Does a random sequence of vectors span a Hilbert space?












8












$begingroup$


Let $mathcal{H}$ be a separable Hilbert space. Let $v$ be a random variable taking values in $mathcal{H}$ such that $P(v perp h) < 1$ for all $h in mathcal{H}.$ Suppose we sample an infinite sequence $v_1, v_2, ldots.$ Is it the case that, almost surely, the closed span of $v_1, v_2, ldots$ is all of $mathcal{H}?$










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    and if they are iid the probability of being in a closed hyperplane $(h)^perp$ is $P(v_kperp h, k=1,2,dots)=0$
    $endgroup$
    – Pietro Majer
    Apr 21 at 17:07






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @Pietro Majer: this is the probability that the vectors all lie in a given closed hyperplane.
    $endgroup$
    – Anthony Quas
    Apr 21 at 17:10








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Whoever voted to close this, I'm pretty sure you don't understand the question. This is subtle and interesting.
    $endgroup$
    – Anthony Quas
    Apr 21 at 17:18






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but is it even clear that the event you are interested in is measurable?
    $endgroup$
    – Jochen Glueck
    Apr 21 at 17:21








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @JochenGlueck: Yes it's measurable: Let $(y_n)$ be a dense sequence in $mathcal H$. Then the event is: for all $m>0$, for all $n>0$, there exist $k>0$ and rational $t_1,ldots,t_k$ such that $|t_1v_1+ldots+t_kv_k-y_n|<1/m$.
    $endgroup$
    – Anthony Quas
    Apr 21 at 19:18


















8












$begingroup$


Let $mathcal{H}$ be a separable Hilbert space. Let $v$ be a random variable taking values in $mathcal{H}$ such that $P(v perp h) < 1$ for all $h in mathcal{H}.$ Suppose we sample an infinite sequence $v_1, v_2, ldots.$ Is it the case that, almost surely, the closed span of $v_1, v_2, ldots$ is all of $mathcal{H}?$










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    and if they are iid the probability of being in a closed hyperplane $(h)^perp$ is $P(v_kperp h, k=1,2,dots)=0$
    $endgroup$
    – Pietro Majer
    Apr 21 at 17:07






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @Pietro Majer: this is the probability that the vectors all lie in a given closed hyperplane.
    $endgroup$
    – Anthony Quas
    Apr 21 at 17:10








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Whoever voted to close this, I'm pretty sure you don't understand the question. This is subtle and interesting.
    $endgroup$
    – Anthony Quas
    Apr 21 at 17:18






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but is it even clear that the event you are interested in is measurable?
    $endgroup$
    – Jochen Glueck
    Apr 21 at 17:21








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @JochenGlueck: Yes it's measurable: Let $(y_n)$ be a dense sequence in $mathcal H$. Then the event is: for all $m>0$, for all $n>0$, there exist $k>0$ and rational $t_1,ldots,t_k$ such that $|t_1v_1+ldots+t_kv_k-y_n|<1/m$.
    $endgroup$
    – Anthony Quas
    Apr 21 at 19:18
















8












8








8


3



$begingroup$


Let $mathcal{H}$ be a separable Hilbert space. Let $v$ be a random variable taking values in $mathcal{H}$ such that $P(v perp h) < 1$ for all $h in mathcal{H}.$ Suppose we sample an infinite sequence $v_1, v_2, ldots.$ Is it the case that, almost surely, the closed span of $v_1, v_2, ldots$ is all of $mathcal{H}?$










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




Let $mathcal{H}$ be a separable Hilbert space. Let $v$ be a random variable taking values in $mathcal{H}$ such that $P(v perp h) < 1$ for all $h in mathcal{H}.$ Suppose we sample an infinite sequence $v_1, v_2, ldots.$ Is it the case that, almost surely, the closed span of $v_1, v_2, ldots$ is all of $mathcal{H}?$







reference-request fa.functional-analysis pr.probability operator-theory hilbert-spaces






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Apr 21 at 16:33









J. E. PascoeJ. E. Pascoe

575316




575316












  • $begingroup$
    and if they are iid the probability of being in a closed hyperplane $(h)^perp$ is $P(v_kperp h, k=1,2,dots)=0$
    $endgroup$
    – Pietro Majer
    Apr 21 at 17:07






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @Pietro Majer: this is the probability that the vectors all lie in a given closed hyperplane.
    $endgroup$
    – Anthony Quas
    Apr 21 at 17:10








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Whoever voted to close this, I'm pretty sure you don't understand the question. This is subtle and interesting.
    $endgroup$
    – Anthony Quas
    Apr 21 at 17:18






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but is it even clear that the event you are interested in is measurable?
    $endgroup$
    – Jochen Glueck
    Apr 21 at 17:21








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @JochenGlueck: Yes it's measurable: Let $(y_n)$ be a dense sequence in $mathcal H$. Then the event is: for all $m>0$, for all $n>0$, there exist $k>0$ and rational $t_1,ldots,t_k$ such that $|t_1v_1+ldots+t_kv_k-y_n|<1/m$.
    $endgroup$
    – Anthony Quas
    Apr 21 at 19:18




















  • $begingroup$
    and if they are iid the probability of being in a closed hyperplane $(h)^perp$ is $P(v_kperp h, k=1,2,dots)=0$
    $endgroup$
    – Pietro Majer
    Apr 21 at 17:07






