Explicit examples of positive crystalline measures and Fourier quasicrystals are constructed using pairs of stable polynomials, answering several open questions in the area.

Our investigation of the additive structure of the spectrum of metric graphs1 provides exotic crystalline measures, in fact, the ones that give answers to a number of open problems. In this article, we explicate the simplest examples and place the construction into the natural general setting of stable polynomials in several variables.

We recall the definitions.

Definition.
A crystalline measureμon$R$is a tempered distribution of the form
$μ=∑λ∈Λaλδλfor whichμ̂=∑s∈Sbsδs,$
(1)
whereδξis a delta mass atξand Λ andSare discrete subsets of$R$.2

If both |μ| and$|μ̂|$are tempered as well, then following Ref.3 (Sec. 1.1), we callμaFourier quasicrystal.

The basic example of a crystalline measure, in fact, a Fourier quasicrystal, comes from the Poisson summation formula

$μ=∑m∈Zδm⇒μ̂=∑s∈Zδ2πs,$
(2)

and its extension to finite combinations of these called “generalized Dirac combs.”2 Various examples of crystalline measures that are not Dirac combs were constructed by Guinand.4 Note, however, that his Example 4 (p. 264) coming from the explicit formula in the theory of primes does not give a Fourier quasicrystal, even assuming the Riemann hypothesis.

Toward a classification theory of crystalline measures μ, there is a series of results that ensures that μ is a generalized Dirac comb (Refs. 3 and 5–7), one of the first being the following theorem:

Theorem

(Ref. 7). Ifaλtakes values in a finite set and$|μ̂|$is translation bounded, that is,$supx∈R|μ̂|(x+[0,1])<∞$, thenμis a generalized Dirac comb.

Examples of varying complexity of Fourier quasicrystals, which are not generalized Dirac combs, are given in Refs. 2 and 8–10, showing that any such classification is probably very difficult.11

A basic question that has been open for some time is whether there are positive (that is, with aλ ≥ 0) crystalline measures that are not generalized Dirac combs. The constructions in Secs. II and III yield such μ’s, which enjoy some other properties, which resolve the related open problems.

In Sec. II, we review the definition of stable polynomials and use them to construct positive Fourier quasicrystals. In Sec. III, we examine the simplest non-trivial example and use Liardet’s proof of Lang’s conjecture in dimension two12,13 to analyze the additive structure of Λ (see Theorem III). This example is rich enough for the purposes of this article. We end the section by recording the general additive structure theorem from Ref. 1, which applies to the supports Λ of the Fourier quasicrystal measures μ that are constructed from stable polynomials.

If $Pz=Pz1,…,zn$ is a multivariable polynomial with complex coefficients, we say that P is $D=z:|z|<1$ stable if P(z) ≠ 0 for z = (z1, z2, …, zn) with $zj∈D$ for all j. To define a stable pair, consider the involution operation on P obtained by zj → 1/zj for j = 1, 2, …, n, the result being denoted by Pι.

Definition.

Two multivariate polynomialsP, Qare said to form astable pairif

1. both polynomialsPandQare$D$-stable,

2. there exists an integer-valued vector$ℓ=(ℓ1,ℓ2,…,ℓn)∈Nn$and a constantηsuch thatPandQsatisfy the functional equation
$Q(z)=ηz1ℓ1z2ℓ2…znℓnPι(z),and$
(3)
3. the normalization condition
$P(0→)=Q(0→)=1$
is fulfilled.

If such and η exist, they are unique.

Such stable pairs arise in many contexts and there are powerful techniques for proving stability.14,15 We point to two basic examples.

1. Spectral pairs. These come up as secular polynomials in quantum graphs.16,17 Let P1, P2, …, Pk be monomials in z1, …, zn of the form
$Pj(z)=z1aj,1z2aj,2…znaj,n,j=1,2,…,k,$
(4)
$aj,ν∈N.$ Let $ℓν=∑j=1kaj,ν,$ which we assume being positive for every ν = 1, …, n. If S is a k × k unitary matrix, set
$RS(z)=detIk×k−P1(z)0…00P2(z)…0⋮⋮⋱⋮00…Pk(z)S.$
(5)
Then, it is easy to see that
$P=RS,Q=RS−1$
is a stable pair with = (1, …, k) and η = (det(−S))−1.

Our studies in Ref. 1 were inspired by the trace formula for metric graphs.18–21 In fact, the presented construction via stable polynomials grew up as an attempt to understand that trace formula from a more abstract point of view.

