3

Brownian motion has a bunch of different definitions. My question is about showing the property in the title using a certain definition of BM and nothing else.

The (partial) definition I am given is that for any $t > s \geq 0$, $B_t - B_s$ is independent of $\mathcal{F}_s$, the filtration to which $B$ is adapted, and is normally distributed with mean $0$ and variance $t-s$.

So now using this property I need to show that for any $0 \leq s_0 < s_1 <\ldots <s_n$ the sigma algebras $\mathcal{F}_{s_0}, \sigma(B_{s_1}-B_{s_0}), \ldots, \sigma(B_{s_n}-B_{s_{n-1}})$ are independent.

It is trivial to show that these sigma algebras are pairwise independent. But how do I show mutual independence, i.e. $$P(\bigcap_{i=0}^nA_i) = \prod_{i=0}^nP(A_i)$$ for any $A_0 \in \mathcal{F}_{s_0}, A_1 \in \sigma(B_{s_1}-B_{s_0}),\ldots$.

The next question is showing that $(B_{t+s_1}-B_{t+s_0},B_{t+s_2}-B_{t+s_1}\ldots,B_{t+s_n}-B_{t+s_{n-1}})$ has the same distribution for all $t \geq 0$. If I could first show that this vector is Gaussian for $t = 0$, then I would argue as follows. Using the result above I could factor the characteristic function of this vector. Then for the characteristic function of each increment $B_{s_j}-B_{s_{j-1}}$, I would substitute the characteristic function of $B_{t+s_j}-B_{t+s_{j-1}}$ for some arbitrary $t \geq 0$ since the two characteristic functions are identical. Using the first result again I could say the product of the characteristic functions of $B_{t+s_j}-B_{t+s_{j-1}}$ is equal to the characteristic function of $(B_{t+s_1}-B_{t+s_0},B_{t+s_2}-B_{t+s_1}\ldots,B_{t+s_n}-B_{t+s_{n-1}})$. Since the characteristic functions of $(B_{t+s_1}-B_{t+s_0},B_{t+s_2}-B_{t+s_1}\ldots,B_{t+s_n}-B_{t+s_{n-1}})$ and $(B_{s_1}-B_{s_0},B_{s_2}-B_{s_1}\ldots,B_{s_n}-B_{s_{n-1}})$ are equal, the two vectors must have the same distribution. Actually, while writing this I realized this has nothing to do with $(B_{s_1}-B_{s_0},B_{s_2}-B_{s_1}\ldots,B_{s_n}-B_{s_{n-1}})$ being a Gaussian vector. Is my argumentation correct then?

Calculon
  • 5,725
  • Naturally, the first step is to show that $\sigma(\mathcal{F}{s_0}, \sigma(B{s_1}-B_{s_0}), \ldots, \sigma(B_{s_{n-1}}-B_{s_{n-2}}))$ and $\sigma(B_{s_n}-B_{s_{n-1}})$ are independent. Can you do that? – Did May 09 '15 at 11:44
  • @Did I don't see how I could show that. Is there a particular result that I need to consider here? – Calculon May 09 '15 at 11:59
  • And yet you do not have much choice here... All the parts of the first sigma-algebra are parts of a simple sigma-algebra which you know is independent of the second sigma-algebra, right? – Did May 09 '15 at 13:10
  • @Did Oh I see, the first sigma algebra is a sub-sigma algebra of $\mathcal{F}{s{n-1}}$, which is independent of the second sigma algebra. Then I take out the last sigma algebra component of the first sigma algebra. The resulting three sigma algebras are mutually independent (that I can show). Repeating this argument gives the result I guess. Is my answer to the second question OK by the way? – Calculon May 09 '15 at 13:33

0 Answers0