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @Pietro Majer: this is the probability that the vectors all lie in a given closed hyperplane.
    $endgroup$
    – Anthony Quas
    Apr 21 at 17:10








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Whoever voted to close this, I'm pretty sure you don't understand the question. This is subtle and interesting.
    $endgroup$
    – Anthony Quas
    Apr 21 at 17:18






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but is it even clear that the event you are interested in is measurable?
    $endgroup$
    – Jochen Glueck
    Apr 21 at 17:21








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @JochenGlueck: Yes it's measurable: Let $(y_n)$ be a dense sequence in $mathcal H$. Then the event is: for all $m>0$, for all $n>0$, there exist $k>0$ and rational $t_1,ldots,t_k$ such that $|t_1v_1+ldots+t_kv_k-y_n|<1/m$.
    $endgroup$
    – Anthony Quas
    Apr 21 at 19:18


















$begingroup$
and if they are iid the probability of being in a closed hyperplane $(h)^perp$ is $P(v_kperp h, k=1,2,dots)=0$
$endgroup$
– Pietro Majer
Apr 21 at 17:07




$begingroup$
and if they are iid the probability of being in a closed hyperplane $(h)^perp$ is $P(v_kperp h, k=1,2,dots)=0$
$endgroup$
– Pietro Majer
Apr 21 at 17:07




3




3




$begingroup$
@Pietro Majer: this is the probability that the vectors all lie in a given closed hyperplane.
$endgroup$
– Anthony Quas
Apr 21 at 17:10






$begingroup$
@Pietro Majer: this is the probability that the vectors all lie in a given closed hyperplane.
$endgroup$
– Anthony Quas
Apr 21 at 17:10






3




3




$begingroup$
Whoever voted to close this, I'm pretty sure you don't understand the question. This is subtle and interesting.
$endgroup$
– Anthony Quas
Apr 21 at 17:18




$begingroup$
Whoever voted to close this, I'm pretty sure you don't understand the question. This is subtle and interesting.
$endgroup$
– Anthony Quas
Apr 21 at 17:18




1




1




$begingroup$
Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but is it even clear that the event you are interested in is measurable?
$endgroup$
– Jochen Glueck
Apr 21 at 17:21






$begingroup$
Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but is it even clear that the event you are interested in is measurable?
$endgroup$
– Jochen Glueck
Apr 21 at 17:21






1




1




$begingroup$
@JochenGlueck: Yes it's measurable: Let $(y_n)$ be a dense sequence in $mathcal H$. Then the event is: for all $m>0$, for all $n>0$, there exist $k>0$ and rational $t_1,ldots,t_k$ such that $|t_1v_1+ldots+t_kv_k-y_n|<1/m$.
$endgroup$
– Anthony Quas
Apr 21 at 19:18






$begingroup$
@JochenGlueck: Yes it's measurable: Let $(y_n)$ be a dense sequence in $mathcal H$. Then the event is: for all $m>0$, for all $n>0$, there exist $k>0$ and rational $t_1,ldots,t_k$ such that $|t_1v_1+ldots+t_kv_k-y_n|<1/m$.
$endgroup$
– Anthony Quas
Apr 21 at 19:18












2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















6












$begingroup$

(This may turn out to be a simplified version of J. E. Pascoe's answer).



The support of (the distribution of) $v$, that we denote by $operatorname{supp} v$, is the set of vectors $h in mathcal{H}$ such that $P(v in B(h, varepsilon)) > 0$ for every $varepsilon > 0$. We list some properties of this set.




  1. The set $operatorname{supp} v$ is the complement of the union of all open sets $B$ such that $P(v in B) = 0$. Thus, the support is a closed set.


  2. Since $mathcal{H}$ is a separable metric space, it has a countable topological base $mathcal{B}$, and $operatorname{supp} v$ is the complement of the union of all $B in mathcal{B}$ such that $P(v in B) = 0$. By countable additivity, it follows that $P(v in operatorname{supp} v) = 1$ (the support is a set of full measure).


  3. With probability one, the closure of the random set $V = {v_1, v_2, ldots}$ contains $operatorname{supp} v$. Indeed, let ${h_1, h_2, ldots}$ be a countable, dense subset of $operatorname{supp} v$. For every $i, n = 1, 2, ldots$ we have $P(v in B(h_i, tfrac{1}{n})) > 0$, and thus, by Borel–Cantelli, $P(V cap B(h_i, tfrac{1}{n}) = varnothing) = 0$. It follows that $h_i in overline{V}$ for every $i = 1, 2, ldots$, and consequently $operatorname{supp} v subseteq overline{V}$.


  4. For every $h in mathcal{H}$, we have $P(h perp v) < 1$, and therefore $h$ is not orthogonal to $operatorname{supp} v$. It follows that the closed span of $operatorname{supp} v$ is $mathcal{H}$.



It remains to note that the closed span of $V$ is the same as the closed span of the closure of $V$, which with probability one contains the closed span of $operatorname{supp} v$, which we have shown to be equal to $mathcal{H}$.



(Item 1 is valid for any topological space; items 2 and 3 work in an arbitrary separable metric space.)






