Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Source. Erdős–Taylor (1960), Theorem 13, printed pp. 161–162 (PDF pp. 25–26). This proof expands the source's union bound and independent-piece argument, with integer cutoffs and an explicit all-future consequence used in Hao–Li–Okada–Zheng, Lemma 3.2.
For symmetric nearest-neighbor simple random walk on , , write and . Let be the probability of never returning to zero after time zero, , and . Then, almost surely,
More quantitatively, for every , define
There are and such that
Classical input. The only analytic estimate needed below is for . This is the standard transient heat-kernel estimate. The summation proof in Hao–Li–Okada–Zheng, Lemma 2.2 gives . No conclusion of Hao's Theorem 1.2 is used.
Upper tail. Starting at a site, the number of visits to that site, including the starting visit, has tail at integer threshold , by the strong Markov property at successive returns. If a site has local time at least by time , its first visit occurs at some and the walk from makes at least visits to . Discarding the first-visit restriction only enlarges the event. A union bound and the independent increments after each fixed give
In particular, for each fixed and large ,
Lower tail. Fix . Set , and . Write for the probability of a first return to zero within steps. The heat-kernel consequence above gives , hence .
Within a block of steps, the event that each of the first successive return times to the block's starting site is at most has probability . Strong Markov gives the product; on this event all returns fit in the block and produce visits. Moreover,
There are disjoint blocks. The success event for each is determined by its own increments, so these events are independent even if their spatial ranges intersect. A success implies . Therefore
Since and , for every fixed the last bound is at most for all sufficiently large . This is an inequality: success in a selected block is a sufficient way to obtain a thick site, not a necessary one.
All late times. Apply (5) with and . The sum of over integers is at most for large ; for example, its terms are eventually at most .
For the upper side, if violates the upper bound in , monotonicity gives
for all sufficiently large . By (4) the probability is at most . Summing over proves the upper half of (2), and hence (2) itself. Here in the floor means logarithm to base two; all other logarithms are natural.
Letting in (2) shows that holds eventually almost surely. Taking a countable sequence of positive tending to zero proves (1). Counting only times , as in the original paper, changes the maximum by at most one.
Used in. Hao–Li–Okada–Zheng, Lemma 3.2 and its transient favorite-site theorem. This logarithmic law concerns ; the separate planar upper bound has a squared logarithm.
Bears on. Problem 1165 only by comparison: the theorem feeds Hao, Li, Okada and Zheng's Theorem 1.2 on favorite sites in dimension , which the problem page cites as a contrast to the planar answer. It is not an input to that answer.