This paper derives formulas for the density of visible points in certain planar quasicrystals and uses these to compute the minimal gaps between angles of visible points, revealing structural properties of these aperiodic sets.
Contribution
It provides explicit formulas for the density of visible points and calculates the minimal angular gaps in specific planar quasicrystals, advancing understanding of their geometric distribution.
Findings
01
Formulas for the density of visible points in quasicrystals
02
Calculation of minimal normalized gaps between visible point angles
03
Application to Ammann-Beenker and Penrose tilings
Abstract
We give formulas for the density of visible points of several families of planar quasicrystals, which include the Ammann-Beenker point set and vertex sets of some rhombic Penrose tilings. These densities are used in order to calculate the limiting minimal normalised gap between the angles of visible points in two families of planar quasicrystals, which include the Ammann-Beenker point set and vertex sets of some rhombic Penrose tilings.
Tables2
Table 1. Table 1 : Numerical data for 𝒜 𝒲 subscript 𝒜 𝒲 \mathcal{A}_{\mathcal{W}} and 𝒜 𝒲 ′ subscript 𝒜 superscript 𝒲 ′ \mathcal{A}_{\mathcal{W}^{\prime}} , where 𝒜 𝒲 subscript 𝒜 𝒲 \mathcal{A}_{\mathcal{W}} is the Ammann–Beenker point set and 𝒲 ′ = 𝒲 + 457 − 323 2 superscript 𝒲 ′ 𝒲 457 323 2 \mathcal{W}^{\prime}=\mathcal{W}+457-323\sqrt{2} ; N ^ T = # ( B T ( 0 ) ∩ 𝒜 𝒲 ^ ) subscript ^ 𝑁 𝑇 # subscript 𝐵 𝑇 0 ^ subscript 𝒜 𝒲 \widehat{N}_{T}=\#(B_{T}(0)\cap\widehat{\mathcal{A}_{\mathcal{W}}}) and N ^ T ′ = # ( B T ( 0 ) ∩ 𝒜 𝒲 ′ ^ ) superscript subscript ^ 𝑁 𝑇 ′ # subscript 𝐵 𝑇 0 ^ subscript 𝒜 superscript 𝒲 ′ \widehat{N}_{T}^{\prime}=\#(B_{T}(0)\cap\widehat{\mathcal{A}_{\mathcal{W}^{\prime}}}) .
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsQuasicrystal Structures and Properties
Full text
The density and minimal gap of visible points in some planar quasicrystals ††thanks: Partially supported by the Swedish Research Council Grant 2016-03360.
Gustav Hammarhjelm
Abstract
We give formulas for the density of visible points of several families of planar quasicrystals, which include the Ammann–Beenker point set and vertex sets of some rhombic Penrose tilings. These densities are used in order to calculate the limiting minimal normalised gap between the angles of visible points in two families of planar quasicrystals, which include the Ammann–Beenker point set and vertex sets of some rhombic Penrose tilings.
1 Introduction
Given a locally finite point set P⊂Rd, let P={x∈P∣tx∈/P,∀t∈(0,1)} denote the subset of points that are visible from the origin. If P⊂R2, then within each finite horizon T>0, an observer located at the origin will see points in a finite number of directions, which correspond to the arguments of the visible points within PT:=P∩BT(0), where BT(0)={x∈R2:∣x∣<T}. For a large family of point sets P⊂R2, including regular cut-and-project sets, the directions of visible points in PT become uniformly distributed in (−π,π] as T→∞. In this paper, we consider the fine-scale statistics of the distribution of visible points, i.e. the limiting distribution of normalised gaps between the angles of visible points in a locally finite point set P⊂R2.
For T∈R>0, let N(T)=#PT. Let −π<α(x)≤π denote the argument of x∈R2 viewed as a complex number and arrange 2πα(x), x∈#PT, in increasing order as
[TABLE]
Define also ξT,0=ξT,N(T)−1. Given an integer 1≤i≤NT, let dT,i=N(T)(ξT,i−ξT,i−1). We call dT,i a normalised gap (between the angles of visible points) in P. Let also
[TABLE]
Form the probability measure
[TABLE]
where δx is the Dirac measure of x∈R. Let FT:R⟶[0,1] be the complementary distribution function of μT, that is
[TABLE]
If μT converges weakly to a Borel probability measure μ on R, or equivalently, FT(s) converges to F(s):=μ([s,∞)) at all continuity points of F, we say that the limiting distribution of normalised gaps between the angles of visible points exists. In this case, we call Fthe limiting distribution of normalised gaps inP. A natural question is to determine for which point sets P the measure μ and the corresponding limiting distribution F exists.
In [5], Boca, Cobeli and Zaharescu proved that the limiting distribution of minimal gaps F exists as a continuous function in the case P=Z2, and gave the following explicit formula
[TABLE]
In particular, they proved
the existence of a minimal gap in the limit, i.e. that there is some mP>0 with
[TABLE]
which can be interpreted as a repulsion among directions of visible points.
By the explicit expression for F(s) given in (3) it follows that mZ2=π23.
In [8], Marklof and Strömbergsson studied the fine-scale distribution of the directions of points in affine lattices of arbitrary dimension and characterised the distributions in terms of probability measures on associated homogeneous spaces. In particular, their result [8, Corollary 2.7] implies that the limiting distribution of minimal gaps F(s) exists continuously when P⊂R2 is an affine lattice. In [1], Baake, Götze, Huck and Jakobi numerically computed the normalised gaps dT,i for large T, in prominent examples of planar quasicrystals such as the Ammann–Beenker point set (see Figure 1(b) below) and the Tübingen triangle tiling. These gaps were then distributed in histograms (cf. Figure 2 below) which were compared to the analytic expression for the limiting distribution of minimal gaps for Z2 in (3).
Several gap distributions that were considered in [1] exhibited a minimal gap at a fixed, large radius, indicating the existence of a minimal gap in the limit. Furthermore, the shape of the histograms in [1] suggest that the limit distributions should exist continuously for the quasicrystals investigated.
In [10, Corollary 3], Marklof and Strömbergsson generalised the result from [8] mentioned above, by proving that for every regular planar cut-and-project set, the limiting distribution of normalised gaps exists as a continuous function, confirming some of the numerical observations in [1]. Furthermore, they expressed this limiting distribution explicitly in terms of a probability measure on an associated space of cut-and-project sets. In [10], the existence of a positive minimal gap for several quasicrystals was also proved, again confirming numerical observations in [1]. For instance, Marklof and Strömbergsson proved the existence of a minimal gap in the Ammann–Beenker point set, as suggested by Figure 2.
In this paper, we give formulas for the minimal gap between visible points in two families of quasicrystals, which include the Ammann–Beenker point set and vertex sets of some rhombic Penrose tilings. As we will see in Section 5, an important ingredient in the calculation of the minimal gap is the density of visible points of a set. A locally finite point set P⊂Rd is said to have an asymptotic density (or simply density) θ(P) if
[TABLE]
holds for all Jordan measurable D⊂Rd with vol(D)>0. The density of visible points of a set P is thus θ(P).
It is well known that the density exists for a wide variety of point sets, in particular, the density of every regular cut-and-project set exists. In [10, Theorem 1], Marklof and Strömbergsson proved that the density of the subset of visible points of a regular cut-and-project set exists as well. However, the density of visible points of a set is only known explicitly in a few cases; we mention some of those here. For d≥2, we have Zd={(n1,…,nd)∈Zd∣gcd(n1,…,nd)=1}, and the well known result θ(Zd)=1/ζ(d) gives the probability that d random integers share no common factor. This can be derived in several ways, see for instance [11]; we sketch another proof in Section 2. More generally, θ(L)=vol(Rd/L)ζ(d)1 for any lattice L⊂Rd, see e.g. [4, Prop. 6]. In the presentation [15], Sing computed the density of visible points in the Ammann–Beenker point set via an adelic approach. In this paper we prove 4.9, which provides a formula for the density of visible points of a family of sets which includes the Ammann–Beenker point set. This result is then extended in 4.12 to cover an even larger family of point sets. In particular, we recover Sing’s result through another approach, whose general structure will be applicable to other families of point sets. For instance, we prove 4.20, which establishes a formula for the density of visible points for a family of rhombic Penrose tilings. We will then use these results to give formulas for the limiting minimal gaps in two families of quasicrystals, in 5.5 and 5.6, respectively.
