text:
# Direct Scattering Processes and Signatures of Chaos in Quantum Waveguides

## I Introduction

In 1957, Wigner proposed the use of statistical measures to analyze complex nuclear scattering data . It was soon found that, in some nuclear scattering data, the spacing between scattering resonances was distributed in a manner similar to the spacing of energy levels of a Gaussian random Hamiltonian . In the 1960’s, extensive work was done to develop a systematic theory of the statistical properties of random hermitian matrices  and random unitary matrices . The general criterion for constructing these random matrices is that they minimize information. In 1979, the appearance of random matrix-like behavior in quantum systems was linked to underlying chaos in the classical deterministic dynamics of these systems . Since then a large body of work has developed linking the statistical properties of bounded and open quantum systems to underlying deterministic chaos .

Historically there have been two different approaches to describing the statistics of quantum scattering processes in chaotic systems. One approach  begins directly with the Hamiltonian and uses it to build the scattering matrix. The other approach , begins directly with the scattering matrix. In both cases, random matrices are used to describe scattering processes and the statistical properties of the eigenphases of the scattering matrix and partial delay times can be obtained and compared to experiment. There has been considerable success in recent years to link the results and predictions of these two approaches .

The connection between the statistical properties of scattering processes and underlying chaos is not straightforward because scattering events may involve either reactive processes or direct processes. Reactive scattering processes are those for which an incident particle becomes engaged with the dynamics in the reaction region, and may be delayed there for a considerable time. Direct processes are those for which the particle passes through the reaction region without becoming significantly engaged in the reaction region. One prediction of the random matrix theory (RMT) of scattering is that, if the scattering process is truly chaotic, the average value of the S-matrix will be zero. However, if direct processes are present this will not happen.

In this paper, we will study the deterministic scattering of a quantum particle in a two dimensional ballistic waveguide which has a classically chaotic cavity formed by a ripple billiard connected to a single lead at one end (see Figure 1). The ripple billiard is particularly well suited to the use of the reaction matrix theory approach to scattering , because a simple coordinate transformation  allows us to construct a Hamiltonian matrix and thus an eigenvalue equation for the basis states inside the cavity. We will compare the results of deterministic scattering from the chaotic cavity to some recent predictions of random matrix theory as regards the scattering process. The open geometry of the waveguide in Fig. (1) ensures that direct processes will play an important role in scattering. We show that the contribution of the direct processes to the scattering can be transformed out and the statistical properties of the reactive part of the scattering process can be compared to random matrix predictions. Our discussion focuses on quantum particles and we will use parameters appropriate for electrons in waveguides made with GaAs, for which a number of experiments have been done . However, our results also apply to electro-magnetic waves in flat microwave cavities, because the eigenmodes in these cavities satisfy a Schrodinger-like equation .

We begin in Section (2), by reviewing the reaction matrix theory of deterministic scattering in the ballistic waveguide and we study some properties of the cavity basis states. In Section (3), we study various statistical properties of the eigenphases of the waveguide scattering matrix (S-matrix). We show that, when the cavity dynamics is chaotic, the deterministic S-matrix eigenphases exhibit level repulsion and their distribution is well described by a Poisson kernel. In Section (4), we compare the distribution of partial delay times for the deterministic scattering process to the predictions of random matrix theory. Finally, in Section (5) we give concluding remarks.

## II Reaction matrix description of scattering

We will explore the behavior of a particle of mass, $`m`$, in a ballistic waveguide as it scatters from the ripple cavity shown in Fig. (1). A particle with energy, $`E`$, enters the cavity from the left along a straight lead which has infinitely hard walls. The particle wave is reflected back to the left by an infinitely hard wall located at $`x=L`$. The dynamics inside the cavity, $`0<x<L`$, can range from mixed to fully chaotic as the ripple amplitude is varied. The Schrodinger equation, which describes propagation of a particle wave, $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x,y,t)`$, in the waveguide at time, $`t`$, is given by

$$i\mathrm{}\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }(x,y,t)}{t}=\widehat{H}\mathrm{\Psi }(x,y,t)=\left[\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\left(\frac{^2}{x^2}+\frac{^2}{y^2}\right)+V(x,y)\right]\mathrm{\Psi }(x,y,t),$$
(1)
where $`\widehat{H}`$ is the total Hamiltonian of the particle in the waveguide and $`\mathrm{}`$ is Planck’s constant. The potential, $`V(x,y)`$, has the following properties: $`V(x,y)=\mathrm{}`$ for $`(Lx<\mathrm{})`$; $`V(x,0)=\mathrm{}`$ for $`(\mathrm{}xL)`$; $`V(x,y=g(x))=\mathrm{}`$ for $`(0<x<L)`$; and $`V(x,y=d)=\mathrm{}`$ for $`(\mathrm{}<x<0)`$; where $`g(x)=d+\mathrm{a}\mathrm{sin}(5\pi x/L)`$ gives the contour of the ripple, $`d`$ is the average width of the cavity, $`L`$ is the length, and a is the ripple amplitude. In all subsequent sections, we take the particle mass to be the effective mass of an electron in GaAs, $`m=0.067m_e`$, where $`m_e`$ is the free electron mass. An energy eigenstate, $`|E`$, with energy, $`E`$, satisfies the equation, $`\widehat{H}|E=E|E`$, and evolves as $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x,y,t)=x,y|E\mathrm{e}^{iEt/\mathrm{}}`$.

As shown in reference  the waveguide energy eigenstates can be expressed in the form

$$x,y|E=\underset{j=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\gamma _j\varphi _j(x,y)+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }_n\mathrm{\Phi }_n(x,y).$$
(2)
The states, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_n(x,y)`$, are the basis states in the lead ($`x0`$),

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_n(x,y)x,y|\mathrm{\Phi }_n=\sqrt{\frac{2}{d}}\chi _n(x)\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{n\pi y}{d}\right)$$
(3)
($`n=1,2,\mathrm{},\mathrm{}`$). These will consist of both propagating and evanescent modes, as we will discuss below. The states, $`\varphi _j(x,y)x,y|\varphi _j`$ ($`j=1,2,\mathrm{},\mathrm{}`$), are the basis states in the cavity ($`0xL`$). In practice, we truncate the number of cavity basis states to some large but finite number, $`M`$. The value of $`M`$ is determined by the accuracy desired for the calculation. The coefficients, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_n`$ and $`\gamma _j`$, in Eq. (2) are defined $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_n=\mathrm{\Phi }_n|E`$ and $`\gamma _j=\varphi _j|E`$.

A complete set of basis states, $`\varphi _j(x,y)`$, inside the ripple cavity has been obtained by solving the Schrodinger equation in the cavity, using Neumann boundary conditions ($`(\frac{d\varphi _j}{dx})_{x=0}=0`$) at the entrance ($`x=0`$), and Dirichlet boundary conditions, ($`\varphi _j(x,y)=0`$) at the walls. We obtained the eigenfunctions, $`\varphi _j(x,y)`$ and the associated eigenvalues, $`\lambda _j`$, using the transformation technique discussed in Ref. , Sect. V.

In Fig. (2.a), we show a Poincare surface of section for a classical particle in a closed ripple cavity with the same shape as in Fig. 1, and with hard walls. We choose $`d=101\AA `$, $`L=511\AA `$, and $`\mathrm{a}=1.0\AA `$. We have plotted Birkhoff coordinates, $`p_x/p=\mathrm{cos}(\alpha )`$ versus $`x`$, each time the particle hits the lower wall at point $`x`$ ($`\alpha `$ is the angle between the wall and the momentum). For these billiard dimensions, the classical phase space contains a mixture of regular orbits, nonlinear resonances, and chaotic motion. If we increase the ripple amplitude, a, there is a range of values of a for which the classical motion appears to become totally chaotic. For the scattering system (with one end of the cavity open) periodic orbits and nonlinear resonance regions can’t be reached classically by a particle that enters from the left, but quantum mechanically tunneling into these regions is possible as we will show Section IV (see also ). In Figs. (2.b-e), we show Husimi plots of quantum Poincare surfaces of section  of cavity basis states, $`\varphi _j(x,y)`$, with eigenvalues $`\gamma _{983}=257.1934E_1`$, $`\gamma _{985}=257.9339E_1`$, $`\gamma _{989}=258.6655E_1`$, and $`\gamma _{990}=258.9072E_1`$, where $`E_1=\frac{\mathrm{}^2\pi ^2}{2md^2}`$. The Husumi plots in Fig. (2.c) and Fig. (2.d) show that these bases states reside on nonlinear resonances of the underlying classical phase space. In Section IV, we will show that these bases states give the primary contribution to sharp resonances in the transmission at these cavity parameters.

Inside the lead, we must distinguish between propagating and evanescent modes. The longitudinal component of the eigenstates in the leads, for propagating modes, can be written

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_n\chi _n(x)=\frac{a_n}{\sqrt{k_n}}\mathrm{e}^{ik_nx}+\frac{b_n}{\sqrt{k_n}}\mathrm{e}^{ik_nx},$$
(4)
where the wavevector, $`k_n`$ is given by $`k_n=\sqrt{\frac{2mE}{\mathrm{}^2}\left(\frac{n\pi }{d}\right)^2}`$. If there are $`N`$ propagating modes then $`n=1,\mathrm{},N`$. Here we use a unit current normalization. A particle propagating in the $`n^{th}`$ channel has energy in the interval, $`n^2E_1E(n+1)^2E_1`$, where $`E_1=\frac{\mathrm{}^2\pi ^2}{2md^2}=0.0738`$eV. All remaining modes, $`n=N+1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{}`$, are evanescent and can be represented in terms of the states,

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_n\chi _n(x)=\frac{c_n}{\sqrt{\kappa _n}}\mathrm{e}^{\kappa _n|x|},$$
(5)
where $`\kappa _n=\sqrt{\left(\frac{n\pi }{d}\right)^2\frac{2mE}{\mathrm{}^2}}`$. In Ref. , we showed that the evanescent modes for this system do not make a significant contribution to the scattering properties that we are interested in. Therefore we will neglect the evanescent modes in subsequent sections.

As shown in Ref. , The eigenvalue equation, $`\widehat{H}|E=E|E`$, leads to the relation,

$$\gamma _j=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\frac{1}{(E\lambda _j)}\underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}\varphi _{j,n}^{}(0)\left(\frac{d\chi _n}{dx}\right)_{x=0}\mathrm{\Gamma }_n.$$
(6)
Also, continuity of energy eigenstates at $`x=0`$ gives

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_n\chi _n(0)=\underset{j=1}{\overset{M}{}}\gamma _j\varphi _{j,n}(0)=\underset{n^{}=1}{\overset{N}{}}R_{n,n^{}}\left(\frac{d\chi _n}{dx}\right)_{x=0}\mathrm{\Gamma }_n^{}.$$
(7)
where

$$R_{n,n^{}}=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\underset{j=1}{\overset{M}{}}\frac{\varphi _{j,n^{}}^{}(0)\varphi _{j,n}(0)}{(E\lambda _j)}$$
(8)
is the $`(n,n^{})^{th}`$ matrix element of the reaction matrix . The quantity, $`\varphi _{j,n}(0)`$ is a measure of the overlap between the $`j^{th}`$ cavity state, and the $`n^{th}`$ channel in the lead, evaluated at the interface,

$$\varphi _{j,n}(0)=\sqrt{\frac{2}{d}}_0^d𝑑y\varphi _j(0,y)\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{n\pi y}{d}\right).$$
(9)
Let us now form an $`N\times 1`$ column matrix, $`\overline{b}`$ ($`\overline{a}`$) whose matrix elements consist of the $`N`$ probability amplitudes $`\{b_n\}`$ ($`\{a_n\}`$) of the outgoing (incoming) propagating modes. The waveguide scattering matrix (S-matrix), $`\overline{S}`$, is a $`N\times N`$ matrix which connects the incoming propagating modes to the outgoing propagating modes, $`\overline{b}=\overline{S}\overline{a}`$.

For the case when there are $`N`$ propagating modes in the lead we can obtain an $`N\times N`$ S-matrix which may be written

$$\overline{S}=\frac{(\overline{1}_Ni\overline{\mathrm{K}})}{(\overline{1}_N+i\overline{\mathrm{K}})},$$
(10)
where $`\overline{1}_N`$ is $`N\times N`$ unit matrix, and the $`N\times N`$ matrix, $`\overline{\mathrm{K}}`$, has matrix elements, $`\overline{\mathrm{K}}_{n,n^{}}=\sqrt{k_n}R_{n,n^{}}\sqrt{k_n^{}}`$ and can be written

$$\overline{\mathrm{K}}=\overline{w}^{}\frac{1}{E\overline{1}_M\overline{H}_{in}}\overline{w}.$$
(11)
In Eq. (11), $`\overline{1}_M`$ is the $`M\times M`$ unit matrix, $`\overline{H}_{in}`$ is an $`M\times M`$ diagonal matrix formed with the eigenvalues, $`\lambda _j`$ ($`j=1,\mathrm{}M`$) in the cavity, and $`\overline{w}`$ is an $`M\times N`$ coupling matrix,

$$\overline{w}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}w_{1,1}& \mathrm{}& w_{1,N}\\ \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}\\ w_{M,1}& \mathrm{}& w_{M,N}\end{array}\right),$$
(12)
where $`w_{j,n^{}}=\varphi _{j,n^{}}(0)\sqrt{k_n^{}}`$. With some algebra, the S-matrix can also be written in the form

$`\overline{S}=\left(\overline{1}_N2i\overline{w}^{}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{E\overline{1}_M\overline{H}_{in}+i\overline{w}\overline{w}^{}}}\overline{w}\right).`$ (13)
In Ref. , we showed that, if evanescent modes are included, an additional term appears in the denominator in Eq. (13).

