arxiv: v1 [math.ca] 3 Oct 2018

Transcription

1 RIESZ ENERGY ON SELF-SIMILAR SETS arxiv: v1 [math.ca] 3 Oct 2018 A. REZNIKOV AND O. VLASIUK Abstract. We investigate properties of minimal N-point Riesz s-energy on fractal sets of non-integer dimension, as well as asymptotic behavior of N-point configurations that minimize this energy. For s bigger than the dimension of the set A, we constructively prove a negative result concerning the asymptotic behavior (namely, its nonexistence) of the minimal N-point Riesz s-energy of A, but we show that the asymptotic exists over reasonable sub-sequences of N. Furthermore, we give a short proof of a result concerning asymptotic behavior of configurations that minimize the discrete Riesz s-energy. Keywords: Best-packing points, Cantor sets, Equilibrium configurations, Minimal discrete energy, Riesz potentials Mathematics Subject Classification: Primary, 31C20, 28A78. Secondary, 52A40 1. Introduction The minimal energy problem originates from potential theory, where for a compact set A R p and a lower semicontinuous kernel K defined on A A, it is required to find (1) I K(A) := inf K(x, y)dµ(x)dµ(y), µ where the infimum is taken over all probability measures supported on A; moreover, we are interested in the measure that attains this infimum. In this paper we focus on the Riesz s-kernels K s(x,y) := x y s. It is convenient to discretize the measure on which the value I K(A) is achieved; for this purpose, we consider the discrete Riesz s-energy problem. Namely, for every integer N 2 we define (2) := inf ω N E s(ω N), where the infimum is taken over all N-point sets ω N = {x 1,...,x N} A, and E s(ω N) := i j x i x j s, N = 2,3,4,... Since the kernel K s is lower semicontinuous, the infimum is always attained. In general, asymptotics of energy functionals arising from pairwise interaction in discrete subsets has been the subject of a number of studies [14, 13, 10, 6]; it has also been considered for random point configurations [7] and in the context of random processes [1, 2]. The interest in such functionals is primarily motivated by applications in physics and modeling of particle interactions, as well as by the connections to geometric measure theory. Date: October 4, The research of A.R. was supported, in part, by the National Science Foundation grant DMS O. V. was supported, in part, by the National Science Foundation grant DMS

2 2 A. REZNIKOV AND O. VLASIUK If d is the Hausdorff dimension of A and s < d, then there is a unique measure µ s,a for which the infimum in (1) is achieved, and the configurations that attain the infimum in (2) resemble µ s,a in the weak sense (for the precise definition, see below). When s > d, we have I Ks (A) =, as the integral in the RHS is infinite on all measures µ supported on A. However, for good sets A (for example, d-rectifiable sets) with integer dimension d, the configurations attaining (2) resemble a certain special measure, namely, the uniform measure on A. More precisely, for a configuration ω N = {x i : 1 i N} A we define the (empirical) probability measure ν N := 1 N δ xi, N and we shall identify the two. Then, as summarized in the Poppy-seed bagel theorem (PSB), see Theorem A, under some regularity requirements on the set A, any sequence { ω N : # ω N = N, = E s( ω N)} converges to the normalized d-dimensional Hausdorff measure H d (A )/H d (A) on A. Moreover, for such sets A, the following it exists: (3) N N. 1+s/d On the other hand, it has been established [4, Proposition 2.6] that for a class of self-similar fractals A with dim H A = d, the it of /N 1+s/d does not exist for s large enough. Using this observation, [8] gives an example of a set A and a sequence of optimal configurations for without a weak it. In view of the above, it is natural to ask what can be said about weak cluster points of {ν N : N 2} in the case when the underlying set A is not d-rectifiable; a characterization of the cluster points of {/N 1+s/d : N 2} is likewise of interest. The following section contains formal definitions and the necessary prerequisites; Section 3 gives an overview of previously established results, both in the case of a rectifiable and a non-rectifiable set A. Sections 4 and 5 contain the formulations of the main theorems and their proofs, respectively. i=1 2. Self-similarity and open set condition We shall be working with subsets of the Euclidean space R p, using bold typeface for its elements: x R p. An open ball of radius r, centered at x, will be denoted by B(x,r). The d-dimensional Hausdorff measure of a Borel set A will be denoted by H d (A). A pair of sets A (1), A (2) will be called metrically separated if x y σ > 0 whenever x A (1) and y A (2). Recall that a similitude ψ : R p R p can be written as ψ(x) = ro(x)+z for an orthogonal matrix O O(p), a vector z R p, and a contraction ratio 0 < r < 1. The following definition can be found in [16]. Definition 2.1. A compact set A R p is called a self-similar fractal with similitudes {ψ m} M with contraction ratios r m, 1 m M if M A = ψ m(a), where the union is disjoint 1. We say that A satisfies the open set condition if there exists a bounded open set V R p such that M ψ m(v) V, where the sets in the union are disjoint. 1 One also considers self-similar fractals where the union is not disjoint these are harder to deal with

