For showing measurability of Brownian motion, how does this set equality holds?

29 Views Asked by At

It is stated that the the following set equality easily comes from continuity of paths of Brownian motion $B_t$, but I can't seem to make sense of it -

$$\{(\omega,t)\in \Omega\times (0,\infty) : B_t(\omega)\in (a,b)\} = \bigcap_{n=1}^{\infty} \bigcup_{t\in\mathbb{Q}_{+}} \{\omega\in\Omega:B_t(\omega)\in (a,b)\}\times (t-\frac{1}{n},t+\frac{1}{n})$$

Let's call RHS $S$. So $S$ is a countable intersection of sets depending on $n$ which is in turn a countable union of some sets. Am I correct in interpreting that, $(x,y)$ belongs to $S$, if and only if for every $n\ge 1$ there is some positive rational $t$ such that $s\in (t-1/n,t+1/n)$ and for this $s$, $B_s(x)\in (a,b)$?

But then isn't the set $\{\omega\in\Omega:B_t(\omega)\in (a,b)\}$ basically all the $\omega$ such that sample paths generated by them is completely contained in $(a,b)$? Doesn't that make things too special?

I think I'm generally confused by what is meant by $S$. It would be great if you could explain in detail what this means