Use this: \begin{align} \sum_{i=1}^{n} (X_i-\bar{X}_n) &= 0 \\ \bar{u}_{n} &=\frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^{n}u_{i} \end{align} To prove this: $$\sum_{i=1}^{n} (X_i-\bar{X}_n)(\beta_i(X_i-\bar{X}_i)+u_i-\bar{u}_n)=\beta\sum_{i=1}^{n} (X_i-\bar{X}_n)^{2}+\sum_{i=1}^{n}(X_i-\bar{X}_n)u_i$$

However, instead I get: $$\beta\sum_{i=1}^{n} (X_i-\bar{X}_n)^{2}+\sum_{i=1}^{n}(X_i-\bar{X}_n)u_i+\sum_{i=1}^{n}(X_i-\bar{X}_n)\bar{u}_n$$

Why doesn't $\sum_{i=1}^{n}(X_i-\bar{X}_n)u_i=0$, but $\sum_{i=1}^{n}(X_i-\bar{X}_n)\bar{u}_n=0$ does? And how do I make $\sum_{i=1}^{n}(X_i-\bar{X}_n)\bar{u}_n=0$ disappear?

  • $\begingroup$ Hint: think about why we may pull $\bar{u}_n$ before the summation sign, but not $u_i$. $\endgroup$ – Christoph Hanck Nov 30 '16 at 11:55
  • $\begingroup$ What is $u$? Please define the terms and symbols you use. $\endgroup$ – Matthew Drury Nov 30 '16 at 14:29
  • $\begingroup$ @MatthewDrury I have added it to the main text now. $\endgroup$ – Mataunited17 Dec 1 '16 at 13:44
  • $\begingroup$ @ChristophHanck Is it because $\bar{u}_{n}$ is a constant, while $u_{i}$ is not? $\endgroup$ – Mataunited17 Dec 1 '16 at 13:46
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, that is right - for $\bar{u}_n$ the average has already been taken over $i$, so it is constant with respect to $i$. $\endgroup$ – Christoph Hanck Dec 1 '16 at 13:47

$\overline{u}_n$ is a constant not depending on $i$. Hence you can write $\sum_{i=1}^n (X_i - \overline{X}_n)\overline{u}_n = \overline{u}_n (\sum_{i=1}^n (X_i - \overline{X}_n))$ and use that $\sum_{i=1}^n (X_i - \overline{X}_n) = 0$ which gives you $\overline{u}_n * 0 =0$

To answer the questions you were asking in the comments, I'll try to explain in a very detailed way, but most of it was already said in the comments somehow. $$ \sum_{i=1}^n(X_i-\overline{X}_n)\overline{u}_n= \sum_{i=1}^nX_i\overline{u}_n - \sum_{i=1}^n\overline{X}_n\overline{u}_n=\overline{u}_n\sum_{i=1}^nX_i - \overline{u}_n\sum_{i=1}^n\overline{X}_n=\\ \overline{u}_n\sum_{i=1}^nX_i - \overline{u}_nn\overline{X}_n=\overline{u}_nn\overline{X}_n - \overline{u}_nn\overline{X}_n=0$$ The first equalitiy is just multiplying out. The second equalitiy holds because $\overline{u}_n$ is a constant (not depending on $i$). The third equalitiy holds becaus $\overline{X}_n$ also does not depend on $i$, hence it is just summed $n$ times. The fourth equality holds because the sum of the $X_i$'s is just $n$ times their mean. The fifths is clear. Now let's consider the other sum. $$ \sum_{i=1}^n(X_i-\overline{X}_n)u_i=\sum_{i=1}^nX_iu_i-\sum_{i=1}^n\overline{X}_nu_i = \sum_{i=1}^nX_iu_i-\overline{X}_{n}\sum_{i=1}^nu_i = \\ \sum_{i=1}^nX_iu_i-\overline{X}_{n}n\overline{u}_n = n\overline{(Xu)_n}-n\overline{X}_{n}\overline{u}_n \neq 0 \quad \text{(in general)}$$ The first equality is just multiplying out. The second hold because $\overline{X}_n$ does not depend on $i$. The third equality holds because the sum of the $u_i$'s is just $n$ times their mean. The fourth equation is rewriting the sum of the $X_i$ times $u_i$, as $n$ times their mean $\overline{(Xu)_n} := (X_1u_1+X_2u_2 + \ldots +X_nu_n)/n$ and since $\overline{(Xu)_n} \neq \overline{X}_{n}\overline{u}_n$ (e.g. $\frac{1*4 + 2*5 + 3*6}{3} = 10.666 \neq 10 =\frac{1+2+3}{3} * \frac{4+5+6}{3}$) the last inequality follows.

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you, @Schlaftablette! That is a great explanation of my problem. $\endgroup$ – Mataunited17 Dec 3 '16 at 11:40
  • $\begingroup$ However, I am wondering something about $\overline{u}_n\sum_{i=1}^nX_i$, why is $\overline{u}_n\sum_{i=1}^nX_i=n\bar{Xu}_{n}$ true? Isn't the definition of $\bar{X}_{n}=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^nX_i$? or wouldn't $\sum_{i=1}^nu_{i}=nu_{i}$? $\endgroup$ – Mataunited17 Dec 3 '16 at 11:56

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.