3 RIESZ ENERGY ON SELF-SIMILAR SETS 3 For a self-similar fractal A, it is known [11, 19] that its Hausdorff dimension dim H A = d where d is such that (4) rm d = 1. It will further be used that if A is a self-similar fractal satisfying the open set condition, then there holds 0 < H d (A) < and A is d-regular with respect to H d ; that is, there exists a positive constant c, such that for every r, 0 < r diam(a), and every x A, (5) c 1 r d H d (A B(x,r)) cr d. 3. Overview of prior results Recall the standard definition of the weak convergence: given a countable sequence {µ N : N 1} of probability measures supported on A and another probability measure µ, µ N µ, N f(x)dµ N(x) f(x)dµ(x), N, A for every f C(A). (Limits along nets are not necessary, as in this context weak topology is metrizable.) We shall say that a sequence of discrete sets converges to a certain measure if the corresponding sequence of counting measures converges to it. The set A is said to be d-rectifiable if it is the image of a compact subset of R d under a Lipschitz map. Furthermore, we say that A is (H d,d)-rectifiable, if (6) A = A (0) A (k), where for k 1 each A (k) is d-rectifiable and H d (A (0) ) = 0. We begin by discussing results dealing with the Riesz energy, both in the rectifiable and non-rectifiable contexts. To formulate the PSB theorem, suppose s > d for simplicity; the case of s = d is similar, but requires stronger assumptions on the set A. We write M d (A) for the d-dimensional Minkowski content of the set A [12, ]. Theorem A (Poppy-seed bagel theorem, [13, 5]). If the set A is (H d,d)-rectifiable for s > d and H d (A) = M d (A), then E(A, N) N N = C s,d 1+s/d H d (A) s/d, and every sequence { ω N : N 2} achieving the above it converges weak to the uniform probability measure on A: 1 N k=0 δ x H d(a ) H d (A) x ω N The smoothness assumptions on A in the above theorem are essential for existence of the it of E(A,N)/N 1+s/d. Let {ω N A : #ω N = N,N N} be a sequence of configurations such that E s(ω N) (7) = inf N N N1+s/d N N =: g s,d(a), 1+s/d and similarly, {ω N A : #ω N = N,N N} a sequence for which E s(ω N) (8) = sup N N N1+s/d N N =: g s,d(a). 1+s/d In the notation of (7)-(8), the result about the non-existence of N /N 1+s/d from [4] that was mentioned in the introduction can be stated as follows.. A

