Limit of the intersection of events

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
20 replies · 10K views
stukbv
Messages
112
Reaction score
0
Hi, I keep seeing this come up
A1 ⊇ A2 ⊇ A3 ... is an infinite decreasing sequence of events. Prove from first principles
that
P(intersection of Ai from i=1 to infinity) = Lim P(An) as n--> infinity

All i can think of is that since each is a subset of the preceding, then A1 ∩ A2...∩An = An
So clearly P(A1 ∩ A2...∩An) = P(An) and thus the same for limits.
I think this is too simplistic though, is it or isn't it ?

Thanks a lot
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi stukbv! :smile:

Did you already encounter the dual version of this? That is, if

[tex]A_0\subseteq A_1\subseteq A_2\subseteq ...[/tex]

then

[tex]P\left(\bigcup_{i=0}^{+\infty}{A_i}\right)=\lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty}{P(A_n)}[/tex]

It is the easiest if we prove this first. Now, this statement actually follows from the [itex]\sigma[/itex]-additivity. However, the [itex]\sigma[/itex]-additivity requires the events to be disjoint, which is not the case here. Is there a way to make the events disjoint, though?
 
Yeah I've done it that way I think
Let B1 = A1
B2 = A2∩A1C
B3=A3∩A2C
And so on,
Then the Bi are disjoint and the union Bi (up to n) = An, but also U Bi up to ∞ = Union of Ai upto ∞ (since preceding ones are subsets!) so P(An) = P(U Bi) (to n) = Sum P(Bi (to n) as all bi are disjoint, then let RHS and LHS n tend to infinity and we get sum to infinity of P(Bi) = P(U Bi) to ∞ = P(U Ai) to ∞.
according to my lecturer!
 
Ah yes, that's very good! So now for your question. You need to prove that

[tex]P\left(\bigcap{A_n}\right)=\lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty}{P(A_n)}[/tex]

Now what happens if you take the complements of these events?
 
SO P(U An^c) is equal to the sum since they are disjoint?
But i don't see how you can relate the 2 like we did before
 
stukbv said:
SO P(U An^c) is equal to the sum since they are disjoint?
But i don't see how you can relate the 2 like we did before

No, they are not disjoint. But you have a formula for

[tex]P\left(\bigcup{A_n^c}\right)[/tex]

Right? You've proven the formula above...
 
1-p(An).
I see , but then how do i relate it to my initial statement?
 
Well, you know already that the statement

[tex]P\left(\bigcup{A_n^c}\right)=1-\lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty}{P(A_n)}[/tex]

is true. Now try to evaluate the left side.
 
surely if they are all subsets of their preceding ones then the union of the complements is just a1^c ?
 
We have

[tex]A_1\supseteq A_2\supseteq ...[/tex]

and thus

[tex]A_1^c\subseteq A_2^c\subseteq ...[/tex]

So that doesn't really work.