory measure-theory random-variables






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Jan 11 at 18:57









6005

36.4k751125




36.4k751125










asked Jan 11 at 18:45









Alex TurnerAlex Turner

3361210




3361210








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Using the inequality version is the approach I would use.
    $endgroup$
    – Joe
    Jan 11 at 18:54














  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Using the inequality version is the approach I would use.
    $endgroup$
    – Joe
    Jan 11 at 18:54








1




1




$begingroup$
Using the inequality version is the approach I would use.
$endgroup$
– Joe
Jan 11 at 18:54




$begingroup$
Using the inequality version is the approach I would use.
$endgroup$
– Joe
Jan 11 at 18:54










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















1












$begingroup$


I've tried using that $X$ is a random variable iff $X^{-1}B in mathcal F$ if $B$ is a Borel set but I cannot conclude anything, also I've tried with the other definition: $X$ is a random variable iff $(X le x) in mathcal F$ $ forall x in R$




You are on the right track. Either idea will work, but let's go with your second idea. Since $mathcal{F} = {varnothing, Omega}$ (there are only two measurable sets), the statement "${X le x} in mathcal{F}$" is equivalent to
$$
{X le x} = varnothing qquadtext{OR}qquad {X le x } = Omega
$$



And that has to be true for all $x$. Now (assuming $Omega$ nonempty), let $a in Omega$, and consider $f(a)$. What can you say about
$$
{X le f(a)}?
$$

Also, what can you say about
$$
{X le y}
$$

for any $y < f(a)$?






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    0












    $begingroup$

    Use the second definition. Let $c=sup {x:{Xleq x} neq Omega}$. Verify that $0<c<infty$. Note that ${Xleq x}=Omega$ for $x>c$ and conclude that $Xleq c$. Next,note that ${Xleq x}=emptyset$ for all $x<c$. Conclude that $X=c$.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
      });
      });
      }, "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "69"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: true,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: 10,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3070206%2flet-mathcal-f-emptyset-omega-prove-that-x-omega-to-bbb-r-is-a-r%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes








      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      1












      $begingroup$


      I've tried using that $X$ is a random variable iff $X^{-1}B in mathcal F$ if $B$ is a Borel set but I cannot conclude anything, also I've tried with the other definition: $X$ is a random variable iff $(X le x) in mathcal F$ $ forall x in R$




      You are on the right track. Either idea will work, but let's go with your second idea. Since $mathcal{F} = {varnothing, Omega}$ (there are only two measurable sets), the statement "${X le x} in mathcal{F}$" is equivalent to
      $$
      {X le x} = varnothing qquadtext{OR}qquad {X le x } = Omega
      $$



      And that has to be true for all $x$. Now (assuming $Omega$ nonempty), let $a in Omega$, and consider $f(a)$. What can you say about
      $$
      {X le f(a)}?
      $$

      Also, what can you say about
      $$
      {X le y}
      $$

      for any $y < f(a)$?






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$


















        1












        $begingroup$


        I've tried using that $X$ is a random variable iff $X^{-1}B in mathcal F$ if $B$ is a Borel set but I cannot conclude anything, also I've tried with the other definition: $X$ is a random variable iff $(X le x) in mathcal F$ $ forall x in R$




        You are on the right track. Either idea will work, but let's go with your second idea. Since $mathcal{F} = {varnothing, Omega}$ (there are only two measurable sets), the statement "${X le x} in mathcal{F}$" is equivalent to
        $$
        {X le x} = varnothing qquadtext{OR}qquad {X le x } = Omega
        $$



        And that has to be true for all $x$. Now (assuming $Omega$ nonempty), let $a in Omega$, and consider $f(a)$. What can you say about
        $$
        {X le f(a)}?
        $$

        Also, what can you say about
        $$
        {X le y}
        $$

        for any $y < f(a)$?






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$
















          1












          1








          1





          $begingroup$


          I've tried using that $X$ is a random variable iff $X^{-1}B in mathcal F$ if $B$ is a Borel set but I cannot conclude anything, also I've tried with the other definition: $X$ is a random variable iff $(X le x) in mathcal F$ $ forall x in R$




          You are on the right track. Either idea will work, but let's go with your second idea. Since $mathcal{F} = {varnothing, Omega}$ (there are only two measurable sets), the statement "${X le x} in mathcal{F}$" is equivalent to
          $$
          {X le x} = varnothing qquadtext{OR}qquad {X le x } = Omega
          $$



          And that has to be true for all $x$. Now (assuming $Omega$ nonempty), let $a in Omega$, and consider $f(a)$. What can you say about
          $$
          {X le f(a)}?
          $$

          Also, what can you say about
          $$
          {X le y}
          $$

          for any $y < f(a)$?






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$




          I've tried using that $X$ is a random variable iff $X^{-1}B in mathcal F$ if $B$ is a Borel set but I cannot conclude anything, also I've tried with the other definition: $X$ is a random variable iff $(X le x) in mathcal F$ $ forall x in R$




          You are on the right track. Either idea will work, but let's go with your second idea. Since $mathcal{F} = {varnothing, Omega}$ (there are only two measurable sets), the statement "${X le x} in mathcal{F}$" is equivalent to
          $$
          {X le x} = varnothing qquadtext{OR}qquad {X le x } = Omega
          $$



          And that has to be true for all $x$. Now (assuming $Omega$ nonempty), let $a in Omega$, and consider $f(a)$. What can you say about
          $$
          {X le f(a)}?
          $$

          Also, what can you say about
          $$
          {X le y}
          $$

          for any $y < f(a)$?







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Jan 11 at 18:55









          60056005

          36.4k751125




          36.4k751125























              0












              $begingroup$

              Use the second definition. Let $c=sup {x:{Xleq x} neq Omega}$. Verify that $0<c<infty$. Note that ${Xleq x}=Omega$ for $x>c$ and conclude that $Xleq c$. Next,note that ${Xleq x}=emptyset$ for all $x<c$. Conclude that $X=c$.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$


















                0












                $begingroup$

                Use the second definition. Let $c=sup {x:{Xleq x} neq Omega}$. Verify that $0<c<infty$. Note that ${Xleq x}=Omega$ for $x>c$ and conclude that $Xleq c$. Next,note that ${Xleq x}=emptyset$ for all $x<c$. Conclude that $X=c$.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$
















                  0












                  0








                  0





                  $begingroup$

                  Use the second definition. Let $c=sup {x:{Xleq x} neq Omega}$. Verify that $0<c<infty$. Note that ${Xleq x}=Omega$ for $x>c$ and conclude that $Xleq c$. Next,note that ${Xleq x}=emptyset$ for all $x<c$. Conclude that $X=c$.






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  Use the second definition. Let $c=sup {x:{Xleq x} neq Omega}$. Verify that $0<c<infty$. Note that ${Xleq x}=Omega$ for $x>c$ and conclude that $Xleq c$. Next,note that ${Xleq x}=emptyset$ for all $x<c$. Conclude that $X=c$.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Jan 11 at 23:57









                  Kavi Rama MurthyKavi Rama Murthy

                  66k42867




                  66k42867






























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3070206%2flet-mathcal-f-emptyset-omega-prove-that-x-omega-to-bbb-r-is-a-r%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Human spaceflight

                      Can not write log (Is /dev/pts mounted?) - openpty in Ubuntu-on-Windows?

                      張江高科駅