On the spectrality of a class of Moran measures

The desired result comes directly from Proposition 3.6 and Proposition 3.7.

For all n\geq 1, let

and

For any \xi\in\mathbb{R}, it follows from (?) that

Hence, \left|\hat{\mu}_{\{\theta_np_n\},\{\mathcal{D}_n+\gamma_n\}}\left(\xi\right)\right|=\left|\hat{\mu}_{\{p_n\},\{\mathcal{D}_n\}}\left(\xi\right)\right| and the conclusion follows directly from Lemma 2.6 (ii).

When the pair \{\mathcal{P},\mathcal{D}\} satisfy \textbf{(T1)-(T3)}, from [AH, Proposition 1.2], [LDZ, Lemma 4.2] and [WX, Proposition 2.2], it is easy to obtain that there exist a sequence of integer subsets \{L_n\}_{n=1}^{\infty}\subseteq\mathbb{Z} such that \{(p_n,\mathcal{D}_n,L_n)\} are Hadamard triples, so we omit the details.

Firstly, when \Phi(n)=N_n, a simple calculation gives that

Using the facts that \left|\sin x\right|\leq \left|x\right| and \left|\frac{\sin x}{x}\right|\geq 1-\frac{x^{2}}{6} for x\in\mathbb{R}\setminus\{0\}, we have

In addition, \left|\hat{\delta}_{{P^{-1}_{n}}\{0,1, \ldots, N_{n}-1\}}(0)\right|=1, i.e., (Proof) still holds at x=0.

Secondly, for the Fourier transform of measure \delta_{P_{n}^{-1}\{0,d_n\}}, we have

Then it follows from the inequality \cos(x)\geq 1-\frac{1}{2}x^{2} that

Finally, when \Phi(n)=3, a straightforward deduction yields the following conclusion:

On the other hand, we give another form of \left|\hat{\delta}_{P_{n}^{-1}\{0,a_{n},b_n\}}(x)\right|, that is

By a simple calculation, we have

Let \partial_{x}f(x,y)=0,\partial_{y}f(x,y)=0, we obtain the zeros of \partial_{x}f(x,y), \partial_{y}f(x,y) satisfying the following system of equations:

(1) \left\{\begin{array}{l}y= \pm \frac{\pi}{2} \\ x= \pm \frac{\pi}{2}\end{array}\right. (2) \left\{\begin{array}{l}y= \pm \frac{\pi}{2} \\ x-2 y=0, \pm \pi, \pm 2 \pi\end{array}\right.

(3) \left\{\begin{array}{l}2 x-y=0, \pm \pi, \pm 2 \pi \\ x= \pm \frac{\pi}{2}\end{array}\right. (4) \left\{\begin{array}{l}2 x-y=0, \pm \pi, \pm 2 \pi \\ x-2 y=0, \pm \pi, \pm 2 \pi\end{array}\right..

Next, we consider the second-order partial derivatives of f and obtain that

Substituting the solutions of the system of equations (1),(2),(3),(4) into (Proof) and combining the discriminatory conditions for the minimal value of a binary function, we find that there are only 8 minimal value points of f(x,y) in the area \Delta:

A regular calculation implies that f has the global minimal value -\frac{1}{8}. Hence, taking the distribution of the minimal value points of f and the assumptions together, we obtain that \inf\limits_{n\geq 1}\{1+8f(x_{n},y_{n})\}>0.

Recall that

For convenience, we set \mathcal{F}_{i}=\Big\{0,\frac{\sigma_{i}}{2^{1+l_{i}}}\Big\}, \mathcal{G}_{m}=\bigg\{\frac{-\lfloor\frac{N_{m}}{2}\rfloor}{N_{m}},\ldots,-\frac{1}{N_m},0,\frac{1}{N_m},\ldots,\frac{N_m-1-\lfloor\frac{N_m}{2}\rfloor}{N_{m}}\bigg\} and \mathcal{M}_{j}=\Big\{0,\frac{1}{3},-\frac{1}{3}\Big\} for 1\leq i,j,m\leq n. Without loss of generality, we assume that \Phi(1)=\Phi(2)=\cdots=\Phi(k_{1})=2, \Phi(k_{1}+1)=\cdots=\Phi(k_{2})=3 and \Phi(k_{2}+1)=N_{k_{2}+1},\cdots,\Phi(n)=N_{n} for k_{1},k_{2}\leq n. Then, for any \lambda\neq\lambda^{\prime}\in\Lambda_{n}^{\sigma,\sigma^{\prime}}, we have

and

where f_{i},f^{\prime}_{i}\in\mathcal{F}_{i}, m_{j}, m^{\prime}_{j}\in\mathcal{M}_{j}, g_{m}, g^{\prime}_{m}\in\mathcal{G}_{m}. Let k be the first index such that f_{k}\neq f^{\prime}_{k}, then

It is easy to see that f_{k}, f^{\prime}_{k} and f_{k}-f^{\prime}_{k} belong to \mathcal{Z}\left(m_{\mathcal{D}_{k}}\right)\left(\mathcal{D}_{k}=\{0,d_{k}\}\right). Noting that 2\mid \frac{p_{n}}{\gcd{(d_{n},p_{n})}} and \Phi(n)\mid p_{n}, we have