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    It would perhaps be even clearer to say that for each fixed vector $hintextrm{supp}; v$, we have $P(hin overline{V})=1$. (This shows that the assumption that $H$ is separable is used, and how you avoid the pitfall from Pietro's comment above.)
    $endgroup$
    – Christian Remling
    Apr 22 at 19:53












  • $begingroup$
    @ChristianRemling: I edited my answer to emphasize where separability is essential. Let me know if anything is wrong. Thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – Mateusz Kwaśnicki
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    Looks good to me. I didn't mean to suggest that such an extensive edit was needed, of course, just wanted to draw attention to where your answer differs from Pietro's comment.
    $endgroup$
    – Christian Remling
    2 days ago



















0












$begingroup$

Another Try



We say a $mathcal{H}$-valued random variable $h$ is a random vector if $P(h perp g)<1$ for all $gin mathcal{H}.$



If $h_1, h_2, ldots$ is a sequence independent identically distributed of random vectors,
then, almost surely, the closed span of the $h_i$ is equal to $mathcal{H}.$



First we will need a lemma.



Lemma 1
Let $h$ be a random vector.
There is a countable subset $A$ of $mathcal{H}$ such that the closed span of the elements of $A$ is equal to $mathcal{H}$
and for every point $ain A,$ $P(hin U)>0$ for any neighborhood $U$ of $a.$



Proof
For any subset $A$ such that for every point $ain A,$ $P(hin U)>0$ for any neighborhood $U$ of $a,$ and
the closed span of the elements of $A$ is not equal to $mathcal{H},$
we will show that we can grow $A$ by a single element which is not in closed span of the elements of $A.$
We can only do this a countable number of times because the Hilbert space dimension of $mathcal{H}$ is countable.
(Otherwise, via Gram-Schmidt, we could construct an uncountable orthonormal set by transfinite induction.)



Choose $g$ such that $g perp a$ for all $ain A.$ Now, $P(h perp g)<1.$ So there must be a point $b$ such that
$P(hin U) >0$ for every neighborhood of $b$ and $b$ is not perpendicular to $g,$ therefore, $b$ is not in the span of the elements of $A.$ QED



Suppose $h_1, h_2, ldots$ is a sequence independent identically distributed of random vectors.
Let $A$ be as in Lemma 1. Index $A$ a a sequence $a_n.$
Let $B_{m,n}$ be a ball of radius $1/m$ centered at $a_n$
Almost surely, the sequence $h_i$ must visit $B_{m,n}$ infinitely often,
as $P(h_iin B_{m,n})>0$. Therefore $A$ is a subset of the closure of the values of the sequence. (We have essentially the fact that a random function $f:mathbb{N}rightarrow mathbb{N}^2$ is surjective with infinite multiplicity.)






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    The point is that you "keep going" by transfinite induction. The process must stop at some countable ordinal before $omega_1$ as the space is countable dimensional.
    $endgroup$
    – J. E. Pascoe
    Apr 21 at 19:59










  • $begingroup$
    That is for each $alpha < omega_1$ there would be $A_alpha$ such that if $alpha < beta,$ $A_alpha^perp cap A_beta neq {0}.$
    $endgroup$
    – J. E. Pascoe
    Apr 21 at 20:06












  • $begingroup$
    "Let $A$ be as in Lemma 1" ... "we may take $A$ to consist of only isolated points, as in a Polish space a countable closed set is equal to the closure of its isolated points." But Lemma 1 does not guarantee that $A$ is closed.
    $endgroup$
    – Iosif Pinelis
    Apr 21 at 20:07












  • $begingroup$
    That does seem to be a gap @IosifPinelis . Ideas for closing it?
    $endgroup$
    – J. E. Pascoe
    Apr 21 at 20:10












  • $begingroup$
    Could you elaborate a bit further on why the set $A$ in Lemma 1 is countable? Of course, there exist linearly independent sets in $H$ that are uncountable -- just choose your favourite Hamel basis of $H$.
    $endgroup$
    – Jochen Glueck
    Apr 21 at 20:18














Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "504"
};
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%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f328585%2fdoes-a-random-sequence-of-vectors-span-a-hilbert-space%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









6












$begingroup$

(This may turn out to be a simplified version of J. E. Pascoe's answer).



The support of (the distribution of) $v$, that we denote by $operatorname{supp} v$, is the set of vectors $h in mathcal{H}$ such that $P(v in B(h, varepsilon)) > 0$ for every $varepsilon > 0$. We list some properties of this set.




  1. The set $operatorname{supp} v$ is the complement of the union of all open sets $B$ such that $P(v in B) = 0$. Thus, the support is a closed set.


  2. Since $mathcal{H}$ is a separable metric space, it has a countable topological base $mathcal{B}$, and $operatorname{supp} v$ is the complement of the union of all $B in mathcal{B}$ such that $P(v in B) = 0$. By countable additivity, it follows that $P(v in operatorname{supp} v) = 1$ (the support is a set of full measure).


  3. With probability one, the closure of the random set $V = {v_1, v_2, ldots}$ contains $operatorname{supp} v$. Indeed, let ${h_1, h_2, ldots}$ be a countable, dense subset of $operatorname{supp} v$. For every $i, n = 1, 2, ldots$ we have $P(v in B(h_i, tfrac{1}{n})) > 0$, and thus, by Borel–Cantelli, $P(V cap B(h_i, tfrac{1}{n}) = varnothing) = 0$. It follows that $h_i in overline{V}$ for every $i = 1, 2, ldots$, and consequently $operatorname{supp} v subseteq overline{V}$.


  4. For every $h in mathcal{H}$, we have $P(h perp v) < 1$, and therefore $h$ is not orthogonal to $operatorname{supp} v$. It follows that the closed span of $operatorname{supp} v$ is $mathcal{H}$.



