Construction of random elements in Hilbert space which are almost surely orthogonal.












6












$begingroup$


Let $(mathcal{H},langle cdot, cdot rangle)$ be an arbitrary Hilbert space. Can one construct two independent and identically distributed random elements $X,Y:(Omega,mathbb{F},P)to (mathcal{H},langle cdot, cdot rangle)$ with $text{supp}(X)not = {0}$, such that
$$
langle X(omega),Y(omega) rangle =0
$$
for almost all $omegainOmega$, i.e. $X$ and $Y$ are almost surely orthogonal.



Question:



I have shown that this can not be done for separable Hilbert spaces $mathcal{H}$, but is it possible to make such a construction in non-separable Hilbert spaces?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I'm not sure what you mean by a random function taking values in a Hilbert space. Usually people mean the Bochner integrable functions on a probability space. And their range is, by definition, inside a separable subspace almost surely.
    $endgroup$
    – Stephen Montgomery-Smith
    Nov 8 '16 at 17:54












  • $begingroup$
    @StephenMontgomery-Smith - $X$ and $Y$ are random Borel elements in $mathcal{H}$ (not random functions, but random variables if you will, such that each $omega$ maps to $X(omega)inmathcal{H}$). We don't assume that $X$ and $Y$ are bochner integrable. This would simply lead the the arguments for separable Hilbert spaces, in which case I have already shown non-existence. I would like to make an argument that almost surely orthogonal random i.i.d. elements are not in general degenerate, but they are if $mathcal{H}$ is separable (or the random elements are Bochner-measurable) they are.
    $endgroup$
    – Martin
    Nov 8 '16 at 19:23












  • $begingroup$
    What precisely do you mean by "random element?" I assume the map $omega mapsto X(omega)$ is measurable, but with respect to which topology on $mathcal H$? The norm topology or the weak topology? (I think the Borel sets generated can be different for non-separable spaces.)
    $endgroup$
    – Stephen Montgomery-Smith
    Nov 8 '16 at 21:08










  • $begingroup$
    Measurable with respect to the sigma algebra generated by the norm topology. Sorry if this was not explicitly written in the question.
    $endgroup$
    – Martin
    Nov 8 '16 at 21:18
















6












$begingroup$


Let $(mathcal{H},langle cdot, cdot rangle)$ be an arbitrary Hilbert space. Can one construct two independent and identically distributed random elements $X,Y:(Omega,mathbb{F},P)to (mathcal{H},langle cdot, cdot rangle)$ with $text{supp}(X)not = {0}$, such that
$$
langle X(omega),Y(omega) rangle =0
$$
for almost all $omegainOmega$, i.e. $X$ and $Y$ are almost surely orthogonal.



Question:



I have shown that this can not be done for separable Hilbert spaces $mathcal{H}$, but is it possible to make such a construction in non-separable Hilbert spaces?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I'm not sure what you mean by a random function taking values in a Hilbert space. Usually people mean the Bochner integrable functions on a probability space. And their range is, by definition, inside a separable subspace almost surely.
    $endgroup$
    – Stephen Montgomery-Smith
    Nov 8 '16 at 17:54












  • $begingroup$
    @StephenMontgomery-Smith - $X$ and $Y$ are random Borel elements in $mathcal{H}$ (not random functions, but random variables if you will, such that each $omega$ maps to $X(omega)inmathcal{H}$). We don't assume that $X$ and $Y$ are bochner integrable. This would simply lead the the arguments for separable Hilbert spaces, in which case I have already shown non-existence. I would like to make an argument that almost surely orthogonal random i.i.d. elements are not in general degenerate, but they are if $mathcal{H}$ is separable (or the random elements are Bochner-measurable) they are.
    $endgroup$
    – Martin
    Nov 8 '16 at 19:23