This paper is organised as follows. First, in Section 2, a proof of θ(Zd)=1/ζ(d) is given. In Section 3 the definition of a cut-and-project set is recalled and several families of quasicrystals obtained from the cut-and-project construction are presented. These families include the Ammann–Beenker point set and vertex sets of rhombic Penrose tilings. In Section 4 the density of visible points of sets from the above families are calculated and in Section 5 these results are used to obtain the limiting minimal gap between the visible points for families of sets which include the Ammann–Beenker point set and vertex sets of rhombic Penrose tilings.
2 The density of visible points of Zd
In this section we recall a proof of the well-known result θ(Zd)=1/ζ(d) for d≥2. The basic argument of the proof will be used in later sections when calculating the density of visible points of other point sets.
Fix T>0 and a Jordan measurable set D⊂Rd, and let P⊂Z>0 denote the set of prime numbers. For each invisible point x∈Zd∖Zd, there is some p∈P such that px∈Zd. For Z∗d:=Zd∖{(0,…,0)}, there are only finitely many p1,…,pn∈P such that piZ∗d∩TD=∅. By inclusion-exclusion counting we have
[TABLE]
The last sum can be rewritten as
∑m=1∞μ(m)#(mZ∗d∩TD),
where μ is the Möbius function. Hence
[TABLE]
Letting T→∞, switching order of limit and summation (for instance justified by finding a constant c depending on D such that #(Z∗d∩TD)≤c⋅vol(TD) for all T) and using θ(Z∗d)=1, it follows that
[TABLE]
3 Particular families of point sets
In this section we first recall the definition of a cut-and-project set and then introduce three families of such sets which we will consider throughout the remainder of the paper.
3.1 Cut-and-project sets
Cut-and-project sets are sometimes called (Euclidean) model sets. We will use the same notation and terminology for cut-and-project sets as in [9, Sec. 1.2]. For an introduction to cut-and-project sets, see e.g. [2, Ch. 7.2].
If Rn=Rd×Rm, let
[TABLE]
denote projections onto Rd and Rm respectively.
Definition 3.1**.**
Let L⊂Rn=Rd×Rm be a lattice and W⊂πint(L) be a bounded set with non-empty interior. Then the cut-and-project set of L and W is given by
[TABLE]
The set P(W,L) is uniformly discrete since W is bounded and relatively dense since W∘ is non-empty (cf. [9, Prop. 3.1]); hence P(W,L) is Delone. If ∂W has measure zero with respect to Haar measure on πint(L) we say that P(W,L) is regular. If L is an affine lattice, i.e. L=L0+x for some lattice L0⊂Rn and some x∈Rn, we extend the above definition by letting P(W,L)=P(W−πint(x),L0)+π(x).
From [9, Prop. 3.2] we have the following.
Proposition 3.2**.**
Let Rn=Rd×Rm and let P=P(W,L) be a regular cut-and-project set such that π∣L is injective and πint(L) is dense in Rm. Then the density θ(P) exists and is equal to vol(Rn/L)vol(W).
3.2 A-sets and T-sets
Given n≥2, let ζ=en2πi be an n-th root of unity. For 1≤i≤n−1 with gcd(i,n)=1, let σi be the automorphism of the cyclotomic field Q(ζ) determined by σi(ζ)=ζi.
Let n=8 and σ=σ3. Note that σ induces the non-trivial automorphism of Q(ζ)∩R=Q(2). For a bounded set W⊂C, let
[TABLE]
and call this an A-set. When W is the open regular octagon with side length 1 centered at the origin with sides perpendicularly bisected by the coordinate axes, A is the Ammann–Beenker point set, see [2, Example 7.8]. This set can also be realised as the vertices of a substitution tiling, see [2, Ch. 6.1 and p. 236]. Let
[TABLE]
be the Minkowski embedding of (Z[ζ]∩R)2=Z[2]2 in R4. Straightforward calculations show that AW⊂C can be identified111Throughout this paper we will frequently identify R2 and C in the natural way. with
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
and I2 is the identity matrix.
This is a cut-and-project set in the sense of 3.1.
Let now n=5 and σ=σ2. Note that σ induces the non-trivial automorphism of Q(ζ)∩R. For a bounded set W⊂C, let
[TABLE]
and call this a T-set. As above, let L be the Minkowski embedding of (Z[ζ]∩R)2=Z[τ]2 in R4, where τ=21+5 is the golden ratio. Then TW⊂C can be identified with
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
hence TW is a cut-and-project set according to 3.1. In [3, Section 4], substitution tilings and corresponding vertex sets are obtained using two triangular tiles. If W is the closed regular decagon of side length 5τ+2 centered at the origin with two vertices at the y-axis, then from e.g. [3, (4.3)] one can verify that for almost all ϵ∈C the set TW+ϵ is the vertex set of such a triangular tiling. In particular, this holds for ϵ=0 which gives a point set with fivefold rotational symmetry, see [3, Fig. 4.4].
3.3 P-sets
Again, let n=5 and σ=σ2. Let also κ:Z[ζ]⟶Z/5Z be the ring homomorphism determined by κ(ζ)=1. The kernel of this map is the prime ideal (1−ζ) of Z[ζ] generated by 1−ζ. Let W1 be the interior of the convex hull of {1,ζ,ζ2,ζ3,ζ4} in C, an open regular pentagon centered at the origin. Given ϵ∈C, let W1,ϵ=W1+ϵ, W2,ϵ=−τW1+ϵ, W3,ϵ=τW1+ϵ and W4,ϵ=−W1+ϵ. Following [2, Example 7.11], define for k∈{1,2,3,4}
[TABLE]
and then define
[TABLE]
We will call Pϵ a P-set.
For j∈{0,…,4}, let vj=52(cos(52πj),sin(52πj),cos(54πj),sin(54πj),21) and let g∈SO(5,R) be the matrix whose (j+1)-th row is vj and let L=Z5g. Let
[TABLE]
Let π, πint denote the projections from R5 onto the first two and last three coordinates, respectively. As shown in [9], we have πint(L)=R2×51Z; note that Wϵ⊂πint(L) is open. Consider now the regular cut-and-project set
[TABLE]
We claim that 52Pϵ=Pϵ′.
Indeed, note that Pϵ′=P(Wϵ,L) consists of elements of the form π(kg) with k∈Z5 such that πint(kg)∈Wϵ. We can identify π(kg)∈R5 with 52x=∑j=04kjζj∈C and πint(kg) with (52σ(x),5∑j=04kj). The claim follows by noting that every x=∑j=04kjζj∈Z[ζ] can be modified so that ∑j=04kj∈{0,1,2,3,4} since 1+ζ+ζ2+ζ3+ζ4=0.
A combination of [6, Theorems 8.1, 11.1] gives the following.
Theorem 3.3**.**
Let ϵ∈C. Then Pϵ is the vertex set of a rhombic Penrose tiling if ϵ=∑j=04γjζ2j for some γ∈R5 with ∑j=04γj=0 such that ϵ∈/⋃k=04(Rζki+(1−ζ)).
In 4.16 we verify that 3.3 holds for all γ∈(Q∖Z)5 with ∑j=04γj=0.
4 Calculation of densities of visible points
In this section we calculate the density of visible points of families of A-, T- and P-sets after presenting some auxiliary results. Firstly, we have the following lemma, which is immediate from the definitions.
Lemma 4.1**.**
Suppose P⊂Rd is locally finite and that θ(P) exists. Then for any A∈GL(d,R) we have
PA=PA and θ(PA)=det(A)θ(P).
Next, we prove that the density of visible points is unaffected when passing to a subset of full density.
Lemma 4.2**.**
If P1⊂P2⊂Rd are locally finite with θ(P1)=θ(P2) and if θ(P1) and θ(P2) both exist, then θ(P1)=θ(P2).
Proof.
We have P1∖P1⊂P2∖P2 and it suffices to show that
θ((P2∖P2)∖(P1∖P1))=0.
To this end, let D be a Jordan measurable set and let T>0 be given. Consider the set
[TABLE]
We say that x∈DT is of type 1 if x∈P1∩TD. Then, x∈P1∩TD so x there must be α>1 with x/α∈(P2∖P1)∩TD; let α(x) be the minimal such α. Otherwise we say that x is of type 2. Define a map f:DT⟶((P2/P1)∩TD)×{1,2} by f(x)=(x/α(x),1) if x is of type 1 and x↦(x,2) if x is of type 2. We claim that this map is injective. Indeed, suppose that (x/α(x),1)=(y/α(y),1). Then if x=y we can assume that there is k∈(0,1) with kx=y, which contradicts x∈P1 since y∈P1.
