How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
Strong Laws of Large Numbers — Examples
1 · Prerequisites
- Absolute and Conditional Convergence; Rearrangement; Products
- Areas of Elementary Plane Figures
- Binary Operations, Monoids, Groups and Subgroups
- Compactness
- Compactness in Metric Spaces
- Completeness, Completion, and Uniform Continuity
- Construction of the Natural Numbers
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Cauchy Sequences
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Dedekind Cuts
- Continuity, IVT, EVT, and Uniform Continuity
- Cosets, Index and Lagrange's Theorem
- Countability and Uncountability
- Divisibility, Euclidean Domains, Principal Ideal Domains and Unique Factorisation
- Equivalent Forms of Completeness
- Filters and Ultrafilters
- Finite Counting, Factorials and Binomial Coefficients
- Finite Probability Spaces and Random Variables
- Foundations of the Real Numbers for Analysis
- Fundamental Trigonometric Identities
- Further Trigonometric Identities and Inverse Functions
- Ideals, Quotient Rings and the Isomorphism Theorems for Rings
- Improper Integrals
- Independence Borel Cantelli and Zero One Laws
- Infinite Product Measures and Kolmogorov Extension
- Lebesgue Measure on Euclidean Space
- Lebesgue-Stieltjes Measures and Distribution Functions
- Limits of Real Functions
- limsup, liminf, and Subsequential Limits
- Linear Independence, Bases and Dimension
- Linear Transformations, Rank-Nullity and Quotient Spaces
- Measurable Functions and Simple Approximation
- Measures and Their Basic Properties
- Metric Spaces
- Modes of Convergence Egorov and Lusin
- Modes of Convergence for Random Variables
- Monotone Functions, Discontinuities, and Continuity Sets
- Monotone Sequences, Bolzano-Weierstrass, and Cauchy Completeness
- Normal Subgroups and Quotient Groups
- Order, Zorn's Lemma, and the Axiom of Choice
- Outer Measure and the Caratheodory Extension Theorem
- Polynomial Rings, the Division Algorithm and Roots
- Power Series and Real-Analytic Functions
- Probability Spaces Random Variables and Expectation
- Product Measures and the Fubini Tonelli Theorems
- Properties of the Integral and the Working FTC
- Relations, Functions, and Quotients
- Rings, Subrings, Integral Domains and Fields
- Rⁿ as a Normed Space; Vector-Valued Functions
- Roots, Rational Powers, and Classical Inequalities
- Sequences and Limits
- Sequences and Series of Functions; Uniform Convergence
- Series: Convergence and the Nonnegative Tests
- Sigma Algebras and Borel Sets
- Simple Field Extensions and the Construction of the Complex Numbers
- Sine, Cosine, and the Definition of Pi
- Strong Laws of Large Numbers
- Subspaces, Products, and Quotients
- Suprema and Infima
- The Derivative and the Mean Value Theorems
- The Exponential Function
- The Lebesgue and Riemann Integrals Compared
- The Lebesgue Integral and the Convergence Theorems
- The Logarithm and General Powers
- The Lᵖ Spaces Holder Minkowski and Riesz Fischer
- The Riemann Integral in Rᵐ and Jordan Content
- The Riemann Integral: Definition and Integrability
- The Topology of Euclidean Space
- The ZFC Axioms and the Basic Set Constructions
- Topological Spaces and Continuity
- Topology of ℝ
- Triangularisation, Generalised Eigenspaces and Jordan Canonical Form
- Vector Spaces, Linear Subspaces, Span and Direct Sums
- Weak Laws and Series of Independent Random Variables
2 · Summary
These examples calculate empirical frequencies, an integrable heavy-tail mean, and a nonidentical variance-series law. The counterexamples separate weak and strong sample-mean convergence, show the obstruction from Cauchy tails, and exhibit failure without independence.
3 · Logical flowchart
4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs
None yet.
5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements
Almost sure frequency of heads
Example
Assume AC and . On the countable product of the law , , the proportion of the first n coordinates that equal one converges almost surely to p.
Facts & Assumptions
Variance and covariance identities for random variables: Let be square-integrable real random variables on one probability space. Then Moreover, covariance is symmetric and bilinear on finite linear combinations. On finite full-power-set probability spaces these formulas reduce to the published finite identities.
