Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let $\mathbb{Z}^d$ be the usual $d$-dimensional lattice and let $\mathbb{H}:=\mathbb{Z}^{d-1}\times Z_+$, where $Z_+:=[0,1,2,\ldots]$. If we now consider bond percolation on $\mathbb{H}$, it is a well known result that at the critical probability for $\mathbb{H}$, $p_c(\mathbb{H})$, equals the usual critical probability $p_c$ for the $d$ dimensional lattice.

Following Grimmett's Percolation textbook, we learn that for $d\geq 2$, $\theta_\mathbb{H}(p_c)=0$, where $\theta_\mathbb{H}$ is the usual probability of 0 connecting to infinity, in this case for the half-space. The conclusion of this is that if $\theta(p_c)>0$ for $\mathbb{Z}^d$ percolation, then there exists a.s. a unique infinite open cluster in $\mathbb{Z}^d$, which is a.s. partitioned into only finite clusters by ANY division of $\mathbb{Z}^d$ into two half-spaces.

My question is, how does this fall short of proving say, $\theta(p_c)=0$ for $d=3$ and so on? It's hard for me to imagine configurations of an infinite cluster even in 3-dimensions that satisfy the slicing criteria above. If I understand correctly, the cluster would need to spiral out radially in all directions and at the very least cross the $x-y$, $y-z$ and $x-z$ planes infinitely many times. It's easy to see that such a construction fails in two dimensions (and rightfully so, $\theta(p_c)=0$ for $d=2$). Where does the difficulty lay? Or rather, if we attempt to rigorously approach a proof in this direction where do we get stuck?

share|improve this question
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.