It remains to note that the closed span of $V$ is the same as the closed span of the closure of $V$, which with probability one contains the closed span of $operatorname{supp} v$, which we have shown to be equal to $mathcal{H}$.



(Item 1 is valid for any topological space; items 2 and 3 work in an arbitrary separable metric space.)






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    It would perhaps be even clearer to say that for each fixed vector $hintextrm{supp}; v$, we have $P(hin overline{V})=1$. (This shows that the assumption that $H$ is separable is used, and how you avoid the pitfall from Pietro's comment above.)
    $endgroup$
    – Christian Remling
    Apr 22 at 19:53












  • $begingroup$
    @ChristianRemling: I edited my answer to emphasize where separability is essential. Let me know if anything is wrong. Thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – Mateusz Kwaśnicki
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    Looks good to me. I didn't mean to suggest that such an extensive edit was needed, of course, just wanted to draw attention to where your answer differs from Pietro's comment.
    $endgroup$
    – Christian Remling
    2 days ago
















6












$begingroup$

(This may turn out to be a simplified version of J. E. Pascoe's answer).



The support of (the distribution of) $v$, that we denote by $operatorname{supp} v$, is the set of vectors $h in mathcal{H}$ such that $P(v in B(h, varepsilon)) > 0$ for every $varepsilon > 0$. We list some properties of this set.




  1. The set $operatorname{supp} v$ is the complement of the union of all open sets $B$ such that $P(v in B) = 0$. Thus, the support is a closed set.


  2. Since $mathcal{H}$ is a separable metric space, it has a countable topological base $mathcal{B}$, and $operatorname{supp} v$ is the complement of the union of all $B in mathcal{B}$ such that $P(v in B) = 0$. By countable additivity, it follows that $P(v in operatorname{supp} v) = 1$ (the support is a set of full measure).


  3. With probability one, the closure of the random set $V = {v_1, v_2, ldots}$ contains $operatorname{supp} v$. Indeed, let ${h_1, h_2, ldots}$ be a countable, dense subset of $operatorname{supp} v$. For every $i, n = 1, 2, ldots$ we have $P(v in B(h_i, tfrac{1}{n})) > 0$, and thus, by Borel–Cantelli, $P(V cap B(h_i, tfrac{1}{n}) = varnothing) = 0$. It follows that $h_i in overline{V}$ for every $i = 1, 2, ldots$, and consequently $operatorname{supp} v subseteq overline{V}$.


  4. For every $h in mathcal{H}$, we have $P(h perp v) < 1$, and therefore $h$ is not orthogonal to $operatorname{supp} v$. It follows that the closed span of $operatorname{supp} v$ is $mathcal{H}$.



It remains to note that the closed span of $V$ is the same as the closed span of the closure of $V$, which with probability one contains the closed span of $operatorname{supp} v$, which we have shown to be equal to $mathcal{H}$.



(Item 1 is valid for any topological space; items 2 and 3 work in an arbitrary separable metric space.)






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    It would perhaps be even clearer to say that for each fixed vector $hintextrm{supp}; v$, we have $P(hin overline{V})=1$. (This shows that the assumption that $H$ is separable is used, and how you avoid the pitfall from Pietro's comment above.)
    $endgroup$
    – Christian Remling
    Apr 22 at 19:53












  • $begingroup$
    @ChristianRemling: I edited my answer to emphasize where separability is essential. Let me know if anything is wrong. Thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – Mateusz Kwaśnicki
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    Looks good to me. I didn't mean to suggest that such an extensive edit was needed, of course, just wanted to draw attention to where your answer differs from Pietro's comment.
    $endgroup$
    – Christian Remling
    2 days ago














6












6








6





$begingroup$

(This may turn out to be a simplified version of J. E. Pascoe's answer).



The support of (the distribution of) $v$, that we denote by $operatorname{supp} v$, is the set of vectors $h in mathcal{H}$ such that $P(v in B(h, varepsilon)) > 0$ for every $varepsilon > 0$. We list some properties of this set.




  1. The set $operatorname{supp} v$ is the complement of the union of all open sets $B$ such that $P(v in B) = 0$. Thus, the support is a closed set.


  2. Since $mathcal{H}$ is a separable metric space, it has a countable topological base $mathcal{B}$, and $operatorname{supp} v$ is the complement of the union of all $B in mathcal{B}$ such that $P(v in B) = 0$. By countable additivity, it follows that $P(v in operatorname{supp} v) = 1$ (the support is a set of full measure).


  3. With probability one, the closure of the random set $V = {v_1, v_2, ldots}$ contains $operatorname{supp} v$. Indeed, let ${h_1, h_2, ldots}$ be a countable, dense subset of $operatorname{supp} v$. For every $i, n = 1, 2, ldots$ we have $P(v in B(h_i, tfrac{1}{n})) > 0$, and thus, by Borel–Cantelli, $P(V cap B(h_i, tfrac{1}{n}) = varnothing) = 0$. It follows that $h_i in overline{V}$ for every $i = 1, 2, ldots$, and consequently $operatorname{supp} v subseteq overline{V}$.


  4. For every $h in mathcal{H}$, we have $P(h perp v) < 1$, and therefore $h$ is not orthogonal to $operatorname{supp} v$. It follows that the closed span of $operatorname{supp} v$ is $mathcal{H}$.