The Axiom of Choice: The Axiom of Choice (AC) is the following statement.
Every family of nonempty sets has a choice function (def-choice-function).
Written out: for every set all of whose members are nonempty, there exists a function with domain satisfying for all .
An equivalent formulation is that a product of nonempty sets is nonempty: if for every , then . Here is the set of functions with domain such that for every ; when a family of nonempty sets is indexed by itself, such an is precisely a choice function for it.
The Axiom of Countable Choice (): The Axiom of Countable Choice, written , is the following statement.
For every family of nonempty sets indexed by there is a function with domain such that for every .
Equivalently, in the vocabulary of def-choice-function: every at most countable family of nonempty sets (def-countable) has a choice function.
The recursion theorem: Let be a Peano system (def-peano-system), in particular the natural numbers (def-natural-numbers). For any set , any element , and any function , there is a unique function such that and for all .
The axiom of dependent choice: a relation in which every element is related to something admits an -indexed chain: Let be a set and let be a binary relation on . Call entire on when
The Axiom of Dependent Choice, written , is the following statement.
For every nonempty set , every relation entire on , and every , there is a function (def-function, def-natural-numbers) with
Here a sequence in means a function from to , not necessarily a real-valued sequence. As everywhere in this library contains , and the sequence is indexed from ; the term is the prescribed starting point and every later term is related to its predecessor.
What DC adds to what came before. def-choice-function and def-axiom-of-choice select one element from each member of a family that is fixed in advance, and def-countable-choice does the same for a family indexed by . In both, the family is given before any selection is made. DC is the principle needed when the -th set to select from is not known until the first selections have been made: here the admissible values of are exactly the -successors of , so the family being chosen from is built along the choosing. That is precisely the situation does not cover, and it is why a construction "pick depending on , for every at once" is not licensed by countable choice.
The starting point may be dropped. The formally weaker statement obtained by deleting the clause — for every nonempty and every entire there is a sequence with for all — is an immediate consequence of the form above, since is nonempty and any of its elements may be taken as . The reverse derivation is standard and is not needed anywhere in this library, so it is not carried out; every use below prescribes .
need not be an order and the terms need not be distinct. What DC delivers is a sequence, that is a function , not a chain in the order-theoretic sense (def-chain). The relation may be symmetric, and the sequence may repeat a value or be constant; all that is asserted is at every index.
Assuming countable and dependent choice, countable products of arbitrary probability spaces: Assume countable choice and dependent choice. For probability spaces there is a unique probability measure on the canonical countable-product sigma-algebra having the prescribed finite product marginals.
Coordinate random elements of a countable product are independent: Under the measure of F6, the coordinate maps have laws and are independent.
Iid finite variance strong law: IID square-integrable real variables satisfy almost surely.
Verification
Given: The objects, hypotheses and definitions in the statement. Its conclusions are to be established below.
The two nonnegative masses sum to one; summing them over subsets of {0,1} gives a countably additive probability measure. Its identity variable has , , and hence by F1.
Under F2, applying a choice function to a countable nonempty family gives F3. For each entire relation R choose a successor s(a) for every a; F4 produces the iterates of s from a prescribed initial point, proving F5. Thus F6 constructs the canonical countable product and F7 makes its coordinate maps independent with the law in step 1.1. For , put ; then is IID with that law.
F8 applies to using the finite variance in step 1.1 and independence in step 2.1. Since counts the ones among , it yields the displayed frequency limit. If or , each coordinate equals that value almost surely, and a countable union of zero-probability exceptions is null.
Strong law for empirical indicator averages
Example
For IID random elements and a fixed measurable A, almost surely. A single conull event works for any specified countable class of sets A.
Facts & Assumptions
Measurable coordinatewise functions preserve independence: Let be an independent family of random elements . For each , let be measurable. Then the family is independent.
The expectation of an indicator is the probability of the event: Let be a probability space and let . Then the indicator satisfies
Kolmogorov iid l1 strong law: For IID real with , almost surely.
Finite and countable subadditivity of measures: Let be a measure and let be measurable. Then
For every one also has
including , where both sides are .