Since θ(P1)=θ(P2), it follows that
limT→∞vol(TD)#DT≤limT→∞vol(TD)2#((P2∖P1)∩TD)=0.
∎
Note that if P=P(W,L) is a regular cut-and-project set, then with P1=P(W,L) we have θ(P)=θ(P1) by [10, (2.4)] and the last part of 4.2, since we know that θ(P), θ(P1) both exist by [10, Theorem 1].
It can be shown that for a locally finite point set P in R2, the subset of visible points of Lebesgue almost every translate of P has full density. In [8], it is observed that if Zα2:=α+Z2 contains invisible points on two distinct lines through the origin, then α∈Q2, which implies that θ(Zα2)=θ(Z2) for all α∈R2∖Q2. Thus Zα2 does not have full density only if α∈Q2. The following result is similar.
Proposition 4.3**.**
Let K be a real number field. Let P⊂K2 and α∈R2 be given. If there is a line through the origin that contains two points of α+P then dimspanK{1,α1,α2}≤2. If there are two distinct lines through the origin that contain two points of α+P then α∈K2.
Proof.
Suppose there is a line ℓ through the origin that contains two distinct points of α+P, say m+α, n+α for some m,n∈K2 with m=n. Then there is some real t=1 with t(m+α)=n+α or equivalently 1−ttm−1−tn=α. Let s=1−tt so that 1+s=1−t1. Thus sm−(1+s)n=α. Since m=n there is i such that mi=ni. We then have s=mi−niαi+ni and 1+s=mi−niαi+mi and we see that αj∈spanK{1,αi}. The first claim is thus proved.
Suppose now there are distinct lines ℓ1, ℓ2 through the origin that contain two points of α+P. Thus, there are m1,m2,n1,n2∈K2 and t1,t2=1 such that ti(mi+α)=ni+α. Since ℓi are distinct the direction vectors mi−ni are not proportional. As above, we have α=simi−(1+si)ni=si(mi−ni)−ni for some real numbers si. Hence we get the following system of equations s1(m1−n1)−n1=s2(m2−n2)−n2. Since m1−n1, m2−n2 are not proportional the system has a unique solution, which has to belong to K2. Hence α∈K2.
∎
It follows that if P⊂K2 and α∈R2∖K2, then θ(α+P)=θ(P). This result can be applied to A-sets with K=Q(2) and T-, P-sets with K=Q(τ+2), by (5), (6).
Given a locally finite point set P⊂Rd, we call C⊂R>1 a set of occlusion quotients forP if for each x∈P∖P there exists c∈C with x/c∈P. Note that each locally finite point set P has a set of occlusion quotients. Let also P∗=P∖{(0,…,0)}. Next, a counting formula for the number of visible points in a bounded set is presented.
Lemma 4.4**.**
Let P⊂Rd be locally finite and fix a set C of occlusion quotients for P. Let T>0 and a bounded set D⊂Rd be given. Then there are only finitely many c∈C such that P∗∩cP∗∩TD=∅, and
[TABLE]
(here the sum ranges over all finite subsets F of C; in particular, F=∅ gives the term #(P∗∩TD)).
Proof.
We first claim that the set CT:={c∈C∣P∗∩cP∗∩TD=∅} is finite. Indeed, suppose this is not true and pick distinct c1,c2,…∈CT and corresponding xi∈P∗∩ciP∗∩TD. Since P is locally finite, the sequence x1,x2,… contains only finitely many distinct elements. Thus, a subsequence xk1,xk2,… which is constant can be extracted, so that xki/cki∈P∗∩ckiTD⊂P∗∩B are all distinct, contradicting the assumption that P is locally finite. Here B is some ball centered at [math] with TD⊂B. Thus, we can write CT={c1,…,cn} for some c1,…,cn∈C. Consequently
[TABLE]
whence the result follows from the inclusion-exclusion counting formula for finite unions of finite sets.
∎
Lemma 4.5**.**
For every lattice L⊂Rd and c>0, there is a constant L such that if B=∏i=1d[ai,bi] is a box with bi−ai≥c for all 1≤i≤d, then #(B∩L)≤Lvol(B).
Proof.
Let ni=⌈cbi−ai⌉∈Z+. Then
cbi−ai≤ni<cbi−ai+1=cbi−ai+c<c2(bi−ai).
With n=∏i=1dni it follows that n≤cd2dvol(B). Also, B can be covered by n translates of [0,c]d. Find now L1>0, depending on L and c, such that supt∈Rd#(L∩(t+[0,c]d))=L1. Hence
#(B∩L)≤nL1≤cd2dL1vol(B), so one can take L=cd2dL1.
∎
Given a real quadratic extension K of Q, let σ denote the non-trivial automorphism of K and let σ(x)=(σ(x1),…,σ(xn)) for x=(x1,…,xn)∈Kn. Let N(x)=xσ(x) denote the norm of x∈K. Let ϵ>1 be the fundamental unit of OK and let
[TABLE]
Given y∈OK∖{0}, let Ly={(x,σ(x))∣x∈yOK2}⊂R4. Note that for any unit u∈OK, Lu is the Minkowski embedding of OK2 in R4. Let also Ly′={(x,σ(x))∣x∈yOK}⊂R2.
Let I be the set of ideals of OK and P⊂I be the subset of prime ideals. For I∈I, let N(I)=#(OK/I). For s∈C with Re(s)>1, Dedekind’s zeta function over K is given by
[TABLE]
When OK is a unique factorisation domain (and hence also a principal ideal domain), write gcd(x,y)=1 if x,y are relatively prime. In this case, let also ω(I) be the number of distinct prime factors of any generator of I. Define a Möbius function μ:I⟶Z by μ(I)=(−1)ω(I) if every generator of I is square-free and μ(I)=0 otherwise. By analogy with the Riemann zeta function we then have
[TABLE]
Lemma 4.6**.**
Given a real quadratic number field K and bounded sets W,D⊂R2, with W star-shaped with respect to the origin, there is a constant L such that for all T>0 and y∈OK
[TABLE]
Proof.
As Ly=Luy for all units u, we may without loss of generality assume that y>0. Fix rD,rW>1 such that D⊂BD:=[−rD,rD]2 and W⊂BW:=[−rW,rW]2. There is a bijection
[TABLE]
given by x↦yx. Now, the right-hand set is in bijection with L∗∩(y1TD×σ(y)1W), by x↦(x,σ(x)). It follows that
[TABLE]
Note also that the right-hand remains unchanged if y is replaced by uy for any unit u∈OK.
Find now c>0 such that c′≤c implies that
[TABLE]
This can be done, for otherwise L would contain elements of arbitrarily small non-zero fourth coordinate within the bounded set ϵD×(W∪(−W)), contradicting that L is a lattice.
Suppose first that T satisfies yσ(y)T<c. Scale y by a positive unit such that 1≤yT<ϵ. This implies that ∣σ(y)∣1<c. Then
[TABLE]
using the fact that W is star-shaped with respect to the origin.
Suppose now T satisfies yσ(y)T≥c. Scale y by a positive unit so that c≤yT<ϵc. This implies that ϵc≤∣σ(y)∣1. It follows that [0,c]4 is contained in B:=yTBD×σ(y)1BW. By 4.5 there is a constant L, depending on c and L, such that
[TABLE]
and L∗∩(yTD×σ(y)1W)≤#(L∩B).
∎
4.1 θ(AW) for certain W
Let ζ=e82πi, so that K=Q(ζ)∩R=Q(2), OK=Z[2] and Z[ζ]=OK⊕OKζ. Let σ be the automorphism of K given by ζ↦ζ3. Note that OK is a Euclidean domain with fundamental unit λ=1+2. Let W1 denote the family of all Jordan measurable W⊂C which are star-shaped with respect to the origin and satisfy −W⊂2W.
Lemma 4.7**.**
For every π∈P we have ∣σ(π)∣≥2.
Proof.
Suppose towards a contradiction that there is a prime π∈P with ∣σ(π)∣<2. Then (π,σ(π))∈L1′∩((1,λ)×(−2,2)), where the right-hand set is finite, being the intersection of a lattice and a bounded set, and can be verified to be empty by hand.