4 4 A. REZNIKOV AND O. VLASIUK Proposition 3.1. For a self-similar fractal A with contraction ratios r 1 =... = r m, there exists an S 0 > 0 such that for every s > S 0, 0 < g s,d (A) < g s,d (A) <. We remark that in the proof of Proposition 3.1, the number S 0 was not obtained constructively. In Theorem 4.4 we give a formula for S 0. The behavior of the sets ω N that attain in the nonrectifiable case is still not fully characterized. The following proposition, taken from [8], is the only known negative result so far. Proposition 3.2. Assume that the two d-regular compact sets A (1), A (2) are metrically separated and are such that A (1) is a self-similar fractal with equal contraction ratios and g s,d (A (2) ) = g s,d (A (2) ). Then for any sequence of minimizers { ω N A : # ω N = N,E s( ω N) = }, the corresponding sequence of measures ν N = 1 N does not have a weak it. x ω N δ x In view of these two propositions, it is remarkable that the local properties of minimizers of E s are fully preserved on self-similar fractals. Indeed, d-regularity of A can be readily used to obtain that any sequence of minimizers of E s has the optimal orders of separation and covering. The following result was proved in [15]: Proposition 3.3. If A R p is a compact d-regular set, { ω N : N 1} a sequence of configurations minimizing E s with ω N = { x i : 1 i N}, then there exist a constant C 1 > 0 such that for any 1 i < j N, x i x j C 1N 1/d, N 2, and a constant C 2 > 0 such that for any y A, min i y x i C 2N 1/d, N 2. The closest one comes to an analog of the PSB theorem for self-similar fractals is the following proposition [3]. Note that we give a simpler proof of (1) for the case when A 0 = A in Theorem 4.1. Proposition 3.4. Suppose A 0 is a self-similar fractal satisfying the open set condition and s > d; fix a compact A A 0. (1) If {ω N : N N}, is a sequence of configurations for which E s(ω N) N N N = g s,d(a), 1+s/d then the corresponding sequence of empirical measures converges weak : (2) There holds and ν N H d( A) H d (A), N N. g s,d (A) = g s,d(a 0)H d (A 0) s/d H d (A) s/d g s,d (A) = g s,d(a 0)H d (A 0) s/d H d (A) s/d. We finish this section with another relevant result on fractal sets. In [4] it was shown that, as s, there is a strong connection between the s-energy E s(a) and the best-packing constant δ(a,n) := supmin xi xj. ω N i j

5 RIESZ ENERGY ON SELF-SIMILAR SETS 5 The main theorem of [18] is given in terms of the function N(δ) := max{n : δ(a,n) δ}. Our Theorem 4.3 gives an analog of the second part of this theorem for the minimal discrete energy. Theorem B. Suppose A is a self-similar fractal of dimension d satisfying the open set condition with contraction ratios r 1,...,r m. (1) If the additive group generated by logr 1,...,logr m is dense in R, then there exists a constant C such that N N1/d δ(a,n) = N(δ) 1/d δ = C. δ 0 (2) If the additive group generated by logr 1,...,logr M coincides with the lattice hz for some h > 0, then N(δ) 1/d δ = C θ, where the it is taken over a subsequence δ 0 with { 1 h logδ} = θ. 4. Main results In accordance with the prior notation, we write ω N = {x i : 1 i N} for the sequence of configurations with the lowest asymptotics (i.e., such that (7) holds), and ν N = 1 N δ xi, N N. N i=1 As described above, generally the it of /N 1+s/d, N does not necessarily exist. It is still possible to characterize the behavior of the sequence {ω N : N N}. The following result first appeared in [3]; we give an independent and a more direct proof. Theorem 4.1. Let A R p be a compact self-similar fractal satisfying the open set condition, and dim H A = d < s. If {ω N : N N}, is a sequence of configurations for which E s(ω N) N N N = g s,d(a), 1+s/d then the corresponding sequence of empirical measures converges weak : (9) ν N h d ( ) := H d( A), N N. H d (A) When the similitudes {ψ m} M fixing A all have the same contraction ratio, it is natural to expect some additional symmetry of minimizers, associated with the M-fold scale symmetry of A. Similarly, since the energy of interactions between particles in different A (m) is at most of order N 2, see proof of Lemma 5.1 below, we expect that byacting with {ψ m} M on a minimizer ω N with N large, we obtain a near-minimizer with MN elements. This heuristic is made rigorous in the following theorem. Theorem 4.2. Let A R p be a self-similar fractal, fixed under M similitudes with the same contraction ratio, and M = {M k n : k 1}. Then the following it exists M N N. 1+s/d The previous theorem can be further extended. We shall need some notation first. For a sequence N, let {N} := N N {log M N}, where { } in the RHS denotes the fractional part, and if the corresponding it exists. E s(n) := N N N, 1+s/d