Verification
Given: The objects, hypotheses and definitions in the statement. Its conclusions are to be established below.
The measurable maps take values in {0,1}. F1 preserves the IID property, and F2 computes their expectation as ; their absolute expectations are at most one.
F3 applied to step 1.1 gives the fixed-set limit. For a specified countable class, let N_A be the failure event for that limit. F4 gives . Outside this union every stated frequency converges simultaneously.
Strong law estimator of an integrable mean
Example
Assume AC. The probability law with for and for has density , mean 3 and infinite second moment. The sample means of IID copies converge almost surely to 3.
Facts & Assumptions
Continuity and derivatives of positive-base real powers: For , the function is continuous on and For , the function is continuous and differentiable on , with
Probability laws correspond to distribution functions: Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice.
- Let be a real random variable, let be its law, and let . Then is nondecreasing and right-continuous, satisfies and obeys
- Conversely, if is nondecreasing and right-continuous with then there is a unique Borel probability measure on such that equivalently
The indefinite integral of a nonnegative measurable function is a measure: Let be measurable and define Then is a measure on .
A continuous function on is Riemann integrable, by Heine-Cantor and Riemann's criterion: Let be reals and let be continuous on (def-continuity-real). Then is bounded (def-bounded-set) and Riemann integrable on (def-darboux-integral).
The proof gives more than integrability: it gives a partition that works. For every real the uniform partition into parts already satisfies , as soon as is large enough that is below the that uniform continuity supplies for . Uniform continuity is exactly what makes one serve all subintervals at once, and it is the only place where the compactness of is used.
The second fundamental theorem: if is differentiable on with and is integrable, then : Let be reals, let be differentiable at every point of as a function on (def-derivative; at and this is the one-sided derivative), let , and suppose is integrable on (def-darboux-integral). Then
Both hypotheses are needed and neither is removable. A function may be differentiable everywhere with not integrable — then the left-hand side does not exist (an everywhere differentiable function with unbounded derivative) — and an integrable need not be the derivative of anything (the sign function); both witnesses are on the companion page.
No continuity of is assumed, which is what makes this the working form: the theorem evaluates for every integrable derivative, not only for continuous integrands.
A bounded Riemann integrable function on a closed bounded interval is Lebesgue measurable and has the same integral: Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice. Let and let be bounded and Riemann integrable. Then is Lebesgue measurable on and is integrable there, and its Lebesgue integral equals its Riemann integral:
This is the point at which the completeness of Lebesgue measure is used essentially: the proof obtains a Borel function equal to almost everywhere, and measurability of itself is then a completeness statement.
Monotone convergence for the integral: Let be measurable and suppose for every . Then
Measures agreeing on a generating pi-system are equal under an increasing finite-measure exhaustion from that pi-system: Let be a -system on generating , and let be measures on that agree on . Suppose there is an increasing sequence in with
Then on .
Layer-cake formulas for random variables: Let be a probability space.
- If is measurable, then where the right-hand side may be .
- If is an integrable real random variable, then
For 0 < p < infinity, the layer-cake formula computes the integral of |f|^p from the distribution function: Let be a measure space, let be measurable, and let . Then where either side may be .
The recursion theorem: Let be a Peano system (def-peano-system), in particular the natural numbers (def-natural-numbers). For any set , any element , and any function , there is a unique function such that and for all .
The axiom of dependent choice: a relation in which every element is related to something admits an -indexed chain: Let be a set and let be a binary relation on . Call entire on when
The Axiom of Dependent Choice, written , is the following statement.
For every nonempty set , every relation entire on , and every , there is a function (def-function, def-natural-numbers) with
Here a sequence in means a function from to , not necessarily a real-valued sequence. As everywhere in this library contains , and the sequence is indexed from ; the term is the prescribed starting point and every later term is related to its predecessor.
What DC adds to what came before. def-choice-function and def-axiom-of-choice select one element from each member of a family that is fixed in advance, and def-countable-choice does the same for a family indexed by . In both, the family is given before any selection is made. DC is the principle needed when the -th set to select from is not known until the first selections have been made: here the admissible values of are exactly the -successors of , so the family being chosen from is built along the choosing. That is precisely the situation does not cover, and it is why a construction "pick depending on , for every at once" is not licensed by countable choice.
