APERIODIC ORDER AND SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION, II:
THE SHADOW TRANSFORM AND THE DIFFRACTION FORMULA

arXiv:1704.00302v1 [math.DS] 2 Apr 2017

MICHAEL BJÖRKLUND, TOBIAS HARTNICK, AND FELIX POGORZELSKI
A BSTRACT. We introduce and study model sets in commutative spaces, i.e. homogeneous
spaces of the form G/K where G is a (typically non-abelian) locally compact group and K is a
compact subgroup such that (G, K) is a Gelfand pair. Examples include model sets in hyperbolic spaces, Riemannian symmetric spaces, regular trees and generalized Heisenberg groups.
Continuing our work from [6] we associate with every regular model set in G/K a Radon measure on K\G/K called its spherical auto-correlation. We then define the spherical diffraction of
the regular model set as the spherical Fourier transform of its spherical auto-correlation in the
sense of Gelfand pairs. The main result of this article ensures that the spherical diffraction of a
uniform regular model set in a commutative space is pure point. In fact, we provide an explicit
formula for the spherical diffraction of such a model set in terms of the automorphic spectrum
of the underlying lattice and the underlying window. To describe the coefficients appearing in
this formula, we introduce a new type of integral transform for functions on the internal space
of the model set. This integral transform can be seen as a shadow of the spherical Fourier transform of physical space in internal space and is hence referred to as the shadow transform of the
model set. To illustrate our results we work out explicitly several examples, including the case
of model sets in the Heisenberg group.

1. I NTRODUCTION
1.1. Background and overview
This article is a continuation of [6], in which we introduced model sets in (typically nonabelian) locally compact second countable (lcsc) groups G and developed a theory of autocorrelation for such model sets. Here, we consider model sets in homogeneous spaces of the
form X = G/K, where G is a lcsc group and K < G is a compact subgroup. The theory of
auto-correlation for such model sets can be developed in close analogy with the group case,
leading to a notion of auto-correlation measure, which is a linear functional on the convolution algebra H(G, K) of bi-K-invariant compactly supported continuous functions on G.
Of particular interest is the case where H(G, K) is a commutative algebra under convolution. In this case, the pair (G, K) is called a Gelfand pair, and the homogeneous space
X = G/K is called a commutative space (see e.g. [33, 11, 12, 15]). Typical examples of commutative spaces include (real, complex or quaternion) hyperbolic spaces of arbitrary dimension,
and more generally Riemannian symmetric spaces of non-compact type, but also (vertex sets of)
regular trees. Connected commutative spaces associated with amenable lcsc groups are closely
related to nilmanifold pairs, a typical example being given by the Heisenberg group and its
higher-dimensional counterparts. All of the commutative spaces listed above admit model
sets, and there is a well-developed Fourier theory for commutative space, which allows one in
particular to associate with every positive-definite continuous linear functional on H(G, K)
its spherical Fourier transform, which is a Radon measure on a certain “dual” locally compact
space formed by positive-definite spherical functions.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary: 52C23; Secondary: 22D40, 22E40, 37A45.
1

2

MICHAEL BJÖRKLUND, TOBIAS HARTNICK, AND FELIX POGORZELSKI

In the classical case where G is abelian and K is the trivial group, the Fourier transform
of the auto-correlation measure of a model set in X = G admits a physical interpretation as
the diffraction measure of the underlying model set, and the study of this measure is the main
subject of the diffraction theory of model sets as developed further e.g. in [13, 22, 26, 23, 31,
30, 3, 2]. Yves Meyer [25] showed that the diffraction measure of a regular model set is a pure
point measure, an observation which is related to the appearance of sharp Bragg peaks in
the diffraction picture. In fact, Meyer’s diffraction formula describes the diffraction measure
completely in terms of the automorphic spectrum of the underlying lattice and the Fourier
transform of the underlying window with respect to the internal variables of the model set.
If (G, K) is a Gelfand pair, then we can define the spherical diffraction of a regular model set
in the commutative space X = G/K as the spherical Fourier transform of its auto-correlation
measure. Unlike the classical case, this is no longer a Radon measure on a topological group,
but rather a Radon measure on the dual of the commutative space X (i.e. the space of
positive-definite spherical functions of the pair (G, K)). Despite this difference, it is natural to ask in which generality spherical diffraction is pure point. One may also ask whether
there is a general spherical diffraction formula for model sets in commutative spaces, which
would specialize to Meyer’s formula in the classical case.
It turns out that the answer to these questions depends crucially on whether the regular
model set under consideration is uniform or non-uniform. (Recall that the existence of nonuniform model sets is a non-abelian phenomenon with no counterpart in the classical theory.)
In the present article, we focus on the diffraction theory of uniform regular model sets. We
show that the spherical diffraction of a uniform regular model set is a pure point Radon measure. We also provide a general formula for this diffraction measure, and work out several
special cases in some detail.
As in the classical case, the support of the diffraction measure is closely related to the
automorphic spectrum of the underlying lattice, whereas the coefficients are related to the
underlying window. However, there is no longer a notion of Fourier transform for the internal space of the model set, and thus the computation of these coefficients requires a new type
of integral transform for functions on internal space. This integral transform can be seen as a
“shadow” of the spherical Fourier transform on physical space, transported to internal space
by means of the underlying lattice; we thus refer to it as the shadow transform. If G is totallydisconnected and K a compact open subgroup, the shadow transform reduces essentially to a
version of the Hecke-correspondence, whereas in the classical case, it is related to the Fourier
transform of the internal space. In accordance with this case, the coefficients in the spherical diffraction formula are in general given by the shadow transform of the (characteristic
function of the) underlying window.
Although we do not develop the spherical diffraction theory of non-uniform model sets
in the present article, we would like to mention that our proof of the diffraction formula can
in principle be generalized to this case. The main difference is that in the non-uniform case
the automorphic spectrum of the underlying lattice is non-discrete, and thus the spherical
diffraction measure will no longer be pure point. Defining the shadow transform and deriving the diffraction formula in the case of continuous spectrum requires some care, and is
beyond the scope of the present article. Still we would like to emphasize that the phenomenon of pure point diffraction, which was the main motivation to study model sets as models
for quasi-crystals, is directly connected to uniformity of the underlying lattice and is not at
all a general phenomenon in model sets beyond the abelian case.
We now describe the results of this article in more details.

APERIODIC ORDER AND SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION

3

1.2. Model sets in commutative spaces and their spherical auto-correlation
Let G be a lcsc group and K < G a compact subgroup. We equip X := G/K with the
quotient topology with respect to the canonical quotient map π : G → G/K and refer to the
image of a (regular, uniform) model set1 in G under π as a (regular, uniform) model set in X.
The space C(X) of closed subsets of X is a compact metrizable G-space with respect to the
Chabauty-Fell topology, and we define the hull of a model set in X as the corresponding orbit
closure. In analogy with the group case [6, Thm. 1.1], we establish the following result in
Corollary 2.13:
Proposition 1.1 (Punctured hulls of regular model sets). Let P be a regular model set in G/K
with hull YP . Then YP× = YP \ {∅} admits a unique G-invariant probability measure ν, which is
also the unique µ-stationary measure for any admissible probability measure µ on G. Moreover, if P
is uniform, then YP = YP× is a compact minimal G-space.
This allows us to define the auto-correlation of P in terms of the measure ν as follows:
Given f ∈ Cc (G/K) we denote by Pf : YP → R the periodization of f as given by
X
Pf (Q) :=
f (x).
x∈Q

(2)

Then there is a unique linear functional ην on Cc ((G/K)2 ), called the second correlation of ν
such that
Z
ην(2) (f1 ⊗ f2 ) =

YP

Pf1 · P f2 dν

(f1 , f2 ∈ Cc (G/K)).

This linear functional is G-invariant and thus descends to a positive-definite continuous linear functional ηP on Cc (K\G/K) ∼
= Cc (G\(G/K)2 ), which we refer to as the spherical autocorrelation of the regular model set P .
If (G, K) is moreover a Gelfand pair, then the corresponding spherical Fourier transform
associates with ηP a Radon measure ηbP on the space S + (G, K) of positive-definite spherical
functions of this Gelfand pair (see Lemma 3.9). We then refer to ηbP as the spherical diffraction
measure of P .
1.3. Approximation of the spherical auto-correlation for Gelfand pairs
As in the group case, one is interested in approximation formulas for the spherical autocorrelation. If one assumes again that (G, K) is a Gelfand pair, then the existence of such
approximation formulas can be established under very general conditions, using spectral
methods. To state the general result, let (Ft ) be a sequence of K-invariant compact subsets
of G/K of positive Haar measure, and let (βt ) be the associated sequence of probability measures on G defined by
Z
1
ρ(s) dmG (s), for ρ ∈ Cc (G).
βt (ρ) =
mG (Ft ) Ft
We call (Ft ) a good approximation sequence for the model set P if it is weakly admissible in
the sense of [6, Def. 5.1] (which is a very mild regularity condition) and for every positivedefinite spherical function ω 6= 1 in the automorphic spectrum of the underlying lattice we
have limt→∞ βbt (ω) = 0. In Theorem A.2 we establish the following approximation result:
1We remind the reader that (regular, uniform) model sets in G were defined in [6, Def. 2.6]. In the sequel we

assume that the reader is familiar with the basic terminology and main results from [6].

4

MICHAEL BJÖRKLUND, TOBIAS HARTNICK, AND FELIX POGORZELSKI

Theorem 1.2 (Approximation of the spherical auto-correlation of a model set). Let P ⊂ G/K
be a regular model set and let (Ft ) be a good approximation sequence for P . Then the spherical autocorrelation ηP ∈ R(K\G/K) is given by
X X
1
f (x−1 y) (f ∈ Cc (K\G/K)).
ηP (f ) = lim
t→∞ mG (Ft )
x∈P0 ∩Ft y∈P0

There are plenty of examples of good approximation sequences. In the amenable case,
every weakly admissible Følner sequence is a good approximation sequence. In the nonamenable case, the spectral condition can be more subtle. On the one hand, if G is a semisimple Lie group with maximal compact subgroup K, then the spectral condition holds automatically by the Howe–Moore theorem, hence every weakly admissible sequence is a good
approximation sequence. On the other hand, for general non-amenable groups the spectral
condition can fail in quite dramatic ways. To illustrate this, consider a regular tree T of even
valency ≥ 30. As explained in Subsection A.4, one can construct a model set P0 in T using
simple lattices in products of trees as constructed by Burger and Mozes [7, 8]. A weakly admissible family (Fn )n∈N of subsets of T is given by balls of radius n ∈ N around some fixed
origin. In Proposition A.12 we establish:
Proposition 1.3 (Balls are bad approximation sequences in trees). The sequence (Fn )n∈N is not
a good approximation sequence, and there exists a compactly supported radial function f ∈ Cc (T )
such that the sequence
X X
1
f (x−1 y)
mG (Fn )
x∈P0 ∩Fn y∈P0

does not converge.
On the other hand it is an immediate consequence of the work of Lubotzky and Mozes [24]
that the subsequence (F2n )n∈N of balls of even radius is a good approximation sequence. In
fact, the failure of the spectral condition is caused by the presence of a sign character in the
automorphic spectrum of Burger–Mozes lattices. This can be seen as a variant of the NevoStein phenomenon [28], which has no counterpart in the classical theory of abelian model
sets.
1.4. The shadow transform associated with a uniform cut-and-project scheme
We now turn towards the spherical diffraction formula for uniform regular model sets in
commutative spaces. Compared with the classical case, the main new ingredient is the socalled shadow transform. To define this transform, let (G, H, Γ) be a cut-and-project scheme in
the sense of [6, Def. 2.3], and let K < G be a compact subgroup such that (G, K) is a Gelfand
pair. Denote by S + (G, K) the space of positive-definite spherical functions associated with
(G, K). If Γ < G × H is uniform, then there exists a countable subset ΩΓ ⊂ S + (G, K) such
that L2 ((G × H)/Γ)K decomposes over the Hecke algebra H(G, K) := Cc (K\G/K) as
M
[
L2 ((G × H)/Γ)K
L2 ((G × H)/Γ)K =
ω,
ω∈ΩΓ

where L2 ((G× H)/Γ)K
ω is the corresponding weight space of weight ω, and where we assume
that L2 ((G × H)/Γ)K
ω 6= {0} for all ΩΓ . Under this assumption, ΩΓ is uniquely determined
and called the spherical automorphic spectrum of Γ with respect to (G, K).
In the above setting, the shadow transform associated with every function r ∈ Cc (H) a
function Sr : ΩΓ → R. The following characterization is established in Corollary 4.8. Here,

APERIODIC ORDER AND SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION

5

given a function F ∈ Cc (G × H) we denote by PΓ F ∈ Cc ((G × H)/Γ) its periodization over
the uniform lattice Γ.
Theorem 1.4. There exists a unique map S : Cc (H) → Map(ΩΓ , R≥0 ) such that for all r ∈ Cc (H)
and d f ∈ H(G, K),
X
1
kPΓ (f ⊗ r)k22 =
Sr(ω) · |fˆ(ω)|2 .
covol(Γ)2
ω∈ΩΓ

It turns out that the shadow transform extends continuously to a certain exponentially
weighted L2 -space (with weight depending on Γ). This allows one to extend the shadow
transform to all compactly supported bounded measurable functions. In particular, if W ⊂
H is a compact subset, the the shadow transform of its characteristic function χW is welldefined.
Since the understanding of the shadow transform is key to the understanding of the spherical diffraction formula, we provide several explicit computations of shadow transforms in
Section 5. Several instances of the shadow transform have been studied before in the literature: When K is trivial and G and H are abelian, then the shadow transform is closely
related to the Fourier transform of H. On the other hand, if G is totally-disconnected and K
is a compact-open subgroup, then the shadow transform is closely related to the associated
Hecke correspondence (see Subsection 5.6). In these cases, the kernel of the shadow transform
is always trivial, but we do not know whether this holds in general. Note that r ∈ Cc (H) lies
in the kernel of the shadow transform if and only if the periodization of f ⊗ r over Γ vanishes
for every f ∈ H(G, K).
1.5. The spherical diffraction formula for a uniform regular model set
We now come to the main result of this article, the spherical diffraction formula. As in the
previous subsection we assume that (G, H, Γ) is a uniform cut-and-project scheme, and that
K < G is a compact subgroup such that (G, K) is a Gelfand pair, and we denote by ΩΓ the
spherical automorphic spectrum of Γ with respect to (G, K). We consider a regular uniform
model set P in X = G/K associated to (G, H, Γ) with underlying window W0 ⊂ H. The
following formula is established in Theorem 4.10.
Theorem 1.5 (Spherical diffraction formula for uniform regular model sets). The spherical
diffraction of the uniform regular model set P is given by
X
1
SχW0 (ω) · δω .
ηbP =
covol(Γ)2
ω∈ΩΓ

In particular, P has pure point spherical diffraction.

To illustrate this theorem, let us work out a special case. An important source of examples of Gelfand pairs comes from certain isometry groups of 2-step nilpotent Lie groups. In
Subsection 5.4, we establish explicit formulas for the spherical diffraction of a large class of
regular uniform model sets in such groups. In what follows, we specialize these results to the
case of Heisenberg groups.
Let us begin by introducing some notation. For every positive integer p, denote by h·, ·ip the
standard Hermitian inner product on Cp and define a skew-symmetric 2-cocycle βp : (Cp )2 →
R by
βp (z, w) = Im(hz, wip ).

6

MICHAEL BJÖRKLUND, TOBIAS HARTNICK, AND FELIX POGORZELSKI

Then the (2p + 1)-dimensional Heisenberg group H2p+1 (R) is defined as the central extension
Cp ⊕βp R, and U (p) acts by automorphisms on H2p+1 (R) by acting on Cp by the standard
representation and acting trivially on the center. We fix positive integers p and q and define
G := H2p+1 (R) ⋊ U (p),

K := U (p) and

H := H2q+1 (R).

