Continuity Property for Non-increasing Sets (Probability)

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the continuity property for non-increasing sets in probability. The original poster seeks clarification on whether to use intersections of disjoint sets instead of unions, similar to the non-decreasing proof. They aim to prove that the limit of the expected value of a sequence of events equals the limit of the probabilities of those events. It is noted that the intersection of disjoint sets is empty, and the probability of an empty set is zero. Ultimately, the poster realizes that they can still utilize disjoint sets and complementary probabilities of unions for their proof.
rbzima
Messages
83
Reaction score
0
So, I know the proof for a non-decreasing set using the continuity property, and I'm wondering if I have to use the intersection of all pairwise disjoint sets rather than the union, as seen in the non-decreasing proof. Any help would be greatly appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It might help if you said what you were trying to prove
 
Ahhh, good call my brother! Forgot!

Probability of the limit as n approaches infinity of E_{n} equals the limit as n approaches infinity of the probability of E_{n}
 
The intersection of disjoint sets is empty! All you need is 2 sets to get the result - Prob(empty set)=0.
 
Does anyone have any idea what this would look like in a Venn Diagram? I personally was thinking that I might be able to prove this using disjoint sets with unions, and complementary probabilities. I'm not 100% sure of that though at this point.
 
Nevermind everone! I just realized that I can still use disjoint sets and complementary probabilities of unions. Thanks for the different opinions though!
 
I was reading documentation about the soundness and completeness of logic formal systems. Consider the following $$\vdash_S \phi$$ where ##S## is the proof-system making part the formal system and ##\phi## is a wff (well formed formula) of the formal language. Note the blank on left of the turnstile symbol ##\vdash_S##, as far as I can tell it actually represents the empty set. So what does it mean ? I guess it actually means ##\phi## is a theorem of the formal system, i.e. there is a...

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
622
Replies
19
Views
2K
Back
Top