Therefore, \lambda-\lambda^{\prime}\in P_{k}\left(\mathcal{Z}\left(m_{\mathcal{D}_{k}}\right)+\mathbb{Z}\right)=P_{k}\left(\mathcal{Z}\left(m_{\mathcal{D}_{k}}\right)\right)=\mathcal{Z}\left(\hat{\delta}_{P^{-1}_{k}\mathcal{D}_{k}}\right)\subset\mathcal{Z}\left(\hat{\mu}_{n}\right). The above result implies that \Lambda_{n}^{\sigma,\alpha} is an orthogonal set of \mu_{n}. Since the dimension of L^{2}(\mu_{n}) is equivalent to the cardinality of the set \Lambda_{n}^{\sigma,\alpha}, we conclude that \Lambda_{n}^{\sigma,\alpha} is a spectrum of \mu_{n}.

Next, we prove that \Lambda^{\sigma,\alpha} is an orthogonal set of \mu_{\mathcal{P},\mathcal{D}}. Fix \sigma\in\{-1,1\}^{\mathbb{N}} and \alpha\in\mathbb{D}_{n}. Since 0\in\Lambda^{\sigma,\alpha}_{n} for all n, we have the following inclusion relation

For \lambda\neq \lambda^{\prime}\in\Lambda^{\sigma,\alpha}, there exists an integer n such that \lambda,\lambda^{\prime}\in\Lambda^{\sigma,\alpha}_{n}. As \Lambda^{\sigma,\alpha}_{n} is a spectrum of \mu_{n}, we have \hat{\mu}_{n}\left(\lambda-\lambda^{\prime}\right)=0. According to the fact that \mu_{\mathcal{P},\mathcal{D}}=\mu_{n}*\mu_{>n}, we obtain

Thus \Lambda^{\sigma,\alpha} is an orthogonal set of \mu_{\mathcal{P},\mathcal{D}}.

By definition,

Let |\xi|<1 and \lambda\in\Lambda_{n_{k}}^{\sigma,\alpha} for all \sigma\in\{-1,1\}^{N^{*}}. Now we estimate the lower bound of \left|\hat{\delta}_{P^{-1}_{i}\{0,d_{i}\}}\left(\xi+\lambda\right)\right|, \left|\hat{\delta}_{P^{-1}_{j}\{0,a_{j},b_{j}\}}\left(\xi+\lambda\right)\right| and \left|\hat{\delta}_{P^{-1}_{m}\{0,1,\ldots,N_{m}-1\}}\left(\xi+\lambda\right)\right| respectively for all \Phi(i)=2, \Phi(j)=3, \Phi(m)=N_{m}, i,j,m\geq n_{k}+2.

We first pay attention to \left|\hat{\delta}_{P^{-1}_{j}\{0,a_{j},b_{j}\}}\left(\xi+\lambda\right)\right|, j\geq n_{k}+2. By Proposition 2.7 (iii) and the assumption \Phi(n_{k}+1)\geq 3, clearly,

From Lemma 2.5 (iii), we see that

where the first two inequalities come from \frac{\left|a_{j}\pm b_{j}\right|}{P_{j}}\left|\xi+\lambda\right|<\frac{1}{2} and \cos(x)\geq 1-\frac{1}{2}x^{2}. Together with (Proof) and (Proof), one has

Now we deal with \left|\hat{\delta}_{P^{-1}_{i}\{0,d_{i}\}}\left(\xi+\lambda\right)\right|, i\geq n_{k}+2 and \Phi(i)=2. Similarly, according to Proposition 2.7 (ii),

thus from Lemma 2.5 (ii), we know that

Finally, continue the similar procedure to \left|\hat{\delta}_{P^{-1}_{m}\{0,1,\ldots,N_{m}-1\}}\left(\xi+\lambda\right)\right|, m\geq n_{k}+2 and \Phi(m)=N_{m}. It follows from the assumption and Proposition 2.7 (i) that

combining (Proof) and Lemma 2.5 (i), we obtain that

Based on the above discussion, we conclude that

where C_{0}=\prod\limits_{\Phi(i)=2~\text{or}~3~\text{or}~N_{i}\atop i\geq n_{k}+2}\left(1-\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{43\pi}{96\cdot 2^{i-9}}\right)^{2}\right)\in(0,1) is a constant which is independent of n_{k}. The proof is complete.

Let \omega_{1}=\pi\frac{a_{n_{k}+1}\left(\xi+\lambda\right)}{P_{n_{k}+1}}, \omega_{2}=\pi\frac{b_{n_{k}+1}\left(\xi+\lambda\right)}{P_{n_{k}+1}}. By (Proof), we obtain

where f(\omega_{1},\omega_{2})=\cos\left(\omega_{1}\right)\cos\left(\omega_{2}\right)\cos\left(\omega_{1}-\omega_{2}\right). From the assumption, there exist \varlimsup\limits_{k\rightarrow\infty}\frac{b_{n_{k}+1}}{p_{n_{k}+1}}<l<\frac{2}{3} and an integer K:=K(l)>0 such that \frac{b_{n_{k}+1}}{p_{n_{k}+1}}\leq l for all k\geq K. It follows from Proposition 2.7 that

for all \left|\xi\right|<1 and \lambda\in\Lambda_{n_k}^{\sigma,\alpha}.