By [33, Theorem 13.2.4] the pair (G, K) is a Gelfand pair. Now let
∆ < Cp × Cq

and Ξ < R × R

be lattices (which are automatically uniform). We assume that
βp (z1 , z2 ) + βq (w1 , w2 ) ∈ Ξ,

for all (z1 , w1 ), (z2 , w2 ) ∈ ∆,

and that ∆ and Ξ project densely onto both factors and injectively to the respective first factor.
For example, one can take p = q and
√
√
√
√

and Ξ = (c + d 2, c − d 2) | c, d ∈ Z .
∆ = {(a + b 2, a − b 2) | a, b ∈ Z[i]p
Now for every pair of lattices (∆, Ξ) satisfying the conditions above, the subgroup

Γ := (z, s, e), (w, t)) ∈ G × H | (z, w) ∈ ∆, (s, t) ∈ Ξ < G × H

is a uniform lattice, and (G, H, Γ) is a cut-and-project scheme. We are going to compute the
spherical diffraction of model sets associated with this cut-and-project scheme with respect
to the Gelfand pair (G, K).
Let us briefly describe the space of positive-definite spherical functions of the Gelfand
pair (G, K), see e.g. [33, Chapter 13] for details. There are two types of positive-definite
spherical functions, distinguished by triviality or non-triviality of the central character of
cp is a
the corresponding irreducible spherical representations. On the one hand, if η1 ∈ C
character, then a positive definite spherical function [η1 ] on G is given by the normalized
Bessel function
Z
[η1 ] : G → C,

η1 (k(q1 ))dmK (k),

[η1 ](q1 , z1 , k) :=

K

c1 . The positive definite spherical functions
which depends only on the K-orbit Kη1 of η1 in Q
of non-trivial central character are more complicated to describe. Given a non-trivial characb \ {1} we say that a continuous function ωo : Cp → R is (K, χ1 )-spherical if ωo ⊗ χ1
ter χ1 ∈ R
is positive definite on Cp ⊕βp R and
Z
ωo (z1 + k(z1 ))χ1 (β1 (z1 , k(z2 )) dmK (k) = ωo (z1 )ωo (z2 ), for all z1 , z2 ∈ Cp .
K

Then ωo ⊗ χ1 is a positive-definite spherical function with central character χ1 . All (K, χ1 )spherical functions can be explicitly expressed in terms of Laguerre functions on Cp , see e.g.
[33, Proposition 13.2.11]; we shall not reproduce these formulas here as they are quite technical. Let us just remark that for every non-trivial character χ1 there are countably infinitely
many different (K, χ1 )-spherical functions.
To state the diffraction formula, we introduce the following notation: If L is a closed subgroup of either Cp × Cq or R × R, we denote by L⊥ its annihilator, i.e. the set of characters
which vanish on L. In particular we have lattices
p × Cq ∼
cq × C
cq
∆⊥ < C\
=C

and

b × R,
b
\
Ξ⊥ < R
×R∼
=R

APERIODIC ORDER AND SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION

7

p
⊥
b
and we denote by ∆⊥
1 < C and Ξ1 < R their projections onto the respective first factors.
⊥
Given η1 ∈ Ξ1 we define

b q | ∃k ∈ K : (k.η1 , η2 ) ∈ ∆⊥ ,
[η1 ](2) := {η2 ∈ C

and observe that this depends only on the Bessel function [η1 ] and not on the character η1 . Fib we define the χ2 -twisted convolution ψ1 ∗χ ψ2 of two integrable functions
nally, given χ2 ∈ R,
2
q
ψ1 , ψ2 : C → C by
Z
ψ1 (w′ )ψ2 (w − w′ )χ2 (βq (w′ , w)) dmCq (w′ ),
(ψ1 ∗χ2 ψ2 )(w) =
Cq

b we define
and given a bounded measurable function r : H → C and a character χ2 ∈ R
rχ2 : Cq → C
Z
r(z, t)χ2 (−t) dt,
rχ2 (z) =
in particular r1 (z, t) =

R

R

R r(z, t) dt.

Theorem 1.6 (Spherical diffraction formula for model sets in the Heisenberg group). Let
P ⊂ G/K = H2p+1 (R) be a regular uniform model set associated with the cut-and-project scheme
(G, H, Γ) above, and with underlying window W0 ⊂ H.
(i) The automorphic spectrum of Γ decomposes as ΩΓ = Ω1Γ ⊔ Ω2Γ , where

Ω1Γ = [η1 ] | η1 ∈ ∆⊥
1 ,
and


Ω2Γ = ωo ⊗ χ1 | χ1 ∈ Ξ⊥
1 and ωo is (K, χ1 )-spherical .

(ii) The diffraction of P is of the form
ηbP =

X SχW ([η1 ])
o
· δ[η1 ] +
2
covol(Γ)
1

[η1 ]∈ΩΓ

X

ωo ⊗χ1 ∈Ω2Γ

SχWo (ωo ⊗ χ1 )
· δωo ⊗χ1 .
covol(Γ)2

(1.1)

(iii) For [η1 ] ∈ Ω1Γ the coefficient of δ[η1 ] in (1.1) is given by
SχWo ([η1 ])
=
covol(Γ)2

X

η2 ∈([η1 ])(2)

2
\
|(χ
W0 )1 (η2 )| .

(iv) For ωo ⊗ χ1 ∈ Ω2Γ the coefficient of δωo ⊗χ1 in (1.1) is given by
SχWo (ωo ⊗ χ1 )
= sup
covol(Γ)2
ψ

X

(δ1 ,δ2 )∈∆

2

ωo (δ1 )(ψ ∗ ∗χ2 (χW0 )χ2 )(δ2 ) ,

where χ2 is the unique character such that χ1 ⊗ χ2 ∈ Ξ⊥ and the supremum is taken over all
ψ ∈ Cc (Cq ) such that
X
ωo (δ1 )(ψ ∗ ∗χ2 ψχ2 )(δ2 ) = 1/kωo k2L2 (Cp ) .
(δ1 ,δ2 )∈∆

A more general version of this theorem is proved in Subsection 5.4.

8

MICHAEL BJÖRKLUND, TOBIAS HARTNICK, AND FELIX POGORZELSKI

1.6. Organization of the article
This article is organized as follows: In Section 2 we define and study model sets in homogeneous spaces and their spherical auto-correlation. In Section 3 we review the necessary
background on Gelfand pairs and spherical Fourier transforms and use it to define the spherical diffraction of a model set in a commutative space. Section 4 is the heart of this article.
Here we first show existence of the shadow transform and use it to establish the spherical
diffraction formula. Section 5 is devoted to examples. Most notably, we work out the case of
the Heisenberg group in some detail and explain the relation between the shadow transform
and the Hecke correspondence in the totally-disconnected case. The appendix is devoted to
the proof of the approximation theorem for the spherical auto-correlation (Theorem 1.2) and
the discussion of examples and non-examples of good approximation sequences.
1.7. Notational conventions
The following notational conventions will be applied throughout this article:
All function spaces are complex-valued and all inner products are anti-linear in the first
variable. Given a locally compact space X we denote by Cc (X), C0 (X) and Cb (X) the function space of compactly supported continuous functions, continuous functions vanishing at
infinity and continuous bounded functions respectively.
Given a group G and a function f : G → C we denote by f¯, fˇ and f ∗ respectively the
functions on G given by
f¯(g) := f (g),

fˇ(g) := f (g −1 ) and

f ∗ (g) := f (g −1 ).

Given an action of G on a set Z we define a G-action on complex-valued functions on Z by
g.f (z) := f (g −1 .z). Moreover we denote by Z G ⊂ Z the subset of G-invariants.
If (X, ν) is a measure space and f, g ∈ L2 (X, ν), then we denote by
hf, giX := hf, gi(X,ν) :=

Z

X

f¯ · g dν

the L2 -inner product. Given a subset A ⊂ X we denote by χA its characteristic function.
If G is a locally compact, second countable group, then we denote by mG some fixed choice
of left-Haar measure on G (normalized to total mass 1 in the compact case). We then denote
by C(G), O(G) and K(G) the sets of closed, open and compact subsets of G respectively. We
also denote by e the identity element of G and by U(G) = Ue (G) the identity neighbourhood
filter of G.
Acknowledgement.
We thank Amos Nevo and Barak Weiss for numerous discussions and their interest in
our work. We also profited from discussions with Michael Baake, Uri Bader, Daniel Lenz,
Christoph Richard, Eitan Sayag, Boris Solomyak and Andreas Strömbergsson. We also thank
the mathematics departments of Chalmers University and Technion, Haifa for their hospitality during our respective visits. Finally we thank the organizers and the participants of the
Oberwolfach Arbeitsgemeinschaft on “Mathematical quasi-crystals” for the opportunity to
present and discuss our work.

APERIODIC ORDER AND SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION

2. A UTO - CORRELATION

9

OF MODEL SETS IN PROPER HOMOGENEOUS SPACES

2.1. Spaces of closed subsets of proper homogeneous spaces
Throughout this section we reserve the letter G to denote a lcsc group. Given a compact
subgroup K < G we denote by π : G → G/K the canonical projection map, and equip G/K
with the coresponding quotient topology. Then G/K is a metrizable locally compact space,
and π is a proper map, whence we refer to G/K as a proper homogeneous space of G. We observe
that since K is compact, the projection π is a closed map. Indeed, if A ⊂ G is closed, then
AK = π −1 (π(A)) is a product of a closed and a compact set, hence closed.
Given a lcsc space Z we denote by C(Z) the collection of all closed subsets of Z, which
we always equip with the Chabauty–Fell topology. We remind the reader that this topology is
generated by the basic open subsets
UV = {P ∈ C(Z) | P ∩ V 6= ∅} and

U C = {P ∈ C(Z) | P ∩ C = ∅},

where V and C range over all open, respectively compact subsets of Z.
For the rest of this section we fix a lcsc group G and a compact subgroup K and denote by
π : G → G/K the canonical projection map. Since π is closed, it induces a map π∗ : C(G) →
C(G/K), A 7→ π(A), which is moreover surjective, since A = π∗ (π −1 (A)) for all A ∈ C(G/K).
Proposition 2.1. Let G be a lcsc group and K < G a compact subgroup.
(i) The map π∗ : C(G) → C(G/K) is continuous.
(ii) The map π∗ : C(G) → C(G/K) is closed.
In particular, the topology on C(G/K) coincides with the quotient topology with respect to π∗ .
Proof. Note firstly that since π is surjective, two subsets of G/K intersect non-trivially if and
only if their pre-images intersect non-trivially in G. Thus if V ⊂ G/K is open and C ⊂ G/K
is compact, then we have
π∗−1 (UV ) = {Q ∈ C(G) | π(Q) ∩ V 6= ∅} = {Q ∈ C(G) | QK ∩ π −1 (V ) 6= ∅}
= {Q ∈ C(G) | Q ∩ π −1 (V )K −1 6= ∅},

π∗−1 (U C ) = {Q ∈ C(G) | Q ∩ π −1 (C)K −1 = ∅}.

Secondly, observe that π −1 (V ) is open, since π is continuous, and thus
[
Ve := π −1 (V )K −1 =
π −1 (V )k−1
k∈K

e := π −1 (C)K −1 is compact
is open. Similarly,
compact, since π is proper, and thus C
as the product of two compact sets. We thus have established that

e
π∗−1 (UV ) = UVe and π∗−1 U C = U C ,
π −1 (C) is

which implies (i), and (ii) follows from (i) and compactness of C(G).



Corollary 2.2. The action of G on C(G/K) is jointly continuous.



Since the action of G on C(G) by left-multiplication is jointly continuous we deduce:

Given a closed subset Λ ⊂ G, respectively P ⊂ G/K, we denote by XΛ , respectively YP ,
the corresponding orbit closure in C(G), respectively C(G/K), i.e.
XΛ := G.Λ ⊂ C(G)

and YP := G.P ⊂ C(G/K).

(2.1)

Following our terminology in [6] we refer to XΛ and YP as the hulls of Λ and P respectively.

10

MICHAEL BJÖRKLUND, TOBIAS HARTNICK, AND FELIX POGORZELSKI

Remark 2.3. Every subset Λ ⊂ G gives rise to a family of “orbits” (Λx )x∈G/K in G/K given
by
Λx := {g.x | g ∈ Λ} ⊂ G/K.
In studying these orbits we will focus on the orbit Λo = π(Λ) through the basepoint o := eK.
This is justified by the fact that the orbit ΛgK is just the image of Λ under the projection
G → G/(gKg −1 ), hence varying the basepoint amounts to replacing K by a conjugate, and
thus every theorem about Λo applies also to arbitrary orbits.
Corollary 2.4. Given Λ ⊂ G, the closed quotient map π∗ : C(G) → C(G/K) restricts to a closed
quotient map πΛ : XΛ → YΛo .

Proof. By Proposition 2.1 the restriction of π∗ to XΛ is continuous, and by Corollary 2.2 the
image of XΛ is given by YΛo . Since XΛ is compact the map πΛ is closed, hence a quotient
map.

Combining this observation with Remark 2.3 we deduce that all the hulls YΛx of orbits of
Λ are quotients of the hull XΛ of Λ.
2.2. FLC sets in proper homogeneous spaces
In [6] we defined a subset Λ ⊂ G to have finite local complexity (FLC) provided Λ−1 Λ is
locally finite. We extend this definition to subsets of proper homogeneous spaces as follows:
Definition 2.5. A subset P ⊂ G/K has G-finite local complexity (or G-FLC for short) if there
exists an FLC subset Λ ⊂ G such that P = π(Λ).
As in the group case, the G-FLC condition guarantees that all elements of the hull are
locally finite with uniform constants:

Proposition 2.6 (Finiteness properties of sets in the hull of an FLC set). If P ⊂ G/K is a GFLC set, then every Q ∈ YP has G-FLC. Moreover, for every pre-compact set C ⊂ G/K there exists
NC > 0 such that for all Q ∈ YP ,
|Q ∩ C| < NC .
(2.2)

Proof. Fix an FLC subset Λ ⊂ G such that P = π(Λ). By Corollary 2.4 the hull YP is a quotient
of XΛ . In particular, every Q ∈ YP is of the form Q = π(Ξ) for some Ξ ∈ XΛ . By [5, Prop.
4.5] every element of XΛ has FLC, and for every pre-compact subset C ′ ⊂ G there exists a
constant MC ′ such that
|Ξ ∩ C ′ | < MC ′ for all Ξ ∈ XΛ .
The former implies that every Q = π(Ξ) ∈ YP has G-FLC, and if we define NC := Mπ−1 (C)
for every pre-compact subset C ⊂ G/K, then the latter implies that for every Q = π(Ξ) ∈ XΛ
we have
|Q ∩ C| = |π(Ξ) ∩ C| ≤ |Ξ ∩ π −1 (C)| ≤ Mπ−1 (C) = NC .

2.3. The correlation measures of a measure on the hull of an FLC set
Let P ⊂ G/K be a G-FLC subset with hull Y = YP ⊂ C(G/K). By (2.2), there exists for
every pre-compact subset C ⊂ G/K a constant NC such that
|Q ∩ C| < NC for all Q ∈ Y.

In particular, if f ∈ Cc (G/K) and Nf := Nsupp(f ) , then |Q ∩ supp(f )| < Nf and thus the sum
X
Pf (Q) :=
f (x)
x∈Q

APERIODIC ORDER AND SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION

11

is finite for every Q ∈ Y . We refer to Pf : YP → R as the periodization of f along P . If we
want to stress the dependence on P we sometimes also write PP f instead of Pf .
Proposition 2.7 (Properties of the periodization). For every G-FLC subset P ⊂ G/K the following hold:
(i) For every f ∈ Cc (G/K) the periodization Pf : YP → R is continuous.
(ii) For every pre-compact subset C ⊂ G/K there exists a constant αC > 0 such that for every
f ∈ Cc (G/K) with supp(f ) ⊂ C we have
kPf k∞ ≤ αC · kf k∞ .

(iii) The image P(Cc (G/K)) of the periodization map separates points in YP \ {∅}.
Proof. If K = {e} this is deduced from [5, Prop. 4.5] in [5, Cor. 4.7, Prop. 5.1, Prop. 5.3 and
Prop. 5.4]. Proposition 2.6 generalizes [5, Prop. 4.5] to the case of arbitrary K. The rest of the
proof then proceeds literally as in the case K = {e}.

From (ii) we deduce:
Corollary 2.8. Let ν be a probability measure on YP . Then for every n ≥ 1 there exists a unique
(n)
Radon measure ην on (G/K)n such that
Z
(n)
Pf1 · · · Pfn dν (f1 , . . . , fn ∈ Cc (G/K)).

ην (f1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ fn ) =
YP

(n)

As in the group case, the measures ην are called the correlation measures of ν, and as in [6,
Prop. 4.4] one deduces from Proposition 2.7.(iii) that these determine ν provided ν does not
charge the empty set, i.e. ν(YP ∩ {∅}) = 0.
2.4. The auto-correlation of an invariant measure on the hull of an FLC set
Let again P ⊂ G/K be a G-FLC set and assume that there exists a G-invariant probability
measure ν on the punctured hull YP× := YP \ {∅}. By G-equivariance of the periodization
map it then follows that all the correlation measures η (n) are invariant under the diagonal
left-action of G on (G/K)n . In particular, η (2) is a G-invariant Radon measure on G/K ×G/K.
From now on we assume that G is unimodular (as is the case in the examples of model
sets we are interested in here). Then, as in [6, Sec. 4.3] we can identify Radon measures on
G/K × G/K with right-K × K-invariant Radon measures on G× G, and similarly G-invariant
Radon measures on G/K × G/K with Radon measures on G\(G/K × G/K). Note that we
have a homeomorphism
ι : G\(G/K × G/K) → K\G/K,

ι([g1 K, g2 K]) = Kg1−1 g2 K,

and hence we can further identify G-invariant Radon measures on G/K × G/K with Radon
measures on K\G/K via ι.
(2)

Definition 2.9. The Radon measure ην on K\G/K corresponding to ην
auto-correlation of ν.

via ι is called the

If ν happens to be the unique G-invariant measure on YP× , then ηP := ην depends only on
P . In this situation we also refer to ηP as auto-correlation of the FLC set P .
Remark 2.10. If f ∈ Cc (G/K) then we define f ∗ ∈ Cc (K\G) by
f ∗ (Kg) = f (g−1 K).

12

MICHAEL BJÖRKLUND, TOBIAS HARTNICK, AND FELIX POGORZELSKI

Given f1 , f2 ∈ Cc (G/K) the convolution f1∗ ∗f2 then defines a function in Cc (K\G/K), and the
set of all such convolutions is dense in Cc (K\G/K). The auto-correlation ην is thus uniquely
determined by the values it takes on such convolutions, and as in [6, Prop. 4.8] one shows
that
ην (f1∗ ∗ f2 ) = ην(2) (f1 ⊗ f2 ).
It thus follows that ην is the unique Radon measure on K\G/K satisfying
ην (f ∗ ∗ f ) = kPf kL2 (ν)

(f ∈ Cc (G/K)).