It remains to note that the closed span of $V$ is the same as the closed span of the closure of $V$, which with probability one contains the closed span of $operatorname{supp} v$, which we have shown to be equal to $mathcal{H}$.



(Item 1 is valid for any topological space; items 2 and 3 work in an arbitrary separable metric space.)






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



(This may turn out to be a simplified version of J. E. Pascoe's answer).



The support of (the distribution of) $v$, that we denote by $operatorname{supp} v$, is the set of vectors $h in mathcal{H}$ such that $P(v in B(h, varepsilon)) > 0$ for every $varepsilon > 0$. We list some properties of this set.




  1. The set $operatorname{supp} v$ is the complement of the union of all open sets $B$ such that $P(v in B) = 0$. Thus, the support is a closed set.


  2. Since $mathcal{H}$ is a separable metric space, it has a countable topological base $mathcal{B}$, and $operatorname{supp} v$ is the complement of the union of all $B in mathcal{B}$ such that $P(v in B) = 0$. By countable additivity, it follows that $P(v in operatorname{supp} v) = 1$ (the support is a set of full measure).


  3. With probability one, the closure of the random set $V = {v_1, v_2, ldots}$ contains $operatorname{supp} v$. Indeed, let ${h_1, h_2, ldots}$ be a countable, dense subset of $operatorname{supp} v$. For every $i, n = 1, 2, ldots$ we have $P(v in B(h_i, tfrac{1}{n})) > 0$, and thus, by Borel–Cantelli, $P(V cap B(h_i, tfrac{1}{n}) = varnothing) = 0$. It follows that $h_i in overline{V}$ for every $i = 1, 2, ldots$, and consequently $operatorname{supp} v subseteq overline{V}$.


  4. For every $h in mathcal{H}$, we have $P(h perp v) < 1$, and therefore $h$ is not orthogonal to $operatorname{supp} v$. It follows that the closed span of $operatorname{supp} v$ is $mathcal{H}$.



It remains to note that the closed span of $V$ is the same as the closed span of the closure of $V$, which with probability one contains the closed span of $operatorname{supp} v$, which we have shown to be equal to $mathcal{H}$.



(Item 1 is valid for any topological space; items 2 and 3 work in an arbitrary separable metric space.)







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited 2 days ago

























answered Apr 21 at 21:40









Mateusz KwaśnickiMateusz Kwaśnicki

4,7421619




4,7421619












  • $begingroup$
    It would perhaps be even clearer to say that for each fixed vector $hintextrm{supp}; v$, we have $P(hin overline{V})=1$. (This shows that the assumption that $H$ is separable is used, and how you avoid the pitfall from Pietro's comment above.)
    $endgroup$
    – Christian Remling
    Apr 22 at 19:53












  • $begingroup$
    @ChristianRemling: I edited my answer to emphasize where separability is essential. Let me know if anything is wrong. Thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – Mateusz Kwaśnicki
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    Looks good to me. I didn't mean to suggest that such an extensive edit was needed, of course, just wanted to draw attention to where your answer differs from Pietro's comment.
    $endgroup$
    – Christian Remling
    2 days ago


















  • $begingroup$
    It would perhaps be even clearer to say that for each fixed vector $hintextrm{supp}; v$, we have $P(hin overline{V})=1$. (This shows that the assumption that $H$ is separable is used, and how you avoid the pitfall from Pietro's comment above.)
    $endgroup$
    – Christian Remling
    Apr 22 at 19:53












  • $begingroup$
    @ChristianRemling: I edited my answer to emphasize where separability is essential. Let me know if anything is wrong. Thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – Mateusz Kwaśnicki
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    Looks good to me. I didn't mean to suggest that such an extensive edit was needed, of course, just wanted to draw attention to where your answer differs from Pietro's comment.
    $endgroup$
    – Christian Remling
    2 days ago
















$begingroup$
It would perhaps be even clearer to say that for each fixed vector $hintextrm{supp}; v$, we have $P(hin overline{V})=1$. (This shows that the assumption that $H$ is separable is used, and how you avoid the pitfall from Pietro's comment above.)
$endgroup$
– Christian Remling
Apr 22 at 19:53






$begingroup$
It would perhaps be even clearer to say that for each fixed vector $hintextrm{supp}; v$, we have $P(hin overline{V})=1$. (This shows that the assumption that $H$ is separable is used, and how you avoid the pitfall from Pietro's comment above.)
$endgroup$
– Christian Remling
Apr 22 at 19:53














$begingroup$
@ChristianRemling: I edited my answer to emphasize where separability is essential. Let me know if anything is wrong. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Mateusz Kwaśnicki
2 days ago




$begingroup$
@ChristianRemling: I edited my answer to emphasize where separability is essential. Let me know if anything is wrong. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Mateusz Kwaśnicki
2 days ago












$begingroup$
Looks good to me. I didn't mean to suggest that such an extensive edit was needed, of course, just wanted to draw attention to where your answer differs from Pietro's comment.
$endgroup$
– Christian Remling
2 days ago




$begingroup$
Looks good to me. I didn't mean to suggest that such an extensive edit was needed, of course, just wanted to draw attention to where your answer differs from Pietro's comment.
$endgroup$
– Christian Remling
2 days ago











0












$begingroup$

Another Try



We say a $mathcal{H}$-valued random variable $h$ is a random vector if $P(h perp g)<1$ for all $gin mathcal{H}.$



If $h_1, h_2, ldots$ is a sequence independent identically distributed of random vectors,
then, almost surely, the closed span of the $h_i$ is equal to $mathcal{H}.$



First we will need a lemma.