The reaction matrix approach to waveguide scattering provides a very efficient means of computing the statistical properties of the scattering process because the Schrodinger equation only needs to be solved once to obtain the basis states and eigenvalues in the cavity. Using these values, the S-matrix can then be obtained at all other particle energies, $`E`$. Typically for the ripple cavity in Figure (1), we can obtain the scattering matrix at $`10^5`$ different values of incident energy in a reasonable amount of time on a Cray machine.

One of the goals of this paper is to compare the statistical properties of the deterministic scattering process in the ripple cavity to statistical properties of a hypothetical scattering process in which $`\widehat{H}_{in}`$ is replaced by a diagonal matrix, $`\widehat{H}_{goe}`$, composed of the $`M`$ eigenvalues of an $`M\times M`$ Gaussian Orthogonal Ensemble (GOE) Hamiltonian, $`\widehat{H}_{goe}^{}`$, and the $`N`$ columns of the coupling matrix, $`\overline{w}`$, are replaced by $`N`$ of the $`M`$ normalized eigenvectors of $`\widehat{H}_{goe}^{}`$ to yield a coupling matrix, $`\widehat{w}_{goe}`$ . In this random matrix theory approach, the strength of the coupling between the cavity and the lead is given by the phenomenological parameter, $`g`$. The parameter, $`g`$, does not appear in the deterministic scattering process. For deterministic scattering the strength of the coupling is entirely determined by the geometry and the potentials at the interface. The scattering matrix, obtain from RMT, can then be written

$`\overline{S}_{goe}=\left(\overline{1}_N2ig\overline{w}_{goe}^{}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{E\overline{1}_M\overline{H}_{goe}+ig\overline{w}_{goe}\overline{w}_{goe}^{}}}\overline{w}_{goe}\right).`$ (14)
It was shown in Ref. (), using supersymmetry techniques, that for the case when the distribution of energy eigenvalues of $`\widehat{H}_{goe}`$ is centered at $`E=0`$ and $`M\mathrm{}`$, the average S-matrix can be written

$$\overline{S}_{goe}=s\overline{1}_N\mathrm{with}s=\frac{1g[iE/2+\pi \nu (E)]}{1+g[iE/2+\pi \nu (E)]},$$
(15)
where $`\nu (E)=\pi ^1\sqrt{1(E/2)^2}`$ is the average density of energy eigenstates. It is useful to introduce the quantity

$$\mu =\mu _r+i\mu _i=\frac{1s}{1+s^{}}=g\nu \pi +ig\frac{E}{2},$$
(16)
where $`\mu _r=g\nu \pi `$ and $`\mu _i=g\frac{E}{2}`$, respectively, are the real and imaginary parts of $`\mu `$. The case when $`g=1`$, corresponds to ideal coupling. In the neighborhood of $`E0`$, the eigenvalues of $`\widehat{H}_{goe}`$ have a constant density, $`\frac{1}{2\pi }`$, and the average S-matrix $`\overline{S}_{goe}=0`$. When $`g1`$, the average S-matrix cannot be zero.

## III Eigenphases of the Scattering Matrix

We have analyzed some of the statistical properties of the eigenphases of the S-matrix for the case of deterministic scattering from the ripple cavity for the cases when the internal dynamics in the cavity is completely chaotic and when it is near-integrable. In this section, we consider the energy interval $`256E_1E289E_1`$ when 16 channels are present in the lead. The S-matrix is a $`16\times 16`$ matrix, and for each value of incident energy it has 16 eigenvalues, $`\mathrm{e}^{i\delta _\alpha }`$ ($`\alpha =1,\mathrm{},16`$) and 16 eigenfunctions, $`|\delta _\alpha `$ ($`\overline{S}|\delta _\alpha =\mathrm{e}^{i\delta _\alpha }|\delta _\alpha `$). The S-matrix is unitary so the eigenfunctions, $`|\delta _\alpha `$, form a complete orthonormal set. We can use the orthonormality of the eigenfunctions to follow each eigenphase, $`\delta _\alpha `$, continuously as a function of energy . The eigenfunctions, for two S-matrices evaluated at nearby energies, will be approximately orthogonal if they do not belong to the same eigenphase. Thus we can plot each of the 16 different eigenphases as a function of the incident energy. These are shown in Figure (3) where the eigenphases, which are defined mod $`2\pi `$, are “unwrapped” and allowed to evolve continuously as a function of energy. In Fig. (3.a), we show the case with ripple amplitude, $`\mathrm{a}=25\AA `$, where the classical cavity dynamics is chaotic, and in Fig. (3.b) we show the case $`\mathrm{a}=1\AA `$ where the classical cavity dynamics is mixed (see Fig. (2)). The case of mixed dynamics shows many more abrupt changes of phase as a function of energy than the chaotic case. This is due to the fact that the mixed dynamics has many long lived resonances not found in the chaotic case. This was also seen in Ref. . We shall return to this feature in Section (IV).

Below we first discuss the effect of direct processes on the distribution of eigenphases, and then we determine the distribution of nearest neighbor spacings of these eigenphases.

### A Distribution of Eigenphases

When a scattering process has a non-zero average S-matrix, $`\overline{S}`$, it indicates that direct processes may play a significant role in the scattering process. Direct processes are generally scattering events which do not interact significantly with the reaction region (cavity) . When direct processes are present, the distribution of S-matrix elements that minimizes information about the scattering process is the Poisson kernel. For the case of an $`N`$ channel process whose dynamics is time reversal invariant, the Poisson kernel has the form,

$$P_N(\overline{S})=\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Omega }}\frac{[\mathrm{Det}(1S^{}S]^{(N+1)/2}}{|\mathrm{Det}(1S^{}\overline{S})|^{(N+1)}},$$
(17)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is a normalization factor that ensures that the Poisson kernel satisfies the normalization condition, $`𝑑\overline{S}P_N(\overline{S})=1`$.

The S-matrix can be diagonalized by a unitary matrix, $`\overline{U}`$, and, as mentioned earlier, the eigenvalues of the S-matrix are denoted, $`\mathrm{e}^{i\delta _\alpha }`$, $`\alpha =1,\mathrm{},N`$. In terms of the eigenphases, $`\delta _\alpha `$, the normalization condition for the Poisson kernel, Eq. (17), can be written

$`{\displaystyle 𝑑\overline{S}P_N(\overline{S})}={\displaystyle \mathrm{}𝑑\delta _1\mathrm{}𝑑\delta _NP_N(\delta _1,\mathrm{},\delta _N)}`$ (18)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Omega }_U}}{\displaystyle \mathrm{}𝑑\delta _1\mathrm{}𝑑\delta _N\times \underset{1\alpha <\alpha ^{}N}{}|\mathrm{e}^{i\delta _\alpha }\mathrm{e}^{i\delta _\alpha ^{}}|}`$ (19)
$`\times \left({\displaystyle \frac{(1s^{}s)^N}{_{\alpha =1}^N(1s^{}\mathrm{e}^{i\delta _\alpha })(1s\mathrm{e}^{i\delta _\alpha ^{}})}}\right)^{(N+1)/2}=1,`$ (20)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_U`$ is a normalization constant. Note that $`P_N(\delta _1,\mathrm{},\delta _N)`$ is the joint probability density to find the angles, $`\delta _\alpha `$, in the intervals $`\delta _\alpha \delta _\alpha +d\delta _\alpha `$, ($`\alpha =1,\mathrm{},N`$).

In Ref. , it is shown that if the following change of angles is introduced

$$\mathrm{tan}(\frac{\theta _\alpha }{2})=\frac{1}{g\pi \nu }\left(\mathrm{tan}(\frac{\delta _\alpha }{2})+g\frac{E}{2}\right),$$
(21)
and if one assumes ideal coupling, $`g=1`$, then Eq. (20) reduces to

$`{\displaystyle 𝑑\overline{S}P_N(\overline{S})}={\displaystyle \mathrm{}𝑑\theta _1\mathrm{}𝑑\theta _NP_N(\theta _1,\mathrm{},\theta _N)}`$ (22)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Omega }_U}}{\displaystyle \mathrm{}𝑑\theta _1\mathrm{}𝑑\theta _N\underset{1\alpha <\alpha ^{}N}{}|\mathrm{e}^{i\theta _\alpha }\mathrm{e}^{i\theta _\alpha ^{}}|},`$ (23)
which is just the distribution for the Circular Orthogonal Ensemble (COE) , . Thus, even for scattering processes which include direct processes, it is possible in principle to transform away the direct processes and compare the eigenphase distribution with that of COE (note that similar ideas first appeared in literature in Ref. ). It is important to note that the transformation that removes direct processes is not the same as the unfolding process that occurs on the energy spectrum of bounded systems to give a constant average density.

In our subsequent analysis, the case of scattering with only a single channel will be useful for analyzing data. For single channel scattering ($`N=1`$), the S-matrix reduces to the complex function, $`S=\mathrm{e}^{i\delta }`$, and the Poisson kernel, reduces to

$$P_1s(\delta )=\frac{1}{2\pi }\frac{[(1s^{}s]}{|(1s^{}\mathrm{e}^{i\delta })|^2},$$
(24)
with normalization condition, $`_\pi ^\pi 𝑑\delta P_1(\delta )=1`$. Under the transformation above, $`P_1(\delta )P_1(\theta )=1/2\pi `$, which is the COE prediction.

Having obtained numerical values of the eigenvalues, $`\mathrm{e}^{i\delta _\alpha }`$, as a function of energy, we can compute an average value for each of the 16 eigenvalues,

$$s_\alpha =\mathrm{e}^{i\delta _\alpha }=\frac{1}{\eta }\underset{k=1}{\overset{\eta }{}}\mathrm{e}^{i\delta _\alpha (E_k)},$$
(25)
where $`\eta `$ is the number of energy values used. The apparently continuous eigenphase curves actually consist of about $`40,000`$ discrete energy points. The approximate orthonormality of S-matrix eigenvectors for neighboring energies has been used to sort the eigenphases. Thus, the eigenphases and eigenvectors have an energy interval over which they are correlated, and we have used that fact in our sorting process. On the other hand, this correlation of the S-matrices at neighboring energies can prevent us from obtaining statistics that can be compared to RMT predictions. Comparison to RMT requires use of independent data points. Therefore, in order to study the statistical properties of the eigenphases, we must choose values of the eigenphases separated in energy a distance greater than the correlation length. For each eigenphase curve we select points which have an energy spacing, $`\mathrm{\Delta }E=0.495E_1`$. We choose this spacing based on an analysis of the delay time correlation discussed in Section IV. (The delay time auto-correlation function is the second derivative of the eigenphase auto-correlation function.)

We have computed a histogram of the number of eigenphases, $`N(\delta )=\eta P_N(\delta )`$, versus value of eigenphase, $`\delta _\alpha `$, in the 16 channel region, where $`\eta `$ is the number of data points. In order to improve the statistics, we use data from four different ripple amplitudes, $`\mathrm{a}=25\AA ,30\AA ,35\AA ,45\AA `$, all of which lie in the chaotic regime. All eigenphases lie in the energy interval, $`256<E/E_1<289`$ and have energy spacing, $`\mathrm{\Delta }E=0.495E_1`$. Thus the histogram includes $`67X16X4=4288`$ data points. We have found that the distribution of eigenphases, along a given eigenphase curve, is well described by the Poisson kernel for the single channel case. We proceed as follows. We compute the average eigenvalue, $`s_\alpha =\mathrm{e}^{i\delta _\alpha }`$, for each eigenphase curve. We can form a histogram using the 67 data points from a single eigenphase curve. We do this for each of the 64 eigenphase curves, using the same number of bins and bin width for each curve. We then add these 64 histograms together to form a single histogram, which is shown in Fig. (4.a). The solid line in Fig. (4.a), is the single channel Poisson kernel, $`P_1(\delta )`$, but with $`s=\frac{1}{64}_{\alpha =1}^{64}s_\alpha `$. We can use Eq. (21) to transform away the effects of the direct interactions and find the distribution of the transformed angles, $`\theta _\alpha `$. If we use Eq. (16) and obtain $`\mu `$ from the numerically calculated values of $`s_\alpha =\mathrm{e}^{i\delta _\alpha }`$, then the transformed angles, $`\theta _\alpha `$, are given by

$$\mathrm{tan}(\frac{\theta _\alpha }{2})=\frac{1}{\mu _r}\left(\mathrm{tan}(\frac{\delta _\alpha }{2})+\mu _i\right),$$
(26)
with $`\mu _r`$ and $`\mu _i`$ computed numerically from $`s_\alpha `$. In Fig. (4.b), we show how the histogram in Fig. (4.a) changes if we transform each eigenphase, $`\delta _\alpha `$, using Eq. (26). In this case distribution is approximately constant and equal to the area, $`\frac{N}{2\pi }`$. Thus, having transformed away the contribution from the direct processes, we obtain the COE eigenphase distribution for this chaotic scattering process, with fairly high confidence level.

For $`\mathrm{a}=1\AA `$ the plots of the eigenphase distributions look very similar to the chaotic case shown in Fig. (4), and it appears that the eigenphase distribution is not as sensitive an indicator for underlying chaos as is the nearest neighbor spacing distribution, at least with this type of analysis.

