Basic stats question involving borel sets

  • Thread starter Thread starter bennyska
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sets Stats
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the complexities of Borel sets in probability theory, particularly in relation to a homework problem involving definitions and theorems. Participants express confusion regarding the implications of certain statements, specifically the need for additional hypotheses to validate the relationships between sets A, B, and C. Key points include the clarification that P(A) should be P(S) = 1, and the acknowledgment that assumptions about disjoint sets are not explicitly stated. The consensus is that the problem requires a deeper understanding of Borel sets and their properties.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Borel sets in probability theory
  • Familiarity with basic probability theorems and definitions
  • Knowledge of set theory, particularly unions and intersections
  • Experience with statistical notation and terminology
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties and definitions of Borel sets in detail
  • Review the relevant probability theorems, focusing on conditions for disjoint sets
  • Examine examples of set relationships in probability, particularly unions and intersections
  • Explore advanced topics in measure theory to understand the implications of Borel sets
USEFUL FOR

Students of probability theory, educators revisiting Borel sets, and anyone seeking to clarify the foundational concepts of set theory in statistics.

bennyska
Messages
110
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



http://i.imgur.com/tjpka.png (the actual problem is the third part down)

Homework Equations



the first two parts are the definition of borel sets,and the second part is a relevant theorem.

The Attempt at a Solution



so I'm new to Borel sets. And I feel like I'm missing something big, because this exercise seems to contradict a lot of statistics I've learned. I have a feeling once I get what I'm missing, it should be relatively easy to prove this stuff, but if someone could help me find out what it is I'm missing, it would be greatly appreciated.

For example: (i) from the exercise. This seems to be true if and only if A and B are disjoint, but nowhere are we told this is so. (ii) seems to imply that AUB = 1 (following from (iv) of the theorem), but again, we are not told this. (iii) seems to imply that A⊆C, or C⊆A, but nowhere are we told this is so. (iv) I haven't started yet, but I'm not worried about that one; at first glance it just looks like letting AUB equal one set, and then using the theorem. But the first 3 are proving a big conceptual block for me.

again, I think I'm missing exactly what a Borel set is, and how it is different than a usual set. Any help with that would be awesome. Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, it's been about 45 years since I taught any stat courses and, believe it or not, even teachers forget eventually :mad:. But, for what it's worth, I don't think you are missing anything. It looks to me like some hypotheses are left out, as you suspect.
 
(i) of 1.3.5 clearly contradicts (iv) of 1.3.1

1.3.1 seem completely correct except that in (i) it says P(A) = 1, while that should be P(S) = 1.

I cannot make much sense out of 1.3.5 - except by assuming there are additional restrictions on A, B & C, which are not shown in the excerpt.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
7K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
12K