∎
The following proposition establishes visibility conditions in AW (recall the definition of AW in (5)). Its statement in the special case of the Ammann–Beenker point set can be found in e.g. [2, p. 427]; a proof in this special case is given in [7, Ch. 4]. Since our statement have weaker assumptions on the window W we write out a proof for clarity.
Proposition 4.8**.**
For W∈W1 we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
We first prove that the visibility conditions are necessary. Suppose that x=x1+x2ζ∈AW and that x1,x2∈Z[2] are not relatively prime, i.e. there is a prime π∈P which divides x1,x2. Then x/π∈Z[ζ]. By 4.7, we have σ(x/π)∈2W∪(2−W)⊂W since W∈W1 and hence x/π∈AW. If σ(x/λ)∈W, we have x/λ∈AW. In either case, we have x∈AW∖AW.
For sufficiency, suppose x=x1+x2ζ∈AW∖AW. Then there is some α>1 with x/α∈AW, which implies that α∈Q(ζ)∩R=Q(2). Since AW is locally finite, we may assume that x/α∈AW. Write x/α=y1+y2ζ for some y1,y2∈Z[2]. By necessity, we must have gcd(y1,y2)=1 which implies α∈Z[2]. If α is not a unit, then x1,x2 are not relatively prime. Otherwise, α=λk for some k≥1. If k=1, then σ(x/λ)∈W and otherwise
[TABLE]
which implies σ(x/λ)∈W since W∈W1.
∎
A consequence of 4.7 and 4.8 is that if W∈W1, then C:=P∪{λ} is a set of occlusion quotients for AW. For a finite subset F⊂C let ΠF denote the product of the elements of F. It follows that
Let D⊂R2 be a Jordan measurable set with vol(D)>0. Let T>0 be given. By 4.4, we have
[TABLE]
Note that for each finite subset F of C, the corresponding term of the sum in (12) tends to \theta\Big{(}\mathcal{A}_{\mathcal{W}}\cap\bigcap_{c\in F}c\mathcal{A}_{\mathcal{W}}\Big{)}. We begin by proving that the limit in (12) can be calculated termwise.
Let Δ>0 be given. By 4.7, there are only finitely many F⊂C with N(ΠF)2<Δ. We have
[TABLE]
where the first inequality follows from −λ1W⊂W together with (10) and the constant L, which is independent of Δ, comes from 4.6. Noting that the right-hand side of (13) tends to [math] as Δ→∞, we conclude that the limit in (12) can be taken termwise. Hence (10) implies
[TABLE]
which is equal to (1−λ21)ζK(2)θ(AW)=ζK(2)2∣σ(λ)∣θ(AW) by (9).
∎
From (5) and 3.2 it follows that θ(AW)=4vol(W). By using results from e.g. [16, Chapter 4], one can show that ζK(2)=482π4; thus the density of AW can be calculated explicitly.
For every W∈W1 with vol(W)>0, 4.9 implies that the relative density of visible points in AW is ζK(2)2∣σ(λ)∣=0.5773…, which is supported numerically by [1, Table 2]. This result also agrees with the calculation in [15], in the special case where AW is the Ammann–Beenker point set. We also remark that in this case θ(AW)=ζK(2)1; note the resemblance with θ(Z2)=ζ(2)1. We provide some numerical support for this result in Table 1 below.
Remark*.*
In [4, pp. 34–38], the set of visible points Zd of Zd is expressed as an adelic cut-and-project set. More precisely, let π be the projection from the d-adeles AQd onto Rd and πint the projection onto the locally compact abelian group AQ,fd of finite d-adeles. Let W=∏p∈P(Zpd∖pZpd), where P⊂Z+ is the set of prime numbers. Let L be the image of the inclusion of Qd in AQd, a lattice in AQd. Then
[TABLE]
Up to minor technical details, an application of the density formula [14, Theorem 1] for cut-and-project sets over locally compact abelian groups yields θ(Zd)=ζ(d)1. In [15], the density of visible points in the Ammann–Beenker point set was calculated via a similar adelic approach; it would be interesting to try this approach on other point sets.
Next, recall from (5) that AW=P(WA−1,L)A1⊂R2 for some invertible matrices A,A1. As noted above, θ(AW)=4vol(W), thus in particular, if vol(W)=vol(W′), then θ(AW)=θ(AW′). This observation together with 4.9 implies the following corollary.
Corollary 4.10**.**
If W,W′∈W1 satisfies vol(W)=vol(W′) then θ(AW)=θ(AW′).
If W∈W1 and x∈Z[ζ] are such that σ(x)+W∈W1, then, since
[TABLE]
and vol(W)=vol(σ(x)+W),
4.10 implies that θ(x+AW)=θ(AW). Note that y∈x+AW if and only if y is the x-translate of a point of AWvisible from −x. Thus, the density of the points of AW visible from −x exists and is equal to θ(AW). If W+ϵ∈W1 for all sufficiently small ϵ∈C, the above holds for all x∈Z[ζ] with ∣σ(x)∣ sufficiently small. For instance, the octagon W defining the Ammann–Beenker point set has this property.
The remainder of this section will be devoted to extending 4.9 to a more general result.
Let W1′ be the family of all Jordan measurable W⊂R2 which are star-shaped with respect to the origin and contain a neighbourhood of the origin. Note that for each W∈W1′, there is some r≥1 with −W⊂rW and the set of all primes π∈P with ∣σ(π)∣≤r is finite.
The following lemma provides a set of occlusion quotients for AW when W∈W1′.
Lemma 4.11**.**
Fix W∈W1′ and r≥1 with −W⊂rW. Let P={π1,…,πn} be the set of primes π∈P with ∣σ(π)∣≤r. Then, there k0,K,m1,…,mn∈Z, k0≤0, so that
[TABLE]
is a set of occlusion quotients for AW.
Proof.
Suppose x∈AW∖AW and π∣x for some π∈P∖P. Then x/π∈AW and π∈C. Next suppose that x∈AW∖AW is divisible by primes in P only. Note that for each i there is an integer mi so that x∈AW if πimi∣x. Thus, if c:=πim∣x for some m≥mi, then x/c∈AW and c∈C. Suppose now, in addition to x being divisible by primes in P only, that the multiplicity of each πi in x is less than mi and that x/λ∈/AW. Find c∈Q(2)>1 so that y:=x/c∈AW. Thus, y is divisible by primes in P only and the multiplicity of πi in y is less than mi. Write c=a/b for some relatively prime a,b∈Z[2]. From c>1 and x/λ∈/AW it follows that there are integers k0,K with k0≤0 and k0≤k≤K.
∎
We can now prove the following theorem, which gives θ(AW) for W∈W1′, and thus generalises 4.9.
Theorem 4.12**.**
Fix W∈W1′ and r≥1 with −W⊂rW. Let P={π1,…,πn} be the set of primes π∈P with ∣σ(π)∣≥r. Let
[TABLE]
be a set of occlusion quotients for AW as in (14). Given a subset M0⊂M, let ΠM0 denote a least common multiple of its elements. Let WM0=W∩⋂c∈M0σ(c)W. Then
Note that for M0⊂M and a finite subset F⊂C with M∩F=M0, we have
[TABLE]
where aF is a least common multiple of the numerators of the elements of F. Note that F∖M0⊂P∖P in this case. The fact that W⊂σ(π)W for all π∈P∖P implies W∩⋂c∈Fσ(c)W=W∩⋂c∈M0σ(c)W=WM0.
We can take aF=ΠM0ΠF∖M0, where ΠM0 is a least common multiple of the numerators of the elements of M0 and ΠF∖M0 is the product of the elements of F∖M0. It follows from (5) and 3.2 that the density of {x∈Z[ζ]y∣σ(x)∈W} for y∈Z[2] exists and is equal to 4N(y)2vol(W). Thus, by similar estimates as in (13), we conclude that
[TABLE]
where ΠF is the product of the elements of F. Since
[TABLE]
the theorem is proved.