In particular, ην is positive-definite in the sense that ην

(f ∗

(2.3)

∗ f ) ≥ 0 for all f ∈ Cc (G/K).

Proposition 2.11 (Auto-correlation of FLC subsets in G vs. auto-correlation of their orbits).
Let Λ ⊂ G be an FLC subset and let P := π(Λ) ⊂ G/K. Let νΛ be a G-invariant probability measure
on XΛ× and let νP := π∗ νΛ be the corresponding G-invariant probability measure on YP× . Then the
auto-correlation of νΛ and νP are related by the formula
ηνP = ηνΛ |Cc (K\G/K) .
Proof. Denote by PΛ : Cc (G) → C(XΛ ) and PP : Cc (G/K) → C(YP ) denote the respective
periodization maps and let π ∗ : Cc (G/K) → Cc (G), respectively π∗ : XΛ → YP denote the
pullback, respectively push-forward, with respect to π : G → G/K. Then by definition, for
all f ∈ Cc (G/K)
π∗ ◦ PΛ ◦ π ∗ (f ) = PP (f )
We deduce that if f1 , f2 ∈ Cc (G/K) and fˆi := π ∗ fi ∈ Cc (G), then
Z
(2) ˆ
ˆ
PΛ fˆ1 · PΛ fˆ2 dνΛ
ηνΛ (f1 ⊗ f2 ) =
X
Z Λ
PP f1 · PP f2 dπ∗ νΛ = ην(2)
(f1 ⊗ f2 ).
=
P
YP

The proposition follows by taking G-invariants.



2.5. Auto-correlation of regular model sets in proper homogeneous spaces
We remind the reader that (regular, uniform) model sets in G were defined in [6, Def. 2.6].
Definition 2.12. An orbit in G/K of a (regular, uniform) model set in G is called a (regular,
uniform) model set in G/K.
By [5, Prop. 2.13] every model set in G, and thus also every model set in G/K, has finite local complexity. Moreover, the punctured hull of such model sets admits a unique G-invariant
probability measure, hence the auto-correlation of model sets is well-defined. For model sets
in G this property was established in [6], and it carries over to the general case, just as unique
stationarity and minimality of the hull do:
Corollary 2.13 (Unique stationarity/ergodicity and minimality of the hull). Let P be a regular
model set in a proper homogeneous space G/K of a lcsc group G. Then YP× = YP \{∅} admits a unique
G-invariant probability measure ν, which is also the unique µ-stationary measure for any admissible
probability measure µ on G. Moreover, if P is uniform, then YP is minimal.
Proof. By [6, Thm. 1.1] the hull of a regular (uniform) model set in G has the analogous
properties. In view of Corollary 2.4 it thus remains to show only that if X is a uniquely
stationary (respectively minimal) G-space and π : X → Y is a G-equivariant quotient map,
then also Y is uniquely stationary (respectively minimal). For this we observe that if µ is

APERIODIC ORDER AND SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION

13

an admissible probability measure on G and ν is a µ-stationary probability measure on Y ,
then the set of all probability measures on X which project to ν is compact, non-empty and
invariant under convolution by µ, hence contains a µ-stationary probability measure by the
Kakutani fixpoint theorem. Thus every µ-stationary probability measure on Y is the pushforward of a µ-stationary probability measure on X, and hence unique stationarity descends
from X to Y . The fact that minimality descends is obvious.

In [6, Thm. 1.3] we established a general formula for the auto-correlation of a general regular model set in G. By Proposition 2.11 we obtain a similar formula for the auto-correlation
of a regular model set in G/K which we record here for ease of reference. Given a cutand-project scheme (G, H, Γ) (see [6, Def.2.3]) over G we denote by YΓ := (G × H)/Γ the
corresponding parameter space, equipped with its Haar probability measure. Assume now
that Λ ⊂ G is a regular model set constructed from (G, H, Γ) with window W0 ⊂ H and let
P := π(Λ) ⊂ G/K. Finally, denote by PΓ the periodization over Γ.
Corollary 2.14 (Auto-correlation formula for regular model sets in G/K). Let P ⊂ G/K be the
regular model set constructed from the quadruple (G, H, Γ, W0 ) as above. Then the auto-correlation
of P is uniquely determined by the formula
ηP (f ∗ ∗ f ) = kPΓ (f ◦ π ⊗ χW0 )k2L2 (YΓ )
3. S PHERICAL

(f ∈ Cc (G/K)).

DIFFRACTION

3.1. Gelfand pairs and commutative spaces
Let G be a lcsc group and K < G be a compact subgroup. According to [33, Thm. 9.8.1] the
following properties of the pair (G, K) are equivalent:
(G1) The Hecke algebra H(G, K) := Cc (K\G/K) of bi-K-invariant compactly supported continuous functions on G is commutative under convolution.
(G2) The Banach algebra L1 (K\G/K) of bi-K-invariant absolutely Haar-integrable function
classes on G is commutative under convolution.
(G3) The measure algebra M(K\G/K) of finite bi-K-invariant complex-valued measures on
G is commutative under convolution.
(G4) The G-representation L2 (G/K) is multiplicity free.
(G5) If V is an irreducible unitary G-representation and V K < V denotes the subspace of
K-invariants, then dim V K ≤ 1.
Definition 3.1. The pair (G, K) is called a Gelfand pair if it satisfies the equivalent properties
(G1)–(G5) above. In this case, the corresponding proper homogeneous space G/K is called a
commutative space.
Our basic reference concerning Gelfand pairs and commutative spaces are [33, 16]. For the
remainder of this section, (G, K) denotes a Gelfand pair and π : G → G/K denotes the
canonical projection.
3.2. Spherical functions and spherical representations
Recall that a spherical representation of a Gelfand pair (G, K) is a unitary G-representation
(V, πV ) such that V K 6= {0}. Positive-definite spherical functions provide a convenient parametrization of the irreducible spherical representations, and can be used to explicitly decompose

14

MICHAEL BJÖRKLUND, TOBIAS HARTNICK, AND FELIX POGORZELSKI

spherical representations into irreducibles. We briefly review both concepts in this subsection and introduce some relevant notation. The material of this subsection is fairly standard
and can be found in [33, 11, 12, 15].
Definition 3.2.
(1) A Radon measure m on G is called a (G, K)-spherical measure if it is
bi-K-invariant and restricts to a (not necessarily continuous) algebra homomorphism
m : H(G, K) → C.
(2) A continuous function ω : G → C is called a (G, K)-spherical function if the associated
Radon measure mω defined by
Z
f (x)ω(x−1 ) dmG (x)
mω (f ) :=
G

is a (G, K)-spherical measure.
(3) A measurable function ω : G → C is called positive definite if
Z Z
ω(x−1 y)f (x)f (y)dmG (x)dmG (y) ≥ 0 (f ∈ Cc (G)).
G

(3.1)

G

We denote by S(G, K), Sb (G, K) respectively S + (G, K) the spaces of spherical, bounded
spherical, respectively positive-definite spherical functions of the Gelfand pair (G, K).
Lemma 3.3 (Properties of spherical functions). (i) A bi-K-invariant continuous function ω :
G → C is (G, K)-spherical if and only if ω 6= 0 and
Z
ω(xky)dmK (k) = ω(x)ω(y) (x, y ∈ G, k ∈ K).
(3.2)
K

Equivalently, ω(e) = 1 and ω is a joint eigenfunction for the Hecke algebra, i.e. for every f ∈
H(G, K) there exists λω (f ) ∈ C such that f ∗ ω = λω (f )ω.
(ii) If ω ∈ Sb (G, K), then mω extends to a linear functional on L1 (K\G/K), and the map ω → mω
provides an identification between Sb (G, K) and the Gelfand spectrum of the Banach algebra
L1 (K\G/K).
(iii) Every measurable positive-definite function agrees almost everywhere with a continuous positivedefinite function. A continuous function ω : G → C is positive definite if and only if
n
n X
X
i=1 j=1

αi αj ω(x−1
i xj ) ≥ 0 (n ∈ N, α1 , . . . , αn ∈ C, x1 , . . . , xn ∈ G),

and in this case ω ∗ = ω and kωk∞ ≤ ω(e).
(iv) A function ω ∈ Sb (G, K) is positive-definite if and only if the associated Radon measure mω is
positive-definite, i.e. mω (f ∗ ∗ f ) ≥ 0 for all f ∈ Cc (G).
(v) If ρ : G → C is a continuous bi-K-invariant function which satisfies f ∗ ρ = mω (f ) · ρ for all
f ∈ H(G, K), then ρ = ρ(e) · ω.

Proof. (i) [11, Prop. 6.1.5 and 6.1.6] and [33, Thm. 8.2.6]. (ii) [11, Thm. 6.1.7] and [33, Thm.
8.2.7]. (iii) [11, Thm. 5.1.6, Rem. 5.1.7 and Lemma 5.1.8]. (iv) [33, Thm. 8.4.8] (v) [33, Thm.
8.2.6].

Remark 3.4. It follows from (ii) that Sb (G, K) carries a natural locally compact Hausdorff
topology given by pointwise convergence of the associated functionals on the Hecke algebra.
By [33, Prop. 9.2.9] the subset S + (G, K) ⊂ Sb (G, K) is closed, hence inherits a locally compact
topology. This topology coincides with the restriction of the weak-∗-topology on L∞ (G) to the
subset S + (G, K) ⊂ Sb (G, K), see [11, Sec. 6.4]. In the sequel we will always equip S + (G, K)
with this locally compact topology

APERIODIC ORDER AND SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION

15

Let now (V, πV ) be an irreducible spherical representation of (G, K). By characterization
(G5) of a Gelfand pair we have dim V K = 1 and thus there exists a unit vector v ∈ V K ,
which is unique up to multiplication by a complex number of norm 1. In particular, the
bi-K-invariant matrix coefficient
ωV : G → C,

ωV (g) := hv, πV (g).vi

(3.3)
S + (G, K),

depends only on the representation (V, πV ). It turns out that ωV ∈
and that the map
(V, πV ) 7→ ωV defines a bijection between unitary equivalence classes of irreducible spherical
representations and positive definite spherical functions [33, Thm. 8.4.8], whose inverse we
denote by ω 7→ [(Vω , πVω )].
Let now (W, ρ) be an arbitrary spherical representation of (G, K). Then ρ extends to a
representation of the measure algebra M(G) which we denote by the same letter ρ, and the
action of the abelian subalgebra M(K\G/K) preserves the subspace W K of K-invariant vectors. By restriction we also obtain representations of L1 (K\G/K) and H(G, K) on W K by
bounded linear operators. Explicitly the latter representation is given by
Z
K
f (g) · (π(g).v) dmG (g).
ρ : H(G, K) → B(W ), π(f ).v =
G

Concerning this representation of the Hecke algebra, we have the following well-known direct integral decomposition.
Lemma 3.5 (Spherical decomposition). Let (W, ρ) be a spherical representation of (G, K).
(i) There exists a Radon measure νW on S + (G, K) such that, as H(G, K)-representations,
Z ⊕
Vω dνW (ω),
WK =
S + (G,K)

where Vω is the irreducible spherical representation corresponding to ω.
(ii) The measure νW is unique up to equivalence in the sense of [15, Thm. 7.32]. In particular, the
atoms and the support of νW depend only on W .
(iii) ω ∈ supp(νW ) if and only if Vω is weakly contained in W , and ω is an atom of νW if and only if
Vω is isomorphic to a subrepresentation of W .
(iv) The representation W is completely reducible if and only if νW is purely atomic. In this case,
M
WK =
Wω ,
ω∈supp(νW )

with Wω = W [Vω ]K , where W [Vω ] denotes the Vω -isotopic component of W . Explicitly,
Wω = {w ∈ W | ∀µ ∈ M(G, K) : ρ(µ).w = µ(ω) · w}.
Proof. The lemma is a consequence of the general representation theory of postliminal C ∗ algebras as developed e.g. in [12]. To see that this theory applies, one observes that if (G, K)
is a Gelfand pair, then G is automatically of type I (see e.g. [9, Thm. 2.2]), and hence its
group C ∗ -algebra is postliminal ([12, Thm. 9.1]). In particular we can write every unitary
G-representation (W, ρ) uniquely (up to equivalence) as a direct integral of irreducible unib of G (see e.g. [15, Thm. 7.32], [12, Thm. 8.6.6]).
tary representations over the unitary dual G
It follows that the H(G, K)-representation (W K , ρ) decomposes uniquely as a direct integral
over the spherical part of the unitary dual, which we can identify with S + (G, K) by identifying each irreducible spherical representation with the associated spherical function. Then the
remaining statements of the lemma follow from [12, Prop. 8.6.8].


16

MICHAEL BJÖRKLUND, TOBIAS HARTNICK, AND FELIX POGORZELSKI

Definition 3.6. The measure νW is called the spherical spectral measure and its support
spec(G,K) (W ) := supp(νW ) ⊂ S + (G, K)
is called the spherical spectrum of the spherical representation (W, ρ).
3.3. The spherical Fourier transform of a positive-definite measure
We can now define our main object of interest.
Definition 3.7. The spherical Fourier transform of the Gelfand pair (G, K) is defined as the
composition
F : L1 (K\G/K) → C0 (Sb (G, K)) → C0 (S + (G, K)),

f 7→ fb,

where the map L1 (K\G/K) → C0 (Sb (G, K)) is the Gelfand transform of the Banach algebra
L1 (K\G/K) and the second map is given by restriction to the subspace S + (G, K) ⊂ Sb (G, K).
Note that by definition,
Z
f (x)ω(x−1 ) dmG (x)
fb(ω) = mω (f ) =
G

(f ∈ L1 (K\G/K), ω ∈ S + (G, K))).

(3.4)

As in the abelian case, we have the usual Plancherel and inversion formulas.
Lemma 3.8 (Plancherel formula). There exists a unique positive Radon measure µG,K on S + (G, K)
with the following properties.
(i) If f ∈ H(G, K) and fb ∈ L1 (S + (G, K), µG,K ) then
Z
fb(ω)ω(g) dµG,K (ω).
f (g) =
S + (G,K)

(ii) If f ∈ L1 (K\G/K) ∩ L2 (K\G/K), then fb ∈ L2 (S + (G, K), µG,K ) and kf k2 = kfbk2 .
(iii) F extends to a bijective isometry L2 (K\G/K) → L2 (S + (G, K), µG,K ).
The measure µG,K is called the Plancherel measure of the Gelfand pair (G, K).
We can extend the spherical Fourier transform to positive definite Radon measures on
K\G/K. Here a Radon measure η on K\G/K is called positive definite if η(f ∗ ∗ f ) ≥ 0 for
every f ∈ Cc (G, K). The following lemma is due to Godement [16] .
Lemma 3.9 (Spherical Fourier transform of positive definite measures). For every positive definite Radon measure η on K\G/K there exists a unique positive Radon measure ηb on S + (G, K) such
that the following hold.
(i) If f ∈ H(G, K), then fb ∈ L2 (S + (G, K), ηb).
(ii) The image F(H(G, K)) is dense in L2 (S + (G, K), ηb).
(iii) For all f1 , f2 ∈ H(G, K) we have
Z
∗
b
b
η(f1 ∗ f2 ) = hf1 , f2 iL2 (S + (G,K),bη) =

S + (G,K)

fb1 (ω) · fb2 (ω) db
η (ω).

The measure ηb is called the spherical Fourier transform of the measure η.

APERIODIC ORDER AND SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION

17

3.4. Spherical auto-correlation and spherical diffraction
Let now P ⊂ G/K be a FLC subset and let ν be a G-invariant probability measure on
⊂ C(G/K). We then refer to the auto-correlation ην ∈ R(K\G/K) as the spherical autocorrelation. By Remark 2.10 the measure ην is positive-definite, hence its spherical Fourier
transform ηbν is well-defined.

YP×

Definition 3.10. The spherical Fourier transform ηbν of the spherical auto-correlation ην is
called the spherical diffraction of ν. If ν is the only G-invariant probability measure on YP× ,
then ηbP := ηbν is also called the spherical diffraction of P .

Note that by Corollary 2.13 the spherical diffraction of a model set in a commutative space
is well-defined. The remainder of this article is devoted to the study of the spherical diffraction of such model sets.
4. T HE

SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION FORMULA FOR UNIFORM MODEL SETS

Throughout this section (G, K) denotes a Gelfand pair and (G, H, Γ) a uniform cut-andproject scheme (see [6, Def.2.3]). In particular, Γ is a uniform lattice in G × H. We denote
by Y the parameter space Y := YΓ := (G × H)/Γ and by mY the (G × H)-invariant probability measure on Y . Moreover, P denotes a uniform regular model set in G/K constructed
from (G, H, Γ) using a window W0 ⊂ H (see (see [6, Def.2.6])). We are going to show that
the spherical diffraction measure ηbP is pure point and compute an explicit formula for this
diffraction in terms of the automorphic spectrum of the underlying uniform lattice.
4.1. Complete reducibility
Consider first the unitary G-representation obtained as the restriction of the unitary (G ×
H)-representation L2 (Y ) = L2 (Y, mY ) to G.
Lemma 4.1. The unitary G-representation L2 (Y ) is completely reducible with countable multiplicities.
Proof. Since Γ is cocompact in G × H, the (G × H)-representation L2 (Y ) is completely reducible with finite multiplicities (see e.g. [33, Thm. 7.2.5]). Since (G, K) is a Gelfand pair, the
group G is of type I (see e.g. [9, Thm. 2.2]). Consequently, every irreducible unitary representation (G × H)-representation is of the form V ⊠ W where V is an irreducible unitary Grepresentation, W is an irreducible unitary H-representation and V ⊠ W is isomorphic to the
completed tensor product of V and W with (G × H)-action given by (g, h).(v ⊗ w) = gv ⊗ hw
(see e.g. [15, Thm. 7.25]). In this situation, if (wi )i∈I is a Hilbert space basis of W then, as
G-representations,
M
M
[
[
V.
V ⊗ C · wi ∼
V ⊠ W |G ∼
=
=
i∈I

i∈I

L2 (Y

Note that I is countable, since
) and hence W are separable. We deduce that, as Grepresentations, each V ⊠ W and thus also L2 (Y ) are completely reducible with countable
multiplicities.