Lemma 1
Let $h$ be a random vector.
There is a countable subset $A$ of $mathcal{H}$ such that the closed span of the elements of $A$ is equal to $mathcal{H}$
and for every point $ain A,$ $P(hin U)>0$ for any neighborhood $U$ of $a.$



Proof
For any subset $A$ such that for every point $ain A,$ $P(hin U)>0$ for any neighborhood $U$ of $a,$ and
the closed span of the elements of $A$ is not equal to $mathcal{H},$
we will show that we can grow $A$ by a single element which is not in closed span of the elements of $A.$
We can only do this a countable number of times because the Hilbert space dimension of $mathcal{H}$ is countable.
(Otherwise, via Gram-Schmidt, we could construct an uncountable orthonormal set by transfinite induction.)



Choose $g$ such that $g perp a$ for all $ain A.$ Now, $P(h perp g)<1.$ So there must be a point $b$ such that
$P(hin U) >0$ for every neighborhood of $b$ and $b$ is not perpendicular to $g,$ therefore, $b$ is not in the span of the elements of $A.$ QED



Suppose $h_1, h_2, ldots$ is a sequence independent identically distributed of random vectors.
Let $A$ be as in Lemma 1. Index $A$ a a sequence $a_n.$
Let $B_{m,n}$ be a ball of radius $1/m$ centered at $a_n$
Almost surely, the sequence $h_i$ must visit $B_{m,n}$ infinitely often,
as $P(h_iin B_{m,n})>0$. Therefore $A$ is a subset of the closure of the values of the sequence. (We have essentially the fact that a random function $f:mathbb{N}rightarrow mathbb{N}^2$ is surjective with infinite multiplicity.)






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    The point is that you "keep going" by transfinite induction. The process must stop at some countable ordinal before $omega_1$ as the space is countable dimensional.
    $endgroup$
    – J. E. Pascoe
    Apr 21 at 19:59










  • $begingroup$
    That is for each $alpha < omega_1$ there would be $A_alpha$ such that if $alpha < beta,$ $A_alpha^perp cap A_beta neq {0}.$
    $endgroup$
    – J. E. Pascoe
    Apr 21 at 20:06












  • $begingroup$
    "Let $A$ be as in Lemma 1" ... "we may take $A$ to consist of only isolated points, as in a Polish space a countable closed set is equal to the closure of its isolated points." But Lemma 1 does not guarantee that $A$ is closed.
    $endgroup$
    – Iosif Pinelis
    Apr 21 at 20:07












  • $begingroup$
    That does seem to be a gap @IosifPinelis . Ideas for closing it?
    $endgroup$
    – J. E. Pascoe
    Apr 21 at 20:10












  • $begingroup$
    Could you elaborate a bit further on why the set $A$ in Lemma 1 is countable? Of course, there exist linearly independent sets in $H$ that are uncountable -- just choose your favourite Hamel basis of $H$.
    $endgroup$
    – Jochen Glueck
    Apr 21 at 20:18


















0












$begingroup$

Another Try



We say a $mathcal{H}$-valued random variable $h$ is a random vector if $P(h perp g)<1$ for all $gin mathcal{H}.$



If $h_1, h_2, ldots$ is a sequence independent identically distributed of random vectors,
then, almost surely, the closed span of the $h_i$ is equal to $mathcal{H}.$



First we will need a lemma.



Lemma 1
Let $h$ be a random vector.
There is a countable subset $A$ of $mathcal{H}$ such that the closed span of the elements of $A$ is equal to $mathcal{H}$
and for every point $ain A,$ $P(hin U)>0$ for any neighborhood $U$ of $a.$



Proof
For any subset $A$ such that for every point $ain A,$ $P(hin U)>0$ for any neighborhood $U$ of $a,$ and
the closed span of the elements of $A$ is not equal to $mathcal{H},$
we will show that we can grow $A$ by a single element which is not in closed span of the elements of $A.$
We can only do this a countable number of times because the Hilbert space dimension of $mathcal{H}$ is countable.
(Otherwise, via Gram-Schmidt, we could construct an uncountable orthonormal set by transfinite induction.)



Choose $g$ such that $g perp a$ for all $ain A.$ Now, $P(h perp g)<1.$ So there must be a point $b$ such that
$P(hin U) >0$ for every neighborhood of $b$ and $b$ is not perpendicular to $g,$ therefore, $b$ is not in the span of the elements of $A.$ QED



Suppose $h_1, h_2, ldots$ is a sequence independent identically distributed of random vectors.
Let $A$ be as in Lemma 1. Index $A$ a a sequence $a_n.$
Let $B_{m,n}$ be a ball of radius $1/m$ centered at $a_n$
Almost surely, the sequence $h_i$ must visit $B_{m,n}$ infinitely often,
as $P(h_iin B_{m,n})>0$. Therefore $A$ is a subset of the closure of the values of the sequence. (We have essentially the fact that a random function $f:mathbb{N}rightarrow mathbb{N}^2$ is surjective with infinite multiplicity.)