Since p_n>1, we have

On the other hand, for any l<l^{'}<\frac{2}{3}, there exists K':=K^{'}(l^{'})>K such that for any k>K^{'}, \left(1+\frac{1}{2^{n_k}}\right)l<l^{'}. Hence,

Due to 0<a_n<b_n for all n\geq 1, it follows that \left|\omega_1\right|<\frac{2\pi}{3} for any k>K^{'} as well. Denote \epsilon=\min\bigg\{\frac{1}{9}\left(1+8f\left(\omega_{1},\omega_{2}\right)\right):\left|\omega_{1}\right|\leq l^{'}\pi,\left|\omega_{2}\right|\leq l^{'}\pi\bigg\}, by lemma 2.6, it is easy to see \epsilon>0 and we have

A direct application of Proposition 2.7 gives that

By Lemma 2.5 (i), we have

The proof is complete.

We choose a subsequence \{n_{k}\}_{k=1}^{\infty} satisfying

1. n_{k}\geq 7,

2. \Phi(n_{k}+1)\geq 3 for all k\in\mathbb{N}.

Due to the assumption \#\{n:\Phi(n)\geq 3,n\geq 1\}=+\infty, the subsequence \{n_{k}\}_{k=1}^{\infty} indeed exists. Obviously, it satisfies the conditions of Proposition 3.3, so there exists \epsilon>0 such that

for all \lambda\in\Lambda^{\sigma,\alpha}_{n_{k}} and \left|\xi\right|<1. On the other hand, it follows from the assumptions and Lemmas 3.4-3.5 that there exists \epsilon^{'} such that

for all \lambda\in\Lambda^{\sigma,\alpha}_{n_{k}} and \left|\xi\right|<1. Hence, we obtain

Finally, it follows from Lemma 3.2 that the spectrality conclusion holds. The proof is complete.

Since \#\{n:\Phi(n)\geq 3,n\geq 1\}<+\infty, we conclude that there only exist finitely many \mathcal{D}_{n} with \#\mathcal{D}_{n}\geq 3 in \mu_{\mathcal{P},\mathcal{D}}. So there exists N>0 such that \Phi(n)=2, i.e. \mathcal{D}_{n}=\{0,d_{n}\} for all n>N. In this way, \mu_{\mathcal{P},\mathcal{D}} can be rewritten as

where

and

Let

where \sigma_{i}\in\{-1,1\} and l_{i},\alpha_{m} is defined by (?). According to Lemma 3.1, we know that \Lambda_{N} is a spectrum of \mu_{N}. On the other hand, it follows from Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 1.3 of [HH] that \nu is a spectral measure with integer spectrum \Lambda^{'}(associated with \sigma). Define a new \tilde{\Lambda} by

Now we are in a position to prove that \tilde{\Lambda} is a spectrum of \mu_{\mathcal{P},\mathcal{D}}. By Lemma 2.1, it is equivalent to show that for all \xi\in\mathbb{R}, Q(\xi)=\sum_{\substack{\tilde{\lambda}\in\tilde{\Lambda}}}\left|\hat{\mu}_{\mathcal{P},\mathcal{D}}(\tilde{\lambda}+\xi)\right|^{2}=1. In fact,

From the above discussion, the conclusion can be reached that \mu_{\mathcal{P},\mathcal{D}} is a spectral measure with spectrum \tilde{\Lambda}. The proof is complete.

From Theorem 1.1, we know \mu_{\mathcal{P},\mathcal{D}} is a spectral one with spectrum \Lambda\subset\mathbb{Z}. When the pair \{\mathcal{P},\mathcal{D}\} satisfies \textbf{(T2)} and \textbf{(T3)}, Lemma 2.4 tells us that there exist \{L_n\}_{n=1}^{\infty}\subseteq\mathbb{Z} such that \{(p_n,\mathcal{D}_n,L_n)\} is a sequence of Hadamard triples. The assumption \Phi(n)=p_n for all n\geq 1 ensures that \mu_{\mathcal{P},\mathcal{D}} is an absolutely continuous measure by Theorem 5.3 and Theorem 5.7 of [LLZ]. From (?), a simple calculation gives

hence we obtain that \Lambda=\mathbb{Z} and it follows from [DL1] and Theorem 2.2 of [Lw2] that \mu_{\mathcal{P},\mathcal{D}}=\chi_{T}dx, where \chi_{T} is a characteristic function on T (support set of \mu_{\mathcal{P},\mathcal{D}}). Finally, by Theorem 2.1 of [Lw2], we can conclude that T is a fundamental domain of lattice \mathbb{Z}, i.e., T\oplus\mathbb{Z}=\mathbb{R} (a fundamental domain of a lattice L is a set \mathcal{D} such that \underset{l\in L}\cup (\mathcal{D}+l) tiles \mathbb{R}^{n} almost everywhere).