Recall from Definition 3.6 the definition of the spherical spectrum spec(G,K) of a spherical
representation. For the special case of the representation L2 (Y ) we introduce the following
notation.

18

MICHAEL BJÖRKLUND, TOBIAS HARTNICK, AND FELIX POGORZELSKI

Definition 4.2. The spherical automorphic spectrum of Γ is
ΩΓ := spec(G,K)(L2 (Y )) ⊂ S + (G, K).
Corollary 4.3. The spherical automorphic spectrum ΩΓ ⊂ S + (G, K) is countable, and L2 (Y )K
decomposes as
M
[
L2 (Y )K
(4.1)
L2 (Y )K =
ω,
ω∈ΩΓ

where each of the eigenspaces
2
K
b
L2 (Y )K
ω = {g ∈ L (Y ) | ∀f ∈ H(G, K) : f ∗ g = f (ω) · g}

is of countable dimension.



4.2. Weighted L2 -spaces
By Struble’s theorem [10, Thm. 2.B.4] every lcsc group admits a right-admissible metric, i.e.
a proper, right-invariant metric which induces the given topology. We now fix admissible
metrics dG and dH on G and H respectively and define an admissible metric d = dG×H on
G × H by
d((g1 , h1 ), (g2 , h2 )) := dG (g1 , g2 ) + dH (h1 , h2 ).
(4.2)
Then there exists a real number α > 0 such that
X
e−αd(γ,e)/2 < ∞,
γ∈Γ

and we fix such an α once and for all. We then set

1/2
X
e−αd(γ,e)/2  .
C := C(dG , dH , Γ, α) := 
γ∈Γ

We also fix left-Haar measures mG and mH on G and H and set mG×H := mG ⊗ mH .

Definition 4.4. Given M ∈ {G, H, G × H} we define α-weighted L2 -norms k · k2,α on Cc (M ) by
1/2
Z
2
α·dM (m,e)
, (f ∈ Cc (M )).
|f (m)| · e
dmM (m)
kf k2,α :=
M

We then define the α-weighted L2 -space L2α (M ) ⊂ L2 (M ) as the closure of Cc (M ) in the corresponding k · k2,α -norm.
Proposition 4.5 (Properties of weighted L2 -norms). The weighted L2 -spaces and L2 -norms have
the following properties:
(i) If f ∈ L2α (G) and r ∈ L2α (H), then f ⊗ r ∈ L2α (G × H) and
kf ⊗ rk2,α = kf k2,α · krk2,α .

(ii) If F ∈ L2α (G × H), then PΓ F ∈ L2 (Y ) and

kPΓ F k2,α ≤ CkF k2,α .

In particular, if f ∈ L2α (G) and r ∈ L2α (H), then PΓ (f ⊗ r) ∈ L2 (Y ) and
kPΓ (f ⊗ r)k2 ≤ Ckf k2,α krk2,α .

APERIODIC ORDER AND SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION

19

Proof. (i) This is immediate from (4.2). (ii) Let us abbreviate M := G × H. We first note that if
F1 , F2 ∈ L2α (M ), then for all m ∈ M we have
Z
|F1 (y)| |F2 (y −1 m)| dmM (y)
|(F1 ∗ F2 )(m)| ≤
ZM
−1
|F1 (y)| eαd(y,e)/2 |F2 (y −1 m)|e−αd(e,y )/2 dmM (y)
=
M
Z
1/2  Z
1/2
−1
2 αd(y,e)
≤
|F1 (y)| e
dmM (y)
|F2 (y −1 m)|2 e−αd(e,y e) dmM (y)
M
M
Z
1/2  Z
1/2
−1
2 αd(y,e)
≤
|F1 (y)| e
dmM (y)
|F2 (y −1 m)|2 e−αd(m,y m) dmM (y)
M
M
1/2
Z
|F2 (y)|2 eα(−d(m,y)+d(m,e)−d(m,e)) dmM (y)
= kF1 k2,α
M
Z
1/2
|F2 (y)|2 eαd(e,y) dmM (y)
≤ kF1 k2,α e−αd(m,e)/2
M

−αd(m,e)/2

= e

kF1 k2,α kF2 k2,α ,

i.e. |(F1 ∗ F2 )(m)| ≤ e−αd(m,e)/2 kF1 k2,α kF2 k2,α . We thus deduce that
Z
X
2
F (mγ) dmM/Γ (mΓ)
kPΓ F k2 =
M/Γ γ∈Γ

=

XZ

F (m)F (mγ) dmM (m)

γ∈Γ M

=

XZ

F (m−1 )F (m−1 γ) dmM (m)

γ∈Γ M

=


X
X
e−αd(γ,e)/2 kF k22,α ,
(F ∗ ∗ F )(γ) ≤
γ∈Γ

γ∈Γ

and thus kPΓ F k ≤ C · kF k2,α .



4.3. The shadow transform
Recall from (4.1) that L2 (Y )K admits a spectral decomposition
L2 (Y )K =

M
[

L2 (Y )K
ω.

ω∈ΩΓ

Given ω ∈ ΩΓ we write

πω : L2 (Y )K → L2 (Y )K
ω

for the orthogonal projection. Let now f ∈ H(G, K) ⊂ L2α (G)K×K and r ∈ L2α (H). By
Proposition 4.5 we then have PΓ (f ⊗ r) ∈ L2 (Y ), and since the K action commutes with the
H-action on Y we have
PΓ (f ⊗ r) ∈ L2 (Y )K .
We can thus decompose PΓ (f ⊗ r) as

PΓ (f ⊗ r) =

X

ω∈ΩΓ

πω (PΓ (f ⊗ r)),

20

MICHAEL BJÖRKLUND, TOBIAS HARTNICK, AND FELIX POGORZELSKI

and in particular we obtain
X

kPΓ (f ⊗ r)k22 =

ω∈ΩΓ

kπω (PΓ (f ⊗ r))k22 .

(4.3)

It turns out that one can separate the dependencies on f and r on the right hand side of this
equation:
Proposition 4.6 (Existence of the shadow transform). For every r ∈ L2α (H) there exists a unique
function r̃ : ΩΓ → L2 (Y ) such that r̃(ω) ∈ L2 (Y )ω and

πω (PΓ (f ⊗ r)) =

fb(ω) · r̃(ω)
covol(Γ)

for all f ∈ H(G, K)

Proof. Fix r ∈ L2α (H) and ω ∈ ΩΓ . We need to show that there exists r̃(ω) ∈ L2 (Y )K
ω such that
covol(Γ) · hPΓ (f ⊗ r), ψi = fb(ω) · hr̃(ω), ψi

for all f ∈ H(G, K) and ψ ∈ L2 (Y )K
ω.

e
Fix ψ ∈ L2 (Y )K
ω and let ψ be the lift of ψ to a right Γ-invariant bounded function class on
G × H. We define
φ(g, h) :=

Z

K

e
ψ(gk,
h) dmK (k),

where mK denotes the Haar probability measure on K. Since ψ is an eigenfunction of H(G, K),
e
ψe is continuous in the G-variable. We can thus find a Borel representative ψe0 of the class ψ,
which is continuous in the first variable. Using such a representative we then define for every
h ∈ H a function φh : G → C by
φh (g) :=

Z

K

ψe0 (gk, h) dmK (k).

The functions φh depend on this choice of representative, but φ(g, h) = φh (g) for mG ⊗ mH almost all pairs (g, h). For every h ∈ H the function φh is continuous (by continuity of ψe0
in the G-variable), bi-K-invariant (by K-invariance of ψe0 ) and satisfies f ∗ φh = fb(ω) · φh
for every f ∈ H(G, K) (since ψe and thus also ψe0 satisfy this property). It then follows from
Lemma 3.3.(v), that φh is a complex multiple of ω. Consequently, there exists a measurable
function cψ : H → C such that
φ(g, h) = cψ (h) · ω(g).

APERIODIC ORDER AND SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION

21

Note that cψ is essentially bounded, since ψe and hence φ(g, h) are. Now let f ∈ H(G, K), so
that in particular f is right-K-invariant. Using that ω ∗ = ω (see Lemma 3.3) we compute
Z
e h) dmG (g)dmH (h)
covol(Γ) · hPΓ (f ⊗ r), ψi =
f (g) · r(h) · ψ(g,
G×H

Z
Z
−1
e h) dmG (g)dmH (h)
f (gk ) dmK (k) r(h) · ψ(g,
=
K
G×H

Z
Z
e
=
ψ(gk,
h) dmK (k) dmG (g)dmH (h)
f (g) · r(h) ·
K
ZG×H
f (g) · r(h) · φ(g, h) dmG (g)dmH (h)
=
G×H
Z
=
f (g) · r(h) · cψ (h) · ω(g) dmG (g)dmH (h)
G×H
Z
Z
∗
−1
=
f (g)ω (g )dmG (g) ·
r(h) · cψ (h)dmH (h)
G

H

= fb(ω) · hr, cψ iH .

By Riesz’ representation theorem it remains to show only that the linear functional
λr : L2 (Y )K
ω → C,

ψ 7→ hr, cψ iH

is continuous. This follows from the fact that the linear map
Z
e
ψ(gk,
h) dmK (k)
ψ 7→ cψ (h) · ω(g) = φ(g, h) =
K

is bounded for almost every pair (g, h).



Definition 4.7. We define the shadow transform S : L2α (H) → Map(ΩΓ , R) by Sr(ω) := kr̃(ω)k22 ,
where r̃ is as in Theorem 4.6.
Corollary 4.8 (Defining property of the shadow transform). The shadow transform S : L2α (H) →
Map(ΩΓ , R) is the unique map with the property that for all r ∈ L2α (H) and f ∈ H(G, K) we have
X
1
Sr(ω) · |fˆ(ω)|2
(4.4)
kPΓ (f ⊗ r)k22 =
2
covol(Γ)
ω∈ΩΓ

Proof. From (4.3) and Proposition 4.6 we obtain for all r ∈ L2α (H) and f ∈ H(G, K),
kPΓ (f ⊗ r)k22 =

X

ω∈ΩΓ

kπω (PΓ (f ⊗ r))k22 =

X kfb(ω) · r̃(ω)k2
X Sr(ω) · |fˆ(ω)|2
2
=
.
covol(Γ)2
covol(Γ)2

ω∈ΩΓ

ω∈ΩΓ

Conversely, (4.4) determines each Sr(ω).



Corollary 4.9 (Kernel of the shadow transform). Let r ∈ L2α (H). Then the following are equivalent:
(i) r is contained in the kernel of the shadow transform, i.e. Sr = 0.
(ii) PΓ (f ⊗ r) = 0 for all f ∈ H(G, K).
Proof. Both conditions are equvialent to re = 0, where re is as in Proposition 4.6.



22

MICHAEL BJÖRKLUND, TOBIAS HARTNICK, AND FELIX POGORZELSKI

4.4. Pure-point spherical diffraction for uniform regular model sets
We can now give a formula for the spherical diffraction of a uniform regular model set
P ⊂ G/K associated with a uniform cut-and-project scheme (G, H, Γ). We denote by W0 ⊂ H
the window of P and by χW0 the characteristic function of W0 . Note that χW0 ∈ L2α (H), and
hence the shadow transform SχW0 is defined.
Theorem 4.10 (Spherical diffraction formula). Let P ⊂ G/K be a uniform regular model set. Then
the spherical diffraction ηbP is pure point. More precisely, if P can be constructed from the uniform
cut-and-project scheme (G, H, Γ) with window W0 ⊂ H, then
X
1
SχW0 (ω) · δω .
(4.5)
ηbP =
2
covol(Γ)
ω∈ΩΓ

Proof. The proof is based on three ingredients: Firstly, if f ∈ H(G/K), then by Lemma 3.9.(iii),
ηbP (|fb|2 ) = ηP (f ∗ ∗ f )

Secondly, by Corollary 2.14 for every f ∈ H(G/K) we have

ηP (f ∗ ∗ f ) = kPΓ (f ⊗ χW0 )k22 .

Thirdly, by (4.4) applied to r = χW0 we have
kPΓ (f ⊗ χW0 )k22 =

X
1
SχW0 (ω) · |fˆ(ω)|2 .
covol(Γ)2
ω∈ΩΓ

Combining these three ingredients we obtain
ηbP (|fb|2 ) =

1
covol(Γ)2

X

ω∈ΩΓ



SχW0 (ω) · |fˆ(ω)|2 = 

1
covol(Γ)2

X

ω∈ΩΓ



SχW0 (ω) · δω  (|fb|2 ).

Since the functions of the form f ∗ ∗ f with f ∈ H(G, K) span a dense subset of H(G, K) the
theorem follows.

Note that the fact that the diffraction is pure point is a direct consequence of complete
reducibility of L2 (Y )K over H(G, K). For non-uniform lattices this property fails, and hence
non-uniform regular model sets do not have pure point diffraction.
In order to obtain more explicit formulas for the spherical diffraction one has to compute
the shadow transform of the window more explicitly. We provide several examples in the
next section. In particular, we will see that in the abelian case, Theorem 4.10 reduces to [2,
Thm. 9.4], which in its essence goes back to the pioneering work of Meyer [25].
5. E XAMPLES

OF DIFFRACTION FORMULAS

5.1. Abelian examples: Meyer’s formula
Let us briefly explain how the spherical diffraction formula (Theorem 4.10) reduces to
Meyer’s diffraction formula in the classical case where G and H are abelian and K = {e}
b and H
b the dual groups of G and H respectively, and
is the trivial subgroup. Denote by G
b
b If we denote by
identify the dual group of G × H with G × H.
b×H
b | ∀(γ1 , γ2 ) ∈ Γ : ξ1 (γ1 )ξ2 (γ2 ) = 1} < G
b×H
b
Γ⊥ := {(ξ1 , ξ2 ) ∈ G

APERIODIC ORDER AND SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION

23

b×H
b → G
b the projection onto the first coordinate, then
the dual lattice of Γ and by πGb : G
b and
S + (G, K) = G
b
ΩΓ = π b (Γ⊥ ) ⊂ G.
G

Note that this automorphic spectrum is actually in bijection with Γ⊥ by the following standard result (see [27, p.19]).
b and
Lemma 5.1. If Γ projects injectively to G and densely to H, then Γ⊥ projects injectively to G
b
densely to H.

b i.e. χ = χ1 ⊗ χ2 , then χ2 is
Proof. If χ ∈ Γ⊥ is contained in the kernel of the projection to G,
trivial on the projection of Γ to H, hence on all of H by continuity, and thus χ = 1. Moreover,
since Γ projects injectively to G, the map H → (G × H)/Γ is injective, and hence the dual map
Γ⊥ → H ⊥ has dense image.

(2)
b such that χ1 ⊗ χ(2) ∈ Γ⊥ . Now
In particular, given χ1 ∈ πGb (Γ⊥ ) there is a unique χ1 ∈ H
1
we choose Haar measures mG on G and mH on H and denote by covol(Γ) the covolume of Γ
with respect to mG ⊗ mH . Given f ∈ L1 (G) ∩ L2 (G) we denote by
Z
b
f (g)χ1 (g−1 )dmG (g)
f (χ1 ) :=
G

the Fourier transform of f with respect to mG , and we denote by the same symbol the Fourier
transform with respect to mH . For f ∈ Cc (G) and r ∈ Cc (H) the Poisson summation formula
yields
X
X
kPΓ (f ⊗ r))k2 =
(f ∗ ∗ f )(γ1 )(r ∗ ∗ r)(γ2 ) =
|fˆ(ξ1 )|2 |r̂(ξ2 )|2 ,
(γ1 ,γ2 )∈Γ

(ξ1 ,ξ2 )∈Γ⊥

hence we deduce from Corollary 4.8 that for r ∈ Cc (H) and χ1 ∈ ΩΓ we obtain
(2)

Sr(χ1 ) = covol(Γ)2 · |r̂(χ1 )|2 .
By a density argument, the same formula holds for all r ∈ L2α (H). In particular, the diffraction
formula (4.5) specializes to
X
ηbP =
|χ̂W0 (ξ2 )|2 · δξ1 ,
(5.1)
(ξ1 ,ξ2 )∈Γ⊥

which is Meyer’s formula.
b ∼
Even more concretely, if we assume that G = Rn , H = Rm the we can identify G
= Rn ,
b ∼
H
= Rm via e2πiλ ↔ λ. Under this identification,
Γ⊥ = {(ξ1 , ξ2 ) ∈ Rn × Rm | (ξ1⊤ , ξ2⊤ ) · Γ ⊂ Z},

and in (5.1) the Fourier transform χ̂W0 is just the classical Fourier transform.
5.2. General structure of model sets in amenable Lie groups
Before we compute further examples, we discuss the general structure of model sets in
commutative spaces associated with amenable Lie groups. There are plenty of examples of
cut-and-project schemes (G, H, Γ) with G amenable, but requiring in addition that G is part
of Gelfand pair (G, K) with K compact is a rather restrictive condition. For example, in the
case of connected Lie groups we have the following:

24

MICHAEL BJÖRKLUND, TOBIAS HARTNICK, AND FELIX POGORZELSKI

Proposition 5.2 (Cut-and-project schemes of amenable Lie groups). Let (G, H, Γ) be a cut-andproject scheme, where G and H are Lie groups and G is amenable and part of a Gelfand pair (G, K)
with K compact, G/K simply-connected and G acting effectively on G/K. Then the following hold:
(i) G = N ⋊ L, where L is compact and contains K, and N is either abelian or 2-step nilpotent.
(ii) If πG (Γ) is contained in N , then H is either abelian or 2-step nilpotent and Γ is uniform.
Proof. (i) is an immediate consequnce of Vinberg’s decomposition theorem [33, Thm. 13.3.20].
If πG (Γ) < N , then πG (Γ) and thus Γ are 2-step nilpotent. But then also H is 2-step nilpotent
since it contains the dense 2-step nilpotent subgroup πH (Γ), and thus Γ is cocompact by [29,
Thm. 2.1].