### B Nearest Neighbor Eigenphase Spacing

In this section we consider the nearest neighbor spacings between eigenphases, $`\delta _\alpha `$, of the scattering matrix for the 16 channel case in the energy interval $`256<E/E_1<289`$. For any given value of the energy, the S-matrix only has 16 eigenphases. However, we can form a histogram of nearest neighbor eigenphase spacings if we obtain eigenphase spacings for a sequence of different energies in the range, $`256<E/E_1<289`$. In Fig. (5.a) we show histograms of 1005 (15X67) nearest neighbor spacings for eigenphases computed at energy increments, $`\mathrm{\Delta }E=0.495E_1`$ and obtained by averaging over histograms for each ripple amplitude, $`\mathrm{a}=25\AA ,30\AA ,35\AA ,45\AA `$. We have fit the histogram to the Brody distribution,

$$P_B(\sigma )=A\left(\frac{\sigma }{\sigma }\right)^\beta \mathrm{exp}\left[\xi \left(\frac{\sigma }{\sigma }\right)^{1+\beta }\right]\mathrm{with}\xi =\left[\frac{1}{\sigma }\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{2+\beta }{1+\beta }\right)\right]^{1+\beta },$$
(27)
$`\sigma `$ is the average spacing between nearest neighbor eigenphases, and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(x)`$ is the Gamma function. In Fig. (5.a), the solid line is a fit to the Brody distribution for $`\beta =0.635`$. In Fig. (5.b) same calculation is performed after direct processes were transformed away. In this case $`\beta =0.865`$. Note that the GOE prediction ($`\beta =0.95`$) for the closed system eigenvalue spacings is fairly close to our value of $`\beta `$, after the effects of direct processes are transformed away. In Ref. , the nearest neighbor energy eigenvalue spacings for a closed ripple billiard were fit to the Brody distribution with $`\beta =0.806`$. In that case, the deviation from GOE predictions was found to be due to bouncing ball orbits. Our result also contains bouncing ball contributions. It is useful to note that in our scattering system there is no long range energy correlation for 16 channel region (we have explicitly removed energy correlations by taking data points at large energy increments), in contrast to the case reported in reference

We also obtained a nearest neighbor spacing histogram for the case with mixed phase space in the 16 channel energy interval. In Fig. (6.a) we show the histogram of nearest neighbor eigenphase spacings for $`\mathrm{a}=0.5\AA ,1\AA ,2\AA ,3\AA ,4\AA ,5\AA `$ in the energy interval $`256<E/E_1<289`$ before direct process are transformed away. We use an energy spacing $`\mathrm{\Delta }E=0.495E_1`$ and obtain 1005 data points for each amplitude. We then average over the histograms for the six ripple amplitudes. The solid line is a fit to the Brody distribution for $`\beta =0.2`$. In Fig. (6.b), the same histogram is shown after direct processes are transformed away. The Brody parameter in this case, $`\beta =0.116`$, which is closer to a Poisson distribution (the Brody distribution becomes a Poisson distribution for $`\beta =0`$).

The distribution of nearest neighbor eigenphase spacings has been computed for a energy independent scattering matrix in  for a very different physical system. They also report close agreement with COE predictions for the chaotic region, although they do not have to deal with direct processes. It is clear that direct processes can play an important role in causing deviations from random matrix theory predictions for scattering processes.

## IV Partial Delay Times

In this section we compare the partial delay time distribution, computed for the deterministic scattering process, to values obtained from random matrix theory. The partial delay times are given by the energy derivative of eigenphases, $`\tau _\alpha =\mathrm{}\frac{d\delta _\alpha }{dE}`$ . The average partial delay time density for a scattering process governed by the scattering matrix, $`\overline{S}_{goe}`$, has been computed by , using supersymmetry techniques, and is given by,

$$\rho (\tau )=(1/N)\underset{\alpha }{}\delta (\tau \tau _\alpha )_{goe}=\frac{(1/2)^{N/2}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N/2)}\frac{\mathrm{exp}(1/2(\tau /\tau ))}{(\tau /\tau )^{N/2+2}}$$
(28)
where $`\tau =1/N`$.

Before showing the distribution obtained for the partial delay times, it is useful to discuss energy correlations contained in the partial delay time curves. In Fig. 7, we show the auto-correlation function for the partial delay times obtained in the 16 channel energy regime $`256<E/E_1<289`$ and averaged over 6 different ripple sizes, $`\mathrm{a}=22\AA ,23\AA ,24\AA ,25\AA ,26\AA ,27\AA `$. For each partial delay time curve we obtain a auto-correlation function, and then we average over all 96 curves. We also show the GOE prediction for the 16 channel case as well as the partial delay time auto-correlation function for the near integrable regime ($`\mathrm{a}=1\AA `$). The GOE prediction is obtained after performing the triple integration given in reference . The energy scale is adjusted to correspond to the relevant scale for our data. We also note the partial delay time auto-correlation function is the second derivative of the eigenphase auto-correlation function. Therefore the eigenphase auto-correlation function decays more slowly than the partial time delay auto-correlation function.

In Fig. (8.a), we show a histogram of the scaled partial delay times, $`\tau /\tau `$. We again consider the energy regime with 16 channels and vary the energy in the interval, $`256E_1<E<289E_1`$. To obtain enough values to build good statistics, we use 4 different ripple sizes, $`\mathrm{a}=25\AA ,30\AA ,35\AA ,45\AA `$. For these ripple amplitudes, the ripple cavity dynamics is chaotic. We used 100 energy points per specific ripple size, and therefore an energy increment of $`\mathrm{\Delta }E=0.33E_1`$. The average, delay time, $`\tau `$, is obtained numerically for each partial delay time curve. Then the histograms for 64 scaled partial delay times are combined into one histogram by simply adding values in the corresponding bins. The solid line in Fig. (8.a), is a plot of the RMT prediction, $`N(\tau )=\eta ^{}\rho (\tau )`$, where $`\eta ^{}`$ is the area under the curve and $`\tau =1/N`$. The agreement is not good because our data contains the effect of direct scattering processes. In Fig. (8.b) we show the partial delay time density obtained from the eigenphases, $`\theta _\alpha `$, which no longer contain the effect of direct scattering processes. The solid line is a plot of $`N(\tau )`$ with $`\tau =1/N`$ . The agreement is very good. Finally in Fig. (8.c) we plot histogram of 4000 partial delay times obtained from a $`16\times 16`$ $`\overline{S}_{goe}`$ by using different realizations. Again, the agreement between the data and Eq. (28) is very good. Thus, after the removal of the effects of direct scattering processes our deterministic scattering from the chaotic ripple cavity behaves very much like the RMT prediction. (It is useful to note that in Ref. , we compared the Wigner-Smith delay time distribution with numerically computed predictions of RMT. The Wigner-Smith delay time is defined, $`\tau _{ws}=\frac{1}{N}_{\alpha =1}^N\tau _\alpha `$.)

In Fig. 9, we show the delay time distributions for the near integrable case, $`\mathrm{a}=1\AA `$. We have used energy increments, $`\mathrm{\Delta }E=0.1E_1`$ justified from Fig. 7. The delay time distribution for the near integrable case deviates significantly from the random matrix result and the results for chaotic cavity shown in Fig. (8).

Let us now return to the eigenphase curve in Fig. (3.b). We see that the curves for the near integrable case have a sequence of fairly abrupt large changes of phase. These are due to resonance structures that cause larger than average delays of the particle in the cavity. In Fig. (10), we plot the Wigner-Smith delay time (which is an average over all partial delay times) in the energy interval, $`257.4E/E_1259.5`$. This energy interval contains two of the large phase changes in the eigenphase curves in Fig. (3.b). We see that each large phase change gives rise to a large peak in the delay time. The crosses in Fig. (10) give the energies of the cavity basis states, $`\lambda _j`$, in that energy interval. There appears to be one cavity state which lies at each resonance energy. In Fig. (10), we have also plotted the configuration space distribution of four of the cavity eigenstates, two at resonance and two off resonance. In Figs. (2.b)-(2.e), we have shown Husimi plots of the quantum Poincare surface of section for each of these four states. The two states giving rise to the delay time resonance peaks lie in the dominant nonlinear resonance structures in the classical phase space. The quantum particle appears to tunnel into these dynamical resonance structures, and is delayed there for a considerable length of time.

## V Conclusion

We have analyzed the statistical properties of a scattering process in a waveguide with a cavity which allows a range of dynamics, including integrable, mixed, or chaotic. In this waveguide, direct processes also play an important role. The “ripple” cavity that we use has the special feature that it allows us to form a Hamiltonian matrix to describe the dynamics interior to the cavity. This, in turn, allows us to use the reaction matrix approach to scattering for our deterministic scattering process. The reaction matrix approach is one of the most efficient methods for obtaining the large amounts of data necessary to obtain good statistics. Until now, mesh based models (like the boundary element method, finite element method, or recursive Green’s function method) were the main numerical methods to deal with scattering problems. However, these methods use an energy dependent boundary condition which makes it a formidable task to obtain solutions for very large numbers of energy points. The reaction matrix approach allows us to circumvent this problem. It is also useful to note that the reaction matrix approach has been used extensively to study properties of the complex poles of the S-matrix. This is discussed in some detail in .

We have obtained a number of results. We find that, in the near integrable regime, nonlinear resonances in the classical phase space give rise to large eigenphase excursions and long delay times for quantum particles that can tunnel into these dynamical structures.

We have focused much of our discussion on the energy regime in which sixteen channels are open in the lead. We have been able to follow each eigenphase of the S-matrix continuously as a function of energy. We have examined the statistical properties of the scattering process by gathering data about each eigenphase at discrete energy intervals in the sixteen channel regime. This assumes a kind of “stationarity” as a function of energy, of the underlying scattering process. We have chosen the energy intervals so that our data points are statistically independent.

We have shown, for the scattering system considered here, that the affect of direct processes on the eigenphase curves can be transformed away. We find that, for the case where the cavity dynamics is classically chaotic, a partial time delay density histogram, formed from all sixteen transformed eigenphase curves, agrees to 96$`\%`$ confidence level with a Brody distribution with Brody parameter, $`\beta =0.87`$. Similar deviations from the GOE prediction of $`\beta =0.95`$ have been seen in the nearest neighbor energy eigenvalue spacing distributions of closed ripple billiards  and in that case are caused by bouncing ball orbits. We expect the same mechanism is having an affect here.

## VI Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the Welch Foundation, Grant No.F-1051; NSF Grant INT-9602971; and DOE contract No.DE-FG03-94ER14405 for partial support of this work. We also thank the University of Texas at Austin High Performance Computing Center for use of their computer facilities.


format: text

text:
# Fractal Measures, 𝑝-Adic Numbers And Continues Transition Between Dimensions.

## 1 Pseudometric space $`𝒜(I)`$

When examining properties of measures, metrics and test functions given on different spaces, it is convenient to define two functions $`f`$ and $`g`$ to be $`\epsilon `$-close if $`e^\epsilon f(x)<g(x)<e^{+\epsilon }f(x)`$ for $`x`$ from a set such that for metrics it is ”a set of infinitely close points” and for test functions it is ”an infinitely small set” only. The construction considered below allows one to describe within a uniform scheme the spaces of measures, test functions, metrics etc. as quasiorder pseudometric spaces. It is important, however, that the Caratheodory construction is a functor, i.e. is a quasiorder-preserving contracting map from the space of test functions into the space of exterior measures.

Let $`I`$ be any set, then, denote by $`𝒜(I)`$ the set of all pairs $`f_{}(f,)`$, where $`f:I\overline{}^+`$ 222 $`\overline{}^+\overline{}\{x:x0\}`$, where $`\overline{}\{\mathrm{},\mathrm{}\}`$ is the extended number axis. It would be more naturally to define functions as $`f:V\overline{}^+`$, where $`V`$, however, we can assume that $`f=\mathrm{}`$ outside $`V`$. From now on, we assume that $`inf\{\mathrm{}\}=\mathrm{}`$ and $`sup\{\mathrm{}\}=0`$ on $`\overline{}^+`$ and $`inf\{\mathrm{}\}=\mathrm{}`$ and $`sup\{\mathrm{}\}=\mathrm{}`$ on $`\overline{}`$.  and $``$ is a filter at $`I`$. 333 The family $``$ of subsets of the set $`I`$ is called filter at $`I`$, if $`I,\mathrm{}`$; if $`A`$ and $`BA`$, then $`B`$; $`A,B,AB`$  . Let us define the relations of quasiorder and a pseudometric at $`𝒜(I)`$ :

Relations $`\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{},\stackrel{}{},`$ at $`𝒜(I)`$ : $`f_{}\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}g_𝒢`$, $`f_{}\stackrel{}{}g_𝒢`$, $`f_{}g_𝒢`$ if $`\mathrm{}(f_{},g_𝒢)<\mathrm{}`$, $`\mathrm{}(f_{},g_𝒢)1`$ and $`\mathrm{}(f_{},g_𝒢)=0`$, respectively, where $`f_{},g_𝒢𝒜(I)`$