The starting point may be dropped. The formally weaker statement obtained by deleting the clause — for every nonempty and every entire there is a sequence with for all — is an immediate consequence of the form above, since is nonempty and any of its elements may be taken as . The reverse derivation is standard and is not needed anywhere in this library, so it is not carried out; every use below prescribes .
need not be an order and the terms need not be distinct. What DC delivers is a sequence, that is a function , not a chain in the order-theoretic sense (def-chain). The relation may be symmetric, and the sequence may repeat a value or be constant; all that is asserted is at every index.
Countably many independent copies of a prescribed law exist: Assume countable choice and dependent choice. Every probability measure on is the common law of a countable independent family of -valued random elements.
Kolmogorov iid l1 strong law: For IID real with , almost surely.
Verification
Given: The objects, hypotheses and definitions in the statement. Its conclusions are to be established below.
F1 makes F continuous at 1 and on each side, nondecreasing, and gives its limits 0 and 1 at infinity. AC implies CC by choosing from each member of a countable nonempty family, so F2 constructs its unique probability law.
The displayed nonnegative Borel density defines a measure by F3. On [1,R], F4 and F5 with primitive give . F6 applies under the CC from step 1.1. F7 extends these nonnegative compact integrals to total mass one. The same calculation on every interval gives the increments of F; F8 on finite intervals identifies the density measure with the law in step 1.1.
The tail is for and for . F9 and F10 give and . The primitives and evaluate compact integrals as and . The compact comparison and increasing-truncation argument in step 2.1 therefore give and .
For any entire relation R, AC selects a successor function s and F11 iterates it from an arbitrary prescribed starting point; this proves F12. Together with the CC from step 1.1 it licenses F13. Apply F14 to these copies: step 3.1 verifies integrability with mean 3, although the second moment is infinite.
Nonidentical strong law under summable normalized variances
Example
Assume AC. Let be independent copies of , and set . Then almost surely although is unbounded.
Facts & Assumptions
Variance and covariance identities for random variables: Let be square-integrable real random variables on one probability space. Then Moreover, covariance is symmetric and bilinear on finite linear combinations. On finite full-power-set probability spaces these formulas reduce to the published finite identities.
The recursion theorem: Let be a Peano system (def-peano-system), in particular the natural numbers (def-natural-numbers). For any set , any element , and any function , there is a unique function such that and for all .
Countably many independent copies of a prescribed law exist: Assume countable choice and dependent choice. Every probability measure on is the common law of a countable independent family of -valued random elements.
Strong law under summable normalized variances: Let be independent square-integrable real random variables. Let be deterministic and nondecreasing with . If then In particular, for IID centered square-integrable variables and any , almost surely (the displayed normalization is used for ).
Verification
Given: The objects, hypotheses and definitions in the statement. Its conclusions are to be established below.
The two equally weighted atoms define a probability law, with and . F1 gives variance one.
AC supplies a choice function on every countable nonempty family, hence CC. For a serial relation choose a successor function and iterate it by F2, giving DC. These are the hypotheses of F3, so the independent copies exist.
Scaling each coordinate preserves independence, since the preimage of a Borel set depends only on that coordinate. F4 gives , and . By F5 the variance series is finite. Apply F6 with =n to obtain the stated limit. The variances tend to infinity because their squares equal n.
Weak law does not imply strong law
Statement refuted
A weak sample-mean law need not be a centered strong law. Assuming AC, there are integrable real with in probability but not tending to zero almost surely.
Facts & Assumptions
The recursion theorem: Let be a Peano system (def-peano-system), in particular the natural numbers (def-natural-numbers). For any set , any element , and any function , there is a unique function such that and for all .
A box in with parameters is Lebesgue measurable of measure , whichever of its faces are included: Let , assume the Axiom of Countable Choice (def-countable-choice), and let be reals for . Write
(def-multidimensional-rectangle-and-volume). Then is open and is closed, so both are Borel and Lebesgue measurable, and every set with is Lebesgue measurable with
In particular this covers the four one-dimensional face conventions in each coordinate — the open box, the closed box , the half-open box of def-half-open-box, and every mixture of them, in any combination of coordinates — and it gives measure to all of them whenever for some . For a half-open box with infinite parameters the value is already (thm-lebesgue-measure-is-a-complete-measure).