2. Lee-Yang pairs (Ref. 22, Theorem 5.12). Let −1 ≤ Aij ≤ 1, Aij = Aji, and
$P(z)=∑S∏i∈S∏j∈S′AijzS,$
(6)
where we use a multi-index notation for zS = ∏jSzj, the sum is over all subsets S of {1, 2, …, n}, and S′ is the complement of S. Then, P is a self-dual stable pair,
$(z1z2…zn)Pι(z)=P(z).$
(7)
For generalizations of these, see Refs. 14, 15, and 23.

For the rest of this section, we show how to attach to a stable pair and real numbers b1, b2, …, bn > 1, a crystalline measure.

Assume that P, Q is a stable pair of multivariable polynomials,

$P(z)=1+∑m∈MPaP(m)zm,Q(z)=1+∑m∈MQaQ(m)zm,$
(8)

where MP,Q are finite subsets of

$Z+n≔k=(k1,k2,…,kn),kj∈Z,kj≥0,k≠(0,0,…,0).$
(9)

Taking the logarithm, we get the following expansion:

$log⁡P(z)=∑ν=1∞(−1)νν∑m∈MPaP(m)zmν=∑ν=1∞(−1)νν∑m1,m2,…,mν∈MPaP(m1)aP(m2)…aP(mν)zm1zm2…zmν=∑ν=1∞(−1)νν∑k∈Z+n∑m1+m2+⋯+mν=kaP(m1)aP(m2)…aP(mν)zk,$
(10)

and hence,

$log⁡P(z)=∑k∈Z+ncP(k)zk,$
(11)

where, for $k∈Z+n$,

$cP(k)=∑ν=1∑j=1nkj∑m1+m2+⋯+mν=k(−1)νaP(m1)aP(m2)…aP(mν)ν.$
(12)

Similar formulas hold for log Q(z).

Let b1, b2, …, bn be real numbers larger than 1, and let ξj = ln bj > 0, j = 1, 2, …, n.

Let us denote by Γ+ and L+ the corresponding multiplicative and additive semigroups,

$Γ+=b1m1b2m2…bnmn:mj∈N∪{0}\{1},L+=logΓ+=m1ξ1+m2ξ2+⋯+mnξn:mj∈N∪{0}\{0},$
(13)

respectively, The elements of these semigroups will be denoted by b and ξ, respectively,

$b∈Γ+,ξ∈L+.$

Let us introduce the following two entire functions of order 1:

$F(s)≔P(b1−s,b2−s,…,bn−s)≡P(e−ξ1s,e−ξ2s…,e−ξns),G(s)≔Q(b1−s,b2−s,…,bn−s)≡Q(e−ξ1s,e−ξ2s…,e−ξns),s∈C.$
(14)

The functions are related via the functional equation

$F(−s)=P(b1s,b2s,…,bns)=Pι(b1−s,…,bn−s)=η−1b1ℓ1…bnℓnsG(s)$
$⇒F(−s)=η−1b1ℓsG(s),$
(15)

where = (1, 2, …, n).

The stability conditions on P and Q ensure that all zeroes of F(s) and G(s) are on the imaginary axis $R(s)=0.$ Moreover, (15) implies that the zeroes for F and G are obtained from each other via reflection.

F and G are finite Dirichlet series, that is,

$F(s)=1+∑m∈MPaP(m)(bm)−s,G(s)=1+∑m∈MQaQ(m)(bm)−s.$
(16)

For $R(s)$ large enough, the series for log F(s) converges absolutely,

$log⁡F(s)=∑k∈Z+ncP(k)e−(k1ξ1+k2ξ2+⋯+knξn)s=∑k∈Z+ncP(k)e−(ξ⋅k)s.$
(17)

Hence, for $R(s)$ large,

$F′(s)F(s)=−∑k∈Z+n(ξ⋅k)cP(k)e−(ξ⋅k)s.$
(18)

A similar analysis can be applied to the entire function G(s), leading to

$G′(s)G(s)=−∑k∈Z+n(ξ⋅k)cQ(k)e−(ξ⋅k)s.$
(19)

Formula (15) establishes the following relation between the logarithmic derivatives of F and G:

$log⁡F(−s)=−log⁡η+s(ξ⋅ℓ)+log⁡G(s)$
$⇒−F′(−s)F(−s)=(ξ⋅ℓ)+G′(s)G(s)$
(20)

for $R(s)$ large. Note that this relation is independent of the parameter η that appeared first in (3).

Let $Ψ∈C0∞(R>0)$ and

$Ψ̃(s)=∫0∞Ψ(x)xsdxx.$
(21)

$Ψ̃(s)$ is entire and is rapidly decreasing when |t| → for s = σ + it, with σ being fixed.

Consider the integral

$I≔12πi∫R(s)=RF′(s)F(s)Ψ̃(s)ds,$
(22)

which is converging for large real R. We next calculate I in two different ways using the functional equation connecting F and G.

