3.3.6 problem 44

(a)
Bern
(b)
If , and are not independent. Imagine that is extremely unlikely. Then, knowing that makes it very likely that . If , then and are independent.

and are independent, since knowledge of still keeps the probability of at

(c)

Let the largest element in be .

Thus,

To prove pairwise independence: Let , be two arbitrary subsets of . We want to show that for , with the second equality coming from our knowledge that for all .

First, let us note that for all that are disjoint, are independent - this follows from the independence of the .

Now, suppose are not disjoint. Let , let , and let . By definition, are disjoint.

Now, we have

using the LOTP. Continuing, we have

by noting that if , we must have and if , we have . Continuing, we get

We can remove the conditioning since are disjoint, and therefore are all independent r.v.s. Finally, we realize that since all are , this results in

as desired - are independent for any pair .

To prove that the are not all independent, consider the subsets . It is clear that if and , then . However, this implies that

i.e. it is impossible for all to simultaneously equal 1. However, we know that

Thus, the are not independent.