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    The point is that you "keep going" by transfinite induction. The process must stop at some countable ordinal before $omega_1$ as the space is countable dimensional.
    $endgroup$
    – J. E. Pascoe
    Apr 21 at 19:59










  • $begingroup$
    That is for each $alpha < omega_1$ there would be $A_alpha$ such that if $alpha < beta,$ $A_alpha^perp cap A_beta neq {0}.$
    $endgroup$
    – J. E. Pascoe
    Apr 21 at 20:06












  • $begingroup$
    "Let $A$ be as in Lemma 1" ... "we may take $A$ to consist of only isolated points, as in a Polish space a countable closed set is equal to the closure of its isolated points." But Lemma 1 does not guarantee that $A$ is closed.
    $endgroup$
    – Iosif Pinelis
    Apr 21 at 20:07












  • $begingroup$
    That does seem to be a gap @IosifPinelis . Ideas for closing it?
    $endgroup$
    – J. E. Pascoe
    Apr 21 at 20:10












  • $begingroup$
    Could you elaborate a bit further on why the set $A$ in Lemma 1 is countable? Of course, there exist linearly independent sets in $H$ that are uncountable -- just choose your favourite Hamel basis of $H$.
    $endgroup$
    – Jochen Glueck
    Apr 21 at 20:18
















0












0








0





$begingroup$

Another Try



We say a $mathcal{H}$-valued random variable $h$ is a random vector if $P(h perp g)<1$ for all $gin mathcal{H}.$



If $h_1, h_2, ldots$ is a sequence independent identically distributed of random vectors,
then, almost surely, the closed span of the $h_i$ is equal to $mathcal{H}.$



First we will need a lemma.



Lemma 1
Let $h$ be a random vector.
There is a countable subset $A$ of $mathcal{H}$ such that the closed span of the elements of $A$ is equal to $mathcal{H}$
and for every point $ain A,$ $P(hin U)>0$ for any neighborhood $U$ of $a.$



Proof
For any subset $A$ such that for every point $ain A,$ $P(hin U)>0$ for any neighborhood $U$ of $a,$ and
the closed span of the elements of $A$ is not equal to $mathcal{H},$
we will show that we can grow $A$ by a single element which is not in closed span of the elements of $A.$
We can only do this a countable number of times because the Hilbert space dimension of $mathcal{H}$ is countable.
(Otherwise, via Gram-Schmidt, we could construct an uncountable orthonormal set by transfinite induction.)



Choose $g$ such that $g perp a$ for all $ain A.$ Now, $P(h perp g)<1.$ So there must be a point $b$ such that
$P(hin U) >0$ for every neighborhood of $b$ and $b$ is not perpendicular to $g,$ therefore, $b$ is not in the span of the elements of $A.$ QED



Suppose $h_1, h_2, ldots$ is a sequence independent identically distributed of random vectors.
Let $A$ be as in Lemma 1. Index $A$ a a sequence $a_n.$
Let $B_{m,n}$ be a ball of radius $1/m$ centered at $a_n$
Almost surely, the sequence $h_i$ must visit $B_{m,n}$ infinitely often,
as $P(h_iin B_{m,n})>0$. Therefore $A$ is a subset of the closure of the values of the sequence. (We have essentially the fact that a random function $f:mathbb{N}rightarrow mathbb{N}^2$ is surjective with infinite multiplicity.)






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



Another Try



We say a $mathcal{H}$-valued random variable $h$ is a random vector if $P(h perp g)<1$ for all $gin mathcal{H}.$



If $h_1, h_2, ldots$ is a sequence independent identically distributed of random vectors,
then, almost surely, the closed span of the $h_i$ is equal to $mathcal{H}.$



First we will need a lemma.



Lemma 1
Let $h$ be a random vector.
There is a countable subset $A$ of $mathcal{H}$ such that the closed span of the elements of $A$ is equal to $mathcal{H}$
and for every point $ain A,$ $P(hin U)>0$ for any neighborhood $U$ of $a.$



Proof
For any subset $A$ such that for every point $ain A,$ $P(hin U)>0$ for any neighborhood $U$ of $a,$ and
the closed span of the elements of $A$ is not equal to $mathcal{H},$
we will show that we can grow $A$ by a single element which is not in closed span of the elements of $A.$
We can only do this a countable number of times because the Hilbert space dimension of $mathcal{H}$ is countable.
(Otherwise, via Gram-Schmidt, we could construct an uncountable orthonormal set by transfinite induction.)



Choose $g$ such that $g perp a$ for all $ain A.$ Now, $P(h perp g)<1.$ So there must be a point $b$ such that
$P(hin U) >0$ for every neighborhood of $b$ and $b$ is not perpendicular to $g,$ therefore, $b$ is not in the span of the elements of $A.$ QED



Suppose $h_1, h_2, ldots$ is a sequence independent identically distributed of random vectors.
Let $A$ be as in Lemma 1. Index $A$ a a sequence $a_n.$
Let $B_{m,n}$ be a ball of radius $1/m$ centered at $a_n$
Almost surely, the sequence $h_i$ must visit $B_{m,n}$ infinitely often,
as $P(h_iin B_{m,n})>0$. Therefore $A$ is a subset of the closure of the values of the sequence. (We have essentially the fact that a random function $f:mathbb{N}rightarrow mathbb{N}^2$ is surjective with infinite multiplicity.)