$`\mathrm{}(f_{},g_𝒢)=\{\begin{array}{ccc}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{}}(f_{},g_𝒢)& sup_{U𝒢}inf_{xU}(r^+:f(x)rg(x)))& if𝒢\\ \mathrm{}& & if𝒢\end{array}.`$ (3)
Pseudometric $`\ae :𝒜(I)\times 𝒜(I)\overline{}^+`$: $`\ae (f_{},g_𝒢)=\mathrm{ln}\left(\mathrm{max}(\mathrm{}(f_{},g_𝒢),\mathrm{}(g_𝒢,f_{}))\right)`$.  We write $`f_{}\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}(\stackrel{}{})g_𝒢`$, if $`f_{}\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}(\stackrel{}{})g_𝒢`$ and $`g_𝒢\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}(\stackrel{}{})f_{}`$ at the same time (cf. with $`O`$-symbolics). It is obvious that $`f_{}\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}(\stackrel{}{})g_𝒢`$, if and only if $`\ae (f_{},g_𝒢)<\mathrm{}(=0)`$444 The partition of $`𝒜(I)`$ according to the equivalence relation $`\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}`$ is exactly the partition of topological space $`𝒜(I)`$ into connected components. Indeed, $`\{h_{}𝒜(I):\ae (h_{},f_{})<\mathrm{}\}`$ $`f_{}𝒜(I)`$ is an open and close set in $`𝒜(I)`$ at the same time, and for any $`f_{}^{}\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}f_{}`$ the map $`[0,1]t(tf+(1t)f^{},)𝒜(I)`$ is a continuous path from $`f_{}`$ to $`f_{}^{}`$.. It is easy to show that

$`\mathrm{ln}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{}}(f_{},g_𝒢)=\underset{𝒢U}{inf}\underset{Ux}{sup}\{\mathrm{ln}f(x)\mathrm{ln}g(x):f(x)g(x)\},`$ (4)
$`\ae (f_𝒢,g_𝒢)=\underset{𝒢U}{inf}sup\{|\mathrm{ln}f(x)\mathrm{ln}g(x)|:xU\{f(x)g(x)\}\},`$ (5)
$`\kappa (f_𝒢,g_𝒢)\mathrm{th}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\ae (f_𝒢,g_𝒢)}{2}}\right)=\underset{𝒢U}{inf}sup\left\{\right|{\displaystyle \frac{f(x)g(x)}{f(x)+g(x)}}|:xU\{f(x)g(x)\}\}.`$ (6)
We shall consider only self-consistent subspaces in $`𝒜(I)`$, i.e. such $`𝒮(I)𝒜(I)`$ that $`f_{},g_𝒢𝒮(I)`$ $`\mathrm{}(f_{},g_𝒢)=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{}}(f_{},g_𝒢)`$ (i.e. if $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{}}(f_{},g_𝒢)<\mathrm{}`$ then $`𝒢`$ and $`f_{}\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}g_𝒢`$). Let us consider two subsets in $`𝒜(I)`$. The first set is a subset of all pairs $`(f,)`$ with trivial $``$ : $`=\{I\}`$. The second set $`𝒩(I)`$ consists of $`(f,)𝒜(I)`$ such that $`f^1(\{0\})\mathrm{}`$ and $``$ is the pre-image of the filter of neighbourhoods of zero, which means that the set $`\{f^1(U):openU:U0\mathrm{}\}`$ is the base of this filter 555The family of sets $``$ is called filter base if $`\mathrm{}`$; $`A,B,C:CAB`$, and $`=\{B:A:AB\}`$ is called filter generated by $``$.. It is easy to check that $`𝒜_0(I)`$ and $`𝒩(I)`$ are self-consistent. Moreover, $`𝒜_0(I)`$ is a metric space, the relations $`\stackrel{}{}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{}`$ at $`𝒜_0(I)`$ are the standard relations $``$ and $`=`$, respectively, and if $`fg`$, then either $`f=0`$, or $`g=\mathrm{}`$. Let us introduce the following notations: $`(f,),(g,𝒢)𝒜(I)`$ we write $`f\stackrel{L}{}(\stackrel{L}{})g`$ if $`(f,\{I\})\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}(\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{})(g,\{I\})`$ or $`x_kIf(x_1,\mathrm{}x_k\mathrm{}x_n)\stackrel{L}{}(\stackrel{L}{})g(x_1,\mathrm{}x_k\mathrm{}x_n)`$, and for any constant $`c`$ we write $`c\stackrel{L}{}1`$ if $`0<c<\mathrm{}`$.

We call any map $`𝒞:\mathrm{\Sigma }𝒜(J^{})`$ for $`\mathrm{\Sigma }𝒜(J)`$ $`\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}(\stackrel{}{},)`$-isotonic map or $`\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}(\stackrel{}{},)`$ -isotonia, if $`𝒞(f_{})\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}(\stackrel{}{},)𝒞(g_𝒢)`$ for all $`f_{},g_𝒢\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ such that $`f_{}\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}(\stackrel{}{},)g_𝒢`$, we also call just isotonia the $`\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{},\stackrel{}{},,`$-isotonic map. For any set $`X`$, denote by $`𝒟(X)`$ $`(𝒟_0(X))`$ the set of all $`(\rho ,)𝒩(X\times X)(𝒜_0(X\times X))`$ such that $`\rho `$ is pseudometric666 One can show that $`𝒟_0(X)`$ is a complete metric space. , and denote by $`(X)𝒜_0(2^X)`$ the set of all exterior $`\sigma `$-semiadditive measures on $`X`$.

Any map $`\mathrm{\Phi }:XY`$ induces an isometry $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{}:𝒟(Y)𝒟(X)`$ such that $`\rho 𝒟(Y)\mathrm{\Phi }^{}(\rho )\rho _\mathrm{\Phi }(,)=\rho (\mathrm{\Phi }(),\mathrm{\Phi }())`$. Let us consider two maps $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1:X(M_1,\rho _1)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_2:X(M_2,\rho _2)`$, where $`M_i`$ is metric spaces with metric $`\rho _i`$. Then, we define the distance $`\ae (\mathrm{\Phi }_1,\mathrm{\Phi }_2)`$ between $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_2`$ by the formula

$$\ae (\mathrm{\Phi }_1,\mathrm{\Phi }_2)\ae (\mathrm{\Phi }_1^{}(\rho _1),\mathrm{\Phi }_2^{}(\rho _2)),$$

we also write $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}(\stackrel{}{},)\mathrm{\Phi }_2`$ as soon as $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1^{}(\rho _1)\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}(\stackrel{}{},)\mathrm{\Phi }_2^{}(\rho _2)`$. We call a given map $`\mathrm{\Phi }:(M_1,\rho _1)(M_2,\rho _2)`$ $`\mathrm{}`$-contraction if $`\mathrm{\Phi }\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}\mathrm{id}`$, and $`\mathrm{}`$-isometry if $`\mathrm{\Phi }\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}\mathrm{id}`$, where $`\mathrm{id}`$ is the identity map on $`M_1`$. It is clear that $`\rho _2(\mathrm{\Phi }(),\mathrm{\Phi }())\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}(\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{})\rho _1(,)`$, iff $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is an $`\mathrm{}`$-contraction ($`\mathrm{}`$ \- isometry), in particular, the $`L`$-contraction is the Lipschitzian map. It is easy to see that the condition $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1\stackrel{}{}(\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{})\mathrm{\Phi }_2`$ is equivalent to the existence of the ($`\mathrm{}`$-) contraction $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{12}:\mathrm{\Phi }_2(X)\mathrm{\Phi }_1(X)`$, such that $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1=\mathrm{\Phi }_{12}\mathrm{\Phi }_2`$ 777It deserves noting that, if one considers a category $`𝒦(X)`$ such that all the objects in it are $`\mathrm{\Phi }:X(M,\rho )`$ with $`\mathrm{\Phi }(X)=M`$ and morphisms $`\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}`$, the indicated correspondence is a functor from $`𝒦(X)`$ into a category of metric spaces with uniform continuous maps between them.. Therefore, if $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ is injective, then $`\mathrm{\Phi }_2`$ is also injective. Besides, if there are given appropriate structures of either (uniform) topological, or metric space, on $`X`$, then, if $`\mathrm{\Phi }_2`$ is a (uniform) continuous map or $`\mathrm{}`$ -contraction, the same is $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$.

## 2  The Caratheodory construction

Let $`𝒥`$ be a family of subsets of any set $`X`$. For any pair $`(\zeta ,)𝒜(𝒥)`$ we define an exterior $`\sigma `$-semiadditive measure $`k_\zeta `$ by putting $`AX`$,

$`k_\zeta (A)=\underset{𝒰}{sup}inf\{{\displaystyle \underset{iJ}{}}\zeta (S_i):S_i𝒰,\{S_i\}_{iJ}\mathrm{𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒}\mathrm{𝑐𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟}\mathrm{𝑜𝑓}A\}.`$ (7)
This correspondence determines the contracting isotonia $`𝒞:𝒜(𝒥)(X)`$, which we call Caratheodory construction (CC) by analogy with the standard Caratheodory construction  which is a particular case of CC.

Hereafter, we always suppose that $`𝒥=2^X`$. Let us define the space of test functions $`𝒯(X)𝒜(2^X)`$ as a set of pairs $`(\zeta ,)`$ such that the following natural requirements hold

$`UifABUthenAU`$ (8)
$`VsuchthatifABVthen\zeta (A)\zeta (B)`$ (9)
It is clear that $`(X)𝒯(X)`$ and $`𝒞_{|(X)}=\mathrm{id}`$.

With each pseudometric $`\rho 𝒟(X)`$ we associate a pair $`(\widehat{\rho },_\rho )𝒩(2^X)𝒜(2^X)`$ such that $`SX\widehat{\rho }(S)\mathrm{diam}(\mathrm{S})=sup_{\mathrm{x},\mathrm{y}\mathrm{S}}(\rho (\mathrm{x},\mathrm{y}))`$ and $`_\rho `$ is the filter generated by the base $`\{S𝒥:\widehat{\rho }(S)1/n\}_{n=1,2\mathrm{}}`$. Property (8,9) for $`(\widehat{\rho },_\rho )`$ obviously holds and $`\mathrm{}(\widehat{\alpha },\widehat{\beta })\mathrm{}(\alpha ,\beta )`$ $`\alpha ,\beta 𝒟(X)`$. Therefore, the map $`\widehat{}:𝒟(X)𝒯(X)`$ is an isotonic contraction. Moreover, for any monotone non-decreasing function $`\zeta :\overline{}^+\overline{}^+`$, using $`\widehat{}`$ one can associate a map $`\widehat{\zeta }:𝒟(X)𝒯(X)`$ such that

$`\widehat{\zeta }_\rho ()=(\zeta (\widehat{\rho }()),_\rho )`$ (10)
It can be shown that $`k_{\widehat{\zeta }_\rho }`$ is regular in the sense of Borel . Let $`\zeta (r)=r^d`$, then for each pseudometric space $`(X,\rho )`$ the composition $`𝒞\widehat{\zeta }:𝒟(X)(X)`$ defines a $`d`$-dimensional Hausdorff measure $`h^d`$ (HM) (up to a constant factor $`2^d\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1}{2})^d/\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+\frac{d}{2})`$ – ”the area of $`d`$–dimensional sphere”; however, as far as we are interested in normalized fractal measures, this factor is inessential). For $`D_1>D_2`$, since $`𝒞`$ is an isotonia and $`\widehat{\rho }^{D_1}\widehat{\rho }^{D_2}`$, we have $`h^{D_1}h^{D_2}`$. One obtains from the last inequality the well-known formula/definition for the Hausdorff dimension (HD)  : $`AX`$

$`D_h(A)inf\{\delta :h^\delta (A)=0\}=sup\{\delta :h^\delta (A)=\mathrm{}\}`$ (11)
For any map $`\mathrm{\Phi }:XY`$ consider now the map $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{}:𝒯(Y)𝒯(X)`$ such that $`(\eta ,)𝒯(Y)`$ $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{}\eta (S)=\eta (\mathrm{\Phi }(S))`$, and $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{}`$ is the filter generated by the base $`\{SX:O𝒰:S\mathrm{\Phi }^1(O)\}_𝒰`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Phi }:(X)(Y)`$ be the map such that $`\mu (X)\mathrm{\Phi }(\mu )(S)=\mu (\mathrm{\Phi }^1(S))`$, $`BY`$ and $`\mu (S)|_B\mu (SB)`$. Then, from (8,9) it follows that the diagram

is commutative. In particular, from (LABEL:diagr) it follows that the contraction of the CC measure onto any $`XY`$ coincides with the CC measure on $`X`$ independently of $`Y`$.