6 6 A. REZNIKOV AND O. VLASIUK Theorem 4.3. If A is a self-similar fractal with equal contraction ratios, and two sequences N 1, N 2 N are such that (10) {N 1} = {N 2}, then (11) E s(n 1) = E s(n 2). In particular, the its in (11) exist. Moreover, the function g s,d : {N} E s(n) is continuous on [0,1]. In the case of equal contraction ratios, the argument in the proof of Theorem 4.2, can be further used to make the result of Proposition 3.1 more precise. Theorem 4.4. Let A R p be a self-similar fractal, fixed under M similitudes with the same contraction ratio r, and write σ := min{ x y : x A i, y A j,i j}. If then for for every value of s such that (12) s max R := r σ (1+rd ) 1/d < 1, { } 2d, log 1/R [2M(M +1)], there holds 0 < g s,d (A) < g s,d (A) <. The proof of this theorem requires an estimate for the value of E s(a,m), which results in the condition R < 1. When E s(a,m) can be computed explicitly, a similar conclusion can also be obtained for sets that do not necessarily satisfy R < 1, as in the following. Corollary 4.5. If A is the ternary Cantor set and s > 3dim H A = 3log 3 2, then 0 < g s,d (A) < g s,d (A) <. 5. Proofs The key to proving Theorem 4.1 is that the hypersingular Riesz energy grows faster than N 2. We shall need this property in the following form. Lemma 5.1. Let a pair of compact sets A (1), A (2) R p be metrically separated; let further {ω N A : N N} be a sequence for which the its exist. Then inf N N E s(ω N) N1+s/d ( β (1)) 1+s/d inf N N #(ω N A (i) ) = β (i), i = 1,2. N N N E s(ω N A (1) ) ( #(ω N A (1) ) + β (2)) 1+s/d inf 1+s/d N N Proof. We observe that with σ = dist(a (1),A (2) ), ( ) E s(ω N) E s(ω N A (1) )+E s(ω N A (2) ) = x i A (1),x j A (2) E s(ω N A (2) ) #(ω N A (2) ) 1+s/d. x i x j s σ s N 2, and use the definition of β (i), i = 1,2, to obtain the desired equality.

7 RIESZ ENERGY ON SELF-SIMILAR SETS 7 This is particularly useful for self-similar fractals satisfying the open set property. Consider such a fractal A; since ψ m(v), 1 m M, are pairwise disjoint for an open set V containing A, there exists a σ > 0 such that dist(ψ i(a),ψ j(a)) σ for i j. Following [11], we will write A m1...m l := ψ m1... ψ ml (A), 1 m i M, l 1. Then dist(a m1...m l, A m 1...m ) rm l 1...r mk σ, where k = min{i : m i m i}, so for a fixed M in the expression M A = m 1,...,m l =1 A m1...m l not only the union is disjoint, but also the sets A m1...m l are metrically separated. The following lemma is technical, and we give its proof for the convenience of the reader. Lemma 5.2. If {µ N : N N} is a sequence of probability measures on the set A, which for every l 1 satisfies N N µn(am 1...m l ) = µ(a m1...m l ), 1 m 1,...,m l M, for another probability measure µ on A, then µ N µ, N N. Proof. Fix an f C(A); since A is compact, f is uniformly continuous on A. For a fixed ε > 0, there exists an L 0 N such that f(x) f(y) < ε whenever x,y A m1,...,m l for any l L 0 and any set of indices 0 m 1,...,m l M; this is possible due to ( diam(a m1,...,m l ) r m1...r ml diam(a) max 1 m M rm ) l diam(a). Fix an l L 0 until the end of this proof, then pick an N 0 N so that for every N N 0, there holds µ N(A m1...m l ) µ(a m1...m l ) < ε/m l, 1 m 1,...,m l M. Finally, let us write f m1...m l := min Am1...m l f(x) for brevity. Then for N N 0, f(x)dµ N(x) f(x)dµ(x) A A (f(x) f m1...m l )dµ N(x) (f(x) f m1...m l )dµ(x) A m A m + m 1,...,m l =1 m 1,...,m l =1 2ε+ε f, (µ N(A m) µ(a m))f m1...m l where the estimate for the first sum used that both µ N and µ are probability measures. This proves the desired statement. Note that the converse is also true: since the sets A m1,...,m l are metrically separated, convergence µ N µ of measures supported on A immediately implies (by Urysohn s lemma) µ N(A m1...m l ) µ(a m1...m l ) for all l 1 and all indices 1 m 1,...,m l M. The proof of the following statement follows a well-known approach [15, 17, Theorem 2], and can be considered standard. Proposition 5.3. If A is a compact d-regular set, then 0 < g s,d (A) g s,d (A) <.