∎
Let us now apply 4.12 to a fixed W′∈W1′∖W1. Let W be the open octagon such that AW is the Ammann–Beenker point set. One can show that W+ϵ∈W1 for ϵ∈R precisely when ∣ϵ∣<22−1. Now take ϵ=457−3232>22−1 and let W′=W+ϵ. We then have W′∈W1′∖W1, but it holds that −W′⊂σ(π)W′ for each π∈P∖{2}; hence we have P={2}. Note that AW′=σ(ϵ)+AW, i.e. AW′ is the translate of the Ammann–Beenker point set by the algebraic integer 457+3232. With notation as in 4.12, one can take M={2,λ,λ2,2,2λ,2λ2,2λ,2λ2}. Note that by (15), vol(WM0) must be calculated for each subset M0⊂M. If W has a simple form, e.g. the shape of a polygon, so that WM0 is an intersection of half-spaces, then this can be done numerically. In the present case W is a regular polygon and a numerical calculation of the sum in (15) gives θ(AW′)=3ζQ(2)(2)c, where c=3.00057… (recall that θ(AW)=ζQ(2)(2)1 by 4.9). By the remark following 4.10, there are infinitely many x∈Z[ζ] such that θ(x+AW)=θ(AW), but the above example AW′=σ(ϵ)+AW shows that this does not hold for all x∈Z[ζ].
We end this discussion with Table 1, which contains numerical support to the above observation that the density of visible points of AW′ is slightly greater than that of AW.
Note that θ(AW)=ζQ(2)(2)1=0.696877… and θ(AW′)=3ζQ(2)(2)c=0.697010… with c as above. The fourth and fifth columns of Table 1 serve as approximations of θ(AW) and θ(AW′) respectively. We have done analogous computations for other values of ϵ∈Z[2] close to 22−1 with similar agreements of θ(AW′) to the corresponding numerical approximations as in Table 1.
4.2 θ(TW) for certain W
Let ζ=e52πi, so that K=Q(ζ)∩R=Q(τ), OK=Z[τ] and Z[ζ]=OK⊕OKζ. Let σ be the automorphism of K given by ζ↦ζ2. Note that OK is a Euclidean domain with fundamental unit τ. Let W2⊂C denote the family of all Jordan measurable W⊂C which are star-shaped with respect to the origin and satisfy −W⊂2τW.
The following results have counterparts in 4.7 and 4.8 with virtually identical proofs. Recall that P is the set of all primes π∈Z[τ] with 1<π<τ.
Lemma 4.13**.**
For every π∈P we have ∣σ(π)∣≥2τ.
Proposition 4.14**.**
For W∈W2 we have
[TABLE]
Let C=P∪{τ} and let W∈W2. Then, by 4.14, C is a set of occlusion quotients for TW. Proceeding in an analogous manner to the case for A-sets we arrive at the following.
Theorem 4.15**.**
For W∈W2 we have
[TABLE]
where ζK(2)=37525π4.
Note that ϵ+W∈W2 for all regular decagons centered at the origin and ϵ∈C sufficiently small. Thus in particular, vertex sets TW from triangular tilings as in [3] are covered by 4.15.
We remark that it ought to be possible to prove an extension of 4.15 analogous to 4.12; however, we have not carried this out.
4.3 θ(Pϵ) for ∣ϵ∣<0.1
Let ζ,K,OK,τ,σ be as in Section 4.2. Recall the definitions of Wk,ϵ, κ and Pϵ from Section 3.3. Note that τ=1+ζ+ζ4, hence κ(τ)=3. In 4.20 below we give a formula for θ(Pϵ) when ∣ϵ∣<0.1.
First, we verify that 3.3 holds for each ϵ=∑j=04γjζ2j, where γ∈(Q∖Z)5 satisfies ∑j=04γj=0. This result then allows us to explicitly provide ϵ∈C, ∣ϵ∣<0.1, with the property that Pϵ is the vertex set of a rhombic Penrose tiling.
Lemma 4.16**.**
If γ∈(Q∖Z)5 satisfies ∑j=04γj=0, then
[TABLE]
Proof.
Suppose, towards a contradiction, that ∑j=04γjζ2j=uζki+α, for some k∈{0,…,4}, u∈R and α∈(1−ζ). Let z=ζ5−k(−α+∑j=04γjζ2j)∈Ri. It follows that z=∑j=04γj′ζj∈Ri for some γ′∈(Q∖Z)5 with ∑j=04γj′∈5Z. Using z=−z, we find that
[TABLE]
Since τ∈R∖Q we must have γ1′+γ4′−γ2′−γ3′=0 and also 2γ0′−γ1′−γ4′=0. Hence, γ1′+γ4=γ2′+γ3′=2γ0′ and therefore 5γ0=∑j=04γj′∈5Z, which implies γ0′∈Z, contradiction.
∎
Henceforth we write ±D⊂E when D∪(−D)⊂E. For all ϵ∈C, with ∣ϵ∣ sufficiently small, we have for all k1,k2∈{1,2,3,4} that Wk1,ϵ is star-shaped with respect to the origin and
±2τ1Wk1,ϵ⊂Wk2,ϵ. This can be verified to hold when ∣ϵ∣<0.1.
Proposition 4.17**.**
For ϵ∈C with ∣ϵ∣<0.1 we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
First necessity of the visibility conditions are proved. Take x=x1+x2ζ∈Pϵ. If x/τ∈Pϵ or x/τ2∈Pϵ, then x is invisible. If x1,x2 are not relatively prime, then there is some prime π∈P such that π∣x1,x2. We must have κ(π)=0, hence 1−ζ∤π in Z[ζ]. The only prime in P divisible by 1−ζ is 3−τ, which is the prime in P dividing 5. Thus, π∈P∖{3−τ}. By 4.13, and the fact that ±2τ1Wk1,ϵ⊂Wk2,ϵ for all k1,k2, we conclude that x/π∈Pϵ, and thus x is invisible.
To prove sufficiency, take x∈Pϵ∖Pϵ. Then, there is some α∈R>1 such that x/α∈Pϵ⊂Z[ζ]. Since Pϵ is locally finite, we may assume that y:=x/α∈Pϵ. By the necessary conditions proved above, if we write y=y1+y2ζ with y1,y2∈Z[τ], then y1,y2 must be relatively prime. Hence α∈Q(ζ)∩R=Q(τ). Write α=a1/a2 for some relatively prime ai∈Z[τ]. Since y1,y2 are relatively prime, a2 has to be a unit, i.e. α∈Z[τ].
If ∣σ(α)∣>1, then x1,x2 are not relatively prime. Otherwise, α=τk for some k>1. If k≥4 then σ(x/τk)=(−1)kτkσ(x)∈Wk1,ϵ for k1=κ(x/τk). Also, we have
[TABLE]
for all k2, hence x/τ∈Pϵ.
Suppose now k=3. For each of the four possible values of κ(x) we verify that x/τ∈Pϵ. The case κ(x)=1 is showed, the other cases can be treated similarly. In this case, κ(x/τ)=2 and κ(x/τ3)=3 so σ(x/τ3)=−τ3σ(x)∈W3,ϵ. Hence, −τσ(x)=σ(x/τ)∈τ2W3,ϵ⊂W2,ϵ, that is x/τ∈Pϵ. The inclusion τ2W3,ϵ⊂W2,ϵ is guaranteed by ∣ϵ∣<0.1.
∎
As a by-product of the proof of 4.17, we find that
[TABLE]
is a set of occlusion quotients for Pϵ if ∣ϵ∣<0.1.
Lemma 4.18**.**
For each k∈{1,…,4}, y∈Z[τ]∖(3−τ) and Jordan measurable W⊂R2 we have, with P={x∈Z[ζ]:κ(x)=k,y∣x,σ(x)∈W}, that
θ(P)=25(2τ−1)N(y)24vol(W).
In particular,
[TABLE]
for any ϵ∈C, where W1 is the open regular pentagon with vertices 1,ζ,ζ2,ζ3,ζ4.
Proof.
By observing that κ(x)=k if and only if x∈k+(1−ζ) we see that P can be identified with the translate of a set of the form (6), whose density can be calculated by 3.2 and 4.1, and the first claim follows.
The formula for θ(Pϵ) follows from the definition of Pϵ and the first claim.
∎
Lemma 4.19**.**
Fix ϵ∈C with ∣ϵ∣<0.1.
For a finite subset F⊂P∖{3−τ}, let ΠF denote the product of the elements of F.
