So in short I want to have something that looks like this:

So far I managed to get to the following output:

with the code as follows:
\documentclass[12pt, a4paper] {article}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\DeclareMathOperator{\var}{var}
\usepackage{mathdesign}
\renewcommand{\vec}[1]{\mathbf{#1}}
\begin{document}
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
R_{it} = \alpha_{i} + \beta_{i} R_{mt} + \varepsilon_{it} \\
E(\varepsilon_{it} = 0) \qquad \var(\varepsilon_{it}) = \sigma_{\varepsilon_{it}}^2
\end{gathered}
\label{eq: marketmodel}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\vec{R}_i = \vec{X}_i\vec{\theta}_i + \boldsymbol{\vec{\varepsilon}}_{it}
\label{eq: mmvectors}
\end{equation}
where $\vec{R}_i = [R_{iT_0} \dotsm R_{iT_1}]'$ is an $(L_1 x 1)$ vector of estimation-window returns,
\end{document}
Note please that especially my in-text definition of the variables in the equation are messed up. Also further help for the following equations (4.4.3 - 4.4.6) would be great! Thanks!


\tau(a stopping time), nott, in the subscript toR? – A.Ellett Dec 12 '14 at 00:49\mathbf(for\vec), but\boldsymbolinstead. See How can I get bold math symbols? – Werner Dec 12 '14 at 00:52\usepackage{bm}and\renewcommand{\vec}[1]{\bm{#1}}for example – Dec 12 '14 at 00:55tis much more natural than\tau. It's an application of the Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) -- no stopping time arguments arise. The only reason I can think why the book's author is using\tauis because of a possible distinction between "event time" (denoted by\tau, I gather) and "calendar time", which presumably would be denoted byt. – Mico Dec 12 '14 at 02:50