In the situation of Proposition 5.2 the possible pairs (G, L) appearing in (i) can actually be
classified; these are called nilmanifold pairs (see [33, Sec. 13.4]). If we assume additionally that
πG (Γ) < N , then we obtain a full classification of all possible triples (G, H, Γ). Namely, H has
to be a 2-step nilpotent Lie group, and these are well-known. Then Γ has to be a lattice in the
nilpotent Lie group N × H, and hence arises from a rational basis of the Lie algebra of N × H
by the construction described in [29, Remark after Thm. 2.12].
If we drop the condition that πG (Γ) < N then we can no longer classify the corresponding
cut-and-project sets. Note that if we drop the assumption that G and H are connected, then
we can no longer even guarantee that Γ is uniform. In fact, there exists a cut-and-project
scheme (G, H, Γ) and a compact subgroup K < G such that G and H are compact-by-abelian
(in particular amenable), (G, K) is a Gelfand pair and Γ is non-uniform, see [6, p. 8] which is
based on [4, Example 3.5] due to Bader, Caprace, Gelander and Monod. This shows that we
are very far from classifying the possible cut-and-project sets in a commutative space G/K
with G a general lcsc amenable group.
For now, let us focus on the cut-and-project sets described in Proposition 5.2. In fact, we
will consider the special case where K = L and πG (Γ) is contained in N . This means that Γ is
of the form

Γ = ((γ1 , e), γ2 ) ∈ (N ⋊ K) × H : (γ1 , γ2 ) ∈ Γo ,
where Γo < N × H is a lattice in N × H, and N and H are either both abelian or both 2-step
nilpotent. Moreover, we can identify a bi-K-invariant function f on G with the corresponding K-invariant functions fo on N given by f (n, k) = fo (n). In particular, we obtain an
identification
H(G, K) → Cc (N )K ,

Given f ∈ H(G, K) and r ∈ L2α (H), we have
X
kPΓ (f ⊗ r)k2 =

(γ1 ,γ2 )∈Γo

f 7→ fo .

(fo∗ ∗ fo )(γ1 )(r ∗ ∗ r)(γ2 ).

(5.2)

Starting from this formula one can now compute the shadow transform of the cut-and-project
scheme (G, H, Γ). The details of this computation depend very much on whether N and H
are abelian or 2-step nilpotent, the abelian case being much easier.
5.3. Virtually abelian examples
Keeping the notation of the previous subsection, we now turn to the case where N and
H are abelian. In this case, the shadow transform can again be computed using the Poisson

APERIODIC ORDER AND SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION

25

summation formula, starting from (5.2). More precisely, denoting by Γ⊥
o the dual lattice of Γo
b ×H
b as in the abelian case, the Poisson summation formula yields
in N
X
X
(fo∗ ∗ fo )(γ1 )(r ∗ ∗ r)(γ2 ) =
|fˆo (ξ1 )|2 |r̂(ξ2 )|2 .
(γ1 ,γ2 )∈Γo

(ξ1 ,ξ2 )∈Γ⊥
o

b we denote by [ξ1 ] the positive-definite spherical function [ξ1 ] : G →
Given a character ξ1 ∈ N
C given by
Z
ξ1 (k′ (n))dmK (k′ ).

[ξ1 ](n, k) :=

K

We then have an identification
b → S + (G, K),
K\N

Kξ1 → [ξ1 ].

In the case where N ∼
= Rn , the functions [ξ1 ] are just normalized Bessel functions, hence we
refer to the functions [ξ1 ] as Bessel type functions in general. The automorphic spectrum of Γ is
then given by
ΩΓ = {[ξ1 ] | (ξ1 , ξ2 ) ∈ Γ⊥ }.
By Lemma 5.1 for every ξ1 ∈ πNb (Γ⊥ ) there is a unique ξ2 with (ξ1 , ξ2 ) ∈ Γ⊥ . Given Kξ1 ∈ ΩΓ
let us denote by (Kξ1 )(2) the set of all ξ2 such that (k.ξ1 , ξ2 ) ∈ Γ⊥ for some k ∈ K. Then
X
|b
r (ξ2 )|2 .
Sr(K.ξ1 ) = covol(Γ)2
ξ2 ∈(Kξ1 )(2)

Thus the diffraction formula (4.5) specializes to

X
X

ηbP =
[ξ1 ]∈ΩΓ

ξ2 ∈(Kξ1 )(2)



|b
χW0 (ξ2 )|2  δ[ξ1 ] ,

which can be seen as a version of the “spherical Poisson summation formula” [1] for regular
model sets.
5.4. Virtually nilpotent examples
We now turn to the case of virtually nilpotent Lie groups. We will make a number of
simplifying assumptions. More precisely, our setting and notation will be as follows:
Convention 5.3. Throughout this subsection we will work in the following setting:
(1) Q1 , Q2 , Z1 , Z2 are abelian lcsc groups, written additively.
(2) βi : Q2i → Zi are skew-symmetric bi-homomorphisms, which give rise to 2-step nilpotent lcsc groups Ni := Qi ⊕βi Zi .
(3) K is a compact group acting by automorphisms on Q1 and leaving β1 invariant; thus
K acts on N1 , fixing the center.
(4) Set G := N1 ⋊ K, H := N2 , and N := N1 × N2 , Q := Q1 × Q2 , Z := Z1 × Z2 . Then
G × H = N ⋊ K and N = Q ⊕β Z, where β : Q2 → Z is given by β((p1 , p2 ), (q1 , q2 )) :=
β1 (p1 , q1 ) + β2 (p2 , q2 ).
(5) ∆ < Q, Ξ < Z are lattices which project injectively to the respective first factor and
densely onto both factors, and β(∆, ∆) ⊂ Ξ. Consequently, ΓN := ∆ ⊕β Ξ is a lattice
in N with the same properties, and if we set
Γ := ΓN ⋊ {e} < N ⋊ K = G × H,

then (G, H, Γ) is a uniform cut-and-project scheme. As before we set Y := (G × H)/Γ.

26

MICHAEL BJÖRKLUND, TOBIAS HARTNICK, AND FELIX POGORZELSKI

(6) Finally, we assume that (G, K) is a Gelfand pair.
(7) We will also assume an exponential decay condition (EDC) on positive-definite spherical
functions of non-trivial central character, which we define in Definition 5.7 below.
Example. The conditions of Convention 5.3 are satisfied for example in the case where N1 =
N2 , and N1 is the real Heisenberg groups, K is the maximal
compact subgroup of the outer
√
automorphism group of N1 and ΓN is the group of Z[ 2]-points of
√ the Heisenberg group,
embedded into N1 × N2 by the two different real embeddings of Z[ 2].
A crucial consequence of our assumptions is that since K preserves β1 , the subgroup Z is
central in G × H, and Z1 is central in G. The latter observation implies that positive definite
spherical functions of (G, K) which are trivial on Z1 correspond to spherical functions of
the virtually abelian Gelfand pair (Q1 ⋊ K, K), which can be described as in the previous
c1 gives rise to a positive definite spherical
subsection. More precisely, every character η1 ∈ Q
function [η1 ] on G given by
Z
η1 (k′ (q1 ))dmK (k′ ),
[η1 ](q1 , z1 , k) :=
K

which depends only on the K-orbit Kη1 of η1 and vanishes on the center Z1 of G, hence
descends to a positive definite spherical function on Q1 ⋊ K. As in the virtually abelian case,
we refer to these positive-definite functions as Bessel type functions.
b and Ξ⊥ ⊂ Zb the dual lattice of ∆ and Ξ
As in the abelian case we denote by ∆⊥ ⊂ Q
respectively. From assumption (5) and Lemma 5.1 we deduce:
c1 and densely to Q
c2 . Similarly, Ξ⊥ projects injectively to
Lemma 5.4. ∆⊥ projects injectively to Q
c1 and densely to Z
c2 .
Z

To describe the spectral decomposition of L2 (Y )K explicitly, we introduce the following
notations.

b we denote by L2 (Q, ∆, χ) the space of measurable funcDefinition 5.5. (i) Given χ ∈ Z
tions h : Q → C satisfying
h(q1 , q2 ) = h(q1 + δ1 , q2 + δ2 )χ1 (β1 (q1 , δ1 ))χ2 (β2 (q2 , δ2 ))

for all (δ1 , δ2 ) ∈ ∆

(5.3)

and |h| ∈ L2 (Q/∆).
c1 we denote by ΩK,χ (Q1 ) the space of all (K, χ1 )-spherical functions, i.e. all
(ii) Given χ1 ∈ Z
1
continuous functions ωo : Q1 → C satisfying ωo (0) = 1 and
Z
ωo (x + k(y))χ1 (β1 (x, k(y)))dmK (k) = ωo (x)ωo (y) for all x, y ∈ Q1 ,
(5.4)
K

and for all f ∈ Cc (N1 ),
Z Z
ωo (q2 − q1 )χ1 (−β1 (q1 , q1 ))f (q1 , z1 )f (q2 , z2 ) dmN1 (q1 , z1 )dmN1 (q2 , z2 ) ≥ 0.
N1

(5.5)

N1

(iii) Given χ = χ1 ⊗ χ2 ∈ Ξ⊥ and ωo ∈ ΩK,χ1 (Q1 ) we denote by L2 (Q, ∆, χ, ωo ) the space of
all h ∈ L2 (Q, ∆, χ) which satisfy
Z
χ1 (β1 (x1 , k(q1 )))h(x1 − k(q1 ), x2 )dmK (k) = ωo (−q1 ) · h(x1 , x2 ).
K

We will also identify characters of Q1 with homomorphisms N1 → S 1 vanishing on the
center.

APERIODIC ORDER AND SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION

27

Proposition 5.6. The spectral decomposition of L2 (Y )K is given as follows.
(i) Every ω ∈ ΩΓ is either a Bessel type function of the form ω = [η1 ] for some η = η1 ⊗ η2 ∈ ∆⊥ or
of the form ω(q1 , z1 , k) = ωo (q1 )χ1 (z1 ) for some χ = χ1 ⊗ χ2 ∈ Ξ⊥ \ {1} and ωo ∈ ΩK,χ1 (Q1 ).
L
C · η ′ ), where the sum is take
(ii) If ω = [η1 ] for some η = η1 ⊗ η2 ∈ ∆⊥ , then L2 (Y )K
ω = iY (
⊥
′
′
′
over all η = η1 ⊗ η2 ∈ ∆ with η1 ∈ Kη1 .
(iii) If ω(q1 , z1 , k) = ωo (q1 )χ1 (z1 ) for some χ = χ1 ⊗ χ2 ∈ Ξ⊥ \ {1} and ωo ∈ ΩK,χ1 (Q1 ), then
there is an isomorphism
jχ : L2 (Q, ∆, χ, ωo ) → L2 (Y )K
ω,

h 7→ F

(5.6)

given by
F ((q1 , z1 , k), (q2 , z2 )) = h(k−1 (q1 ), q2 )χ1 (z1 )χ2 (z2 ).
We postpone the proof of Proposition 5.6 to the following subsection. From the proposition
one obtains immediately that
[
ΩΓ ⊆ {[η1 ] | ∃η = η1 ⊗ η2 ∈ ∆⊥ } ∪
{ωo ⊗ χ1 | ωo ∈ ΩK,χ1 (Q1 )}
(5.7)
χ=χ1 ⊗χ2 ∈Ξ⊥ \{1}

In general, the inclusion on (5.7) may be proper, since for ω as in (iii) it may happen that
L2 (Y )K
ω = {0}. We will later provide a sufficient condition (EDC) which guarantees that each
of these spaces is infinite-dimensional, and hence that equality holds in (5.7). This condition
will be satisfied in the Heisenberg example above.
Let now f ∈ H(G, K) and r ∈ L2α (H), where α is chosen as in Subsection 4.2 and let
F := PΓ (f ⊗ r). By Proposition 4.5 we have F ∈ L2 (Y )K , and the latter space decomposes as
M
d
L2 (Y )K =
L2 (Y )K
(5.8)
ω,
ω∈ΩΓ

where ΩΓ is given by (5.7) above. If for every ω ∈ ΩΓ we denote by Fω the projection of F to
L2 (Y )K
ω , then by (4.4)
X
X
covol(Γ)2 ·
kFω k2 =
Sr(ω) · |fˆ(ω)|2 ,
ω∈ΩΓ

ω∈ΩΓ

and thus, since the Fourier transforms of functions in H(G, K) separate points in ΩΓ , we
conclude that for every ω ∈ ΩΓ we have
|fˆ(ω)|2 · Sr(ω) = covol(Γ)2 · kFω k2 .

(5.9)

Thus in order to compute the shadow transform, we have to compute the norms kFω k2 . If
ω = [η1 ] for some η1 ⊗ η2 ∈ Ξ⊥ , then we argue exactly as in the virtually abelian case. Thus if
we denote by (Kη1 )(2) the set of all η2 such that (k.η1 , η2 ) ∈ Ξ⊥ for some k ∈ K, then
X
Sr([η1 ]) = covol(Γ)2 ·
|rb1 (η2 )|2 (r ∈ L2α (H)),
η2 ∈(Kη1 )(2)

where r1 (·) =
variable.

R

Z2

r(·, z2 ) dmZ2 (z2 ), and the Fourier transform is taken with respect to the Q2 -

It remains to compute the shadow transform Sr(ω) for ω of the form
ω(q1 , z1 , k) = ωo (q1 )χ1 (z1 )

28

MICHAEL BJÖRKLUND, TOBIAS HARTNICK, AND FELIX POGORZELSKI

for some χ = χ1 ⊗ χ2 ∈ Ξ⊥ \ {1} and ωo ∈ ΩK,χ1 (Q1 ). We fix such an ω once and for all and
observe that, by definition,
F ((q1 , z1 , k), (q2 , z2 )) = PΓ (f ⊗ r)((q1 , z1 , k1 ), (q2 , z2 )

= PΓN (f ⊗ r)((k−1 (q1 ), z1 ), (q2 , z2 ))
X
X
=
f (k−1 (q1 ) + δ1 , z1 + ξ1 + ω1 (k−1 (q1 ), δ1 ))
(δ1 ,δ2 )∈∆ (ξ1 ,ξ2 )∈Ξ

· r(q2 + δ2 , z2 + ξ2 + ω2 (q2 , δ2 )).
In order to compute the norm of the projection Fω for ω as above we need to construct a dense
∼ 2
subspace of L2 (Y )K
ω = L (Q, ∆, χ, ωo ). We would like to construct such a dense subspace by
suitable periodizations, but for these periodizations to converge we need to assume sufficient
decay of certain spherical functions.
Definition 5.7. The Gelfand pair (G, K) satsfies the exponential decay condition (EDC) provided
c1 \ {1} there exists α > 0 such that ΩK,χ (Q1 ) ⊂ L2 (Q1 ).
for every χ1 ∈ Z
α
1

Remark 5.8. Let us briefly discuss why the condition EDC holds for Gelfand pairs associated
to real Heisenberg groups. For simplicity, let us assume that
Q1 = C p ∼
= R2p

and Z1 = R

and

β1 (z, w) = Im(hz, wi),

where h·, ·i denotes the standard Hermitian inner product on Cp , and K = U (p). By [33,
Proposition 13.2.2], for every non-trivial central character χ1 on Z1 there exists a real polynomial L and a positive constant c such that each (K, χ1 )-spherical function on Q1 satisfies
2

|ωo (q1 )| ≤ L(kq1 k2 )e−ckq1 k ,

for all (q1 , t1 ) ∈ N1 ,

where k · k denotes the Hermitian norm on Cp . In particular, ωo belongs to L2α (Q1 ) for every
α > 0.
From now on we assume that (G, K) satisfies (EDC).
Lemma 5.9. Let χ ∈ Ξ⊥ \ {1} and ωo ∈ ΩK,χ1 (Q1 ).