  • $begingroup$
    What precisely do you mean by "random element?" I assume the map $omega mapsto X(omega)$ is measurable, but with respect to which topology on $mathcal H$? The norm topology or the weak topology? (I think the Borel sets generated can be different for non-separable spaces.)
    $endgroup$
    – Stephen Montgomery-Smith
    Nov 8 '16 at 21:08










  • $begingroup$
    Measurable with respect to the sigma algebra generated by the norm topology. Sorry if this was not explicitly written in the question.
    $endgroup$
    – Martin
    Nov 8 '16 at 21:18














6












6








6


4



$begingroup$


Let $(mathcal{H},langle cdot, cdot rangle)$ be an arbitrary Hilbert space. Can one construct two independent and identically distributed random elements $X,Y:(Omega,mathbb{F},P)to (mathcal{H},langle cdot, cdot rangle)$ with $text{supp}(X)not = {0}$, such that
$$
langle X(omega),Y(omega) rangle =0
$$
for almost all $omegainOmega$, i.e. $X$ and $Y$ are almost surely orthogonal.



Question:



I have shown that this can not be done for separable Hilbert spaces $mathcal{H}$, but is it possible to make such a construction in non-separable Hilbert spaces?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




Let $(mathcal{H},langle cdot, cdot rangle)$ be an arbitrary Hilbert space. Can one construct two independent and identically distributed random elements $X,Y:(Omega,mathbb{F},P)to (mathcal{H},langle cdot, cdot rangle)$ with $text{supp}(X)not = {0}$, such that
$$
langle X(omega),Y(omega) rangle =0
$$
for almost all $omegainOmega$, i.e. $X$ and $Y$ are almost surely orthogonal.



Question:



I have shown that this can not be done for separable Hilbert spaces $mathcal{H}$, but is it possible to make such a construction in non-separable Hilbert spaces?







probability general-topology functional-analysis probability-theory hilbert-spaces






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Nov 6 '16 at 18:52









MartinMartin

911717




911717












  • $begingroup$
    I'm not sure what you mean by a random function taking values in a Hilbert space. Usually people mean the Bochner integrable functions on a probability space. And their range is, by definition, inside a separable subspace almost surely.
    $endgroup$
    – Stephen Montgomery-Smith
    Nov 8 '16 at 17:54












  • $begingroup$
    @StephenMontgomery-Smith - $X$ and $Y$ are random Borel elements in $mathcal{H}$ (not random functions, but random variables if you will, such that each $omega$ maps to $X(omega)inmathcal{H}$). We don't assume that $X$ and $Y$ are bochner integrable. This would simply lead the the arguments for separable Hilbert spaces, in which case I have already shown non-existence. I would like to make an argument that almost surely orthogonal random i.i.d. elements are not in general degenerate, but they are if $mathcal{H}$ is separable (or the random elements are Bochner-measurable) they are.
    $endgroup$
    – Martin
    Nov 8 '16 at 19:23












  • $begingroup$
    What precisely do you mean by "random element?" I assume the map $omega mapsto X(omega)$ is measurable, but with respect to which topology on $mathcal H$? The norm topology or the weak topology? (I think the Borel sets generated can be different for non-separable spaces.)
    $endgroup$
    – Stephen Montgomery-Smith
    Nov 8 '16 at 21:08










  • $begingroup$
    Measurable with respect to the sigma algebra generated by the norm topology. Sorry if this was not explicitly written in the question.
    $endgroup$
    – Martin
    Nov 8 '16 at 21:18


















  • $begingroup$
    I'm not sure what you mean by a random function taking values in a Hilbert space. Usually people mean the Bochner integrable functions on a probability space. And their range is, by definition, inside a separable subspace almost surely.
    $endgroup$
    – Stephen Montgomery-Smith
    Nov 8 '16 at 17:54