Expansion (18) gives us

$I=12πi∫R(s)=R−∑k∈Z+n(ξ⋅k)cP(k)e−(ξ⋅k)sΨ̃(s)ds=−∑k∈Z+n(ξ⋅k)cP(k)12πi∫R(s)=RΨ̃(s)e−(ξ⋅k)sds.$
(23)

To get the second representation, we shift the contour for the integral defining I to $R(s)=−R$ picking up the residues, which are $Ψ̃(ρ)$, since the entire function $Ψ̃$ is integrated with the logarithmic derivative $F′F$, which is meromorphic. Summing over all zeroes of F (which are lying on the imaginary axis), we obtain

$∑ρ:F(ρ)=0Ψ̃(ρ),$
(24)

where the summation respects the multiplicity of the zeroes, and hence,

$I=∑ρ:F(ρ)=0Ψ̃(ρ)+12πi∫R(s)=−RF′(s)F(s)Ψ̃(s)ds=∑ρ:F(ρ)=0Ψ̃(ρ)+12πi∫R(s)=RF′(−s)F(−s)Ψ̃(−s)ds.$

Formula (20) together with expansion (19) then implies

$I=∑ρ:F(ρ)=0Ψ̃(ρ)−(ξ⋅ℓ)12πi∫R(s)=RΨ̃(−s)ds+∑k∈Z+n(ξ⋅k)cQ(k)12πi∫R(s)=RΨ̃(−s)e−(ξ⋅k)sds.$
(25)

Comparing two formulas for I [expressions (23) and (25)], we may calculate the sum over the zeroes of F,

$∑ρ:F(ρ)=0Ψ̃(ρ)=(ξ⋅ℓ)12πi∫R(s)=RΨ̃(s)ds−∑k∈Z+n(ξ⋅k)cP(k)12πi∫R(s)=RΨ̃(s)e−(ξ⋅k)sds−∑k∈Z+n(ξ⋅k)cQ(k)12πi∫R(s)=RΨ̃(−s)e−(ξ⋅k)sds.$
(26)

We make a change of variables,

$x=et,(0,+∞)→(−∞,+∞)$

so that

$Ψ(et)=h(t)$

for a certain $h∈C0∞(R).$ We have, in particular,

$Ψ̃(iγ)=∫0∞Ψ(x)xiγdxx=x=etdx=etdt=∫−∞∞h(t)eiγtdt=ĥ(γ),$

where ĥ is the Fourier transform of h and

$12πi∫R(s)=RΨ̃(s)e−(ξ⋅k)sds=12πi∫R(s)=R∫0∞Ψ(x)xsdxxe−(ξ⋅k)sds=12π∫−∞+∞∫−∞∞h(t)e(R+is)tdte−(ξ⋅k)Re−i(ξ⋅k)sds=h(ξ⋅k).$

Then, formula (26) becomes the following summation formula:

$∑γ:F(iγ)=0ĥ(γ)=(ξ⋅ℓ)h(0)−∑k∈Z+n(ξ⋅k)cP(k)h(ξ⋅k)−∑k∈Z+n(ξ⋅k)cQ(k)h(−ξ⋅k),$
(27)

which is valid for any $ĥ∈C0∞(R)$ and extends to all of $S(R)$, as shown in the Proof of Theorem 1.

To be precise, introducing the discrete support set,

$ΛP≔{γ:F(iγ)=0},$

obtained from the zero set of F (all lying on the imaginary axis), we define the discrete measure associated with the left-hand side of (27),

$μ=μP≔∑γ:F(iγ)=0δγ≡∑λ∈ΛPm(λ)δλ,$
(28)

where m(λ) is the multiplicity of the corresponding zero.

Then, the spectrum SP of μ is a subset of

$L+∪−L+∪{0}$

[with L+ introduced in (13)], and the Fourier transform of μ can be written as

$μ̂=(ξ⋅ℓ)−∑k∈Z+n(ξ⋅k)cP(k)δξ⋅k−∑k∈Z+n(ξ⋅k)cQ(k)δ−ξ⋅k.$
(29)

Theorem 1.

Given any pairP, Qof stable polynomials satisfying assumptions (1) and (2), the measureμis a positive crystalline measure, in fact, a Fourier quasicrystal, and is an almost periodic measure.