Countably many independent copies of a prescribed law exist: Assume countable choice and dependent choice. Every probability measure on is the common law of a countable independent family of -valued random elements.
Measurable coordinatewise functions preserve independence: Let be an independent family of random elements . For each , let be measurable. Then the family is independent.
Second Borel-Cantelli lemma under pairwise independence: Let be pairwise independent events with Then
Counterexample
Given: The objects, hypotheses and definitions in the statement. Its conclusions are to be established below.
AC restricted to a countable family gives CC; choosing a successor for each point of an entire relation and using F1 gives DC. On the identity U has for 0< by F2. F3 supplies IID copies . Let , which are independent by F4.
Set =0 and . These finite-valued variables are integrable; telescoping gives . Thus for every >0, and .
The sum of diverges: each block contributes at least 1/2. The complementary probabilities n/(n+1) also have divergent sum. Apply F5 to the independent events =1 and separately to =0. Both occur infinitely often on a common conull event. Hence the centered averages have limsup 1 and liminf 0 there, refuting the centered strong law while step 1.2 establishes the weak law.
Iid strong law fails at infinite absolute mean
Statement refuted
Assume AC. IID standard Cauchy variables have standard Cauchy sample means for every positive n. Their averages cannot converge in probability to a finite constant, and cannot converge almost surely to any finite random limit. Here the standard Cauchy law has CDF .
Facts & Assumptions
For ,
At the endpoint, the ordinarily convergent alternating series satisfies
Probability laws correspond to distribution functions: Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice.
- Let be a real random variable, let be its law, and let . Then is nondecreasing and right-continuous, satisfies and obeys
- Conversely, if is nondecreasing and right-continuous with then there is a unique Borel probability measure on such that equivalently
The recursion theorem: Let be a Peano system (def-peano-system), in particular the natural numbers (def-natural-numbers). For any set , any element , and any function , there is a unique function such that and for all .
Countably many independent copies of a prescribed law exist: Assume countable choice and dependent choice. Every probability measure on is the common law of a countable independent family of -valued random elements.
A continuous function on is Riemann integrable, by Heine-Cantor and Riemann's criterion: Let be reals and let be continuous on (def-continuity-real). Then is bounded (def-bounded-set) and Riemann integrable on (def-darboux-integral).
The proof gives more than integrability: it gives a partition that works. For every real the uniform partition into parts already satisfies , as soon as is large enough that is below the that uniform continuity supplies for . Uniform continuity is exactly what makes one serve all subintervals at once, and it is the only place where the compactness of is used.
The second fundamental theorem: if is differentiable on with and is integrable, then : Let be reals, let be differentiable at every point of as a function on (def-derivative; at and this is the one-sided derivative), let , and suppose is integrable on (def-darboux-integral). Then
Both hypotheses are needed and neither is removable. A function may be differentiable everywhere with not integrable — then the left-hand side does not exist (an everywhere differentiable function with unbounded derivative) — and an integrable need not be the derivative of anything (the sign function); both witnesses are on the companion page.
No continuity of is assumed, which is what makes this the working form: the theorem evaluates for every integrable derivative, not only for continuous integrands.
A bounded Riemann integrable function on a closed bounded interval is Lebesgue measurable and has the same integral: Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice. Let and let be bounded and Riemann integrable. Then is Lebesgue measurable on and is integrable there, and its Lebesgue integral equals its Riemann integral:
This is the point at which the completeness of Lebesgue measure is used essentially: the proof obtains a Borel function equal to almost everywhere, and measurability of itself is then a completeness statement.
Monotone convergence for the integral: Let be measurable and suppose for every . Then
The indefinite integral of a nonnegative measurable function is a measure: Let be measurable and define Then is a measure on .
Measures agreeing on a generating pi-system are equal under an increasing finite-measure exhaustion from that pi-system: Let be a -system on generating , and let be measures on that agree on . Suppose there is an increasing sequence in with
Then on .
The natural logarithm has derivative 1/x and equals the integral from 1 to x of 1/t: For , is differentiable and
Order, continuity, range, and the product, quotient, and reciprocal laws for the natural logarithm: The function is continuous and strictly increasing, is onto , and satisfies, for , Also .