  • $begingroup$
    @StephenMontgomery-Smith - $X$ and $Y$ are random Borel elements in $mathcal{H}$ (not random functions, but random variables if you will, such that each $omega$ maps to $X(omega)inmathcal{H}$). We don't assume that $X$ and $Y$ are bochner integrable. This would simply lead the the arguments for separable Hilbert spaces, in which case I have already shown non-existence. I would like to make an argument that almost surely orthogonal random i.i.d. elements are not in general degenerate, but they are if $mathcal{H}$ is separable (or the random elements are Bochner-measurable) they are.
    $endgroup$
    – Martin
    Nov 8 '16 at 19:23












  • $begingroup$
    What precisely do you mean by "random element?" I assume the map $omega mapsto X(omega)$ is measurable, but with respect to which topology on $mathcal H$? The norm topology or the weak topology? (I think the Borel sets generated can be different for non-separable spaces.)
    $endgroup$
    – Stephen Montgomery-Smith
    Nov 8 '16 at 21:08










  • $begingroup$
    Measurable with respect to the sigma algebra generated by the norm topology. Sorry if this was not explicitly written in the question.
    $endgroup$
    – Martin
    Nov 8 '16 at 21:18
















$begingroup$
I'm not sure what you mean by a random function taking values in a Hilbert space. Usually people mean the Bochner integrable functions on a probability space. And their range is, by definition, inside a separable subspace almost surely.
$endgroup$
– Stephen Montgomery-Smith
Nov 8 '16 at 17:54






$begingroup$
I'm not sure what you mean by a random function taking values in a Hilbert space. Usually people mean the Bochner integrable functions on a probability space. And their range is, by definition, inside a separable subspace almost surely.
$endgroup$
– Stephen Montgomery-Smith
Nov 8 '16 at 17:54














$begingroup$
@StephenMontgomery-Smith - $X$ and $Y$ are random Borel elements in $mathcal{H}$ (not random functions, but random variables if you will, such that each $omega$ maps to $X(omega)inmathcal{H}$). We don't assume that $X$ and $Y$ are bochner integrable. This would simply lead the the arguments for separable Hilbert spaces, in which case I have already shown non-existence. I would like to make an argument that almost surely orthogonal random i.i.d. elements are not in general degenerate, but they are if $mathcal{H}$ is separable (or the random elements are Bochner-measurable) they are.
$endgroup$
– Martin
Nov 8 '16 at 19:23






$begingroup$
@StephenMontgomery-Smith - $X$ and $Y$ are random Borel elements in $mathcal{H}$ (not random functions, but random variables if you will, such that each $omega$ maps to $X(omega)inmathcal{H}$). We don't assume that $X$ and $Y$ are bochner integrable. This would simply lead the the arguments for separable Hilbert spaces, in which case I have already shown non-existence. I would like to make an argument that almost surely orthogonal random i.i.d. elements are not in general degenerate, but they are if $mathcal{H}$ is separable (or the random elements are Bochner-measurable) they are.
$endgroup$
– Martin
Nov 8 '16 at 19:23














$begingroup$
What precisely do you mean by "random element?" I assume the map $omega mapsto X(omega)$ is measurable, but with respect to which topology on $mathcal H$? The norm topology or the weak topology? (I think the Borel sets generated can be different for non-separable spaces.)
$endgroup$
– Stephen Montgomery-Smith
Nov 8 '16 at 21:08




$begingroup$
What precisely do you mean by "random element?" I assume the map $omega mapsto X(omega)$ is measurable, but with respect to which topology on $mathcal H$? The norm topology or the weak topology? (I think the Borel sets generated can be different for non-separable spaces.)
$endgroup$
– Stephen Montgomery-Smith
Nov 8 '16 at 21:08












$begingroup$
Measurable with respect to the sigma algebra generated by the norm topology. Sorry if this was not explicitly written in the question.
$endgroup$
– Martin
Nov 8 '16 at 21:18




$begingroup$
Measurable with respect to the sigma algebra generated by the norm topology. Sorry if this was not explicitly written in the question.
$endgroup$
– Martin
Nov 8 '16 at 21:18










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

Counterexample. This counterexample is inspired by class notes by D.J.H. Garling from the 1980s.