Proof.
The support of μ is given by the zeroes j of the entire function F in (14), and hence, the support Λ of μ is discrete. The support S of $μ̂$ is a subset of L+ ∪ −L+ ∪ {0}, which is also discrete. Since m(λ) ≥ 1 and μ is positive, applying the summation formula to ϕ(y) = ϕ0(xy) with ϕ0 ≥ 0, ϕ0 ≥ 1 on [−1, 1] and $ϕ̂0$ having compact support in (−ɛ0, ɛ0) where (−ɛ0, ɛ0) ∩ (L+ ∪ −L+) is empty yields $∑λ:x−1≤λ≤x+1m(λ)≪(ξ⋅ℓ)ϕ̂0(0)$ uniformly in x. That is, μ = |μ| is translation bounded and, in particular, μ and hence $μ̂$ are both tempered. This shows that μ is a crystalline measure. To show that it is a Fourier quasicrystal, we need to show in addition that $|μ̂|$ is tempered (since μ = |μ|). To this end, we first bound the coefficients cP(k) in (11). The series in (11) converges absolutely and uniformly for z in compact subsets of $Dn=D×D×⋯×D$ and yields log P(z) = ln |P(z)| + i arg P(z), where the arg is obtained by continuous variation along the path {sz}, 0 ≤ s ≤ 1. P(sz) as a function of s is a polynomial in s of degree deg P with the constant term equal to P(0) = 1, and each term in the polynomial may contribute with at most π to the argument, and hence,
$|argP(z)|≤π(degP).$
(30)
Let $K=supz∈Dn|P(z)|$, then
$ln|P(z)|≤lnKfor z∈Dn.$
(31)
Introducing the notation
$eiθ=(eiθ1,eiθ2,…,eiθn),$
we have from (11) that for 0 ≤ r < 1,
$∫Tn⁡log⁡P(reiθ)e−ik⋅θdθ=rk|cP(k).$
(32)
In particular, for k = 0,
$∫Tn⁡ln|P(reiθ)|dθ=0,$
(33)
since the constant term is absent in (11). According to (31),
$ln|P(reiθ)|−ln⁡K≤0,$
and hence,
$∫Tnln|P(reiθ)|dθ=∫Tnln|P(reiθ)|−lnK+lnKdθ≤−∫Tnln|P(reiθ)|−lnKdθ+lnK=2⁡lnK$
(34)
by (33). From (32) and the r independent bounds (30) and (34), we deduce
$cP(k)≤C<∞.$
(35)
From (29), it follows that the measure $|μ̂|$ satisfies
$|μ̂|([−A,A])≤ξ⋅ℓ+2∑k∈Z+n,ξ⋅k≤A(ξ⋅k)|cP(k)|≤ξ⋅ℓ+2max{ξj}C∑k1+k2+⋯+kn≤A/min{ξj}k∈Z+n,(k1+k2+⋯+kn)≤ξ⋅ℓ+2max{ξj}CAmin{ξj}+1n+1.$
(36)
Hence, $|μ̂|([−A,A])$ grows at most polynomially (∼An+1) and, therefore, determines a tempered distribution.

To complete the proof, we invoke Theorem 11 of Ref. 24, which asserts that our translation bounded μ that has a countable spectrum is an almost periodic measure in the sense of Ref. 2 (Definition 5).□

• Starting with the function G instead of F, we get a similar summation formula
$∑γ:F(iγ)=0ĥ(−γ)=(ξ⋅ℓ)h(0)−∑k∈Z+n(ξ⋅k)cQ(k)h(ξ⋅k)−∑k∈Z+n(ξ⋅k)cP(k)h(−ξ⋅k).$
(37)
Summing the two formulas, we get
$∑γ:F(iγ)=0ĥ(γ)+ĥ(−γ)=2(ξ⋅ℓ)h(0)−∑k∈Z+n(ξ⋅k)cP(k)+cQ(k)h(ξ⋅k)+h(−ξ⋅k).$
(38)
• In the self-dual case P(z) = Q(z), the summation formula takes the simplest form
$∑γ:F(iγ)=0ĥ(γ)=(ξ⋅ℓ)h(0)−∑k∈Z+n(ξ⋅k)cP(k)h(ξ⋅k)+h(−ξ⋅k).$
(39)
• The simplest stable polynomial is
$P(z1)=1−z1.$
For it,
$Q(z1)=z1−1,F(s)=1−1/b1s,γn=2πξ1n,n∈Z,log⁡F(s)=log(1−1b1s)=−∑n=1∞1n1(b1n)s,F′F(s)=∑n=1∞1(b1n)sξ1.$
Substitution into the summation formula (27) gives
$∑n∈Zĥ2πξ1n=ξ1h(0)+∑n=1∞h(nξ1)+h(−nξ1)≡ξ1∑n∈Zh(nξ1),$
(40)
which is nothing else than the classical Poisson summation formula (properly scaled) [see (2)].