(i) There is a well defined map Pωo : Cc (Q2 ) → L2 (Q, ∆, χ, ωo ) which sends ψ ∈ Cc (Q2 ) to the
function
X
hψ (q1 , q2 ) :=
ωo (q1 + δ1 )ψ(q2 + δ2 )χ1 (β1 (q1 , δ1 ))χ2 (β2 (q2 , δ2 ))
(δ1 ,δ2 )∈∆

(ii) The map Pωo from (i) has dense image.
Proof. (i) Note that by Lemma 5.4 the assumption χ 6≡ 1 implies χ1 6≡ 1 and thus ωo ∈ L2α (Q1 )
by EDC. If ψ ∈ Cc (Q2 ) then ψ ∈ L2α (Q2 ), and thus |hψ | ∈ L2 (Q/∆) by Proposition 4.5. By
construction,
hψ (q1 , q2 ) = hψ (q1 + δ1 , q2 + δ2 )χ1 (β1 (q1 , δ1 ))χ2 (β2 (q2 , δ2 ))
and thus hψ ∈ L2 (Q, ∆, χ). It is straight-forward to check that actually hψ ∈ L2 (Q, ∆, χ, ωo ).
(ii) Suppose that the image of Pωo is not dense. Then, by Hahn-Banach’s Theorem, there
exists some non-zero h ∈ L2 (Q, ∆, χ, ωo ) such that
hh, hψ i = 0,

for all ψ ∈ Cc (Q2 ),

APERIODIC ORDER AND SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION

which translates to
Z

h(q1 , q2 )ωo (q1 )ψ(q2 ) dmQ (q1 , q2 ) = 0,

Q

29

for all ψ ∈ Cc (Q2 ).

We conclude that there exists a conull subset Q′2 ⊂ Q2 such that
Z
h(q1 , q2 )ωo (q1 ) dmQ1 (q1 ) = 0, for all q2 ∈ Q′2 .
Q1

We want to show that this leads to a contradiction. Firstly, since ∆ is countable, we may
without loss of generality assume that Q′2 is invariant under the projection of ∆ to Q2 . In
particular, since h ∈ L2 (Q, ∆, χ, ωo ), we see that for all q2 ∈ Q′2 and (δ1 , δ2 ) ∈ ∆,
Z
h(q1 , q2 + δ2 )ωo (q1 ) dmQ1 (q1 )
0 =
Q1
Z
=
h(q1 − δ1 + δ1 , q2 + δ2 )ωo (q1 ) dmQ1 (q1 )
Q1
Z
=
h(q1 − δ1 , q2 )χ(β((q1 , q2 ), (δ1 , δ2 )))ωo (q1 ) dmQ1 (q1 ),
Q1

and thus

Z

Q1

h(q1 − δ1 , q2 )χ1 (β1 (q1 , δ1 )) ωo (q1 ) dmQ1 (q1 ) = 0.

We note that the function
τh (t) =

Z

Q1

h(q1 − t, q2 )χ1 (β1 (q1 , t)) ωo (q1 ) dmQ1 (q1 )

is continuous on Q1 , and satisfies τh (δ1 ) = 0 for all (δ1 , δ2 ) ∈ ∆. By assumption the set all
possible δ1 is dense in Q1 , and thus
Z
h(q1 − t, q2 )χ1 (β1 (q1 , t)) ωo (q1 ) dmQ1 (q1 ) = 0, for all t ∈ Q1 .
Q1

In particular, since ωo is K-invariant and β1 (s, t) = −β1 (−t, −s) for all s, t ∈ Q1 , this implies
that
Z Z

h(−t − k(−q1 ), q2 )χ1 (β1 (−t, −k(q1 )) dmK (k) ωo (q1 ) dmQ1 (q1 ) = 0
Q1

K

for all t ∈ Q1 . Since h ∈ L2 (Q, ∆, χ, ωo ), the inner integral equals h(−t, q2 )ω(q1 ) for all t, and
thus
Z
|ωo (q1 )|2 dmQ1 (q1 ) = 0, for all (t, q2 ) ∈ Q1 × Q′2 .
h(−t, q2 )
Q1

We conclude that h = 0 in L2 (Q, ∆, χ, ωo ), and this contradiction finishes the proof.



If we denote by jχ : L2 (Q, ∆, χ, ωo ) → L2 (Y )K
ω the isomorphism from (5.6), then we deduce
that the subset
2
K
{jχ (hψ ) ∈ L2 (Y )K
ω | ψ ∈ Cc (Q2 )} ⊂ L (Y )ω

is dense. In particular, for F = PΓ (f ⊗ r) as above we have

kFω k = sup hF, jχ (hψ )i | kjχ (hψ )k = 1, ψ ∈ Cc (Q2 ) .

(5.10)

30

MICHAEL BJÖRKLUND, TOBIAS HARTNICK, AND FELIX POGORZELSKI

To compute the inner products involved in this expression we introduce the following notations. Given a function h ∈ Cc (N2 ) we define
Z
h(q2 , z2 )χ2 (−z2 ) dmZ2 (z2 ),
hχ2 (q2 ) =
Z2

and given two functions h1 , h2 ∈ Cc (Q2 ) we define their χ2 -twisted convolution by
Z
h1 (x − y)h2 (y)χ2 (β2 (y, x)) dmQ2 (y) (x ∈ Q2 ).
(h1 ∗χ2 h2 )(x) =
Q2

Then we have:
Lemma 5.10. Let F = PΓ (f ⊗ r) as above. Then for all ψ ∈ Cc (Q2 ) we have
X
hF, jχ (hψ )i = fb(ω)
ωo (δ1 )(ψ ∗ ∗χ2 rχ2 )(δ2 )
(δ1 ,δ2 )

and

kjχ (hψ )k2 = kωo k2L2 (Q1 )

X

(δ1 ,δ2 )

ωo (δ1 )(ψ ∗ ∗χ2 ψχ2 )(δ2 ).

Proof. We prove the first formula, the proof of the second formula being similar. One checks
that ωo (−q) = ωo (q), and thus
X Z Z
f (q1 , z1 )r(q2 , z2 )ωo (−q1 − δ1 ) ·
hF, jχ (hψ )i =
(δ1 ,δ2 )∈∆ Q

Z

ψ(q2 + δ2 )χ((z1 , z2 ) + β((q1 , q2 ), (δ1 , δ2 )) dmQ (q1 , q2 ) dmZ (z1 , z2 ).
Note that since f is assumed K-invariant and β1 is skew-invariant we have by (5.4),
Z
f (q1 , z1 )ωo (−q1 )χ1 (β1 (q1 , δ1 )) dmQ1 (q1 )
Q1
Z
Z

f (q1 , z1 )
ωo (k(−q1 ) − δ1 )χ1 (β1 (k(q1 ), δ1 )) dmK (k) dmQ1 (q1 )
=
Q
K
Z 1
Z

f (q1 , z1 )
ωo (k(q1 ) − δ1 )χ1 (β1 (δ1 , k(q1 ))) dmK (k) dmQ1 (q1 )
=
Q
K
Z 1
f (q1 , z1 )ωo (−δ1 )ωo (q1 ) dmQ1 (q1 ).
=
Q1

Comparing this to

we observe that

fb(ω) =

Z

Q1

hF, jχ (hψ )i = fb(ω)
·

Z

Z2

Z

Z

Z1

X

(δ1 ,δ2 )

Q2

f (q1 , z1 )ωo (−q1 )χ1 (−z1 ) dmQ1 (q1 )dmZ1 (z1 ).

φo (−δ1 ) ·

r(q2 , z2 )ψ(q2 + δ2 )χ2 (β2 (q2 , δ2 )) χ2 (−z2 ) dmQ2 (q2 ) dmZ2 (z2 )

The double integral can be rewritten as
Z
ψ ∗ (−δ2 − q2 )rχ2 (q2 )χ2 (β2 (q2 , δ2 )) dmQ2 (q2 ) = (ψ ∗ ∗χ2 rχ2 )(δ2 ),
Q2

APERIODIC ORDER AND SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION

31

and thus the formula follows.



From (5.9) and (5.10) we now deduce that
Sr(ω) = covol(Γ)2 · sup
ψ

X
∆

2

ωo (δ1 )(ψ ∗ ∗χ2 rχ2 )(δ2 ) ,

where the supremum is taken over all ψ ∈ Cc (Q2 ) such that
X
ωo (δ1 )(ψ ∗ ∗χ2 ψχ2 )(δ2 ) = 1/kωo k2L2 (Q1 ) .
∆

This finishes our computation of the coefficients in the spherical diffraction formula for model
sets associated with the cut-and-project set (G, H, Γ). Specializing to the case of real Heisenberg groups we obtain Theorem 1.6.
5.5. Proof of the spectral decomposition in the virtually nilpotent case
This subsection is devoted to the proof of the spectral decomposition of L2 (Y )K as stated in
Proposition 5.6. We first observe that as an N -module we can identify L2 (Y )K with L2 (N/ΓN )
via the isomorphism
iY : L2 (N/ΓN ) → L2 (N ⋊ K/(ΓN ⋊ {e}))K = L2 (Y )K ,

Fe 7→ F,

(5.11)

given by F (q, z, k) := Fe(k−1 (q), z). In particular, this isomorphism is Z-equivariant.
Given χ ∈ Zb we denote by L2 (Y )K
χ the subspace of central character χ. Since the action
of H(G, K) on L2 (Y )K is completely reducible and commutes with the action of Z, the space
L2 (Y )K decomposes as a direct sum over the L2 (Y )K
χ , which we can identify by iY with the
subspace L2 (N/ΓN )χ ⊂ L2 (N/ΓN ) of the same central character. If χ 6∈ Ξ⊥ , then clearly
L2 (N/ΓN )χ = {0} and thus
M
M
L2 (Y )K =
L2 (Y )K
iY (L2 (N/ΓN )χ ).
χ =
χ∈Ξ⊥

χ∈Ξ⊥

b there is an isomorphism
Lemma 5.11. For every χ ∈ Z

iχ : L2 (Q, ∆, χ) → L2 (N/ΓN )χ ,

(5.12)

f ((q1 , z1 ), (q2 , z2 )) = h(q1 , q2 )χ1 (z1 )χ2 (z2 ).

(5.13)

which sends h ∈ L2 (Q, ∆, χ) to the function f given by

Proof. By definition f ∈ L2 (N/ΓN ) is contained in L2 (N/ΓN )χ iff it satisfies the identity
f ((q1 , z1 − w1 ), (q2 , z2 − w2 )) = χ1 (w1 )χ2 (w2 )f ((q1 , z1 ), (q2 , z2 )).

for almost all q1 ∈ Q1 , q2 ∈ Q2 , w1 , z1 ∈ Z1 , w2 , z2 ∈ Z2 , which implies that the product
χ1 (z1 )−1 χ2 (z2 )−1 f ((q1 , z1 ), (q2 , z2 )) is almost surely independent of z1 and z2 , i.e.
f ((q1 , z1 ), (q2 , z2 )) = h(q1 , q2 )χ1 (z1 )χ2 (z2 )
Right-ΓN -invariance of f amounts to the condition
h(q1 , q2 ) = h(q1 + δ1 , q2 + δ2 )χ1 (β1 (q1 , δ1 ))χ2 (β2 (q2 , δ2 )) ((δ1 , δ2 ) ∈ ∆)

or h. In particular, |h| descends to Q/∆. Moreover, square-integrability of f implies that
|h| ∈ L2 (Q/∆), hence h ∈∈ L2 (Q, ∆, χ). Conversely, if h ∈ L2 (Q, ∆, χ), then the function f
given by (5.13) is contained in L2 (N/ΓN )χ .


32

MICHAEL BJÖRKLUND, TOBIAS HARTNICK, AND FELIX POGORZELSKI

For the trivial character χ ≡ 1, Lemma 5.11 specializes to the statement that
L2 (Q, ∆, 1) = L2 (Q/∆).
The decomposition of the latter is now exactly as in the virtually abelian case (Subsection 5.3),
and this establishes Part (ii) of Proposition 5.6.
Now assume that χ = χ1 ⊗ χ2 ∈ Ξ⊥ \ {1}. By Lemma 5.4 we then have χ1 6= 1, hence Part
(i) of Proposition 5.6 follows from the following lemma:
Lemma 5.12. A function ω : G = (Q1 ⊕β1 Z1 ) ⋊ K is a positive-definite spherical function if and
c1 and some ωo ∈ ΩK,χ (Q1 )
only if is of the form ω(x, z, k) = ωo (x)χ1 (z) for some character χ1 ∈ Z
1
Proof. Recall that every positive-definite spherical function ω is the matrix coefficient of an
irreducible spherical representation (Vω , πω ), i.e.
ω(g) = hv, πω (g)vi
b the central character of πω , i.e. the restriction of π
for a unit vector v ∈ VωK . Denote by χ1 ∈ Z
to the center Z1 , and denote by ωo the restriction of ω to Q1 . Since v is K-invariant we obtain
ω(q, z, k) = hv, πω (q)πω (z)πω (k)vi = hv, πω (q)χ1 (z)vi = hv, πω (q)viχ1 (z) = ωo (q)χ1 (z).
c1
Thus every ω ∈ S + (G, K) is of the form ω(x, z, k) = ωo (x)χ1 (z) for some character χ1 ∈ Z
+
and a continuous function ωo : Q1 → C. Recall from Proposition 3.3 that ω ∈ S (G, K) if
and only if ω is bi-K-invariant and satisfies ω(e) = χ1 (e) = 1, (3.2) and (3.1). The latter three
conditions for ω are equivalent to ωo = e, (5.4) and (5.5) for ωo respectively. Finally, bi-Kinvariance of ω amounts to K-invariance of ωo . The latter, however, follows automatically
from (5.4) by choosing x = 0. The lemma follows.

Only Part (iii) of Proposition 5.6 remains to show. Let us denote by
jχ : L2 (Q, ∆, χ) → L2 (Y )K
χ
the isomorphism arising as the composition of the isomorphisms iχ : L2 (Q, ∆, χ) → L2 (N/ΓN )χ
from (5.12) and iY : L2 (N/ΓN )χ → L2 (Y )K
χ from (5.11).
Proposition 5.13. Given χ = χ1 ⊗ χ2 , the weights appearing in the decomposition of L2 (Y K )χ are
of the form ω(x, z, k) = ωo (x)χ1 (z) for some ωo ∈ ΩK,χ1 (Q1 ). If ω is of this form, then
2
jχ−1 (L2 (Y )K
ω ) = L (Q, ∆, χ, ωo ).

Proof. Let h ∈ L2 (Q, ∆, χ) and let f ∈ L2 (N/ΓN )χ be the image of h under the isomorphism
iχ from (5.12). Assume that f ∈ L2 (N/ΓN )χ is an eigenfunction of the Hecke algebra, i.e.
there exists ω ∈ S + (G, K) such that for all ρ ∈ Cc (N1 )K ,
Z
ρ(n1 )f (n−1
(5.14)
1 m1 , m2 )dmN1 (n1 ) = mω (ρ)f (m1 , m2 ) (m1 ∈ N1 , m2 ∈ N2 ).
N1

It then follows from Lemma 5.12 that ω(x, z, k) = ωo (x)χ1 (z) for some ωo ∈ ∆K,χ1 (Q), and
it remains to show only that f satisfying(5.14) is equivalent h ∈ L2 (Q, ∆, χ, ωo ). If we write

APERIODIC ORDER AND SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION

33

m1 = (x1 , t1 ) and m2 = (x2 , t2 ), then the left-hand side of (5.14) is given by
Z
ρ(n1 )f (n−1
1 m1 , m2 )dmN1 (n1 )
N1
Z Z
ρ(q1 , z1 )f ((x1 − q1 , t1 − z1 + β1 (x1 , q1 )), (x2 , t2 )) dmZ1 (z1 ) dmQ1 (q1 )
=
Q 1 Z1
Z Z
ρ(q1 , z1 )h(x1 − q1 , x2 )χ1 (t1 − z1 + β1 (x1 , q1 ))χ2 (t2 ) dmZ1 (z1 ) dmQ1 (q1 )
=
Q 1 Z1

Z
Z
ρ(q1 , z1 )χ1 (−z1 ) dmZ1 (z1 ) dmQ1 (q1 ).
χ1 (β1 (x1 , q1 ))h(x1 − q1 , x2 )
= χ1 (t1 )χ2 (t2 ) ·
Z1

Q1

In terms of the K-invariant function
ρχ1 (q1 ) :=

Z

Z1

ρ(q1 , z1 )χ1 (−z1 ) dmZ1 (z1 )

this can be written as
Z
Z
−1
ρ(n1 )f (n1 m1 , m2 )dmN1 (n1 ) = χ1 (t1 )χ2 (t2 )·
N1

Q1

χ1 (β1 (x1 , q1 ))h(x1 −q1 , x2 )ρχ1 (q1 ) dmQ1 (q1 ).

On the other hand, the right-hand side of (5.14) can be written as
Z
ρ(x)ω(x−1 )dmG (x) · h(x1 , x2 )χ1 (t1 )χ2 (t2 )
mω (ρ)f (m1 , m2 ) =
G
Z Z
ρ(q1 , z1 )ω(−q1 , −z1 ) dmZ1 (z1 ) · dmQ1 (q1 )
= χ1 (t1 )χ2 (t2 ) ·
Q 1 Z1 ]
Z
ωo (−q1 )ρχ1 (q1 ) dmQ1 (q1 )h(x1 , x2 ),
= χ1 (t1 )χ2 (t2 ) ·
Q1

and thus (5.14) is equivalent to
Z
Z
χ1 (β1 (x1 , q1 ))h(x1 − q1 , x2 ) · ρχ1 (q1 ) dmQ1 (q1 ) =
Q1

Q1

ωo (−q1 ) · h(x1 , x2 ) · ρχ1 (q1 ) dmQ1 (q1 ).