8 8 A. REZNIKOV AND O. VLASIUK The above proposition can be somewhat strengthened, to obtain uniform upper and lower bounds on E s(ω N) N1+s/d, N 2; furthermore, each bound requires only one of the inequalities in (5). In addition, for any sequence of configurations ω N, N N, with E s(ω N) <, N N N1+s/d every weak cluster point of ν N, N N, must be absolutely continuous with respect to H d on A. Lastly, we will need the following standard estimate. Corollary 5.4. Suppose A is a compact d-regular set, ω N = {x i : 1 i N} A, and s > d. Then the minimal point energy of ω N is bounded by: where C depends only on A,s,d. min x A j=1 N x x j s CN s/d, Proof of Theorem 4.1. In view of the weak compactness of probability measures in A, to establish existence of the weak it of ν N, N N, it suffices to show that any cluster point of ν N, N N, in the weak topology is h d which is definedin (9) (see [9, Proposition A.2.7]). To that end, consider a subsequence of N for which the empirical measures ν N converge to a cluster point µ; for simplicity we shall use the same notation N for this subsequence. As discussed above, ν N(A m1...m l ) µ(a m1...m l ), N N ; this ensures that the quantities β m := µ(a m) = νn(am) = N N N N are well-defined. From (7), separation of {A m}, and Lemma 5.1 follows g s,d (A) = N N E s(ω N A m) N 1+s/d β 1+s/d m rm s g s,d (A). #(ω N A m), m = 1,...,M, N β 1+s/d m inf N N E s(ω N A m) #(ω N A m) 1+s/d Consider the RHS in the last inequality. As a function of {β m}, it satisfies the constraint m βm = 1; note also that by the defining property (4) of d, there holds m Rm = 1 with Rm := rd m, 1 m M. We have { M } (13) g s,d (A) inf βm 1+s/d Rm s/d : β m = 1 g s,d (A). Level sets of the function m β1+s/d m m are convex, so the infimum is attained and unique; it is easy to check that the solution is at β m = R m = rm, d 1 m M, and the minimal value is 1. Indeed, the corresponding Lagrangian is hence R s/d L(β 1,...,β M,λ) := βm 1+s/d Rm s/d λ β m, ( ) s/d βm L βm = (1+s/d) λ, 1 m M, R m and it remains to use β m 0, 1 m M, and mrm = 1, to conclude βm = Rm, 1 m M.

9 RIESZ ENERGY ON SELF-SIMILAR SETS 9 Since 0 < g s,d (A) < by Lemma 5.3, from (13) it follows Note that this argument shows also N N β m = r d m, m = 1,...,M. E s(ω N A m) (#(ω N A m)) 1+s/d = g s,d(a), so the above can be repeated recursively for sets A m1...m l. Namely, for every l 1 and 1 m,m 1,...,m l M, µ(a mm1...m l ) =: β mm1...m l = r d mβ m1...m l. Observe further that h d satisfies h d (A mm1...m l ) = r d mh d (A m1...m l ) by definition, so by Lemma 5.2 follows that every weak cluster point of ν N, N N, is h d, as desired. Proof of Theorem 4.2. Note that setting equal contraction ratios r 1 =... = r m = r in (4) gives r s = M s/d. Consider the set function M ψ : x ψ m(x), x A, and denote ψ(ω N) := x ω N ψ(x). It follows from the open set condition that the union above is metrically separated; as before, we denote the separation distance by σ. Observe that the definition of a similitude implies #(ψ(ω N)) = M#(ω N). We then have for any configuration ω N, N 2, E s(a,mn) E s(ψ(ω N)) Mr s E s(ω N)+σ s N 2 M 2 = M 1+s/d E s(ω N)+σ s N 2 M 2, and repeated application of the second inequality yields E s(a,m k N) E s[ψ(ψ (k 1) (ω N))] M 1+s/d E s(ψ (k 1) (ω N))+σ s (M k 1 N) 2 M 2 (M 2 ) 1+s/d E s(ψ (k 2) (ω N))+M 1+s/d σ s (M k 2 N) 2 M 2 +σ s (M k 1 N) 2 M 2... k (M k ) 1+s/d E s(ω N)+σ s N 2 (M l 1 ) 1+s/d (M k l ) 2 M 2. Estimating the geometric series in the last inequality, we obtain (14) l=1 E s(a,m k N) (M k ) 1+s/d E s(ω N)+σ s N 2 M 2k+1 s/d k Let now ε > 0 fixed; find ω N0 such that N 0 M and l=1 M l(s/d 1) (M k ) 1+s/d E s(ω N)+σ s N 2 M 2k+1 s/d M (k+1)(s/d 1) 1 M s/d 1 1 (M k ) 1+s/d N 1 s/d ( (1+s/d). E s(ω N)+ M N) k σ s (M s/d 1 1) E s(ω N0 ) N 1+s/d 0 inf M N +ε, N1+s/d