Our goal in this section is to present an explicit example of a positive crystalline measure. Consider the following polynomial:

$P(z1,z2)=1−13z1+13z22−z1z22,$
(41)

in fact, describing the non-linear part of the spectrum of the lasso graph.1 With 1 = 1, 2 = 2, and η = −1, we get

$Q(z1,z2)=(−1)z1z22−13z22+13z1−1≡P(z1,z2).$

The polynomial is $D$-stable since the equation P(z1, z2) = 0 can be writen as

$z1−31−3z1=z22,$

and the Möbius transformation $z1↦z1−31−3z1$ maps the unit disk to its complement.

The Dirichlet series is equal to

$F(s)=1−131b1s+131b22s−1b1sb22s,$
$log⁡F(s)=−∑k=1∞1k131b1s−131b22s+1b1sb22sk=∑(n1,n2)∈Z+2c(n1,2n2)1b1n1sb22n2s,$

with

$c(n1,2n2)=−∑k2+k3=n2k1+k3=n1k1,k2,k3∈N∪{0}(k1+k2+k3−1)!k1!k2!k3!(−1)k23k1+k2.$
(42)

To determine the zero set of F(s), let us first describe the zero set of P on the unit torus $T=(z1,z2)∈C2:|z1|=|z2|=1.$ Introducing notations z1 = eix, z2 = eiy, the same torus can be seen as the square [0, 2π] × [0, 2π] with the opposite sides identified.

Then, the zero set is described by the Laurent polynomial

$L(x,y)=3⁡sin(x2+y)+sin(x2−y)$

and is plotted in Fig. 1.

FIG. 1.

Zero set for L(x, y).

FIG. 1.

Zero set for L(x, y).

Close modal

Note that the normal to the curve always lies in the first quadrant, in fact,

$∂y∂x=−∂L(x,y)∂x∂L(x,y)∂y=−123⁡cos(x/2+y)+cos(x/2−y)3⁡cos(x/2+1)−cos(x/2−y)=−128(3⁡cos(x/2+y)−cos(x/2−y))2<0,$

where we used that L(x, y) = 0.

Knowing the zero set of L(x, y), the zeroes of the Dirichlet series F(s) (all lying on the imaginary axis) are obtained in the following way:

$0=F(iγj)=P(b1iγj,b2iγj)=P(eiγjξ1,eiγjξ2)=L(γjξ1,γjξ2)$
$⇔3⁡sin(ξ12+ξ2)γj+sin(ξ12−ξ2)γj=0,$
(43)

where we used that ξj = lnbj > 0. In other words, zeroes of F are situated at the intersection points between the line (γξ1, γξ2) and the zero curve for L. Both the normal to the zero curve and the guide vector for the line belong to the first quadrant; hence, the intersection is never tangential. This implies, in particular, that all zeroes are simple. γ0 = 0 is always a solution since L(0, 0) = 0. All other zeroes γj indicate the distance between the intersection points and the origin measured along the line. It is clear that L(−x, −y) = −L(x, y) [which also follows from (15) and the fact that F = G in the current example], implying that the zeroes are symmetric with respect to the origin.

The summation formula (27) takes the form

$∑γjĥ(γj)=ξ1+2ξ2h(0)−∑n=(n1,n2)∈Z+2c(n1,2n2)(n1ξ1+2n2b2)h(n1ξ1+2n2ξ2)+h(−(n1ξ1+2n2ξ2)),$
(44)

where

• γj are solutions to the secular Eq. (43),

• c(n1, 2n2) are given by (42), and

• $h∈C0∞(R)$ is an arbitrary test function.

The difference between formula (44) and the general formula (27) is due to the fact that the stable polynomials just depend on $z22$.

Both series on the left- and right-hand sides are infinite, but they have different properties depending on whether ξ1 and ξ2 are rationally dependent or not. This is related to the number of intersection points on the torus. The number of zeroes j is also always infinite, and the number of intersection points on the torus may be finite. Indeed, if $ξ1ξ2∈Q$, then the line is periodic on the torus, implying that there are finitely many intersection points (on the torus). The points γj form a periodic sequence, implying that the obtained summation formula is just a finite sum of Poisson summation formulas with the same period and μ is a generalized Dirac comb.