First of all, we are interested in scale-covariant measures. These are the measures $`k`$ such that under the scale transform $`\lambda :XX`$ such that $`\rho (\lambda (x),\lambda (y))=\lambda \rho (x,y)`$ with some $`\lambda >0`$:

$`k(\lambda ())=\lambda ^Dk()`$ (13)
for some scale dimension $`D>0`$. It is clear that any HM is a scale-covariant measure, however, this is not the only possible choice. Indeed, since $`𝒞`$ is a contraction, then $`\eta _{}\stackrel{}{}\zeta _𝒢`$ implies that $`k_\eta _{}=k_{\zeta _𝒢}`$. Therefore, to satisfy condition (13) for $`k_{\zeta _𝒢}`$ it suffices

$`\zeta _{}(\lambda ())\stackrel{}{}\lambda ^D\zeta _{}().`$ (14)
For any $`D0`$ let us denote by $`𝒮^D`$ the set $`(\eta ,𝒩)𝒜(\overline{})`$ such that $`𝒩`$ is the filter of neighbourhoods of zero and $`\eta \stackrel{}{}\varsigma `$, where $`\varsigma `$ is a monotone nondecreasing function such that $`\varsigma (r)>0`$ with $`r>0`$ and

$`\underset{r0}{lim}{\displaystyle \frac{\varsigma (\lambda r)}{\varsigma (r)}}=\lambda ^D.`$ (15)
The following lemma is correct (see proof in the Appendix):

###### Lemma 1

If $`\zeta 𝒮^D`$, then the map $`\zeta :𝒩(I)f_{}(\zeta f,)𝒜(I)`$ at $`D>0`$ ($`D=0`$) is isotonia ( $`\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}`$ ,$`\stackrel{}{}`$-isotonia) and $`f_{},g_𝒢𝒩(I)`$ if $`\mathrm{}(f_{},g_𝒢)<\mathrm{}`$, then

$$\mathrm{}(\zeta (f_{}),\zeta (g_𝒢))\mathrm{}(f_{},g_𝒢)^D.$$

In addition, if $`D^{}>D`$ and $`f_{}\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}g_𝒢`$, then $`\eta 𝒮^D^{}`$ $`\eta (f_{})\zeta (g_𝒢).`$

It is easy to show that $`\eta 𝒮^D`$ and $`\rho 𝒟(X)`$, the function $`\widehat{\eta _\rho }`$ satisfies (14). Moreover, since $`𝒞`$ is an isotonia in accordance with lemma 1, then it follows from lemma 1

###### Proposition 1

For $`D0`$ and $`\zeta 𝒮^D`$ we have
1) The map $`\widehat{\zeta }:𝒟(X)𝒯(X)`$ (and also $`𝒞\widehat{\zeta }:𝒟(X)(X)`$) is $`\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{},\stackrel{}{}`$-isotonic and, if additionally $`D>0`$, it is $``$-isotonic.
2) $`\alpha ,\beta 𝒟(X)`$

$`\ae (k_{\widehat{\zeta _\alpha }},k_{\widehat{\zeta _\beta }})\ae (\widehat{\zeta _\alpha },\widehat{\zeta _\beta })D\ae (\alpha ,\beta ).`$ (16)
3) $`\rho 𝒟(X)`$ , $`D_1,D_20`$ and $`\zeta ^1𝒮^{D_1}`$, $`\zeta ^2𝒮^{D_2}`$, if $`D_1>D_2`$, then

$`\widehat{\zeta }_\rho ^1\widehat{\zeta }_\rho ^2,k_{\widehat{\zeta }_\rho ^1}k_{\widehat{\zeta }_\rho ^2}.`$ (17)
###### Corollary 1

If for some set $`F`$ $`\eta ,\xi 𝒮^D`$ such that $`k_\eta =0`$ and $`k_\xi >0`$, then $`D=D_h(F)`$. In particular, if $`\zeta 𝒮^D`$ such that $`k_\zeta `$ is nontrivial on $`F`$, then $`D=D_h(F)`$.

###### Corollary 2

Let $`(X,\rho )`$ and $`(Y,d)`$ be metric spaces and $`\mathrm{\Phi }:XY`$. Then, if $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is an $`\mathrm{}`$-contraction ($`\mathrm{}`$-isometry), for any $`\zeta 𝒮^D`$ all the arrows in (LABEL:diagr) are isotonic and Lipschitzian maps. Therefore,

$$k_{\zeta _d}|_{\mathrm{\Phi }(X)}\stackrel{L}{}(\stackrel{L}{})\mathrm{\Phi }k_{\zeta _\rho },$$

in particular, $`AX`$ $`D_h(\mathrm{\Phi }(A))(=)D_h(A)`$. In addition, if $`D=0`$, then $`k_{\zeta _d}|_{\mathrm{\Phi }(X)}(=)\mathrm{\Phi }k_{\zeta _\rho }`$. Therefore, if $`\zeta _0𝒮^0`$, then $`k_{\zeta _0}`$ is invariant with respect to all $`\mathrm{}`$-isometries, in particular, $`k_{\zeta _0}`$ on $`^n`$ is invariant w.r.t. all diffeomorphisms of $`^n`$ (since $`^n`$ is a countable union of compact sets ) .

In the next section, we give an example of $`k_{\zeta _0}`$ which is non-trivial on a continuum. The following claim also turns out to be valid:

###### Proposition 2

Let $`O,O^{}`$ be open domains in $`^n`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is a conformal map from $`O^{}`$ onto $`O`$, $`\mathrm{J}(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ denotes the Jacobian for $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and $`\zeta _D𝒮^D`$. Then, for any $`k_{\zeta _D}|_O`$-summable function $`f`$, for a change of variables the following formula holds: 999 Note that, for $`^2`$, formula (18) is valid for all biholomorphic $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$, while on $`^1`$ it is correct for all diffeomorphisms of $``$. Moreover, in both cases $`\left(\sqrt[n]{|\mathrm{Jac}(\mathrm{\Phi })(x)|}\right)^D=|\mathrm{\Phi }^{}(x)|^D`$.

$`{\displaystyle _O}f(y)k_{\zeta _D}(dy)={\displaystyle _O^{}}f(\mathrm{\Phi }(x))\left(\sqrt[n]{|\mathrm{J}(\mathrm{\Phi })(x)|}\right)^Dk_{\zeta _D}(dx).`$ (18)
Proof For linear $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$, the proof immediately follows from (13). In the generic case, the proof follows from statement 7 and since due to lemma 3.2.2  $`\delta >0`$ there exists a countable covering by Borel sets $`E_i`$ such that $`cE_i\ae (\mathrm{\Phi }^{}(c)|_{E_i},\mathrm{\Phi }|_{E_i})<\delta `$. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 3 Fractal Measures in $`𝐐_p`$ .

Fractals having an hierarchical structure (for example, the Cantor set, the Sierpinski triangle, the Koch curve etc. ) are convenient to consider as images of uniformly continuous maps from ultrametric spaces to $`^d`$. Such fractals can be constructed through the following procedure. Let $`𝒞_n`$ be a sequence of finite or countable families of compact sets in $`^d`$, called clusters of level $`n`$, and $`\{a\}\{a_n\}_n`$ be a sequence such that $`C_n𝒞_nC_n=\underset{x_n=0}{\overset{a_n1}{}}C_{n+1}^{x_n}`$, where $`C_{n+1}^{x_n}𝒞_{n+1}`$. Let us assume that $`g_n\underset{C_n𝒞_n}{sup}\mathrm{diam}(C_n)0`$ as $`n\mathrm{}`$. Let us fix any set $`C_0𝒞_1`$, then the fractal required is the set $`\underset{n𝐍}{}\{C:C𝒞_n,CC_0\}`$. Each point $`f`$ is the limit of some thread $`C_0C_1^{x_0}C_2^{x_1}\mathrm{}.C_{n+1}^{x_n}\mathrm{}`$ (i.e. $`\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}C_{n+1}^{x_n}=\{f\}`$) and, vice versa, the limit of each such thread is an element of $``$.

Let us identify the set of such threads with the set $`𝐙_{\{a\}}`$ of all sequences $`\{x_n\}_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}`$ such that $`x_n\{0\mathrm{},a_n1\}`$, and also enter the (ultra)metric $`\rho (x,y)=g(v(x,y))`$ on $`𝐙_{\{a\}}`$, where $`v(x,y)=sup\{n:x_n=y_n\}`$ and $`g`$ is any monotone decreasing function, and $`g(\mathrm{})=0`$. If $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}:𝐙_{\{a\}}^d`$ is a map such that $`\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}C_{n+1}^{x_n}=\{\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(\{x_n\}_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}})\}`$, then $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ is a uniformly continuous map on $``$, and if also $`ng_n\stackrel{L}{}g(n)`$, then $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ is the Lipschitzian map. Let $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ be an injective map (for instance, this is the case, if the clusters do not intersect). If $`g()`$ is such that $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^1:𝐙_{\{a\}}`$ is also (locally) the Lipschitzian map, then the construction of the fractal measure $``$ can be transferred from $`^d`$ onto the more convenient ultrametric space $`𝐙_{\{a\}}`$ isomorphic to the ring of $`\{a\}`$-adic integers  and, in the special case of $`a_n=p`$, to the ring of $`p`$-adic integers $`𝐙_p𝐐_p`$.

Each element $`x`$ of the $`p`$-adic number field $`𝐐_p`$ is uniquely representable as a formal power series ,

$`x={\displaystyle \underset{n=v}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}a_np^n={\displaystyle \underset{n=v}{\overset{1}{}}}a_np^n+{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}a_np^n`$ (19)
with coefficients $`a_n\{0,1,\mathrm{},p1\}`$, where $`v<\mathrm{}`$ and $`p`$ is some fixed prime number. 101010 Actually, the role of $`p`$ can be equally well played by any positive integer, since we nowhere use the existence of inverse elements in the ring $`𝐐_p`$.  The number $`v(x)=v`$ is called logarithmic norm of $`x`$. Any strictly monotone decreasing function $`g`$ such that $`g(\mathrm{})=0`$ defines an invariant metric on the additive group $`𝐐_p`$ by the formula $`x,y𝐐_p\rho (x,y)\rho (xy)=g(v(xy))`$ 111111 Note that the uniform structure (and, therefore, topology) in $`𝐐_p`$ does not depend on the choice of $`g`$. . This metric have the ultrametric property:

$`\rho (xy)\mathrm{max}(\rho (x),\rho (y)).`$ (20)
The series (19) absolutely converges in $`\rho `$. Any number $`q`$ can be uniquely expanded into series (19) and $`𝐐_p`$ is the completion of $``$ . The first sum at the right-hand side of (19) is denoted as $`\left\{x\right\}_p`$ being the fractional part of $`x`$. The second sum is denoted as $`\left[x\right]_p`$ being the integer part of $`x`$. In this case, $`\left\{x\right\}_p[0,1)`$ and $`\left[x\right]_p𝐙_p`$ , where $`𝐙_p=\{x𝐐_p:x1\}`$ is the ring of $`p`$-adic integers and $`|x|_pp^{v(x)}`$ is the canonical norm. We assume further (unless otherwise stated) that there is a canonical norm in $`𝐐_p`$. It can be shown  that the 1-dimensional Hausdorff measure in $`(𝐐_p,||_p)`$ coincides with the standard Haar measure $`\chi `$ in $`𝐐_p`$ such that

$`\chi (𝐙_p)={\displaystyle \underset{𝐙_p}{}}𝑑\chi =1.`$ (21)
Let us consider $`(𝐐_p,\rho )`$ with $`\rho (x,y)=g(v(xy))`$ and $`\zeta (r)\stackrel{}{}(\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{})p^{g^1(r)}`$. Then, it is obvious that

$`k_{\zeta _\rho }()=(\stackrel{L}{})\chi ().`$ (22)
Thus, $`\zeta 𝒮^D`$ one can find the proper metric in $`𝐐_p`$; for instance, if

$`\zeta (r)\stackrel{}{}{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\left(\mathrm{log}_p^{\{k\}}(1/r)\right)^{D_k}}}={\displaystyle \underset{k=m}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\left(\mathrm{log}_p^{\{k\}}(1/r)\right)^{D_k}}},`$ (23)
where $`(\mathrm{exp}_a(t)a^t)`$,

$`\mathrm{log}_a^{\{k\}}(t)\mathrm{exp}_a^{\{k\}}(t)\{\begin{array}{ccc}\underset{ktimes}{\underset{}{\mathrm{log}_a(\mathrm{log}_a\mathrm{}\mathrm{log}_a(t))\mathrm{}))}}& :& k>0\\ t& :& k=0\\ \underset{ktimes}{\underset{}{\mathrm{exp}_a(\mathrm{exp}_a\mathrm{}\mathrm{exp}_a(t)\mathrm{}))}}& :& k<0\end{array}`$ (27)
and $`D_0=D`$, $`D_m>0`$ then one can easily show that proper metric can be chosen as follows

$`\rho _{\{\overline{D}\}}(x)\stackrel{}{}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{exp}_p^{\{m\}}\left(|x|_p^{\frac{1}{D_m}}\underset{k=1}{\overset{Nm}{}}\left(\mathrm{log}_p^{\{k\}}|x|_p^1\right)^{\frac{D_{m+k}}{D_m}}\right)}}.`$ (28)
Let us consider the map $`J^m:𝐐_p𝐐_p`$ such that

$`J^m\left({\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}x_np^n\right)={\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}x_np^{\mathrm{exp}_p^{\{m\}}(n)}`$ (29)
is an $`\mathrm{}`$-isometry from $`𝐐_p`$, with the metric $`\rho (x)=p^{\mathrm{exp}_p^{\{m\}}\left(v(x)\right)}`$ in $`(𝐐_p,||_p)`$. Thus, for $`m>0`$ one obtains a continuum $`J^m(𝐐_p)𝐐_p`$ with HD$`=0`$ and the nontrivial measure $`k_\zeta `$ for $`\zeta (r)\stackrel{}{}\left(\mathrm{log}_p^{\{m\}}(1/r)\right)^1`$. Moreover, $`k_\zeta `$ is invariant w.r.t. any $`\mathrm{}`$-isometry on $``$.