Let $kappa$ be a measurable cardinal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measurable_cardinal which is also a limit ordinal. Thus there is a ${0,1}$ valued measure on $kappa$ in which every subset is measurable.



Let $mathcal H$ be the Hilbert space whose basis is of cardinality $kappa$, and let $(e_{alpha})_{alpha in kappa}$ be a basis. Let $X,Y:kappa to mathcal H$ be the functions $X(alpha) = e_{alpha}$ and $Y(alpha) = e_{alpha'}$, where $alpha'$ denotes the successor ordinal of $alpha$.



Clearly $langle X,Yrangle = 0$ everywhere. It remains to show that $X$ and $Y$ are independent. But this follows because any two subsets of $kappa$ are independent (since their measures can only take the values $0$ or $1$).



It does use measurable cardinals, whose existence cannot be proved. But most likely, if their existence can be disproved, then probably the same proof will show ZF is inconsistent.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    As an aside, if $X$ and $X'$ are independent copies of $X$ defined on the first and second coordinates of the product space $kappa times kappa$, then $langle X,Yrangle$ is non-measurable! This is essentially the point D.J.H. Garling was trying to make in his notes - separability is no mere technicality.
    $endgroup$
    – Stephen Montgomery-Smith
    Nov 10 '16 at 20:01



















0












$begingroup$

Let $mathcal{A} = mathbb{R}^{[0,1]}$ be the set of all functions from $[0,1]$ to $mathbb R$, not necessarily continuous, equipped with the product Gaussian measure. Let $mathcal H$ be $L^2(mathcal{A})$. $mathcal H$ is not separable.



Let $x$ be uniformly distributed on $[0,1]$ and let $X_x$ be the function that takes $a in mathcal A$ to $a(x)$. The marginal distribution of each $X$ is a Gaussian, so $X_x in mathcal H$. Furthermore, $X_x$ is independent of $X_y$ unless $x=y$, which happens with probability zero.






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%2f2002362%2fconstruction-of-random-elements-in-hilbert-space-which-are-almost-surely-orthogo%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









    2












    $begingroup$

    Counterexample. This counterexample is inspired by class notes by D.J.H. Garling from the 1980s.



    Let $kappa$ be a measurable cardinal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measurable_cardinal which is also a limit ordinal. Thus there is a ${0,1}$ valued measure on $kappa$ in which every subset is measurable.



    Let $mathcal H$ be the Hilbert space whose basis is of cardinality $kappa$, and let $(e_{alpha})_{alpha in kappa}$ be a basis. Let $X,Y:kappa to mathcal H$ be the functions $X(alpha) = e_{alpha}$ and $Y(alpha) = e_{alpha'}$, where $alpha'$ denotes the successor ordinal of $alpha$.



    Clearly $langle X,Yrangle = 0$ everywhere. It remains to show that $X$ and $Y$ are independent. But this follows because any two subsets of $kappa$ are independent (since their measures can only take the values $0$ or $1$).



    It does use measurable cardinals, whose existence cannot be proved. But most likely, if their existence can be disproved, then probably the same proof will show ZF is inconsistent.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$









    • 1




      $begingroup$
      As an aside, if $X$ and $X'$ are independent copies of $X$ defined on the first and second coordinates of the product space $kappa times kappa$, then $langle X,Yrangle$ is non-measurable! This is essentially the point D.J.H. Garling was trying to make in his notes - separability is no mere technicality.
      $endgroup$
      – Stephen Montgomery-Smith
      Nov 10 '16 at 20:01
















    2












    $begingroup$

    Counterexample. This counterexample is inspired by class notes by D.J.H. Garling from the 1980s.



    Let $kappa$ be a measurable cardinal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measurable_cardinal which is also a limit ordinal. Thus there is a ${0,1}$ valued measure on $kappa$ in which every subset is measurable.