Next, we assume that ξ1 and ξ2 are rationally independent,

$ξ1ξ2∉Q.$
(45)

By Kronecker’s theorem, the line covers the torus densely, and therefore, the intersection points (γjξ1, γjξ2) cover densely the zero curve of L as well. We are interested in the rational dependence of $γj,j∈Z.$ In particular, we shall need the following:

Lemma 1.
Ifξ1andξ2are rationally independent, then the secular Eq. (43),
$L(γξ1,γξ2)=0,$
has infinitely many rationally independent solutions, i.e.,
$dimQLQ{γj}j∈Z=∞,$
(46)
where$LQ$denotes the linear span with rational coefficients and$dimQ$denotes the dimension of the vector space with respect to the field$Q.$

Proof.
Assume that the dimension is finite. This means that there exists a certain MN such that every γj for arbitrary j can be written as a rational combination of γ1, …, γM,
$γj=a1jγ1+a2jγ2+⋯+aMjγM,amj∈Q.$
(47)
It follows that
$eiγjξα=eiγ1ξαa1jeiγ2ξαa2j×⋯×eiγMξαaMj,α=1,2,$
or, equivalently,
$bαiγj=bαik1a1jbαik2a2j×⋯×bαikMaMj.$
(48)
Consider the multiplicative subgroup Γ of $(C*)2$ generated by
$(b1ikm,b2ikm),m=1,2,…,M,$
with the multiplication carried out coordinatewise. Then, the points $(b1ikj,b2ikj)$ belong to the division group$Γ¯$ of Γ, that is,
$Γ¯=z∈(C*)2:zm∈Γfor some m≥1.$
In accordance with Lang’s conjecture,12 the intersection between any algebraic subvariety and the division group for a finitely generated subgroup is along finitely many subtori. The following theorem is proven in Ref. 13:

Theorem

(Ref. 13). Assume that

• Γ is a finitely generated subgroup of the multiplicative group of the complex torus$(C*)2,$

• $Γ¯$is the division group of Γ, and

• $V⊂(C*)2$is an algebraic subvariety given by the zero set of Laurent polynomials.

Then, the intersection ofVand$Γ¯$belongs to the union of finitely many translates of certain subtoriT1, …, Tνcontained inV,
$V∩Γ¯=V∩T1∪T2∪⋯∪Tν.$
(49)

Now, no line belongs to the zero set of L, so L contains no one-dimensional subtori, and hence, the intersection of the zero set (the curves plotted in Fig. 1) and the union of Tj in (49) is also finite being the intersection of V with finitely many zero-dimensional subtori. This contradicts the fact that the number of intersection points is infinite if ξ1 and ξ2 are rationally independent, which completes the proof.□

Our main result can be formulated as follows:

Theorem 2.

For$ξ1/ξ2∉Q$, the Fourier quasicrystal measureμcorresponding toPin (41) satisfies as follows:

• aλ = 1 forλ ∈ Λ, that is, μ is a positive “idempotent.”

• $dimQΛ=∞,dimQS=2,$in particular, μ is not a generalized Dirac comb.

• Λ meets any arithmetic progression in$R$in a finite number of points.

• Λ is a Delone set (that is, the minimal distance between elements of Λ is bounded below by a positive constant and Λ is relatively dense in$R$), whileSis not a Delone set.

• $|μ̂|$is not translation bounded.

Proof.

That μ is a Fourier quasicrystal follows from Theorem 1. Note, however, that the argument with c(n1, 2n2) being Fourier coefficients for log P on the torus is especially transparent, since P is real on $T2$ and log P has just logarithmic singularities on the smooth curve L(x, y) = 0 and, therefore, is absolutely integrable.

• All zeroes of the secular Eq. (43) have multiplicity one and form a discrete set; hence, by construction, aλ = 1 and μ is a positive idempotent discrete measure.

• Since $ξ1/ξ2∉Q$, Lemma 1 implies that $dimQΛP=∞$; hence, the support of μ is not contained in a finite union of translates of any lattice and μ is not a generalized Dirac comb. The spectrum SP—the support of $μ̂$—belongs to
$L+∪−L+∪{0},$
and its dimension is equal to 2.
• Assume that there exists a full arithmetic progression, say, γ*n, which intersects the support of μ at an infinite number of points. Consider the corresponding group generated by $(b1γ*,b2γ*).$ Its intersection with the algebraic subvariety P(z1, z2) = 0 [where P is given by (41)] is along finitely many subtori (Liardet’s theorem) as before. The zero set contains no one-dimensional subtori, and hence, the number of intersection points on the torus is finite. The number of intersection points between the arithmetic progression and the zero set can be infinite only if certain points occur several times, but this is impossible since $ξ1/ξ2∉Q.$ It follows that the intersection between any arithmetic progression and Λ is always finite. The same result could be proven using Lech’s theorem (lemma on p. 417 in Ref. 25).

