I'm reading Baxter's "Introduction to Financial Calculus" and he defines a stochastic process as a continuous process $X_t $ that can be written as
$X_t = X_0 + \int_0^t \sigma_s dW_s + \int_0^t \mu_s ds $, where $\sigma, \mu $ are are visible processes that satisfy $\int_0^t (\sigma_s^2 +|\mu_s|) ds $ is finite for all $t$. My question is where does this last condition come from and why must it be finite?
Secondly, once we have the above definition, he writes that two stochastic processes $X_t, \tilde{X}_t$ that have the same volatility $\sigma_t$ and drift $\mu_t$, and that agree at time zero ($X_0=\tilde{X}_0$) are identical i.e. $X_t = \tilde{X}_t$ for all $t$. I'm confused about this since, by the above definition, both processes involve a random number (one from $W_t$ and one from $\tilde{W}_t$ and unless these two Brownian motions are equal, I cannot convince myself that even a single random draw from each of the $N (0,t)$ distribution would yield the same result - the probability is infinitesimally small. If we then demand this to be true for all $t#, it will be even less likely. Why then do these two stochastic processes agree? If it's because the Brownian motion parts are the same, why is this the case - I'd have thought that for two processes, this would not generally be the case.