Now two functions integrate against a dense set of K-invariant functions, if and only if their
averages along K-orbits agree, and thus (5.14) is equivalent to h ∈ L2 (Q, ∆, χ, ωo ). This
finishes the proof.

5.6. Totally disconnected examples: Shadow transform vs. Hecke correspondence
In the case where G is a totally disconnected lcsc group and K < G is a compact open
subgroup, the shadow transform is closely related to a classical object in harmonic analysis,
the so-called Hecke correspondence, which we recall briefly.
For this let G be a totally-disconnected lcsc group, K < G a compact open subgroup so that
(G, K) is a Gelfand pair, H another lcsc group and Γ < G × H a lattice with dense projections
ΓG < G and ΓH < H such that Γ → ΓG is an isomorphism. We will normalize the Haar
measures on G and H such that mG (K) = covol(Γ) = 1. For the moment we do not assume
that Γ is uniform.
Since ΓG is dense in G and K is open, the multiplication map K × ΓG → G is onto. We
denote by g 7→ (kg , γg ) a fixed Borel section of this map. As before we denote by τ : ΓG → H
the map τ (g) = pH (p−1
G (g)).
Proposition 5.14 (Hecke correspondence). Let ΓK := ΓG ∩ K and Γ0 := τ (ΓK ) < H.

34

MICHAEL BJÖRKLUND, TOBIAS HARTNICK, AND FELIX POGORZELSKI

(i) Γ0 < H is a lattice, which is uniform if and only if Γ is uniform.
(ii) The map j : K\(G × H)/Γ → H/Γ0 given by j([g, h]) := hτ (γg−1 )Γ0 is a homeomorphism
with inverse given by i : H/Γ0 → K\(G × H)/Γ, hΓ0 7→ K(e, h)Γ.
(iii) i and j induce mutually inverse isomorphisms of H-representations
i∗ : L2 (Y )K → L2 (H/Γ0 )

and j ∗ : L2 (H/Γ0 ) → L2 (Y )K .

(iv) The Hecke algebra H(G, K) acts on L2 (H/Γ0 ) via
Z
ρ(g)f (τ (γg )hΓ0 ) dmG (g)
T (ρ)(f )(hΓ0 ) =
G

(ρ ∈ H(G, K), f ∈ L2 (H/Γ0 )).

Proof. We first prove (ii). Observe first that for all (g, h) ∈ G × H,

K(g, h)Γ = K(kg γg , h)Γ = K(γg , h)Γ = K(e, hτ (γg )−1 )Γ.

This shows that the map π : H → K\G × H/Γ given by π(h) := K(e, h)Γ is onto. Now
assume that π(h1 ) = π(h2 ). Then
∃k ∈ K, γ ∈ ΓG : (e, h1 ) = k(e, h2 )(γ, τ (γ)) = (kγ, h2 τ (γ))

(5.15)

This implies that kγ = e, hence k = γ −1 ∈ ΓK and thus h1 ∈ h2 Γ0 . Conversely, if h1 ∈ h2 Γ0
then (5.15) holds. Thus π factors through H/Γ0 and defines a continuous bijection i as in the
proposition with inverse j. Now note that H acts on K\(G × H)/Γ, since it commutes with
K, and that i is H-equivariant. It follows that i is open, whence i and j are mutually inverse
homeomorphisms. This proves (ii) and shows in particular that Γ0 is of finite covolume,
respectively cocompact in H if and only if Γ < G × H has the corresponding property. To
show (i) it thus remains to show only that Γ0 is discrete. However, for every compact subset
W ⊂ H we have
Γ0 ∩ W = τ (ΓK ) ∩ W = τ (pG ((K × W ) ∩ Γ)),
which is finite by discreteness of Γ. This finishes the proof of (i) and provides us with a unique
H-invariant probability measure mH/Γ0 on H/Γ0 . Now (ii) yields an H-equivariant isomorphism i∗ : Cc (Y )K → Cc (H/Γ0 ), and under this identification the H-invariant measure mY
on Y must correspond to mH/Γ0 , hence we deduce that (iii) holds. In particular, H(G, K) acts
on L2 (H/Γ0 ) via
T (ρ)(f ) := i∗ (πY (ρ).(j ∗ f )) (ρ ∈ H(G, K), f ∈ L2 (H/Γ0 )).

Writing out the definitions of i∗ , j ∗ and πY explicitly we end up with (iv).



Example. The most classical examples of a Hecke correspondence is given by G := PGL2 (Qp ),
K := PGL2 (Zp ), H := PGL2 (R) and Γ := PGL2 (Z[1/p]) sitting diagonally inside G × H. In
this case, ΓK = PGL2 (Z) and thus
Λ2 := H/Γ0 = PGL2 (R)/PGL2 (Z)
can be identified with the space of homothety classes of lattices in R2 . Here the Hecke algebra
H(G, K) is generated by the single element


p
ρ0 := χKgp K ∈ H(G, K), where gp :=
,
1
and the action of the Hecke algebra on Λ2 is determined by
X
T (ρ0 )f (Λ) =
f (Λ′ ).
[Λ:Λ′ ]=p

APERIODIC ORDER AND SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION

35

While Example 5.6 concerns a non-uniform lattice, here we are interested in the case of a
uniform lattice Γ < G × H. In this case, Γ0 is cocompact in H, and we can decompose the
representation (L2 (H/Γ0 ), T ) of H(G, K) as
M
L2 (H/Γ0 ) =
L2 (H/Γ0 )ω ,
ω∈ΩΓ

where L2 (H/Γ

L2 (H/Γ

0 )ω ⊂
0 ) denotes the H(G, K)-eigenspace of weight ω. Given a function
r ∈ Cc (H), we denote by PΓ0 r ∈ Cc (H/Γ0 ) ⊂ L2 (H/Γ0 ) its periodization over Γ0 and by
PΓ0 rω the projection of the latter onto L2 (H/Γ0 )ω .

Proposition 5.15 (Shadow transform vs. Hecke correspondence). Let r ∈ Cc (H/Γ0 ) and denote
by j ∗ : L2 (H/Γ0 ) → L2 (Y )K the Hecke correspondence. Then
Sr(ω) = covol(Γ)2 · kj ∗ (PΓ0 rω )k22 .

Proof. We recall from Proposition 4.6 that Sr(ω) = ke
r (ω)k22 , where re satisfies
fb(ω) · re(ω)
= πω (PΓ (f ⊗ r))
covol(Γ)

(5.16)

for every f ∈ H(G, K). Now observe that χK is a two-sided identity in H(G, K), and thus for
all h ∈ H(G, K) and ω ∈ S + (G, K),
b
χ
bK (ω) · b
h(ω) = χ\
K ∗ h(ω) = h(ω),

and hence χ
bK (ω) = 1. We can thus apply (5.16) with f := χK and obtain
re(ω)
= πω (PΓ (χK ⊗ r)),
covol(Γ)

and thus

Sr(ω) = covol(Γ)2 · kπω (PΓ (χK ⊗ r))k2 .
Now for (g, h) ∈ G × H we have
X
X
PΓ (χK ⊗ r)((g, h)Γ) =
χK (gγ)r(hτ (γ)) =
χK (kg γg γ)r(hτ (γ))
γ∈ΓG

=

X

γ∈ΓG

χK (γg γ)r(hτ (γ))

γ∈ΓG

=

X

X

=

χK (γ)r(hτ (γg−1 )τ (γ))

γ∈γg ΓG

χK (γ)r(j([g, h])τ (γ))

γ∈ΓG

=

X

r(j([g, h])τ (γ))

γ∈ΓK

= PΓ0 (r ◦ j)((g, h)Γ)

=

j ∗ (PΓ0 r)((g, h)Γ),

hence PΓ (χK ⊗r) = j ∗ (PΓ0 r). Finally, by H(G, K)-equivariance of the Hecke-correspondence,
we have
r̃(ω) = πω (j ∗ (PΓ0 r)) = j ∗ (πω (PΓ0 r)) = j ∗ (PΓ0 rω ),
and the proposition follows.

Corollary 5.16 (Spherical diffraction formula for a compact-open K). In the situation of Proposition 5.15 the spherical diffraction ηbP of the model set P in G/K associated with the cut-and-project
scheme (G, H, Γ) and window W0 is given by
X
ηbP =
kπω (PΓ0 χW0 )k2H/Γ0 · δω .
ω∈ΩΓ



36

MICHAEL BJÖRKLUND, TOBIAS HARTNICK, AND FELIX POGORZELSKI

A PPENDIX A. A PPROXIMATION

OF THE SPHERICAL AUTO - CORRELATION

A.1. Statement of the approximation theorem
Throughout this appendix we consider the following situation. (G, K) is a Gelfand pair, Λ
a regular model set (not necessarily uniform) in G associated with a cut-and-project scheme
(G, H, Γ) and a window W0 ⊂ H. We then denote by P ⊂ G/K is the corresponding model
set in G/K and by by ν the unique G-invariant measure on YP× . By definition, the spherical auto-correlation of P is given by ηP := ην . The goal of this appendix is to provide an
approximation formula for ηP under rather general circumstances.
We will identify compact subsets of G/K with right-K-invariant subset of G, and Kinvariant (i.e. radial) subsets of G/K with bi-K-invariant subsets of G. Given a sequence
(Ft ) of compact subsets of G of positive measure we denote by (βt ) the associated sequence
of probability measures on G defined by
Z
1
βt (ρ) =
ρ(s) dmG (s), for ρ ∈ Cc (G).
mG (Ft ) Ft
Definition A.1. Let (Ft ) be a sequence of K-invariant compact subsets of G/K of positive
Haar measure. Then (Ft ) is called a good approximation sequence for Γ with respect to the
Gelfand pair (G, K) if
(GAS1) (Ft ) is weakly admissible in the sense of [6, Def. 5.1];
(GAS2) the associated sequence (βt ) of bi-K-invariant Borel probability measures on G satisfies
lim βbt (ω) = 0 for all ω ∈ spec(G,K)(L2 ((G × H)/Γ)) \ {1}.
t→∞

Theorem A.2 (Approximation of the spherical auto-correlation of a model set). Let P ⊂ G/K
be the regular model set associated with (G, H, Γ, W0 ) and let (Ft ) be a good approximation sequence
for Γ with respect to the Gelfand pair (G, K). Then the spherical auto-correlation ηP ∈ R(K\G/K)
is given by
X X
1
f (x−1 y) (f ∈ H(G, K)).
ηP (f ) = lim
t→∞ mG (Ft )
x∈P0 ∩Ft y∈P0

A.2. Reduction to a pointwise ergodic theorem
We now turn to the proof of Theorem A.2. Let G, K, H, Γ, Λ, P be as above and fix a good
approximation sequence (Ft ) for Γ with respect to the Gelfand pair (G, K) with associated
sequence (βt ) of bi-K-invariant Borel probability measures on G.
We recall from Proposition 2.11 that ηP = ηΛ |H(G,K) . In view of [6, Thm. 5.3], Theorem A.2
will thus follow if we can establish that the Hecke algebra H(G, K) is generic with respect to
ν and (Ft ) in the sense of [6, Def. 5.2], i.e. that
Z
1
∗
Pf1 (s−1 Λ) Pf2 (s−1 Λ) dmG (s) for all f1 , f2 ∈ H(G, K).
ην (f1 ∗ f2 ) = lim
t→∞ mG (Ft ) F
t
This condition can be rephrased as a pointwise ergodic theorem for the parameter space Y :=
(G × H)/Γ as follows.
Definition A.3. A sequence (βt ) of bi-K-invariant Borel probability measures on G is called
pointwise good with respect to (K, Y ) if
Z
Z
−1
h dmY for all h ∈ Cb (Y )K and y ∈ Y .
h(g .y) dβt (g) =
lim
t→∞

G

Y

APERIODIC ORDER AND SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION

37

Lemma A.4 (Genericity criterion). Let (Ft ) be a sequence of K-invariant compact subsets of G/K
of positive Haar measure, and let (βt ) the corresponding sequence of probability measures on G.
If the sequence (βt ) is pointwise good with respect to (K, Y ), then H(G, K) is generic with respect
to ν and (Ft ), and thus Theorem A.2 holds.
Proof. Denote by β : XΛ → Y the periodization map from [6, Thm. 3.1] and let y0 := β(Λ) ∈
Y . We recall from [6, Thm. 4.11 and Lemma 4.12] that for f ∈ Cc (G) we have
(A.1)

Pf (P ) = PΓ (f ⊗ χW0 )(β(P )).
Now let f1 , f2 ∈ H(G, K). Then by (A.1) and G-equivariance of β we have
Pf (s−1 Λ) = PΓ (fj ⊗ χW0 )(β(s−1 Λ)) = Pf (s−1 y0 )

(s ∈ G),

and hence if we define a function h : Y → C by
h(y) := PΓ (f1 ⊗ χW0 )(y)PΓ (f2 ⊗ χW0 )(y),
then by definition of the measures βt we obtain
Z
1
Pf1 (s−1 Λ)Pf2 (s−1 Λ) dmG (s)
lim
t→∞ mG (Ft ) F
Zt
1
= lim
PΓ (f1 ⊗ χW0 )(s−1 .y0 )PΓ (f2 ⊗ χW0 )(s−1 .y0 )dmG (s)
t→∞ mG (Ft )
Z
Z Ft
1
−1
h(g −1 .y0 ) dβt (g).
h(s .y0 )dmG (s) = lim
= lim
t→∞
t→∞ mG (Ft )
G
Ft
If we now assume that (βt ) is pointwise good, then unravelling the definition of h we obtain
Z
1
lim
Pf1 (s−1 Λ)Pf2 (s−1 Λ) dmG (s)
t→∞ mG (Ft ) F
t
Z
Z
h dmY
h(g−1 .y0 ) dβt (g) =
= lim
t→∞ G

= hPΓ (f1 ⊗ χW0 ), PΓ (f2 ⊗ χW0 )iY

Y

=

ην (f1∗ ∗ f2 ),

which shows that H(G, K) is generic with respect to ν and (Ft ).



A.3. From the spectral condition to the pointwise ergodic theorem
We keep the notation of the previous subsection. In order to finish the proof of Theorem
A.2 it remains to show only that every sequence (βt ) of bi-K-invariant probability measures
on G satisfying the spectral condition (GAS2) from Definition A.1 above is pointwise good
with respect to (K, Y ). By a classical argument (recalled in Proposition A.6 below), Condition
(GAS2) implies that the sequence (βt ) satisfies a spherical mean ergodic theorem. The work of
Gorodnik and Nevo [17, 18, 19, 20, 21] investigates in great generality under which conditions
one can sharpen mean ergodic theorems for (possibly non-amenable) groups into pointwise
statements. Specializing some of their ideas to the setting at hand we will show that in our
setting the mean ergodic theorem implies the desired pointwise statement, thereby finishing
the proof of Theorem A.2.
Let us start by formulating the mean ergodic theorem which is implied by the spectral
condition (GAS2).

38

MICHAEL BJÖRKLUND, TOBIAS HARTNICK, AND FELIX POGORZELSKI

Definition A.5. Let (Y, ν) be a G-probability space. A sequence (βt ) of bi-K-invariant Borel
probability measures on G is called weakly ergodic with respect to (K, Y ) if for every f ∈
L2 (Y )K the functions
Z
f (s−1 y) dβt (s)
Ft (y) :=
G
R
converge to the constant function Y f dmY with respect to the weak topology in L2 (Y ) as
t → ∞.

With this terminology understood, the classical mean ergodic theorem for Gelfand pairs
can be formulated as follows.
Proposition A.6. Let (Y, ν) be an ergodic G-probability space and let (βt ) be a sequence of bi-Kinvariant Borel probability measures on G . Then the following are equivalent.
(i) (βt ) satisfies the spectral condition (GAS2).
(ii) (βt ) is weakly ergodic with respect to (K, Y ).
To keep our exposition self-contained, we recall the well-known proof.
Proof. We consider the subrepresentation W := L2o (Y ) ⊂ L2 (Y ). Then

spec(G,K)(L2 (Y )) \ {1} ⊂ supp(νW ) ⊂ spec(G,K) (L2 (Y ))

and since (Y, ν) is ergodic, the trivial representation is not contained in W , and thus νW ({1}) =
0 by Lemma 3.5. Observe that (ii) is equivalent to the condition
hπW (βt )f1 , f2 iL2 (Y ) → 0 (f1 , f2 ∈ L2o (Y )K ),

which by polarization is equivalent to

lim hf, πW (βt )f i = 0 (f ∈ L2o (Y )K ).

t→∞

Under the isomorphism
W

K

∼
=

Z

(A.2)

⊕

S + (G,K)

Vω dνW (ω)

the function f corresponds to a vector field (fω ) on supp(νW ) and we have
πW (βt ).(fω ) = (βbt (ω) · fω ).

Thus (A.2) is equivalent to lim βbt (ω) = 0 for νW -almost all ω, or equivalently, νL2 (Y,ν) -almost
all ω ∈ spec(G,K)(L2 (Y )) \ {1}. This shows that (i) and (ii) are equivalent.