(i)
Let Pϵ(F,τ)=Pϵ∩τPϵ∩⋂π∈FπPϵ. Then
[TABLE]
where W1,ϵ′=W1,ϵ∩W1,−ϵ/τ, W2,ϵ′=τ−1W1,−ϵ, W3,ϵ′=−τ−1W1,ϵ and W4,ϵ′=(−W1,−ϵ)∩(−W1,ϵ/τ).
(ii)
Let Pϵ(F,τ2)=Pϵ∩τ2Pϵ∩⋂π∈FπPϵ. Then
[TABLE]
where W1,ϵ′=−τ−2W1,−ϵ, W2,ϵ′=τ−1W1,ϵ/τ, W3,ϵ′=−τ−1W1,−ϵ/τ and W4,ϵ′=τ−2W1,ϵ.
(iii)
Let Pϵ(F,τ,τ2)=Pϵ∩τPϵ∩τ2Pϵ∩⋂π∈FπPϵ. Then
[TABLE]
where W1,ϵ′=−τ−2W1,−ϵ, W2,ϵ′=τ−1(W1,−ϵ∩W1,ϵ/τ), W3,ϵ′=−τ−1(W1,ϵ∩W1,−ϵ/τ) and W4,ϵ′=τ−2W1,ϵ.
(iv)
The densities of Pϵ(F,τ), Pϵ(F,τ2) and Pϵ(F,τ,τ2) exist and are equal to
[TABLE]
with the appropriate Wk,ϵ′ defined in (i)–(iii).
Proof.
(i)
This equality is proved by treating each of the cases κ(x)=k separately. These cases are similar, hence we will only discuss the case k=1 here.
Take x in the left hand side of the equality with κ(x)=1. Then, κ(x/τ)=2 so σ(x/τ)=−τσ(x)∈W2,ϵ which implies that σ(x)∈W1,ϵ′. Since ΠF∣x, it follows that x is an element of the right hand-side. For the reverse inclusion, note that ±τ21Wk1,0′⊂Wk2,0′ for all k1,k2. Thus also ±2τ1Wk1,ϵ′⊂Wk2,ϵ′ holds for ϵ sufficiently small. This can be verified to hold for ∣ϵ∣<0.1 whence the conclusion follows by 4.13.
2. (ii)
As in (i), we discuss the case k=1 only. Again it is straightforward to verify that x in the left hand side with κ(x)=1 belongs to the right-hand side. For the reverse inclusion note again that ±τ21Wk1,ϵ′⊂Wk2,ϵ′ for all k1,k2 for ϵ=0 whence ±2τ1Wk1,ϵ′⊂Wk2,ϵ′ holds for sufficiently small ϵ as well, in particular for ∣ϵ∣<0.1.
3. (iii)
As in (i), we discuss the case k=1 only. Take x in the left hand side with κ(x)=1. Then κ(x/τ)=2 and κ(x/τ2)=4, so σ(x/τ)=−τσ(x)∈W2,ϵ and σ(x/τ2)=τ2σ(x)∈W4,ϵ. Thus,
[TABLE]
since ∣ϵ∣<0.1. We have that τ−2W4,ϵ=W1,ϵ′ so x belongs to the right-hand side.
For the reverse inclusion, note again that ±τ21Wk1,ϵ′⊂Wk2,ϵ′ for all k1,k2 for ϵ=0, whence ±2τ1Wk1,ϵ′⊂Wk2,ϵ′ holds for sufficiently small ϵ as well, in particular for ∣ϵ∣<0.1.
4. (iv)
We can now prove the following theorem, which gives the density of visible points of Pϵ for ∣ϵ∣<0.1.
Theorem 4.20**.**
For ϵ∈C with ∣ϵ∣<0.1 we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
Observe that 0∈/Pϵ, since κ(0)=0. Hence (Pϵ)∗=Pϵ. An application of 4.4, with C=(P∖{3−τ})∪{τ,τ2}, yields for any Jordan measurable D⊂R2 with vol(D)>0
[TABLE]
To obtain θ(Pϵ), we let T→∞ in the above. In the right-hand side we have to switch order of limit and summation. We show that this is possible for the fourth term (19); one can proceed analogously with the other terms. To this end, let Δ>0 be given. The terms of (19) converge to
[TABLE]
as T→∞, where ΠF denotes the product of the elements of F. By 4.13 there are only finitely many finite subsets F⊂C with N(ΠF)2<Δ. Now
From the second part of 4.18 and 4.19 (iv) it follows that
[TABLE]
Therefore
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
and the proof is complete.
∎
We conclude this section by presenting some numerical support for 4.20, in the case of a particular ϵ=ϵ0. Let γ=1011(2,1,−2−2,1) and set ϵ0=∑j=04γjζ2j=−0.0084…. Note that ∣ϵ0∣<0.1 and that Pϵ0 is the vertex set of a rhombic Penrose tiling by 4.16. A numerical calculation of θ(Pϵ0) using 4.20 yields
Given a unital ring R, let ASL(n,R) be SL(n,R)×Rn endowed with the group operation
[TABLE]
Let n=d+m be given. Let G=ASL(n,R) and Γ=ASL(n,Z). Note that G acts on Rn by rg=rA+v for r∈Rn and g=(A,v)∈G. Hence L=δ1/n(Zng) is an affine lattice for every δ>0, g∈G, and every affine lattice in Rn can be represented in this way. Let φg:ASL(d,R)⟶ASL(n,R) be the map (A,v)↦g((A00Im),(v,0))g−1. By the results of Ratner [12, 13] there exists a unique, closed, connected subgroup Hg⊂G such that Γ∩Hg⊂Hg is a lattice, φg(SL(d,R))⊂Hg and the closure of Γ\Γφg(SL(d,R)) in Γ\G is Γ\ΓHg. These results also imply the existence of a unique, closed, connected subgroup Hg⊂G such that Γ∩Hg⊂Hg is a lattice, φg(ASL(d,R))⊂Hg and the closure of Γ\Γφg(ASL(d,R)) in Γ\G is Γ\ΓHg.
Let X be the homogeneous space X=(Γ∩Hg)\Hg. Note that X can be identified with Γ\ΓHg; let μ be the Hg-invariant probability measure on either of these spaces. Fix a bounded set W⊂πint(L)⊂Rm and define for x=Γh∈X
[TABLE]
By taking a random x∈X with respect to μ, a point process x↦Px on Rd consisting of cut-and-project sets is obtained. This process is SL(d,R)-invariant since φg(SL(d,R))⊂Hg. The process x↦Px and the space {Px∣x∈X} were introduced in [9].
Let now P=P(W,L)⊂R2 be a regular cut-and-project and let F:R⟶[0,1] be the limiting distribution of normalised gaps in P as defined in the introduction. In [10] it is shown that
[TABLE]
for each s>0 where
[TABLE]
and κP=θ(P)θ(P). In [10, Section 12], mP is defined as
[TABLE]
and it is shown that mP=sup{σ≥0∣F(s)=1\leavevmodefor\leavevmodeall\leavevmodes∈[0,σ]}. Thus the definition of mP given in (21) is equivalent with the definition given in (4).
The SL(2,R)-invariance of the process x↦Px implies that mPA=mP for all A∈SL(2,R). This invariance also implies that the value of mP remains unaffected if C(κP−1s) in (21) is replaced by any other triangle with one vertex at the origin and with equal area. We now claim that mP=mcP for each c>0. For x∈X we have (cP)x=cPx. Hence, by (21) we have
[TABLE]
In view of 4.1 we have θ(cP)=c−2θ(P), which implies that the triangles c−1C(κcP−1s) and C(κP−1s) have the same area. It follows that mcP=mP and therefore also that mP is invariant under P↦PA for A∈GL(2,R) with positive determinant.
We now prove that the minimal gap of a regular cut-and-project set remains unchanged when replacing the window defining the cut-and-project set by its closure.
Lemma 5.1**.**
Let P=P(W,L)⊂R2 be a regular cut-and-project set and let P1=P(W,L), where W is the closure of W in πint(L). Then mP=mP1.
Proof.
Suppose L=δ1/n(Zng) for some g∈G and δ>0. Since P(W,cL)=cP(c−1W,L) for c>0 and mcP=mP, we may assume that δ=1. Let X=Γ\ΓHg. Since W⊂W, we have Px⊂P1x for all x∈X and hence mP≥mP1 by (21). Next, it is shown that mP≤mP1. To this end, take s0<mP. Then
X′:={x∈X∣#(Px∩C(κP−1s0))≤1} satisfies μ(X′)=1. Let X′′⊂X′ be the set {x∈X∣#(P1x∩C(κP1−1s0))≤1}. We will show that μ(X′′)=1 as well.