10 10 A. REZNIKOV AND O. VLASIUK and in addition, N 1 s/d 0 < εσ s (M s/d 1 1). Then by (14) we have This proves the desired statement. N Es(ωN 0) +ε inf 1+s/d N 1+s/d M N 0 +2ε, M N N0. N1+s/d In the following lemma we write N(k),k N, to denote the k-th element of the sequence N N; we say that N is majorized by a sequence M, if the inequality N(k) < M(k) holds for every k 1. Lemma 5.5. If M N is a sequence such that the it M N N 1+s/d exists, then for any sequence of integers N Z with N(k) majorized by M and satisfying N(k) = o(m(k)), k, there holds (15) (M+N) N where the addition M + N is performed elementwise. = N1+s/d M N N, 1+s/d Proof. First, observe that by passing to subsequences of M and N, it suffices to assume N(k) 0 and to show(15) for M+N and M N. If N(k) 0, we have by the definition of E s, Thus (16) inf (M+N) N E s[a,(m+n)(k)] E s(a,m(k)) N ( E s(a,m(k)) = k (M(k)) 1+s/d in view of N(k) = o(m(k)). Similarly, 1+s/d k (17) sup (M N) N M(k) M(k)+N(k) E s(a,m(k)) (M(k)+N(k)) 1+s/d ) 1+s/d = M N N, 1+s/d N1+s/d M N N. 1+s/d For the converse estimates, use Corollary 5.4 to conclude that for every N N there holds E s(a,n +1) +CN s/d. Applying this inequality N(k) times to M(k), we obtain which yields (18) sup (M+N) N E s[a,(m+n)(k)] E s(a,m(k))+n(k)c[m(k)+n(k)] s/d, N1+s/d M N N. 1+s/d Finally, applying Corollary 5.4 N(k) times to M(k) N(k) gives whence, using that N(k) = o(m(k)), k, (19) inf (M N) N E s[a,m(k)] E s[a,(m N)(k)]+N(k)CM(k) s/d, N1+s/d M N N. 1+s/d Combining (16) with (18) and (17) with (19), we get the desired result. The proof of the previous lemma implies the following.

11 RIESZ ENERGY ON SELF-SIMILAR SETS 11 Corollary 5.6. If M,N N are a pair of sequences such that then and inf (M+N) N sup (M+N) N where C is the same as in Corollary 5.4. N(k) θm(k), k 1, ( ) 1+s/d 1 inf N1+s/d M N N 1+s/d 1+θ sup N1+s/d M N Cθ + N1+s/d 1+θ, Proof of Theorem 4.3. To show that g s,d ( ) is well-defined, it is necessary to verify that (i) existence of the it {N} implies that of the it E s(n), and (ii) the value of E s(n) is uniquely defined by {N}. To this end, fix a pair of sequences N 1, N 2 N such that {N 1} = {N 2}. First assume that N 1, N 2 are multiples of (a subset of) the geometric series, that is, N i = {M k n i : k K i}, i = 1,2. Observe that (10) implies {log M n 1} = {log M n 2} and let for definiteness n 2 n 1; then n 2 = M k 0 n 1 for some integer k 0 1. It follows that N i N 0, i = 1,2, with N 0 = {M k n 0 : k 1}. By Theorem 4.2, the it N 0 N N 1+s/d exists, so it must be that the its over subsequences of N 0 N i N, i = 1,2, N1+s/d also exist and are equal, so the function g s,d ( ) is well-defined on the subset of [0,1] of all the sequences N with N = {M k n : k K}. Now let N 1, N 2 N be arbitrary. Denote the common value of the it a := {N i}, i = 1,2. We shall assume for definiteness that a [0,1); the case of a = 1 can be handled similarly. In order to bound N i between two sequences of the type {M k n i : k K i}, discussed above, fix an ε > 0 such that a + 2ε < 1, and find an N 0 N, for which (20) {log M N i} a < ε, N 0 N i N i, i = 1,2. By the choice of ε, the above equation gives {log M N 1} = {log M N 2} when N 0 N i N i. Now let n i, i = 1,2 be such that (21) a 2ε {log M n 1} a ε a+ε {log M n 2} a+2ε. Replacing one of n i, i = 1,2, with its multiple, if necessary, we can guarantee that 0 < log M n 2 log M n 1 < 4ε. Consider a pair of sequences Ñi = {Mk n i : k log M N 0 }, i = 1,2; observe that by the above argument, its E s(ñi) =: Li, i = 1,2, along Ñi, i = 1,2, both exist, and the inequality Ñ 1(k) N i Ñ2(k), k = log M N i, N 0 N i N i, i = 1,2, holds. By the definition of E s, and due to (20) (21), and sup N i N inf N i N E s(a,m k n 2) N1+s/d k (M k n = 1) 1+s/d E s(a,m k n 1) N1+s/d k (M k n = 2) 1+s/d ( n2 n 1 ( n1 n 2 ) 1+s/d L 2, i = 1,2, ) 1+s/d L 1, i = 1,2.