    Let $mathcal H$ be the Hilbert space whose basis is of cardinality $kappa$, and let $(e_{alpha})_{alpha in kappa}$ be a basis. Let $X,Y:kappa to mathcal H$ be the functions $X(alpha) = e_{alpha}$ and $Y(alpha) = e_{alpha'}$, where $alpha'$ denotes the successor ordinal of $alpha$.



    Clearly $langle X,Yrangle = 0$ everywhere. It remains to show that $X$ and $Y$ are independent. But this follows because any two subsets of $kappa$ are independent (since their measures can only take the values $0$ or $1$).



    It does use measurable cardinals, whose existence cannot be proved. But most likely, if their existence can be disproved, then probably the same proof will show ZF is inconsistent.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$









    • 1




      $begingroup$
      As an aside, if $X$ and $X'$ are independent copies of $X$ defined on the first and second coordinates of the product space $kappa times kappa$, then $langle X,Yrangle$ is non-measurable! This is essentially the point D.J.H. Garling was trying to make in his notes - separability is no mere technicality.
      $endgroup$
      – Stephen Montgomery-Smith
      Nov 10 '16 at 20:01














    2












    2








    2





    $begingroup$

    Counterexample. This counterexample is inspired by class notes by D.J.H. Garling from the 1980s.



    Let $kappa$ be a measurable cardinal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measurable_cardinal which is also a limit ordinal. Thus there is a ${0,1}$ valued measure on $kappa$ in which every subset is measurable.



    Let $mathcal H$ be the Hilbert space whose basis is of cardinality $kappa$, and let $(e_{alpha})_{alpha in kappa}$ be a basis. Let $X,Y:kappa to mathcal H$ be the functions $X(alpha) = e_{alpha}$ and $Y(alpha) = e_{alpha'}$, where $alpha'$ denotes the successor ordinal of $alpha$.



    Clearly $langle X,Yrangle = 0$ everywhere. It remains to show that $X$ and $Y$ are independent. But this follows because any two subsets of $kappa$ are independent (since their measures can only take the values $0$ or $1$).



    It does use measurable cardinals, whose existence cannot be proved. But most likely, if their existence can be disproved, then probably the same proof will show ZF is inconsistent.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$



    Counterexample. This counterexample is inspired by class notes by D.J.H. Garling from the 1980s.



    Let $kappa$ be a measurable cardinal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measurable_cardinal which is also a limit ordinal. Thus there is a ${0,1}$ valued measure on $kappa$ in which every subset is measurable.



    Let $mathcal H$ be the Hilbert space whose basis is of cardinality $kappa$, and let $(e_{alpha})_{alpha in kappa}$ be a basis. Let $X,Y:kappa to mathcal H$ be the functions $X(alpha) = e_{alpha}$ and $Y(alpha) = e_{alpha'}$, where $alpha'$ denotes the successor ordinal of $alpha$.



    Clearly $langle X,Yrangle = 0$ everywhere. It remains to show that $X$ and $Y$ are independent. But this follows because any two subsets of $kappa$ are independent (since their measures can only take the values $0$ or $1$).



    It does use measurable cardinals, whose existence cannot be proved. But most likely, if their existence can be disproved, then probably the same proof will show ZF is inconsistent.







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited Nov 11 '16 at 12:56

























    answered Nov 10 '16 at 17:24









    Stephen Montgomery-SmithStephen Montgomery-Smith

    17.8k12247




    17.8k12247








    • 1




      $begingroup$
      As an aside, if $X$ and $X'$ are independent copies of $X$ defined on the first and second coordinates of the product space $kappa times kappa$, then $langle X,Yrangle$ is non-measurable! This is essentially the point D.J.H. Garling was trying to make in his notes - separability is no mere technicality.
      $endgroup$
      – Stephen Montgomery-Smith
      Nov 10 '16 at 20:01














    • 1




      $begingroup$
      As an aside, if $X$ and $X'$ are independent copies of $X$ defined on the first and second coordinates of the product space $kappa times kappa$, then $langle X,Yrangle$ is non-measurable! This is essentially the point D.J.H. Garling was trying to make in his notes - separability is no mere technicality.
      $endgroup$
      – Stephen Montgomery-Smith
      Nov 10 '16 at 20:01