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited Apr 21 at 21:24

























answered Apr 21 at 19:48









J. E. PascoeJ. E. Pascoe

575316




575316












  • $begingroup$
    The point is that you "keep going" by transfinite induction. The process must stop at some countable ordinal before $omega_1$ as the space is countable dimensional.
    $endgroup$
    – J. E. Pascoe
    Apr 21 at 19:59










  • $begingroup$
    That is for each $alpha < omega_1$ there would be $A_alpha$ such that if $alpha < beta,$ $A_alpha^perp cap A_beta neq {0}.$
    $endgroup$
    – J. E. Pascoe
    Apr 21 at 20:06












  • $begingroup$
    "Let $A$ be as in Lemma 1" ... "we may take $A$ to consist of only isolated points, as in a Polish space a countable closed set is equal to the closure of its isolated points." But Lemma 1 does not guarantee that $A$ is closed.
    $endgroup$
    – Iosif Pinelis
    Apr 21 at 20:07












  • $begingroup$
    That does seem to be a gap @IosifPinelis . Ideas for closing it?
    $endgroup$
    – J. E. Pascoe
    Apr 21 at 20:10












  • $begingroup$
    Could you elaborate a bit further on why the set $A$ in Lemma 1 is countable? Of course, there exist linearly independent sets in $H$ that are uncountable -- just choose your favourite Hamel basis of $H$.
    $endgroup$
    – Jochen Glueck
    Apr 21 at 20:18




















  • $begingroup$
    The point is that you "keep going" by transfinite induction. The process must stop at some countable ordinal before $omega_1$ as the space is countable dimensional.
    $endgroup$
    – J. E. Pascoe
    Apr 21 at 19:59










  • $begingroup$
    That is for each $alpha < omega_1$ there would be $A_alpha$ such that if $alpha < beta,$ $A_alpha^perp cap A_beta neq {0}.$
    $endgroup$
    – J. E. Pascoe
    Apr 21 at 20:06












  • $begingroup$
    "Let $A$ be as in Lemma 1" ... "we may take $A$ to consist of only isolated points, as in a Polish space a countable closed set is equal to the closure of its isolated points." But Lemma 1 does not guarantee that $A$ is closed.
    $endgroup$
    – Iosif Pinelis
    Apr 21 at 20:07












  • $begingroup$
    That does seem to be a gap @IosifPinelis . Ideas for closing it?
    $endgroup$
    – J. E. Pascoe
    Apr 21 at 20:10












  • $begingroup$
    Could you elaborate a bit further on why the set $A$ in Lemma 1 is countable? Of course, there exist linearly independent sets in $H$ that are uncountable -- just choose your favourite Hamel basis of $H$.
    $endgroup$
    – Jochen Glueck
    Apr 21 at 20:18


















$begingroup$
The point is that you "keep going" by transfinite induction. The process must stop at some countable ordinal before $omega_1$ as the space is countable dimensional.
$endgroup$
– J. E. Pascoe
Apr 21 at 19:59




$begingroup$
The point is that you "keep going" by transfinite induction. The process must stop at some countable ordinal before $omega_1$ as the space is countable dimensional.
$endgroup$
– J. E. Pascoe
Apr 21 at 19:59












$begingroup$
That is for each $alpha < omega_1$ there would be $A_alpha$ such that if $alpha < beta,$ $A_alpha^perp cap A_beta neq {0}.$
$endgroup$
– J. E. Pascoe
Apr 21 at 20:06






$begingroup$
That is for each $alpha < omega_1$ there would be $A_alpha$ such that if $alpha < beta,$ $A_alpha^perp cap A_beta neq {0}.$
$endgroup$
– J. E. Pascoe
Apr 21 at 20:06














$begingroup$
"Let $A$ be as in Lemma 1" ... "we may take $A$ to consist of only isolated points, as in a Polish space a countable closed set is equal to the closure of its isolated points." But Lemma 1 does not guarantee that $A$ is closed.
$endgroup$
– Iosif Pinelis
Apr 21 at 20:07






$begingroup$
"Let $A$ be as in Lemma 1" ... "we may take $A$ to consist of only isolated points, as in a Polish space a countable closed set is equal to the closure of its isolated points." But Lemma 1 does not guarantee that $A$ is closed.
$endgroup$
– Iosif Pinelis
Apr 21 at 20:07














$begingroup$
That does seem to be a gap @IosifPinelis . Ideas for closing it?
$endgroup$
– J. E. Pascoe
Apr 21 at 20:10






$begingroup$
That does seem to be a gap @IosifPinelis . Ideas for closing it?
$endgroup$
– J. E. Pascoe
Apr 21 at 20:10














$begingroup$
Could you elaborate a bit further on why the set $A$ in Lemma 1 is countable? Of course, there exist linearly independent sets in $H$ that are uncountable -- just choose your favourite Hamel basis of $H$.
$endgroup$
– Jochen Glueck
Apr 21 at 20:18






$begingroup$
Could you elaborate a bit further on why the set $A$ in Lemma 1 is countable? Of course, there exist linearly independent sets in $H$ that are uncountable -- just choose your favourite Hamel basis of $H$.
$endgroup$
– Jochen Glueck
Apr 21 at 20:18




















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to MathOverflow!


  • 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%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f328585%2fdoes-a-random-sequence-of-vectors-span-a-hilbert-space%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

Plaza Victoria

In PowerPoint, is there a keyboard shortcut for bulleted / numbered list?

How to put 3 figures in Latex with 2 figures side by side and 1 below these side by side images but in...