So far all these constructions in $`𝐐_p`$ look like a tautology, however, they become nontrivial if one finds out an $`\mathrm{}`$-isometry from $`(𝐐_p,\rho _{\{D\}})`$ to $`^d`$. For $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_N\{x𝐐_p:|x|_pp^N\}(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{}}=𝐐_p)`$, we call a continuous map $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}:\mathrm{\Lambda }_N^d`$ automodel if for some $`m0`$

$`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(B_l^n)={\displaystyle \underset{\overline{l}=0}{\overset{p^m1}{}}}E_{l,\overline{l},n}\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(B_{\overline{l}}^{nm}),`$ (30)
$`n,l𝐐_p`$. Here $`B_l^n\{x\mathrm{\Lambda }_N:|xl|_pp^n\}`$ are closed (and simultaneously open) balls in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_N`$ and $`E_{l,\overline{l},n}:^d^d`$ are isometry maps. We call $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}:\mathrm{\Lambda }_N^d`$ quasiautomodel if there exists a sequence of automodel maps $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_k`$ such that $`lim_k\mathrm{}\ae (\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_k,\mathrm{{\rm Y}})=0`$. The following statement is correct:

###### Proposition 3

Let $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}:\mathrm{\Lambda }_N^d`$ be quasiautomodel, $`\zeta 𝒮^D`$ is such that $`k_\zeta (\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(𝐙_p))<\mathrm{}`$ and $`k_\zeta (\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(B_l^n)\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(B_l^{}^n^{}))=0`$, when $`B_l^nB_l^{}^n^{}=\mathrm{}`$. Then $`A^d`$

$`k_\zeta (A\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(\mathrm{\Lambda }_n))=k_\zeta |_{\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(\mathrm{\Lambda }_n)}(A)=k_\zeta (\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(𝐙_p))\chi (\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^1(A)),`$ (31)
Proof From the proposition (1) it follows that it is sufficient to consider the automodel map. For the automodel map, formula (31) is valid $`B_{\overline{l}}^n𝐐_p`$. Indeed, the clusters $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(B_l^n)`$ in (30) do not overlap $`k_\zeta `$-nearly everywhere and $`k_\zeta `$ is a translation invariant. Since $`k_\zeta `$ and $`\chi `$ are regular in Borel sense, $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(\mathrm{\Lambda }_n)=_{k<n}\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(\mathrm{\Lambda }_k)`$ is a Borel set ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }_k`$ is a compact set, and $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ is a continuous map) and the semi-ring $`\{B_l^n\}_{n,l}`$ generates a Borel $`\sigma `$-algebra in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_N`$, then formula (31) is valid $`A^d`$ . $`\mathrm{}`$
Thus, if $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ is quasiautomodel and $`\zeta 𝒮^D`$ such that $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ is an $`\mathrm{}`$ -isometry from $`(𝐐_p,\rho )`$ into $`^d`$ for some $`\rho (x,y)=g(v(xy))`$ such that $`\zeta (r)\stackrel{}{}p^{g^1(r)}`$, then the fractal measure of $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(\mathrm{\Lambda }_N)`$ defined by

$`\mu _{\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(\mathrm{\Lambda }_N)}()={\displaystyle \frac{1}{k_\zeta (\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(𝐙_p))}}k_\zeta (\mathrm{\Lambda }_N)`$ (32)
is the image of the Haar measure in $`𝐐_p`$ i.e. $`\mu _{\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(\mathrm{\Lambda }_N)}()=\chi (\mathrm{{\rm Y}}^1())`$ .

## 4 Maps $`:𝐐_p`$.

The map $`𝐐_pxpx𝐐_p`$ generates a natural group of scaling transformations $`\{p^n\}_n()`$ in the ring $`𝐐_p`$ $`(|p^nx|_p=p^n|x|_p)`$. On the other hand, any scaling transform of $``$ is of the form $`zsz+t`$, where $`s,t`$. We want to describe scaling-covariant uniformly continuous maps $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}:𝐐_p`$, i.e. those consistent with the scaling transforms: $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(px)=s\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(x)+tx𝐐_p`$ for some $`s,t`$. For the map $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s()=\mathrm{{\rm Y}}()\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(0)`$ the latter requirement reduces to the following principal condition on $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s`$

$`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s(px)=s\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s(x)=p^{\frac{1}{D_s}}e^{i\mathrm{arg}(s)}\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s(x),`$ (33)
where $`D_s=\mathrm{ln}(p)/\mathrm{ln}|s|`$. Let us assume that $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s()0`$. Then from (33), the continuity of $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s`$ and from the condition $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s(0)=0`$ it follows that $`s\mathrm{U}_1(\mathrm{U}_\mathrm{r}\{\mathrm{z}:|\mathrm{z}|<\mathrm{r}\})`$ 121212 Note that if $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s:𝐐_p`$ is injective, then $`lim_{|x|_p\mathrm{}}|\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s(x)|=\mathrm{}`$. Therefore, one could consider the continuous maps $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}:\overline{𝐐}_p\overline{}`$ such that $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(px)=L(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(x))`$, where $`\overline{𝐐}_p𝐐_p\{\mathrm{}\}`$ is the single-point compactification of $`𝐐_p`$, $`\overline{}`$ is the Riemannian sphere and $`L(z)=(az+b)/(c+dz)`$. Then, $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(0)`$ and $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(\mathrm{})`$ are fixed points of $`L`$, however, if $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(0)\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(\mathrm{})`$, there exists a linear-fractional automorphism $`U:\overline{}\overline{}`$ such that, for $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s=U\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$, (33) is valid . .

Let us define two numbers

$`\mathrm{\Delta }^\pm (\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s)=inf\{|\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s(x)\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s(y)|^{\pm 1}:x,y𝐐_p:|xy|_p=1\}.`$ (34)
From (33) it follows that $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s)>0`$ iff $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s`$ is uniformly continuous and $`\mathrm{\Delta }^+(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s)>0`$ iff there exists a uniformly continuous map $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^1:\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s(𝐐_p)𝐐_p`$ such that $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^1\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s=\mathrm{id}`$.  Let $`\rho _D(x,y)=\sqrt[D]{|xy|_p}`$ and $`d_{\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s}(x,y)=|\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s(x)\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s(y)|`$, then it is easy to show that $`\mathrm{}(\rho _{D_s},d_{\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s})=1/\mathrm{\Delta }^+(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s)`$ and $`\mathrm{}(d_{\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s},\rho _{D_s})=1/\mathrm{\Delta }^{}(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s)`$ and, hence, $`\ae (d_{\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s},\rho _{D_s})=\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{min}(\mathrm{\Delta }^+(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s),\mathrm{\Delta }^{}(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s)))`$. Therefore, $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s:𝐐_p`$ is uniformly continuous iff $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s:(𝐐_p,\rho _{D_s})`$ is an $`\mathrm{}`$-isometry. From this one immediately obtains that for any scaling-covariant uniformly continuous embedding $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s:𝐐_p`$ the Hausdorff measure $`h^{D_s}`$ is nontrivial on $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s(𝐐_p)`$ and $`D_h(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s(B))=D_s`$ for any open set $`B𝐐_p`$ . Besides, it is clear that if $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s`$ is only a uniformly continuous map, then $`D_h(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s(𝐐_p))D_s`$. Let us assume furthermore that, for each fixed $`x𝐐_p`$$`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_{()}(x)`$ is a function holomorphic on $`\mathrm{U}_1^{}(\mathrm{U}_\mathrm{r}^{}\mathrm{U}_\mathrm{r}\backslash \{0\})`$. Then the requirement $`(\text{33})`$ and the residue at zero uniquely determines the set of maps $`\{\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s\}_{s\mathrm{U}_1^{}}`$. Indeed, let $`\varphi (x)=res_{s=0}(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s(x))`$, then $`x𝐐_p`$

$`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s(x)={\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\varphi \left({\displaystyle \frac{x}{p^{n+1}}}\right)s^n.`$ (35)
Let us also assume that, for some $`r>0`$, there exists $`\mathrm{\Delta }_r>0`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s)\mathrm{\Delta }_rs\mathrm{U}_\mathrm{r}^{}`$ 131313 One can easily show that the requirement $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s)\mathrm{\Delta }_r>0`$ is equivalent (up to the replacement $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_ss^M\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s`$) to the equipotential uniform continuity of the set of functions $`\{\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s\}_{s\mathrm{U}_\mathrm{r}^{}}`$. . Then, from the Cauchy inequalities for the Laurent series (35) it follows that $`\varphi (x+𝐙_p)=\varphi (x)x𝐐_p`$, or, which is the same, $`\varphi (x)=\varphi (\left\{x\right\}_p)`$. Now the Laurent expansion of $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s`$ can be written as

$`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s(x)=\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (x)={\displaystyle \underset{n=v(x)}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\varphi \left({\displaystyle \frac{x}{p^{n+1}}}\right)s^n={\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\varphi \left(\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{x}{p^{n+1}}}\right\}_p\right)s^n.`$ (36)
The function $`\varphi `$ is uniquely determined by its values on the set

$$\mathrm{Z}(p^{\mathrm{}})\{\left\{x\right\}_p:x𝐐_p\}=\{l/p^k:l,k𝐍,l<p^k\}.$$

Therefore, the function $`\varphi `$ can be considered as being defined on $`[0,1)`$ or as a periodic function (with period $`=1`$ ) defined on $``$, $`𝐐_p`$, or $``$. For the sake of simplicity, let us assume that $`\varphi :\mathrm{Z}(p^{\mathrm{}})`$ is an arbitrary bounded function (without loss of generality, let $`|\varphi (x)|1`$). Then, the series (36) defines the map $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi `$ such that (33) holds and $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi )1|s|`$. Using that $`\varphi (x/p^{n+1})`$ depends only on $`x_n,x_{n1}\mathrm{},x_{v(x)}`$, one easily gets the following estimate for $`\mathrm{\Delta }^+(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi )`$:

$`\mathrm{\Delta }^+(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi )\nu [\varphi ]{\displaystyle \frac{|s|}{1|s|}},`$ (37)
where $`\nu [\varphi ]=inf_{a=1,p1}\{|\varphi (p^1a+\tau )\varphi (\tau )|:\tau \mathrm{Z}(p^{\mathrm{}})\}`$ 141414 Considering $`\varphi (t)`$ as the periodic function $`\varphi (t)=\varphi (t+n)`$, it is possible to interpret $`\varphi (t)`$ as a trajectory of a particle in $``$. Then, $`\nu [\varphi ]`$ is the minimal distance between $`p`$ particles which started to move at sequent moments of ”time” $`t=0,\frac{1}{p}\mathrm{},\frac{p1}{p}`$. . Thus, if $`\nu [\varphi ]>0`$, then, for small enough $`s`$ such that $`|s|<\sigma _\varphi \nu [\varphi ]/(1+\nu [\varphi ])`$, the map $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi `$ is an $`\mathrm{}`$-isometry. For example, if $`\varphi (x)=(p1)^1x_1`$, then $`\nu [\varphi ]=(p1)^1`$ , $`\sigma _\varphi =p^1`$, and if $`\varphi (x)=\mathrm{exp}(i2\pi \left\{x\right\}_p)1`$, then $`\nu [\varphi ]=\mathrm{sin}(\pi /p)`$ ,$`\sigma _\varphi =(1+\mathrm{sin}(\pi /p)^1)^1p^1`$ (cf. with ).

If $`\varphi (x)=\varphi (x_1)`$, it is possible to obtain a lower bound for $`D_h(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (𝐐_p))`$. Indeed, it is easy to prove that $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_{s^K}^\varphi =\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi \mathrm{\Theta }_K`$, where $`\mathrm{\Theta }_K:𝐐_p𝐐_p`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Theta }_K\left(_{n=\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}x_np^n\right)=_{n=\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}x_np^{Kn}`$. Thus, for $`K`$ such that $`|s|^K<\sigma _\varphi `$, one gets

$$D_s/K=D_{s^K}=D_h(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (\mathrm{\Theta }(𝐐_p)))D_h(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (𝐐_p)).$$

For any integer $`l`$, let us introduce $`x𝐙_p`$ the map $`_s^l\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi :𝐙_p`$,

$`_s^l\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (x)={\displaystyle \underset{n=l}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\varphi \left(\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{x}{p^{n+1}}}\right\}_p\right){\displaystyle \frac{n!}{(nl)!}}s^{nl}.`$ (38)
Using (46), it is easy to show that $`d_{_s^l\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi }\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}\rho _{(D_s,l)}`$ with $`|s|<\sigma _\varphi `$, where $`\rho _{(D_s,l)(x)}=v(x)^lp^{v(x)/D_s}`$ and $`d_{_s^l\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s}(x,y)=|_s^l\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s(x)_s^l\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s(y)|`$. Thus, $`k_\zeta `$ with $`\zeta (r)=(r|\mathrm{ln}(r)|^l)^{D_s}`$ ($`\zeta 𝒮^{D_s}`$) is a nontrivial measure on $`_s^l\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (𝐙_p)`$, however, $`h_{|_s^l\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (𝐙_p)}^{D_s}=0`$ at $`l<0`$ and is $`\sigma `$-infinite at $`l>0`$.

Now let us construct a set in $``$ of zero Lebesgue measure, but with HD$`=2`$. Put $`_2^{}=_s^1\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (𝐙_p)`$ with $`\varphi (x)=x_1`$ and $`s=\frac{i}{\sqrt{p}}`$. Using (47), one can prove that

$$\rho _{(2,1)}\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}d_{_s^1\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi }\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}\rho _{(2,2)}.$$

Hence, using corollary 1 of proposition (1), one obtains that $`D_h(_2^{})=2`$ and $`h^2(_2^{})=0`$, since $`\rho _{(2,0)}\rho _{(2,1)}`$.