    1




    1




    $begingroup$
    As an aside, if $X$ and $X'$ are independent copies of $X$ defined on the first and second coordinates of the product space $kappa times kappa$, then $langle X,Yrangle$ is non-measurable! This is essentially the point D.J.H. Garling was trying to make in his notes - separability is no mere technicality.
    $endgroup$
    – Stephen Montgomery-Smith
    Nov 10 '16 at 20:01




    $begingroup$
    As an aside, if $X$ and $X'$ are independent copies of $X$ defined on the first and second coordinates of the product space $kappa times kappa$, then $langle X,Yrangle$ is non-measurable! This is essentially the point D.J.H. Garling was trying to make in his notes - separability is no mere technicality.
    $endgroup$
    – Stephen Montgomery-Smith
    Nov 10 '16 at 20:01











    0












    $begingroup$

    Let $mathcal{A} = mathbb{R}^{[0,1]}$ be the set of all functions from $[0,1]$ to $mathbb R$, not necessarily continuous, equipped with the product Gaussian measure. Let $mathcal H$ be $L^2(mathcal{A})$. $mathcal H$ is not separable.



    Let $x$ be uniformly distributed on $[0,1]$ and let $X_x$ be the function that takes $a in mathcal A$ to $a(x)$. The marginal distribution of each $X$ is a Gaussian, so $X_x in mathcal H$. Furthermore, $X_x$ is independent of $X_y$ unless $x=y$, which happens with probability zero.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$


















      0












      $begingroup$

      Let $mathcal{A} = mathbb{R}^{[0,1]}$ be the set of all functions from $[0,1]$ to $mathbb R$, not necessarily continuous, equipped with the product Gaussian measure. Let $mathcal H$ be $L^2(mathcal{A})$. $mathcal H$ is not separable.



      Let $x$ be uniformly distributed on $[0,1]$ and let $X_x$ be the function that takes $a in mathcal A$ to $a(x)$. The marginal distribution of each $X$ is a Gaussian, so $X_x in mathcal H$. Furthermore, $X_x$ is independent of $X_y$ unless $x=y$, which happens with probability zero.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$
















        0












        0








        0





        $begingroup$

        Let $mathcal{A} = mathbb{R}^{[0,1]}$ be the set of all functions from $[0,1]$ to $mathbb R$, not necessarily continuous, equipped with the product Gaussian measure. Let $mathcal H$ be $L^2(mathcal{A})$. $mathcal H$ is not separable.



        Let $x$ be uniformly distributed on $[0,1]$ and let $X_x$ be the function that takes $a in mathcal A$ to $a(x)$. The marginal distribution of each $X$ is a Gaussian, so $X_x in mathcal H$. Furthermore, $X_x$ is independent of $X_y$ unless $x=y$, which happens with probability zero.






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$



        Let $mathcal{A} = mathbb{R}^{[0,1]}$ be the set of all functions from $[0,1]$ to $mathbb R$, not necessarily continuous, equipped with the product Gaussian measure. Let $mathcal H$ be $L^2(mathcal{A})$. $mathcal H$ is not separable.



        Let $x$ be uniformly distributed on $[0,1]$ and let $X_x$ be the function that takes $a in mathcal A$ to $a(x)$. The marginal distribution of each $X$ is a Gaussian, so $X_x in mathcal H$. Furthermore, $X_x$ is independent of $X_y$ unless $x=y$, which happens with probability zero.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Dec 10 '18 at 14:26

























        answered Dec 10 '18 at 14:19









        NeuromathNeuromath

        14710




        14710






























            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%2f2002362%2fconstruction-of-random-elements-in-hilbert-space-which-are-almost-surely-orthogo%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

            How do I know what Microsoft account the skydrive app is syncing to?

            When does type information flow backwards in C++?

            Grease: Live!