• The zero set of L(x, y) is given by two non-intersecting curves on [0,2π]2, implying that there is a minimal distance ρ between the different components of the curve. Taking into account that the intersection between the line (ξ1γ, ξ2γ) and the zero curve of L(x, y) is non-tangential, we conclude that there is a minimal distance between the consecutive solutions γj of the secular Eq. (43). The function L(γξ1, γξ2) is given by a sum of two sinus functions with amplitudes 3 and 1 implying that every interval $[n2πξ12+ξ2,(n+1)2πξ12+ξ2]$ contains a solution to the secular equation. It follows that the support of μ is relatively dense and uniformly discrete, i.e., it is a Delone set. The spectrum SP is not a Delone set, since the measure μ would be a generalized Dirac comb.6

• Similarly, $|μ̂|$ is not translation bounded, since this would contradict Meyer’s theorem stating that every crystalline measure with aλ from a finite set (aλ = 1 in our case) and $|μ̂|$ translation bounded is a generalized Dirac comb (see Sec I and Ref. 7).□

Remarks to Theorem 2:

• Properties (ii) and (iii) show that the measures μ in the theorem are far from being generalized Dirac combs.

• In Theorem 5.16 of Ref. 26, a positive measure μ of the type in (1) is constructed for which Λ is discrete but for which S need not be (called there a Poisson measure). In fact, these Λ’s can be realized as the intersection of the graph of a periodic continuous function on the two tori with an irrational line and as such are of a similar shape to our μ’s.

The measures μ in Theorem 2 provide examples answering the following questions concerning crystalline measures:

• The last question in Ref. 2:

a positive crystalline measure which is not a generalized Dirac comb;

• Part 3 of question 11.2 in Ref. 3:

a positive Fourier quasicrystal for which every arithmetic progression meets the support in a finite set;

• The question on p. 3158 of Ref. 2 and part 2 of question 11.2 in Ref. 3:

a Fourier quasicrystal for which the support (that is Λ) is a Delone set, but the spectrum (that is S) is not;

• Problem 4.4 in Ref. 27:

a discrete set (that is Λ) which is a Bohr almost periodic Delone set, but is not an ideal crystal.

In our forthcoming paper,1 we use higher dimensional quantitative theorems from Diophantine analysis28–31 to show that general crystalline μ constructed in Sec. II using a stable pair P, Q with parameters b1, …, bn, satisfies the following:

Theorem 3.

For such aμ, we have that

• Λ = L1L2 ⊔ ⋯ ⊔ LνN, withL1, …, Lνfull arithmetic progressions andNif not empty is infinite dimensional over$Q$(the unionmeans counted with multiplicities).

• aλtake values in a finite set of positive integers;μis a positive Fourier quasicrystal.

• $dimQS=dimQξ1,…,ξn.$

• There isc = c(P) < such that any arithmetic progression in$R+$meetsNin at mostc(P) points.

Remarks to Theorem 3:

• Theorem 3 allows us to make μ’s for which $dimQS$ is as large as we wish however, in as much as any positive crystalline measure is (measure) almost periodic, it follows from Lemma 5 of Ref. 2 that S ∩ (0, ) or S ∩ (−, 0) cannot be linearly independent over $Q.$

The authors would like to thank Boris Shapiro for initiating our collaboration, Yves Meyer for attracting our attention to crystalline measures and pointing us to his paper,26 Alexei Poltoratskii for pointing out the importance of positive crystalline measures, and Nir Lev and Alexander Olevskii for their comments.

This paper is written in memory of our brilliant colleague Jean Bourgain.