Since $`_s^0\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi =\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi |_{𝐙_p}`$, let us identify $`_s^0\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi `$ with $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi :𝐐_p`$. Let $`[\varphi ]_m(x)\varphi (p^m\left[p^mx\right]_p)=\varphi (_{n=m}^0x_np^n)`$. Then, similarly to  it can be shown that $`_s^l\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^{[\varphi ]_m}`$ is automodel. For any function $`\varphi :[0,1)`$, let $`\varphi _{\mathrm{}}^{(p)}sup\{|\varphi (q)|:q\mathrm{Z}(p^{\mathrm{}})\}`$. A function $`\varphi :[0,1)`$ is called $`(p)`$-continuous, if $`lim_m\mathrm{}\varphi [\varphi ]_m_{\mathrm{}}^{(p)}=0`$. Obviously, $`M_+`$ $`\varphi (x)=[\varphi ]_M(x)`$ is a $`(p)`$-continuous function. The following claim is correct.

###### Proposition 4

If $`_s^l\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi `$ is an $`\mathrm{}`$-isometry with a $`(p)`$-continuous function $`\varphi `$, then $`_s^l\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi `$ is a quasi-automodel map and $`M`$ such that $`_s^l\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^{[\varphi ]_m}`$ is also an $`\mathrm{}`$-isometry at $`mM`$.

Proof Since $`\ae (\rho _{(D_s,l)},d_{_s^l\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi })<\mathrm{}`$ and for any $`m_+`$ $`_s^l\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^{[\varphi ]_m}`$ is an automodel map, the proof follows from the following lemma (proved in the Appendix) applied to $`\varphi _1=\varphi `$ and $`\varphi _2=[\varphi ]_m`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 2

For any bounded function $`\varphi _i:\mathrm{Z}(p^{\mathrm{}})(i=1,2)`$

$`\kappa (_s^l\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^{\varphi _1},_s^l\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^{\varphi _2})ce^{\mathrm{min}(\ae _1,\ae _2)}\varphi _1\varphi _2_{\mathrm{}}^{(p)},`$ (39)
where $`\ae _i=\ae (\rho _{(D_s,l)},d_{_s^l\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^{\varphi _i}})`$ and $`c=2(1|s|)^1`$.

The requirement of $`(p)`$-continuity is not too restrictive. Indeed, the following assertion (proved in the Appendix) is valid.

###### Proposition 5

The function $`\varphi :[0,1]`$ is $`(p)`$-continuous, if it is right-continuous and is continuous everywhere except for a finite number of points of the first kind discontinuity $`a_1\mathrm{},a_N`$ such that $`a_i\mathrm{Z}(p^{\mathrm{}})`$, in particular, if $`\varphi `$ is just continuous (continuity is understood in the sense of ordinary topology on $``$).

From 3 and 4 it follows that $`h^{D_s}(𝐙_p)\stackrel{L}{}1`$ at $`\mathrm{\Delta }_s^\varphi >0`$ and the fractal measure $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (𝐐_p)`$ is the image of the Haar measure on $`𝐐_p`$. Similarly, the fractal measure $`_s^l\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (𝐙_p)`$ (with $`\zeta (r)=r^{D_s}|\mathrm{ln}(r)|^{D_sl}`$ ) is the image of the Haar measure on $`𝐐_p`$ too.

Let now $`\mathrm{\Delta }_s^\varphi >0`$. It is easy to show that the map $`𝒩\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi J^m:𝐐_p`$ is an $`\mathrm{}`$-isometry from $`𝐐_p`$ with metric $`\rho _m(x)=p^{\mathrm{exp}_p^{\{m\}}\left(\frac{v(x)}{D_s}\right)}`$ to $``$. Let $`\zeta (r)\stackrel{}{}\left(\mathrm{log}_p^{\{m\}}(1/r)\right)^1`$, then $`\zeta 𝒮^0`$ and, from proposition 1, it follows that $`k_\zeta |_{𝒩(𝐐_p)}()=k_{\zeta _{\rho _m}}|(𝒩^1())=\chi (𝒩^1())`$ 151515 Note that in this case quasiautomodelity of $`𝒩`$ is not used. Moreover, $`k_\zeta (𝒩(𝐙_p))=\chi (𝐙_p)=1`$ . The measure $`k_\zeta `$ is invariant w.r.t. any diffeomorphism $`^2`$, and, at $`m>1`$, w.r.t. any homeomorphism with arbitrary Holder index.

Thus, in the cases considered above for any $`\mu _{\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (\mathrm{\Lambda })}`$-summable function $`f:`$ one has

$`{\displaystyle \underset{}{}}\mu _{\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (\mathrm{\Lambda })}(dz)f(z)={\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{}}\chi (dx)f(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (x)).`$ (40)
Note that the integral in the right hand side of (40) is correctly defined even if the measure $`\mu _{\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (\mathrm{\Lambda })}`$ is not defined, furthermore, the following proposition holds (see proof in the Appendix).

###### Proposition 6

Let $`O`$ be an open set in $`\mathrm{U}_\mathrm{r}^{}`$ for some $`r<1`$ , $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ be a measurable subset in $`𝐐_p`$, $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_O(\mathrm{\Lambda })_{sO}\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s(\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ and $`fC^m(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_O(\mathrm{\Lambda }))`$ and $`l,\overline{l}`$ be such that $`l+\overline{l}m`$. Then, if one of the following condition holds,
1) the set $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is bounded;
2) $`\delta _s^\varphi inf_{|x|_p=1}|\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (x)|>0`$ and $`\nu >0`$ such that with $`kl,\overline{k}\overline{l}`$ the following inequality holds ( $`_z\frac{}{x}+i\frac{}{y}`$ $`_{\overline{z}}\frac{}{x}i\frac{}{y}`$ )

$$z\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_O(\mathrm{\Lambda })|_z^k_{\overline{z}}^{\overline{k}}f(z)|\stackrel{L}{}\frac{1}{1+|z|^{D_s+k+\overline{k}+\nu }};$$

then the integral

$`\mathrm{I}_s^\mathrm{\Lambda }(f){\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{}}\chi (dx)f(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (x)),`$ (41)
exists, $`\mathrm{I}_s^\mathrm{\Lambda }(f)C^m(O)`$ and the following equation is correct

$`_s^l_{\overline{s}}^{\overline{l}}\mathrm{I}_s^\mathrm{\Lambda }(f)={\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{}}\chi (dx)_s^l_{\overline{s}}^{\overline{l}}f(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (x)).`$ (42)
In particular, if $`f𝒮(^2)`$, where $`𝒮(^2)`$ is the Schwarz space of rapidly decreasing $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$-smooth functions, then, $`\mathrm{I}_s^\mathrm{\Lambda }(f)C^{\mathrm{}}(O)`$. Furthermore, $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_O(\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ is an open set, since from holomorphy of $`f`$ in $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_O(\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ it follows that $`\mathrm{I}_s^\mathrm{\Lambda }(f)`$ is some holomorphic function in $`O`$ $`(_{\overline{z}}f(z)=0_{\overline{s}}\mathrm{I}_s^\mathrm{\Lambda }(f)=0)`$.

The constructions considered in this section can be immediately generalized onto maps from $`𝐙_{\{a\}}`$ to $``$. Let us define the map $`\omega _\nu ^\varphi :\times 𝐙_{\{a\}}`$ (assuming that $`\varphi (t+1)=\varphi (t)`$) as follows $`(\tau ,x)\times 𝐙_{\{a\}}`$

$$\omega _\nu ^\varphi (\tau ,x)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\frac{1}{a^{(n)}}\right)^\nu \varphi \left(\frac{(x)_a^n+\tau }{a^{(n)}}\right),$$

where $`a^{(n)}=\underset{k=0}{\overset{n}{}}a_k(a^{(1)}1)`$ and $`(x)_a^n=\underset{k=0}{\overset{n}{}}x_ka^{(k1)}`$. In the special case of $`a_k=p`$, one has $`\omega _\nu ^\varphi (0,x)=\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (x)`$ $`x𝐙_p`$ for $`s=p^\nu `$. Furthermore, it can be proved that, for example, if $`a_k=(k+2)!`$, $`\varphi (t)=\mathrm{exp}(i2\pi t)`$ and $`D^1=\mathrm{Re}\left(\nu \right)>1`$, then $`\rho _{D,0}\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}d_\tau \stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}\rho _{D,1}`$, where $`\rho _{D,i}(x,y)=v(x,y)^i/\sqrt[D]{a^{(v(x,y))}}`$ and $`d_\tau (x,y)=|\omega _\nu ^\varphi (\tau ,x)\omega _\nu ^\varphi (\tau ,y)|`$. Therefore, $`\tau `$ $`D_h(\omega _\nu ^\varphi (\tau ,𝐙_{\{a\}}))=D`$. It is easy to show that $`n\omega _\nu ^\varphi (\tau ,x)=\omega _\nu ^\varphi (\tau n,x+n)`$, i.e. the function $`\omega _\nu ^\varphi `$ is constant on the cosets of the subgroup $`B\{(n,n)\times 𝐙_{\{a\}}:n\}`$ and, therefore, it can be represented as the map of $`\{a\}`$-adic solenoid  $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\{a\}}(\times 𝐙_{\{a\}})/B`$ to $``$. Similarly, the map $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\nu ,\alpha }^\varphi :\times 𝐙_{\{a\}}^3`$ such that $`\rho +ih=\omega _\nu ^\varphi (\tau ,x)+\alpha `$ and $`\varphi =\tau `$, where $`h,\rho ,\varphi `$ are cylindrical coordinates on $`^3`$, can be considered as the map from $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\{a\}}`$ into $`^3`$ 161616 Note that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\{a\}}`$ for $`a_k=(k+2)!`$ is isomorphic to the character group of the additive group of the field $``$  or to the group $`𝐀/`$, where $`𝐀`$ is the ring of adeles . . If now $`\omega _\nu ^\varphi `$ is such that $`\rho _{D,0}\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}d_\tau \stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}\rho _{D,1}`$, repeating the arguments from  it can be shown that, for $`|\mathrm{Re}\left(\alpha \right)|`$ large enough, the map $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\nu ,\alpha }^\varphi `$ is a continuous embedding and $`D_h(\mathrm{\Omega }_{\nu ,\alpha }^\varphi (\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\{a\}}))=D+1`$. Moreover, if $`\varphi :[0,1]`$ is a continuously differentiable function, then $`(\tau ,x)\times 𝐙_{\{a\}}`$ the following equality holds

$$_\tau \omega _\nu ^\varphi (\tau ,x)=\omega _{\nu +1}^{_\tau \varphi }(\tau ,x)$$

It follows that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\nu ,\alpha }^\varphi (\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\{a\}})`$ is the invariant set of the autonomous ordinary differential equation in $`^3`$ with the Lipschitzian right hand side .

## 5 Continuous Transition between Dimensions

Before considering a concrete set of maps realizing the transition between integer dimensions note that the set $`_s=\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s(𝐐_p)`$ is invariant w.r.t. the scale transformation $`zsz`$ and its fractal measure $`\mu __s`$ is transformed as follows

$`\mu __s(s)=p^1\mu __s()=|s^d|\mu __s()=e^{i\theta }s^d\mu __s().`$ (43)
Here we introduce a ”complex dimension” $`d`$ of the set $`_d_s`$ and an arbitrary parameter $`\theta `$, with the following relations between them being correct

$`s=s(d)\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}p+i\theta }{d}}\right).`$ (44)
$`D_s^1=\mathrm{Re}\left(d^1\left(1+i{\displaystyle \frac{\theta }{\mathrm{ln}p}}\right)\right)0.`$ (45)
Let us consider now the map $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi `$ with $`\varphi `$ such that $`\varphi (x)=x_1`$ $`x=\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}x_np^n𝐐_p`$ . Using the p-adic decomposition of the real numbers, it can be proved that $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_{\frac{1}{p}}^\varphi (𝐙_p)=\{x+iy:0x\frac{p}{p1},y=0\}`$. Now from (33) it follows that $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_{\frac{1}{p}}^\varphi (𝐐_p)=\{z:\mathrm{Im}\left(z\right)=0,\mathrm{Re}\left(z\right)0\}`$. It is easy to show that $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_{\frac{1}{p}}^\varphi (𝐙_p)[\frac{p}{2}]\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\frac{1}{p}\right)^n=\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_{\frac{1}{p}}^\varphi (𝐙_p)[\frac{p}{2}]_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}\left(\frac{1}{p}\right)^n`$, therefore, $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_{\frac{1}{p}}^\varphi (𝐙_p)=\{x+iy:0x+\frac{2p^2[p/2]}{p^21}\frac{p}{p1},y=0\}`$. From this, using (33), one gets $`_d=\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_{\frac{1}{p}}^\varphi (𝐐_p)=\{z:\mathrm{Im}\left(z\right)=0\}`$ with $`d=1\left(\frac{\mathrm{ln}p+i\theta }{\mathrm{ln}p+i\pi }\right)(s(d)=1/p)`$. Let us define the bijection $`q:𝐐_p\times 𝐐_p𝐐_p`$ such that

$$q(\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}x_np^n,\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}y_np^n)=\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}x_n\left(p^2\right)^n+p\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}y_n\left(p^2\right)^n,$$

One easily shows that $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (q(x,y))=\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_{s^2}^\varphi (x)+s\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_{s^2}^\varphi (y)`$ and, in particular, $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_{\pm \frac{i}{\sqrt{p}}}^\varphi (q(x,y))=\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_{\frac{1}{p}}^\varphi (x)\pm i\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{p}}\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_{\frac{1}{p}}^\varphi (y)\right)`$ . Therefore, for $`d=2\left(\frac{\mathrm{ln}p+i\theta }{\mathrm{ln}p\pm i\pi }\right)`$ $`(s(d)=\pm \frac{i}{\sqrt{p}})`$ one obtains that $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (𝐙_p)`$ is a closed rectangle in $``$ of the size $`\frac{p}{p1}\times \frac{\sqrt{p}}{p1}`$ and $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (𝐐_p)=`$.