By assumption, ∂W has measure [math] with respect to Haar measure on πint(L). Hence, by applying [9, Theorem 5.1] with f=1Rd×∂W, we conclude that Znhg∩(Rd×∂W)=∅ for μ-almost every Γh=x∈X. Now, the remark following 4.2 gives κP=κP1. Take x∈X′∖X′′ and write x=Γh for some h∈Hg. Then, #(P1x∩C(κP−1s0))≥2 and #(Px∩C(κP−1s0))≤1 hold. It follows that there is y∈Znhg with πint(y)∈∂W, which, by the above, can only hold for x=Γh in set of measure zero. Consequently, μ(X′∖X′′)=0.
∎
5.1 implies that when determining mP for a regular cut-and-project set P=P(W,L)⊂R2, W can be replaced with its interior, i.e. it may be assumed that W is open. In this case, the following lemma holds.
Lemma 5.2**.**
Let L=δ1/n(Zng) for some g∈G and let X=Γ\ΓHg. Suppose P=P(W,L)⊂R2 is a regular cut-and-project set with W⊂πint(L) open and θ(P)>0. Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
It suffices to show that if #(Px∩C(κP−1s0))≥2 holds for some x∈X, then #(Px′∩C(κP−1s0))≥2 holds for all x′∈X in a set of positive measure. Write x=Γh for some h∈Hg⊂ASL(n,R). Take n1,n2∈Zn so that π(δ1/nn1hg),π(δ1/nn2hg) are linearly independent and belong to Px∩C(κP−1s0). By [9, Proposition 3.5], we have πint(δ1/n(Znhg))⊂πint(L) for all h∈Hg. For all x′=Γh′ with h′∈Hg sufficiently close to h in ASL(n,R) we have that π(δ1/nn1h′g),π(δ1/nn2h′g) are linearly independent and belong to Px′∩C(κP−1s0) since C(κP−1s0) and W are open. Since C(κP−1s0) is star-shaped with respect to the origin, the claim follows.
∎
Given p1,p2∈R2, let Δ(p1,p2) denote the area of the triangle with vertices 0,p1,p2. In view of the SL(2,R)-invariance of the process x↦Px we have
[TABLE]
if W is open, by 5.2 and
the fact that the area of C(κP−1s) is s/θ(P).
Next we show that the minimal gaps δT at finite horizons converge to the minimal gap under fairly general assumptions.
Lemma 5.3**.**
Let L=δ1/n(Zng) for some g∈G.
Suppose that P=P(W,L)⊂R2 is a cut-and-project set with W⊂πint(L) open, θ(P)>0 and mP>0. Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
From (2), it follows that for each ϵ>0 we have μT([mP,mP+ϵ))>δ for some δ>0 and all T large enough, i.e. the proportion of dT,i that are close to mP is positive for all T large enough. Thus, T→∞limsupδT≤mP.
For all T>0 large enough we have ξT,i−ξT,i−1≥(πθ(P))−1mPT−2 for all 1≤i≤N(T) by a modification of [10, Lemma 15]; its proof works just as well when it is assumed that W is open. Furthermore, by noting that C(κP−1s0) is star-shaped with respect to the origin, as in 5.2, it is seen that the assumption 0∈/P or 0∈Px for all x∈X can be omitted from [10, Lemma 15]. Thus dT,i≥N(T)(πθ(P))−1mPT−2 for T large enough, and since the right hand side converges to mP, it follows that T→∞liminfδT≥mP.
∎
The following result shows that for generic translates of a Penrose set, the limiting minimal gap between visible points vanishes.
Proposition 5.4**.**
Let ϵ∈R2 be given and consider Pϵ′. For t∈R2, let Pϵ,t′=t+Pϵ′. Then mPϵ,t′=0 for Lebesgue-almost every t∈R2.
Proof.
Recall the definition of Pϵ′=P(Wϵ,L) in (8), where L=Z5g. For t∈R2 we have Pϵ,t′=P(Wϵ,Z5gt) with gt:=(g,(t,0))∈ASL(5,R). By [9, Prop. 4.5], we have Hgt=Hg for Lebesgue-almost all t∈R2. From [9, Section 2.5] we have
[TABLE]
We now show that for every t with Hgt=Hg we have mPϵ,t′=0.
Fix y1,y2∈L such that π(y1),π(y2) are linearly independent and πint(y1),πint(y2)∈Wϵ. Let σ0>0 be arbitrary and fix v1,v2∈C(κPϵ,t−1σ0) which are linearly independent. Since ASL(2,R) acts transitively on pairs of distinct vectors of R2, there is (A,v)∈ASL(2,R) with π(yi)A+v=vi for i∈{1,2}. Let
[TABLE]
and x=Γh. Then (vi,πint(yi))∈Z5hgt and so
(Pϵ,t′)x=P(Wϵ,Z5hgt) intersects C(κPϵ,t−1σ0) in at least two points which does not lie on the same line through the origin. Hence #((Pϵ,t′)x∩C(κPϵ,t−1σ0))≥2 and since Wϵ⊂πint(L) is open and C(κPϵ,t−1σ0) is open this holds for all x′=Γh′ with h′ close to h in ASL(5,R). Since σ0 was arbitrary, we conclude that mPϵ,t′=0 by (21).
∎
In an analogous manner, considering (5), (6) and [9, Section 2.2], it follows that for Lebesgue-almost all translates of an A-set or T-set, the limiting minimal gap between visible points is [math] since in these cases the Hgt is equal to
[TABLE]
for a generic translate t,
where L=δ1/4Z4g for some g∈SL(4,R).
5.1 On mP for A-sets
Let W⊂R2 be a Jordan measurable, open, convex set which contains the origin and consider AW. Let A=AWA1−1, with A1 as in (5). Since det(A1)>0 we have mAW=mA, as noted in the previous section. Note that A=P(WA−1,L), where det(A)=21 and L is the Minkowski embedding of Z[2]2 in R4. Pick δ>0 and g∈SL(4,R) so that L=δ1/4Z4g.
By [9, (2.6)], we have Hg=gSL(2,R)2g−1, where SL(2,R)2 is the image of the map
[TABLE]
Fix B1,B2∈SL(2,R) and let b=ι(B1,B2). If x=Γgι(B1,B2)g−1 then
where we make use of the fact that if x=(x1,x2),y=(y1,y2)∈Z[2]2, then Δ(x,y)=21∣x1y2−x2y1∣ and Δ(σ(x),σ(y))=21∣σ(x1y2−x2y1)∣.
Thus, to determine mA, one must solve a problem of the following type: find the infimum of ∣x∣ over non-zero x∈Z[2] subject to ∣σ(x)∣<c for some fixed c>0. This amounts to finding a minimum among finitely many possible values of ∣x∣ since {(x,σ(x))∣x∈Z[2]} is a lattice in R2. Note that by 4.7, this minimum has to be a unit. Indeed, take a non-zero, non-unit x∈Z[2] with ∣σ(x)∣<c and take a prime π∈P with π∣x. Then, ∣x/π∣<∣x∣ and ∣σ(x/π)∣≤2∣σ(x)∣<c, so x cannot be the desired minimum. It follows that the minimum is given by λ−m, where λ=1+2 is the fundamental unit of Z[2] and m is the maximal integer such that λm<c. We thus have the following result.
Theorem 5.5**.**
Let W⊂R2 be an open, convex Jordan measurable set containing the origin. Then
[TABLE]
where m is the maximal integer such that λm<22TW.
By observing that if x=x1+x2ζ, y=y1+y2ζ for x1,x2,y1,y2∈Z[2], then Δ(x,y)=221∣x1y2−x2y1∣ and Δ(σ(x),σ(y))=221∣σ(x1y2−x2y1)∣ it follows that 22λ−m, with m as in 5.5, is equal to minΔ(AW) where
[TABLE]
Furthermore, for each c>0 we have #(Δ(AW)∩(0,c))<∞.
5.5 allows us to explicitly calculate mAW for a large family of W⊂R2; in particular for all W which are Jordan measurable, open, convex, contain the origin and satisfy −W⊂2W, since then θ(AW) is known explicitly by 4.9.