Integrability is necessary for an iid finite mean strong law: If IID real have converging almost surely to a finite, possibly random, limit , then and almost surely.
Independent random elements have product joint law: Let , and let for be independent random elements. Define
Then is a random element of , and its law is the finite product of the marginal laws:
Tonelli's theorem for nonnegative measurable functions on a sigma-finite product: Let and be -finite measure spaces, and let be product-measurable. Then and are measurable, and
The principal inverse tangent : By lem-tangent-principal-branch-is-bijective, tangent restricts to a continuous strictly increasing bijection
Its inverse is the principal inverse tangent
Thus for every real , while precisely for in the displayed principal interval. The inverse is continuous and strictly increasing by thm-continuous-inverse.
A box in with parameters is Lebesgue measurable of measure , whichever of its faces are included: Let , assume the Axiom of Countable Choice (def-countable-choice), and let be reals for . Write
(def-multidimensional-rectangle-and-volume). Then is open and is closed, so both are Borel and Lebesgue measurable, and every set with is Lebesgue measurable with
In particular this covers the four one-dimensional face conventions in each coordinate — the open box, the closed box , the half-open box of def-half-open-box, and every mixture of them, in any combination of coordinates — and it gives measure to all of them whenever for some . For a half-open box with infinite parameters the value is already (thm-lebesgue-measure-is-a-complete-measure).
Counterexample
Given: The objects, hypotheses and definitions in the statement. Its conclusions are to be established below.
The inverse in F16 is increasing onto . Its limit at positive infinity is the supremum of that range, : for each in the range, implies . The analogous argument at negative infinity gives . Inverse-tangent calculus F1 gives derivative . Thus F is increasing, continuous and has limits 0 and 1. AC gives CC by restriction to any countable family of nonempty sets, so F2 constructs the law. For a serial relation, AC selects a successor map; F3 iterates it, giving DC and licensing the IID construction in F4.
For set . Its primitive is . Continuous integrability F5, F6, and the CC-qualified compact comparison F7 therefore evaluate its Lebesgue integral on every compact interval. F8 and the primitive limits give total mass one. F9 makes this a measure; equality of finite-interval increments and F10 identify its CDF as . In particular is the standard density.
For fixed real x and a, put and . If , multiplication by the two denominators verifies the identity , where , , . The cubic coefficient cancels; the quadratic and linear coefficients are zero; the constant is one.
For , F11 gives . This tends to infinity by F12. The compact comparison and nonnegative MCT in step 1.2 show . Consequently F13 excludes any finite almost-sure limit of the sample means.
For independent variables with densities and , F14 and F15 give, on an interval (u,v], probability . For fixed y, the affine substitution z=x-y on the finite interval is justified by the continuous primitive in step 1.2, and changes the inner integral to . Tonelli then gives interval probability . This defines a mass-one density measure; interval uniqueness extends the equality to all Borel sets.
A singleton is a degenerate closed box of length zero by F17. Integrate step 1.3 on [-R,R] using the logarithm and inverse-tangent primitives in step 1.2 and step 2.1. The logarithmic contribution is , which tends to zero, while the arctangent contributions tend to . Since , the limit is . Multiplying by ab/^2 gives . The only excluded case is a=b and . A singleton is Lebesgue-null, so this almost-everywhere equality suffices for the density measures; no subtraction of divergent integrals was made.
Induction with step 2.2 and step 3.1 gives density for . Its CDF at nx is , so /n has density for every n. For any finite c, this law gives , independently of n, since the arctangent difference is strictly less than . Thus convergence in probability to c fails. Step 2.1 supplies the stronger obstruction to finite random almost-sure limits.
Identical distribution without independence can defeat the mean law
Statement refuted
Identical integrable marginals alone do not imply the strong mean law: on with equal masses, set and for every n.
Counterexample
Given: The objects, hypotheses and definitions in the statement. Its conclusions are to be established below.
The law gives each atom mass 1/2 and has total mass one. Every coordinate has this same law, and . It is integrable since ||<=1.
For every n, at both points. Hence everywhere, and convergence to the common mean fails on the whole space. Independence fails as well: .