Let us assume that $`\theta =\pi `$, then one gets that $`_1`$ is the real axis $`^1`$ and $`_2=^2`$. Besides, in spite of the fact that the map $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi `$ is not injective at $`d=1,2`$, still $`D_s=d`$, $`h^{D_s}(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_{s(d)}^\varphi (𝐙_p))\stackrel{L}{}1`$ and the formula (40) (with $`\zeta (\rho )=\rho ^{D_s}`$) is valid. Thus, the fractal measures of $`_1`$ and $`_2`$ are (up to a constant factor) the 1-dimensional $`\mu __1(dz)\delta (z\overline{z})dzd\overline{z}`$ and 2-dimensional $`\mu __1(dz)dzd\overline{z}`$ Lebesgue measures, respectively. It is easy to show that the points $`1`$ and $`2`$ in the $`d`$-plane can be connected by a continuous path such that $`\mu __d(f)`$ is defined on it and $`f𝒮(^2)`$, due to proposition 6, $`\mu __d(f)`$ $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ is a $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ -smooth function and if $`f`$ is a holomorphic function on $`\mathrm{U}_{\sqrt{\mathrm{p}}/(\sqrt{\mathrm{p}}1)}`$, then, $`\mu _{_d^0}(f)`$ is a holomorphic function on this path, $`_d^0=\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_{s(d)}^\varphi (𝐙_p)`$. In figure 1 an example of such a path is shown in $`d`$\- and $`s`$\- planes with $`p=2`$. There are also drawn the (white) domain of embeddings $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi )>2^{12}0`$, where the fractal measures are defined and the formula (40) holds, and the (grey) domain $`\delta (\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi )>2^{10}0`$, where the requirements of assertion 6 hold.

## 6 Appendix

Proof of lemma 1 The following lemma holds

###### Lemma 3

If the function $`\varphi :`$ such that $`\delta `$ $`\underset{t\mathrm{}}{lim}|\varphi (t+\delta )\varphi (t)|=0`$ and $`\varphi (t)=\mu (t)+\upsilon (t)`$, where $`\mu (t)`$ and $`\upsilon (t)`$ are, respectively, monotone and uniformly continuous functions at some interval $`(\tau _0,\mathrm{})`$, then
I) $`\epsilon >0\tau `$ such that $`|\varphi (t)\varphi (t^{})|<\epsilon +\epsilon |tt^{}|`$ at $`t,t^{}\tau `$.
II) $`r<\mathrm{}`$ $`\underset{\tau \mathrm{}}{lim}sup\{|\varphi (t)\varphi (t^{})|:t,t^{}>\tau ,|tt^{}|<r\}=0.`$
III) $`\epsilon >0\tau `$ such that $`|\varphi (t)|<\epsilon t`$ at $`t\tau `$.

Proof $`\delta ,\epsilon >0\tau _{\delta ,\epsilon }>\tau _0`$ such that $`t^{}\tau _{\delta ,\epsilon }`$ $`|\varphi (t^{}+\delta )\varphi (t^{})|<\epsilon \delta /2`$. Let us choose $`\delta <1`$ such that $`\delta ^{}\delta ,\delta ^{}>0`$ $`|\upsilon (t^{}+\delta ^{})\upsilon (t^{})|<\epsilon /4`$ . Then, from monotonicity of $`\mu (t)`$ it follows that $`|\varphi (t^{}+\delta ^{})\varphi (t^{})||\varphi (t^{}+\delta )\varphi (t^{})|+\epsilon /2<\epsilon `$. ($`|\varphi (t^{}+\delta ^{})\varphi (t^{})|\epsilon /4|\mu (t^{}+\delta ^{})\mu (t^{})||\mu (t^{}+\delta )\mu (t)||\varphi (t^{}+\delta )\varphi (t^{})|+\epsilon /4`$). Let $`tt^{}`$ and $`t_k=t+\delta k`$, then $`tt_{N_\delta }=\delta ^{}\delta `$, where $`N_\delta =\left[\delta ^1(tt^{})\right]`$ and the following chain of inequalities holds

$`|\varphi (t)\varphi (t^{})||\varphi (t)\varphi (t_{N_\delta })|+|\varphi (t_{N_\delta })\varphi (t^{})|`$
$`|\varphi (t_{N_\delta }+\delta ^{})\varphi (t_{N_\delta })|+{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{N_\delta 1}{}}}|\varphi (t_k)\varphi (t^{})|<\epsilon +{\displaystyle \frac{\epsilon }{2}}\delta N_\delta \epsilon +{\displaystyle \frac{\epsilon }{2}}|tt^{}|.`$
Now assertions I and II take place at $`\tau \tau _{\delta ,\epsilon }`$, and assertion III can be obtained for $`\tau |t^{}|+2+2|\varphi (t^{})|/\epsilon `$. $`\mathrm{}`$
Let us return now to the proof of lemma 1. $`f_{},g_𝒢𝒩(I)\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{}(f_{},g_𝒢)=\mathrm{}_0<\mathrm{}`$, Let $`\alpha (s)=\mathrm{ln}f(s)`$ and $`\beta (s)=\mathrm{ln}g(s)`$, then $`ϵ>0t_0`$ such that $`sV_{t_0}=\{s:\beta (s)t_0\}`$ $`\delta (s)=\beta (s)\alpha (s)<\mathrm{}=\mathrm{}_0+ϵ`$. $`\mu (t)=Dt+\varphi (t)=\mathrm{ln}\zeta (e^t)`$ is a monotone increasing function, thus, $`\varphi (t)`$ obeys lemma 3 and $`t_0^{}>t_0`$ such that $`sV_{t_0^{}}\delta \mu (s)=\mu (\beta (s))\mu (\alpha (s))=D\delta (s)+\varphi (\beta (s))\varphi (\alpha (s))D\delta (s)+ϵ|\delta (s)|+ϵ(D+ϵ\mathrm{sign}(\mathrm{}))\mathrm{}+ϵ`$. Therefore, $`\mathrm{}(\zeta (f_{}),\zeta (g_𝒢))\mathrm{}(f_{},g_𝒢)^D`$ at $`D>0`$. Since $`\delta \mu (s)0`$ at $`\delta (s)0`$, then $`\delta \mu (s)\mathrm{max}(ϵ\delta (s)+ϵ,0)`$ at $`D=0`$. From this one obtains from this $`\mathrm{}(\zeta (f_{}),\zeta (g_𝒢))1`$ at $`\mathrm{}(f_{},g_𝒢)<\mathrm{}`$. Let $`D^{}>D`$, then $`\eta 𝒮^D^{}`$ such that $`t>t_0`$ $`\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{}(\eta (g_𝒢),\zeta (g_𝒢))\mathrm{ln}(\eta (e^t)/\zeta (e^t))=(D^{}D)t+\varphi (t)\varphi ^{}(t)`$. Using assertion III of lemma 3, one gets that $`\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{}(\eta (g_𝒢),\zeta (g_𝒢))=\mathrm{}`$. Thus, $`\eta (f_{})\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}\eta (g_𝒢)\zeta (g_𝒢)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$
Let $`0r<1`$ and $`p𝐍`$, then, using formula 5.2.3.1 , it can be proved that the following relations hold at $`v\mathrm{}`$

$`{\displaystyle \underset{n=v}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{n!}{(nl)!}}r^n\stackrel{}{}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1r}}v^lr^v`$ (46)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{p^v}{v^2}}\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p^v}{v}}(p1){\displaystyle \underset{n=v+1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{p^n}{n}}\right).`$ (47)
Proof of lemma 2 At $`\ae _1=\ae _2=\mathrm{}`$ the proof is trivial. Let now $`\ae _1<\mathrm{}`$. Then $`_{\rho _{(D_s,l)}}=_{d_1}`$, where $`d_i=d_{_s^l\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^{\varphi _i}}`$. $`\epsilon >0v_0`$ such that $`d_i(x,y)e^{(\ae _i+\epsilon )}\rho _{(D_s,l)}(xy)`$ at $`v(x,y)v_0`$. On the other hand, $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^{\varphi _i}(x)\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^{\varphi _i}(y)=R_v^i(x)R_v^i(y)`$ at $`v(x,y)=v`$, where $`R_v^i(x)=_{n=v}^{\mathrm{}}\varphi _i\left(\left\{\frac{x}{p^{n+1}}\right\}_p\right)\frac{n!}{(nl)!}s^{nl}`$. Therefore, $`|d_1(x,y)d_2(x,y)||R_v^1(x)R_v^2(x)|+|R_v^1(y)R_v^2(y)|`$. Using (46) and the equation $`\rho _{(D_s,l)}(x)=v(x)^l|s|^{v(x)}`$, one can choose $`v_0`$ such that $`|d_1(x,y)d_2(x,y)|e^\epsilon 2/(1+|s|)\varphi _1\varphi _2_{\mathrm{}}^{(p)}\rho _{(D_s,l)}(xy)`$ at $`v>v_0`$. Thus, $`|d_1(x,y)d_2(x,y)|/(d_1(x,y)+d_2(x,y))2(1|(|s))e^{\mathrm{min}(\ae _1,\ae _2)+2\epsilon }\varphi _1\varphi _2_{\mathrm{}}^{(p)}`$. Now the proof is obtained immediately from (6). $`\mathrm{}`$
Proof of proposition 5 If $`\varphi `$ is continuous on $`[0,1]`$, then it is a uniformly continuous function and the proof is trivial. Each $`a_i`$ has the form $`a_i=l_i/p^{k(i)}`$. Let $`m_0>k(i)`$, $`a_0=0`$, $`a_{N+1}=1`$ and $`S_i=[a_i,a_{i+1})`$. It is easy to show that, if $`qS_i\mathrm{Z}(p^{\mathrm{}})`$, then also $`[q]^mp^m\left[p^mq\right]_pS_i`$ at $`m>m_0`$, and, therefore, $`\varphi [\varphi ]_m_{\mathrm{}}^{(p)}=\mathrm{max}_{i=0,N}(sup\{|\varphi (q)[\varphi ]_m(q)|:qS_i\mathrm{Z}(p^{\mathrm{}})\})`$. The function $`\varphi `$ is uniformly continuous on $`S_i`$, since $`\varphi `$ is continuous on $`S_i`$ and $`lim_{xa_{i+1}0}\varphi (x)`$. Therefore, $`lim_m\mathrm{}sup\{|\varphi (x)[\varphi ]_m(x)|:xS_i\}=0`$. $`\mathrm{}`$
Proof of proposition 6 From theorem IV.115  it follows that, if there exists a $`\chi `$-summable function $`g`$ such that $`x\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ $`|_s^l_{\overline{s}}^{\overline{l}}f(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (x))|\stackrel{L}{}g(x)`$, then there exists the integral $`\mathrm{I}_s^\mathrm{\Lambda }(f)`$ and the equation (42) holds. One can easily show that, for $`_s^l_{\overline{s}}^{\overline{l}}f(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (x))`$, the following representation takes place

$`_s^l_{\overline{s}}^{\overline{l}}f(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (x))={\displaystyle \underset{q,\overline{q}}{\overset{l,\overline{l}}{}}}(_z^q_{\overline{z}}^{\overline{q}}f)(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (x))P_s^q(x)\overline{P}_s^{\overline{q}}(x),`$ (48)
where $`P_s^q(x)`$ are degree $`q`$ polynomials of $`_s^k\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (x)(k=0\mathrm{},q)`$. It can be proved that $`q=0,1,2\mathrm{}`$ the following inequalities hold

$`\underset{|x|_p1}{sup}|_s^q\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (x)|{\displaystyle \frac{q!}{(1|s|)^q}}.`$ (49)
From this one obtains from these $`sup_{x\mathrm{\Lambda }_n}|_s^q\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (x)|\stackrel{L}{}|s|^n`$ $`n>0`$. Therefore, if $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is bounded, then $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_O(\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ is bounded too. Now it follows from (48) that $`|_s^l_{\overline{s}}^{\overline{l}}f(\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (x))|\stackrel{L}{}1`$ $`x\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. To prove assertion 2) note that $`\mathrm{I}_s^\mathrm{\Lambda }(f)=\mathrm{I}_s^{\mathrm{\Lambda }𝐙_p}(f)+_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{I}_s^{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{S}_\mathrm{n}}(f),`$ where $`\mathrm{S}_\mathrm{n}=\{x𝐐_p:|x|_p=p^n\}`$. Since $`|\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi (x)|\delta _s^\varphi |s|^n,x\mathrm{S}_\mathrm{n}`$, one can prove using $`\chi (\mathrm{S}_\mathrm{n})=\frac{(p1)}{p}p^n`$ that the function $`g`$ can be chosen as follows

$$g(x)=\mathrm{Ind}_{𝐙_p}(x)+\frac{1}{\delta _s^\varphi }\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|s|^{\nu n}\frac{1}{\chi (\mathrm{S}_\mathrm{n})}\mathrm{Ind}_{\mathrm{S}_\mathrm{n}}(x),$$

where $`\mathrm{Ind}_B`$ denotes the indicator of the set $`B`$. To conclude the proof, it remains to note that $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_O(\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ is an open set, since the holomorphic map $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_s^\varphi `$ is open (proposition 2.1 part I  ). $`\mathrm{}`$