12 12 A. REZNIKOV AND O. VLASIUK Combining the last two inequalities gives ( ) 1+s/d n1 L 1 inf N i N n 2 sup N1+s/d N i N N1+s/d ( n2 n 1 ) 1+s/d L 2, so it suffices to show that L 2 can be made arbitrarily close to L 1 by taking ε 0. The latter follows from Corollary 5.6, and the choice of n i, i = 1,2: 0 Ñ2(k) Ñ1(k) Ñ 1(k) = n2 n 1 1 M 4ε 1. Taking ε 0 shows both that E s(n 1) = E s(n 2), and that these two its exist. The function g s,d : [0,1] (0, ) is therefore well-defined. Note that repeating the above argument for {N 1} {N 2} < ε for a fixed positive ε gives a bound on E s(n 1) E s(n 2), which implies that g s,d is continuous. This completes the proof. Proof of Theorem 4.4. Assume without loss of generality that the diameter of the set A satisfies diam(a) = 1. Denote the minimal value of the Riesz s-energy on M points on A by E s,m := E s(a,m); recall also that σ is the lower bound on the distance between A i, A j when i j. With this assumption, the last inequality in (14) with N = M gives (22) M 1 s/d E s(a,m k+1 ) M k(1+s/d) E s,m +σ s (M s/d 1 1) M(k+1)(1+s/d) M k(1+s/d) σ s M 2 +σ s M 2 (M s/d 1 1) Mk(1+s/d) ) = M k(1+s/d) σ s M ( M s/d 1 1 = M (k+1)(1+s/d) σ s M s/d 1 1. On the other hand, consider a configuration ω M k+1 +M k. The set A is partitioned by the Mk+1 subsets A m1...m k+1, 1 m 1,...,m k+1 M, so by the pigeonhole principle, for at least M k pairs i j, the points x i, x j ω M k+1 +Mk belong to the same subset A m1...m k+1. Writing r for the common contraction ratio of the defining similitudes {ψ m : 1 m M} preserving the set A, we have diam(a m1...m k+1 ) = r k+1 diam(a) = r k+1. Configuration ω M k+1 +Mk was chosen arbitrarily, so it follows, (23) E s(a,m k+1 +M k ) M k (r k+1 ) s = M k (M s/d ) k+1 = M s/d (M k ) 1+s/d, where we used that r s = M s/d when all the contraction ratios are equal. Combining equations (22) (23) gives g s,d (A) / g s,d (A) sup k = E s(a,m k+1 ) / E s(a,m k+1 +M k ) inf (M k+1 ) 1+s/d k (M k+1 +M k ) 1+s/d σ s / 1 M s/d 1 1 M(1+1/M) 1+s/d = M(1+1/M)1+s/d σ s (M s/d 1 1).

