1
$\begingroup$

I am trying to learn some stuff about percolation. On wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percolation_theory) it says:

"when $p<p_{c}$, the probability that a specific point (for example, the origin) is contained in an open cluster of size $r$ decays to zero exponentially in $r$."

... which suggests that we are very likely to be in a small cluster, but less and less likely to be in an increasingly large cluster. (I think)

I am slightly confused by this. In the picture below are clusters on a $1000$x$1000$ square lattice (site percolation, where $p_{c}=0.592...$) and the image was made when $p=0.58$, so $p<p_{c}$.

However, if you look at the image, most of the area is taken up by large clusters. So if we take a specific point on the grid, surely we're most likely to find that it is in one of these large clusters?

Can anyone explain what I am misunderstanding here?

enter image description here

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

I think the confusion comes from the fact that the event '0 is in a large cluster' is not the same (and has a smaller probability of) as 'the size of a cluster when randomly choosing a point', because you will have more chance of falling into a large cluster, if you choose randomly. It's like when you are waiting for the train that follows a poisson with intensity lambda. when you arrive randomly you might think you will wait for lambda / 2 but actually you will have to wait for lambda because you have more chance to get there when the 2 train are far from each other. (hope i am clear)

$\endgroup$

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.