At this point we have reduced the proof of Theorem A.2 to the following purely ergodic
theoretic statement:
Theorem A.7 (Weak ergodicity implies pointwise goodness). If a sequence (βt ) of bi-K-invariant
Borel probability measures on G is weakly ergodic with respect to (K, Y ), then it is pointwise good
with respect to (K, Y ).
The proof of Theorem A.7 is based on two lemmas. The first one is just a convenient
reformulation of Definition A.5.
Lemma A.8. Suppose that ν is a bounded positive Borel measure on Y which is absolutely continuous
with respect to mY with a square-integrable density. If (βt ) is weakly ergodic with respect to (K, Y ),
then β̌t ∗ ν → mY in the vague topology.

APERIODIC ORDER AND SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION

39

The second ingredient is the following continuity result, which is known in various related
forms and which we state and prove here for ease of reference.
Lemma A.9. Let ψ ∈ Cc (G × H) be non-negative and fix y ∈ Y . Then the bounded non-negative
measure ν on Y , defined by
Z Z
ψ(g, h)f ((g, h).y) dmG (g)dmH (h) for f ∈ Cc (Y ),
ν(f ) = (ψ ∗ δy )(f ) =
G

H

is absolutely continuous with respect to mY with a bounded density.
Proof. It suffices to prove the lemma when y = (e, e)Γ. We begin by noting that ν is uniquely
determined by its values at functions f of the form
X
f ((g, h)Γ) =
F ((g, h)γ), where F ∈ Cc (G × H),
γ∈Γ

and a straightforward calculation shows that if f has this form, then
Z
Z
f (y)ρψ (y) dmY (y),
F (g, h)ρψ ((g, h)Γ) dmG (g) dmG (h) =
ν(f ) =
Y

G

where
ρψ ((g, h)Γ) =

X

ψ((g, h)γ).

γ∈Γ

This shows that ν is absolutely continuous with respect to mY with density ρψ . To prove that
this density is bounded, we obtserve that
|ρψ ((g, h)Γ)| ≤ kψk∞ · | supp(ψ) ∩ (g, h)Γ|

Since Γ has finite local complexity and supp(ψ) is compact, the right-hand side is uniformly
bounded (see e.g. [5, (2.1)]).

Proof of Theorem A.7. Given a non-negative ψ ∈ Cc (G × H) and a bounded positive measure
ν on Y , we define a new bounded positive measure ψ∗ ν on Y by
ψ∗ ν(φ) := ν(ψ̌ ∗ φ).

With this notation we have to show that for every y ∈ Y the sequence (β̌t )∗ δy converges to
mY in the vague topology. Note that the set {(β̌t )∗ δy } is vaguely sequentially pre-compact
in the space of all sub-probability measures. It thus suffices to show that every vague limit
point ν coincides with mY .
Thus assume that ν is a sub-probability measure given by ν = lim (β̌tn )∗ δy for some subsequence (tn ) and note that ν is automatically K-invariant. We have to show that ν = mY .
For this it suffices to show that ρ∗ ν = mY for every probability density ρ ∈ Cc (G × H)K , for
then we can extract an approximate identity (ρn ) of such functions and conclude that
ν = lim (ρn )∗ ν = mY .
n→∞

H)K

Thus let ρ ∈ Cc (G ×
be a probability density and f ∈ Cc (Y ). Observe that β̌t commutes
with Cc (H) since the G and H actions commute, and thus, by commutativity of the Hecke
algebra, the β̌t commute with every ρ ∈ Cc (G × H)K with respect to convolution. We thus
have
ρ∗ ν(f ) =
=

lim ρ∗ ((β̌tn )∗ δy )(f ) = lim (ρ ∗ β̌tn )∗ δy (f )

n→∞

n→∞

lim (β̌tn ∗ ρ)∗ δy (f ) = lim (ρ∗ δy )(βtn ∗ f ).

n→∞

n→∞

40

MICHAEL BJÖRKLUND, TOBIAS HARTNICK, AND FELIX POGORZELSKI

By Lemma A.9, ρ∗ δy is absolutely continuous with respect to mY with a bounded (hence
square-integrable) density. By Lemma A.8, we conclude that the last limit above is equal to
mY (f ), which finishes the proof.

This finishes the proof of Theorem A.2.
A.4. Examples of good approximation sequences
In order to apply Theorem A.2 we need to construct good approximate sequences in the
lcsc groups we are interested in. The existence of such sequences depends very much on the
class of groups in question. As we will see, many amenable and all semisimple groups admit
plenty of good approximate sequences, but for very different reasons (existence of Følner sets
vs. mixing).
As for amenable groups, we have already pointed out in [6] that every weakly admissible
Følner sequence is a good approximation sequence. We do not know whether every amenable
groups admits such a sequence, but many examples of interest do.
In the semisimple case, the existence of good approximation sequences is guaranteed by
the Howe–Moore theorem, as we will explain next. Recall first that if G is a semisimple real
Lie group, then all maximal compact subgroups of G are conjugate, and if K is any such
subgroup, then (G, K) is a Gelfand pair. Similarly, if G is a semisimple group over a nonArchimidean local field, then we can construct a Gelfand pair (G, K) by choosing K to be a
vertex stabilizer of the associated Bruhat-Tits building. Generalizing both cases, if G is an Sadic semisimple group in the sense of [4], then we obtain a Gelfand pair (G, K) by choosing
K to be the product of the maximal compact subgroups of the Archimedean local factors and
the vertex stabilizers of the Bruhat-Tits buildings associated with the non-Archimedean local
factors. For these Gelfand pairs we have:
Proposition A.10 (Good approximation sequences in semisimple groups). Let G be a S-adic
semisimple group, Γ < G a lattice and K < G as above. Then every weakly admissible sequence (Ft )
is a good approximation sequence for Γ with respect to the Gelfand pair (G, K).
Proof. Every ω ∈ S + (G, K) \ {1} is a matrix coefficient for some non-trivial irreducible spherical representation V of G. Since V is irreducible and non-trivial, it does not contain any
fixed vectors, hence its matrix coefficients decay by the (S-adic version of the) Howe–Moore
theorem.

Proposition A.10 is related to the fact that the G-action on Y is mixing, a phenomenon which
does not occur in the abelian case. To illustrate further the connection between good approximation sequences in non-amenable groups and mixing, we consider a class of examples of
model sets in (automorphism groups of) trees.
Let T = Td be a d-regular tree, o ∈ T a vertex, G := Aut(T ) the full automorphism group
and K := Stab(o). Then K is a maximal compact subgroup of G, and (G, K) is a Gelfand pair
(see [14] for a discussion of these Gelfand pairs). G contains a topologically simple subgroup
G0 of index 2, which contains K (see [32]). If we fix a bi-partite coloring of the vertices of T ,
then G0 can be defined as the subgroup of coloring preserving automorphisms of T . By [24],
G0 has the Howe–Moore property.
Let us briefly explain how to construct model sets in G0 using the results from [7, 8].
Given d ∈ N we denote by Sd the permutation group on d letters and let F < Sd be a
2-transitive subgroup, e.g. the alternating group Ad . As explained in [7, Sec. 3.2] one obtains
a subgroup U (F ) < Aut(Td ) called the universal group of F . Roughly speaking, U (F ) consists

APERIODIC ORDER AND SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION

41

of those automorphisms of Td which on each vertex link induce a permutation from F with
respect to some fixed legal coloring, and different colorings lead to conjugate subgroups of
Aut(Td ). If d1 , d2 are large even integers (d1 ≥ 30 and d2 ≥ 38 is sufficient), then Burger and
Mozes construct in [8, Thm. 6.3] a lattice
Γ1 < U (Ad1 ) × U (Ad2 ) < Aut(Td1 ) × Aut(Td2 )

with the following properties. The projections of Γ1 into U (Ad1 ) and U (Ad2 ) are dense, Γ1 is
torsion-free, cocompact and admits a finite index simple subgroup Γ.
Proposition A.11 (Model sets of Burger–Mozes type). Let d ≥ 30 be an even integer, G :=
Aut(Td ), G0 < G the index 2 subgroup, H := U (A38 ) and Γ as above. Then Γ is a simple cocompact
lattice in G0 × H, and (G, H, Γ) and (G0 , H, Γ) are model set triples.

Proof. By [8, Thm. 6.3], Γ1 is cocompact and projects densely into H; the finite index subgroup
Γ inherits these properties. The projection of Γ to G is non-trivial, since it has finite index in
the projection of Γ1 which is dense in U (Ad1 ). Since Γ is simple, the projection is injective and
the finite index subgroup Γ ∩ (G0 × H) coincides with Γ, i.e. Γ is contained in G0 × H.


We now discuss approximation sequences for Γ. Observe that bi-K-invariant subsets in
G correspond via the projection π : G → G/K = T to radial subsets of T . Thus the most
obvious sequence of bi-K-invariant sets in G is (Ft := π −1 (Bt (o)))t∈N , and these are easily
seen to be weakly admissible. Similarly, the sets (Ft,0 ) := (Ft ∩ G0 ) form a weakly admissible
sequence in G0 . Since G0 has the Howe-Moore property we deduce as in the Lie group case
that the sequence (Ft,0 ) is a good approximation sequence for Γ with respect to (G0 , K). On
the other hand we have:
Proposition A.12 (Nevo–Stein phenomenon for model sets of Burger–Mozes type). The sequence (Ft ) is not a good approximation sequence for Γ with respect to (G, K), but the sequence (F2t )
is.

The second part of the proposition is immediate from the Howe-Moore property of G0 .
The reason for the failure of the spectral property in the former case is a lack of mixing:
Lemma A.13. The action of G on Y = (G × H)/Γ is not mixing. In fact, G0 does not act ergodically.

Proof. If G0 acted ergodically on Y , then Γ would have to act ergodically on (G/G0 ) × H
by the duality principle. However, a finite index subgroup of Γ preserves the open subset
{e} × H ⊂ (G/G0 ) × H. Since Γ is simple and infinite, this finite index subgroup coincides
with Γ, contradicting ergodicity.

Proof of Proposition A.12. The Hecke algebra H(G, K) is generated by a single element σ1 ,
hence spherical functions ω are determined by c
σ1 (ω). Explicitly, σ1 is the characteristic function of the clopen subset π −1 (S1 (o)), where S1 (o) ⊂ T denotes the 1-sphere around o. The sign
function ω0 ∈ S + (G, K) is the unique positive definite spherical function with c
σ1 (ω0 ) = −1.
Let now G0 as in Lemma A.13. We deduce from the proposition that there exists a nonzero function f0 ∈ L2o (Y )G0 . Since K < G0 , the Hecke algebra H(G, K) acts on L2 (Y )G0 =
L2 ((G/G0 )×H/Γ), and σ1 ∗σ1 acts trivially on L2 (Y )G0 . Thus if we define f := f0 −σ1 ∗f0 , then
σ1 ∗ f = −f , and thus the sign function ω0 is contained in the spectrum of L2o ((G × H)/Γ).
Since βbt (ω0 ) 6→ 0 for the sequence (βt ) associated to (Ft ), the sequence (Ft ) is not a good
approximation sequence for Γ.

The proposition shows in particular that the spectral condition in the approximation theorem is not always satisfied automatically in the non-amenable case and can be rather subtle.

42

MICHAEL BJÖRKLUND, TOBIAS HARTNICK, AND FELIX POGORZELSKI

R EFERENCES
[1] M. Baake, D. Frettlöh, and U. Grimm. A radial analogue of Poisson’s summation formula with applications
to powder diffraction and pinwheel patterns. J. Geom. Phys., 57(5):1331–1343, 2007.
[2] M. Baake and U. Grimm. Aperiodic order. Vol. 1, volume 149 of Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013. A mathematical invitation, With a foreword by Roger
Penrose.
[3] M. Baake and D. Lenz. Dynamical systems on translation bounded measures: pure point dynamical and
diffraction spectra. Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems, 24(6):1867–1893, 2004.
[4] Y. Benoist and J.-F. Quint. Lattices in S-adic Lie groups. J. Lie Theory, 24(1):179–197, 2014.
[5] M.
Bjorklund
and
T.
Hartnick.
Approximate
lattices.
Preprint,
2016.
on
arXiv:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1612.09246.
[6] M. Bjorklund, T. Hartnick, and F. Pogorzelski. Aperiodic order and spherical diffraction, i: Auto-correlation
of model sets. Preprint, 2017.
[7] M. Burger and S. Mozes. Groups acting on trees: from local to global structure. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ.
Math., (92):113–150 (2001), 2000.
[8] M. Burger and S. Mozes. Lattices in product of trees. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math., (92):151–194 (2001),
2000.
[9] C. Ciobotaru. A note on type I groups acting on d-regular trees. preprint, 2015. on arXiv:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.02950.
[10] Y. Cornulier and P. de la Harpe. Metric geometry of locally compact groups, volume 25 of EMS Tracts in Mathematics. European Mathematical Society (EMS), Zürich, 2016.
[11] G. v. Dijk. Introduction to Harmonic Analysisand Generalized Gelfand Paris, volume 26 of Studies in Mathematics.
Walter de Gruyter, 2009.
[12] J. Dixmier. C ∗ -algebras. North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam-New York-Oxford, 1977. Translated from
the French by Francis Jellett, North-Holland Mathematical Library, Vol. 15.
[13] S. Dworkin. Spectral theory and x-ray diffraction. J. Math. Phys., 34(7):2965–2967, 1993.
[14] A. Figà-Talamanca and C. Nebbia. Harmonic analysis and representation theory for groups acting on homogeneous
trees, volume 162 of London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
1991.
[15] G. Folland. A course in abstract harmonic analysis, volume 172 of Studies in advanced mathematics. CRC-Press,
1995.
[16] R. Godement. Introduction aux travaux de A. Selberg. In Exposé no. 144, February 1957, volume 4 of Séminaire
Bourbaki, pages 95–110. Soc. Math. France, 1957.
[17] A. Gorodnik and A. Nevo. The ergodic theory of lattice subgroups, volume 172 of Annals of Mathematics Studies.
Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2010.
[18] A. Gorodnik and A. Nevo. Counting lattice points. J. Reine Angew. Math., 663:127–176, 2012.
[19] A. Gorodnik and A. Nevo. On Arnold’s and Kazhdan’s equidistribution problems. Ergodic Theory Dynam.
Systems, 32(6):1972–1990, 2012.
[20] A. Gorodnik and A. Nevo. Ergodic theory and the duality principle on homogeneous spaces. Geom. Funct.
Anal., 24(1):159–244, 2014.
[21] A. Gorodnik and A. Nevo. Quantitative ergodic theorems and their number-theoretic applications. Bull.
Amer. Math. Soc. (N.S.), 52(1):65–113, 2015.
[22] A. Hof. On diffraction by aperiodic structures. Comm. Math. Phys., 169(1):25–43, 1995.
[23] A. Hof. Uniform distribution and the projection method. In Quasicrystals and discrete geometry (Toronto, ON,
1995), volume 10 of Fields Inst. Monogr., pages 201–206. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1998.
[24] A. Lubotzky and S. Mozes. Asymptotic properties of unitary representations of tree automorphisms. In Harmonic analysis and discrete potential theory (Frascati, 1991), pages 289–298. Plenum, New York, 1992.
[25] Y. Meyer. Nombres de Pisot, nombres de Salem et analyse harmonique. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 117.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York, 1970. Cours Peccot donné au Collège de France en avril-mai 1969.
[26] R. V. Moody. Meyer sets and their duals. In The mathematics of long-range aperiodic order (Waterloo, ON, 1995),
volume 489 of NATO Adv. Sci. Inst. Ser. C Math. Phys. Sci., pages 403–441. Kluwer Acad. Publ., Dordrecht,
1997.
[27] R. V. Moody. Meyer sets and their duals. In From quasicrystals to more complex systems (Les Houches, 1998),
pages 145–166. Springer, Berlin, 2000.

APERIODIC ORDER AND SPHERICAL DIFFRACTION

43

[28] A. Nevo and E. M. Stein. A generalization of Birkhoff’s pointwise ergodic theorem. Acta Math., 173(1):135–
154, 1994.
[29] M. S. Raghunathan. Discrete subgroups of Lie groups. Springer-Verlag, New York-Heidelberg, 1972. Ergebnisse
der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete, Band 68.
[30] M. Schlottmann. Generalized model sets and dynamical systems. In Directions in mathematical quasicrystals,
volume 13 of CRM Monogr. Ser., pages 143–159. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2000.
[31] B. Solomyak. Spectrum of dynamical systems arising from Delone sets. In Quasicrystals and discrete geometry
(Toronto, ON, 1995), volume 10 of Fields Inst. Monogr., pages 265–275. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1998.
[32] J. Tits. Sur le groupe des automorphismes d’un arbre. In Essays on topology and related topics (Mémoires dédiés
à Georges de Rham), pages 188–211. Springer, New York, 1970.
[33] J. A. Wolf. Harmonic analysis on commutative spaces, volume 142 of Mathematical Surveys and Monographs. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2007.
D EPARTMENT OF M ATHEMATICS , C HALMERS , G OTHENBURG , S WEDEN
E-mail address: micbjo@chalmers.se
M ATHEMATICS D EPARTMENT, T ECHNION , H AIFA 32000, I SRAEL
E-mail address: hartnick@tx.technion.ac.il
M ATHEMATICS D EPARTMENT, T ECHNION , H AIFA 32000, I SRAEL
E-mail address: felixp@tx.technion.ac.il