13 RIESZ ENERGY ON SELF-SIMILAR SETS 13 After substituting 1/M = r d, the last inequality can be rewritten as g s,d (A) / ( ) r(1+r d ) 1/d s M s/d 1 g s,d (A) M(M +1) σ M s/d 1 1 = R s M s/d 1 M(M +1). M s/d 1 1 Note that the second factor in the above equation is less than 2 when s > 2d holds (since M 2); for an R < 1, choosing the Riesz exponent as in (12) makes the RHS less than 1, as desired. Proof of Corollary 4.5. The proof repeats that of Theorem 4.4, except for the simplified expression for E s,m = E s,2 = 1. Equations (22) (23) become respectively. Finally, from E s(a,2 k+1 ) = 2 (k+1)(1+s/d) (2 s/d 1 1), E s(a,2 k+1 +2 k ) 2 s/d (2 k ) 1+s/d, g s,d (A) / g s,d (A) 2(3/2)1+s/d 2 2 (2 s/d 1 1) = ( ) s/d s/d 1 2 s/d The RHS is a decreasing function of s and is less than 1 for s 3d = 3dim H A = 3log 3 2, which completes the proof. Acknowledgments. The authors are grateful to Peter Grabner, Douglas Hardin, and Edward Saff for stimulating discussions. Part of this work was done while O.V. was in residence at the Institute for Computational and Experimental Research in Mathematics in Providence, RI during the Point Configurations in Geometry, Physics and Computer Science program, supported by the NSF grant DMS Both authors would like to thank ICERM for the hospitality and for providing a welcoming environment for collaborative research. References [1] Alishahi, K., and Zamani, M. The spherical ensemble and uniform distribution of points on the sphere. Electron. J. Probab. 20 (2015). [2] Beltrán, C., Marzo, J., and Ortega-Cerdà, J. Energy and discrepancy of rotationally invariant determinantal point processes in high dimensional spheres. J. Complex. 37 (2016), [3] Borodachov, S. Asymptotics for the minimum Riesz energy and best-packing on sets of finite packing premeasure [4] Borodachov, S. V., Hardin, D. P., and Saff, E. B. Asymptotics of best-packing on rectifiable sets. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 135, 08 (apr 2007), [5] Borodachov, S. V., Hardin, D. P., and Saff, E. B. Asymptotics for discrete weighted minimal Riesz energy problems on rectifiable sets. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 360, 03 (mar 2008), [6] Brauchart, J. S. About the second term of the asymptotics for optimal Riesz energy on the sphere in the potential-theoretical case. Integr. Transform. Spec. Funct. 17, 5 (2006), [7] Brauchart, J. S., Saff, E. B., Sloan, I. H., Wang, Y. G., and Womersley, R. S. Random Point Sets on the Sphere Hole Radii, Covering, and Separation. [8] Calef, M. T. A sequence of discrete minimal energy configurations that does not converge in the weak-star topology. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 395, 2 (nov 2012), [9] Conway, J. B. A course in functional analysis, 2 nd ed., vol. 96 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, New York, [10] Damelin, S. B., and Maymeskul, V. On point energies, separation radius and mesh norm for s- extremal configurations on compact sets in R n. J. Complex. 21, 6 (2005),

14 14 A. REZNIKOV AND O. VLASIUK [11] Falconer, K. J. The geometry of fractal sets, vol. 85 of Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, [12] Federer, H. Geometric Measure Theory. Classics in Mathematics. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, [13] Hardin, D., and Saff, E. Discretizing Manifolds via Minimum Energy Points. Not. AMS, x (2004), [14] Hardin, D. P., and Saff, E. B. Minimal Riesz Energy Point Configurations for Rectifiable d- Dimensional Manifolds. Adv. Math. (N. Y). 193, 1 (2003), [15] Hardin, D. P., Saff, E. B., and Whitehouse, J. T. Quasi-uniformity of minimal weighted energy points on compact metric spaces. J. Complex. 28, 2 (2012), [16] Hutchinson, J. Fractals and self-similarity. Indiana Univ. Math. J. 30 (1981), [17] Kuijlaars, A. B. J., and Saff, E. B. Asymptotics for minimal discrete energy on the sphere. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 350, 2 (1998), [18] Lalley, S. P. The Packing and Covering Functions of Some Self-similar Fractals. Indiana Univ. Math. J. 37, 3 (1988), [19] Mattila, P. Geometry of sets and measures in Euclidean spaces, vol. 44 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Fractals and rectifiability. Department of Mathematics, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL address: reznikov@math.fsu.edu Center for Constructive Approximation, Department of Mathematics, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN and Department of Mathematics, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL address: vlasiuk@math.fsu.edu