1.
P.
Kurasov
and
P.
Sarnak
, “
The additive structure of the spectrum of a Laplacian on a metric graph
” (unpublished) (
2020
).
2.
Y. F.
Meyer
, “
Measures with locally finite support and spectrum
,”
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
113
(
12
),
3152
3158
(
2016
).
3.
N.
Lev
and
A.
Olevskii
, “
Fourier quasicrystals and discreteness of the diffraction spectrum
,”
Adv. Math.
315
,
1
26
(
2017
).
4.
A. P.
Guinand
, “
Concordance and the harmonic analysis of sequences
,”
Acta Math.
101
,
235
271
(
1959
).
5.
A.
Córdoba
, “
La formule sommatoire de Poisson
,”
C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Sér. I Math.
306
(
8
),
373
376
(
1988
) (in French, with English summary).
6.
N.
Lev
and
A.
Olevskii
, “
Quasicrystals and Poisson’s summation formula
,”
Invent. Math.
200
(
2
),
585
606
(
2015
).
7.
Y.
Meyer
,
Nombres de Pisot, Nombres de Salem et Analyse Harmonique: Cours Peccot donné au Collège de France en Avril-mai 1969
, Lecture Notes in Mathematics Vol. 117 (
Springer-Verlag
,
Berlin, NY
,
1970
) (in French).
8.
M. N.
Kolountzakis
, “
Fourier pairs of discrete support with little structure
,”
J. Fourier Anal. Appl.
22
(
1
),
1
5
(
2016
).
9.
N.
Lev
and
A.
Olevskii
, “
Quasicrystals with discrete support and spectrum
,”
Rev. Mat. Iberoam.
32
(
4
),
1341
1352
(
2016
).
10.
D.
Radchenko
and
M.
Viazovska
, “
Fourier interpolation on the real line
,”
Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes Études Sci.
129
,
51
81
(
2019
).
11.
F. J.
Dyson
,
Birds and Frogs
, Notices of the American Mathematical Society Vol. 56 (
American Mathematical Society
,
2009
), Issue 2, pp.
212
223
.
12.
S.
Lang
, “
Report on diophantine approximations
,”
Bull. Soc. Math. France
93
,
177
192
(
1965
).
13.
P.
Liardet
, “
Sur une conjecture de Serge Lang
,” in
Journées Arithmétiques de Bordeaux
, Society for Mathematics France, Paris, 1975 (
Conference, University Bordeaux
,
Bordeaux
,
1974
), pp.
187
210
, astérisque, Nos. 24-25 (in French).
14.
J.
Borcea
and
P.
Brändén
, “
The Lee-Yang and Pólya-Schur programs. I. Linear operators preserving stability
,”
Invent. Math.
177
(
3
),
541
569
(
2009
).
15.
D. G.
Wagner
, “
Multivariate stable polynomials: Theory and applications
,”
Bull. Am. Math. Soc.
48
(
1
),
53
84
(
2011
).
16.
F.
Barra
and
P.
Gaspard
, “
On the level spacing distribution in quantum graphs
,”
J. Stat. Phys.
101
(
1-2
),
283
319
(
2000
), special issue on: Dedicated to Grégoire Nicolis on the Occasion of His Sixtieth Birthday (Brussels, 1999).
17.
Y.
Colin de Verdière
, “
Semi-classical measures on quantum graphs and the Gaußmap of the determinant manifold
,”
Ann. Henri Poincaré
16
(
2
),
347
364
(
2015
).
18.
B.
Gutkin
and
U.
Smilansky
, “
Can one hear the shape of a graph?
,”
J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.
34
(
31
),
6061
6068
(
2001
).
19.
T.
Kottos
and
U.
Smilansky
, “
Periodic orbit theory and spectral statistics for quantum graphs
,”
Ann. Phys.
274
(
1
),
76
124
(
1999
).
20.
P.
Kurasov
, “
Schrödinger operators on graphs and geometry. I. Essentially bounded potentials
,”
J. Funct. Anal.
254
(
4
),
934
953
(
2008
).
21.
P.
Kurasov
, “
Graph Laplacians and topology
,”
Ark. Mat.
46
(
1
),
95
111
(
2008
).
22.
D.
Ruelle
,
Thermodynamic Formalism: The mathematical Structures of Classical Equilibrium Statistical Mechanics
, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications Vol. 5 (
Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.
,
Reading, MA
,
1978
), with a foreword by Giovanni Gallavotti and Gian-Carlo Rota.
23.
T. D.
Lee
and
C. N.
Yang
, “
Statistical theory of equations of state and phase transitions. II. Lattice gas and Ising model
,”
Phys. Rev.
87
(
2
),
410
419
(
1952
).
24.
S. Yu.
Favorov
, “
Large Fourier quasicrystals and Wiener’s theorem
,”
J. Fourier Anal. Appl.
25
(
2
),
377
392
(
2019
).
25.
C.
Lech
, “
A note on recurring series
,”
Ark. Mat.
2
,
417
421
(
1953
).
26.
Y. F.
Meyer
, “
Global and local estimates on trigonometric sums
,”
Trans. R. Norw. Soc. Sci. Lett.
2
,
1
25
(
2018
).
27.
J. C.
Lagarias
, “
Mathematical quasicrystals and the problem of diffraction
,” in
Directions in Mathematical Quasicrystals
, CRM Monograph Series Vol. 13 (
American Mathematical Society
,
Providence, RI
,
2000
), pp.
61
93
.
28.
J.-H.
Evertse
, “
Points on subvarieties of tori
,” in
A Panorama of Number Theory or the View from Baker’s Garden
(
Zürich; Cambridge University Press
,
Cambridge
,
1999; 2002
), pp.
214
230
.
29.
J.-H.
Evertse
,
H. P.
Schlickewei
, and
W. M.
Schmidt
, “
Linear equations in variables which lie in a multiplicative group
,”
Ann. Math.
155
(
3
),
807
836
(
2002
).
30.
M.
Laurent
, “
Équations diophantiennes exponentielles
,”
Invent. Math.
78
(
2
),
299
327
(
1984
).
31.
W. M.
Schmidt
, “
The zero multiplicity of linear recurrence sequences
,”
Acta Math.
182
(
2
),
243
282
(
1999
).