When W is the open regular octagon of side length 1 centered at the origin with sides perpendicularly bisected by the coordinate axes, i.e. when AW is the Ammann–Beenker point set, we have TW=42+2 since the outer radius of W is 22+2. The maximal m with λm<22TW=1+2 is [math]. Recall from 4.9 that θ(AW)=ζQ(2)(2)1 and therefore
Next, some numerical support for this result is presented. Given T>0, recall that N(T)=#(BT(0)∩AW). Recall the definition of ξT,i for 0≤i≤N(T) in (1). Finally recall the normalised gaps given by di=N(T)(ξT,i−ξT,i−1) and δT=1≤i≤N(T)mindT,i.
Figure 3 was produced by generating the 134091 points of B700(0)∩AW in the closed octant 0≤y≤x (recall that the Ammann–Beenker point set exhibits eightfold rotational symmetry about the origin) and then calculating δT for T∈{50,51,…,700}.
5.2 On mP for P-sets
Let ζ=e52πi and let σ be the automorphism of Q(ζ) given by ζ↦ζ2. Recall the definition of Pϵ in (7) and the definition of Pϵ′=P(Wϵ,L) in (8). Recall in particular that L=Z5g, where g∈SO(5,R) is the matrix whose (j+1)-th row is given by vj=52(cos(52πj),sin(52πj),cos(54πj),sin(54πj),21). In this section we will give a formula for mPϵ=mPϵ′ for all ϵ∈C with ∣ϵ∣<0.1.
Henceforth we assume that ∣ϵ∣<0.1, so that Wk,ϵ contains the origin and θ(Pe) can be calculated by 4.20.
From the structure of Hg and (22), it then follows that
[TABLE]
where πint′(x1,…,x5)=(x3,x4). Let mj1,j2 be the infimum corresponding to j1,j2 in the last expression, so that mPϵ′=1≤j1,j2≤4minmj1,j2. We can identify 5/2π(kg) with x:=∑j=04kjζj∈Z[ζ] and 5/2πint′(kg) with σ(x) for every k∈Z5. Given x,y∈Z[ζ], write x=x1+x2ζ, y=y1+y2ζ for some x1,x2,y1,y2∈Z[τ]. It is then straightforward to show that
[TABLE]
It follows that
[TABLE]
Note that to determine dj1,j2 one must solve a problem of the following type: find the infimum of 0<∣x∣ over non-zero x∈Z[τ] subject to ∣σ(x)∣<c for some c>0. By reasoning as before 5.5, it follows that the infimum is a minimum and must be a unit.
From the definition of dj1,j2 it is seen that dj1,j2 is minimal when Tj1,j2 is maximal, in which case j1,j2∈{2,3}. Fix such j1,j2. Suppose x=τm with m∈Z gives the minimal ∣x∣ subject to ∣σ(x)∣<τ+24τTj1,j2. If j1=2 let x=ζ2+ζ3=−τ and y=y1−τm−1ζ where y1∈Z[τ] is chosen so that y=∑j=04kjζj with ∑j=04kj=j1. If j2=3 let x=τ and y=y1+τm−1ζ where y1∈Z[τ] is chosen so that y=∑j=04kjζj with ∑j=04kj=j2. This shows that mj1,j2=dj1,j2 and hence we have the following result.
Theorem 5.6**.**
For ϵ∈C with ∣ϵ∣<0.1 we have
[TABLE]
where m is the maximal integer such that τm<τ+24τ2≤j1,j2≤3maxTj1,j2.
Let
[TABLE]
If ϵ∈C satisfies ∣ϵ∣<0.1 it follows from 5.6 that mPϵ=θ(Pϵ)minΔ(Pϵ). Furthermore, #(Δ(Pϵ)∩(0,c))<∞ for each c>0.
We illustrate 5.6 by an example. As in the discussion after 4.20, let γ=1011(2,1,−2−2,1) and set ϵ0=∑j=04γjζ2j. Recall that Pϵ0 is the vertex set of a rhombic Penrose tiling and that ∣ϵ0∣<0.1. It is easily verified numerically that Tj1,j2 is maximal when (j1,j2)∈{(2,3),(3,2)} and that then Tj1,j2=1.2554… and hence τ+24τTj1,j2=4.2718…. Recall from the discussion after 4.20 that θ(Pϵ0)=0.6843…. Since τ3<4.2718…<τ4, 5.6 gives
[TABLE]
We now present some numerical support for the above value of the minimal gap. Figure 4 was produced by generating the 8599221 visible points of Pϵ0 in B2000(0) and then calculating δT numerically for all T∈{100+10i∣i∈{0,1,…,190}}.
We conclude this paper with a comparison of Figure 3 and Figure 4. Let AW be the Ammann–Beenker point set. By 5.5, we have mAW=Δ1θ(AW), where Δ1:=minΔ(AW)=221 (cf. (24)). Consider a gap dT,i formed by x,x′∈AW⊂Z[ζ], ∥x∥≤∥x′∥≤T. Let v be the angle between x,x′ so that dT,i=NT2πv. By taking T large, we may suppose that v is small, so that v is close to sinv. From Δ(x,x′)=21∥x∥∥x′∥sinv∈Δ(AW), NT∼θ(AW)T2π and the fact that Δ(AW)∩(0,c) is finite for each c>0, it follows that for large T, if dT,i is close to mAW, then ∥x∥, ∥x′∥ must both be close to T and Δ(x,x′)=Δ1. That is, the triangle formed by 0,x,x′ must have area Δ1 and be nearly isosceles. In this case Δ1σ:=Δ(σ(x),σ(x′))=221.
Similarly, if T is large, and y,y′∈Pϵ0 forms a gap dT,i which is close to mPϵ0, then the triangle formed by 0,y,y′ must be nearly isosceles and have area equal to Δ2:=minΔ(Pϵ0)=4τ−3τ+2 (cf. (25)). We then have Δ2σ:=Δ(σ(y),σ(y′))=4τ2τ+2.
Assume now that for those T we have considered numerically, the points σ(x), x∈AW∩BT(0) are well-distributed in W, and that σ(y), y∈Pϵ0∩BT(0) are well-distributed in W1,ϵ0,…,W4,ϵ0. Observe that the difference T2,3−Δ2σ=0.01… is quite small. Thus, for points y,y′∈Pϵ0∩BT(0) with Δ(y,y′)=Δ2, the points σ(y),σ(y′) are forced to be near vertices of W2,ϵ0 and W3,ϵ0, respectively. On the other hand, the difference TW−Δ1σ=21 is substantially larger, so the restriction of the location in W of the conjugates of points x,x′∈AW with Δ(x,x′)=Δ1 is not as severe. Under the above well-distribution assumption, we find a possible explanation to the observation that it seems more likely that δT is close to mP in the case of AW (see Figure 3) than in the case of Pϵ0 (see Figure 4) for comparable values of T. It should be recalled that, in both cases, δT→mP by 5.3.
Bibliography16
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] M. Baake, F. Götze, C. Huck, and T. Jakobi , Radial spacing distributions from planar point sets. , Acta crystallographica. Section A, Foundations and advances, 70 (2014), pp. 472–482.
2[2] M. Baake and U. Grimm , Aperiodic Order , vol. 1, Cambridge University Press, 2013.
3[3] M. Baake, P. Kramer, M. Schlottmann, and D. Zeidler , Planar patterns with fivefold symmetry as sections of periodic structures in 4-space , International Journal of Modern Physics B, 4 (1990), pp. 2217–2268.
4[4] M. Baake, R. V. Moody, and P. A. Pleasants , Diffraction from visible lattice points and kth power free integers , Discrete Mathematics, 221 (2000), pp. 3–42.
5[5] F. P. Boca, C. Cobeli, and A. Zaharescu , Distribution of lattice points visible from the origin , Communications in Mathematical Physics, 213 (2000), pp. 433–470.
6[6] N. G. de Bruijn , Algebraic theory of Penrose’s non-periodic tilings of the plane , Kon. Nederl. Akad. Wetensch. Proc. Ser. A, 43 (1981), pp. 1–7.
7[7] T. Jakobi , Radial projection statistics: a different angle on tilings , (2017).
8[8] J. Marklof and A. Strömbergsson , The distribution of free path lengths in the periodic Lorentz gas and related lattice point problems , Annals of Mathematics, (2010), pp. 1949–2033.