text:
# Affine extension of noncrystallographic Coxeter groups and quasicrystals

## 1. Introduction

In contrast to the well known Weyl groups of affine Kac-Moody algebras, affine extensions of finite noncrystallographic Coxeter groups have apparently not been studied, although they too are a natural part of the general theory of Coxeter groups of infinite order. The goal of this article is to describe such extensions for the Coxeter groups $`H_2`$, $`H_3`$, and $`H_4`$ of order $`10`$, $`120`$, and $`\mathrm{14\hspace{0.17em}440}`$, respectively. Since our motivation for this study comes from the theory of quasicrystals, we illustrate the exploitation of such groups on problems related to quasicrystal generation/growth, but we expect applications also to other areas such as e.g. fullerenes  as we comment below.

There is a far going parallel between the finite noncrystallogaphic and the crystallographic Coxeter groups, the latter being the Weyl groups associated with simple Lie algebras. In both cases, the groups are generated by reflections and have a unique affine extension. The main difference between the two consists in the fact that the crystallographic affine groups generate an entire root lattice starting from any root or from the origin, whereas similar applications of a noncrystallographic group to the origin or to any root of $`H_2`$, $`H_3`$, and $`H_4`$ would generate a point set which densely covers the whole space.

There is an important property which makes the $`H_k`$-cases richer than the crystallographic ones: There exists a root map, that is a mapping transforming root systems into root systems, which is not from the Coxeter group, and which acts as a nontrivial transformation of $`H_k`$-roots. It is the mapping called the star map in  which, for example, provides the one-to-one correspondence between quasicrystal points and the points in the corresponding acceptance window.

Since the discovery of quasicrystals in physics , mathematical models describing these aperiodic structures have been proposed. Perhaps the best established is the cut-and-project approach for the construction of point sets modelling quasicrystals . Through the years a number of variants of the method have been developed (see for example  and references therein). Our considerations are based on an algebraic way of construction , in which the uniformity of the procedure for different dimensions allows to consider these models simultaneously subject only to a variation of the starting data. Properties of the cut-and-project point sets are now understood in great details particularly in one dimension . A key constituent in models related to point sets with 10-fold rotational symmetry are the noncrystallographic Coxeter groups $`H_2`$, $`H_3`$ and $`H_4`$, leading to models in 2, 3 and 4 dimensions, respectively. They exploit the fact that $`H_2`$, $`H_3`$ and $`H_4`$ point sets are projections from crystallographic lattices of types $`A_4`$, $`D_6`$ or $`E_8`$, respectively .

Coxeter groups  are discrete groups generated by reflections. A special class among them are the Weyl groups (or crystallographic Coxeter groups) which are the finite symmetry groups of root and weight lattices in the theory of semisimple Lie algebras/groups and their representations. Affine extensions of the Weyl groups are also generated by reflections. They are of infinite order and are known to underlie similar symmetries of the affine Kac-Moody algebras . Finite noncrystallographic Coxeter groups (which are not products of several smaller ones) can be easily enumerated. Those generated by more than two reflections are two: $`H_3`$ generated by three reflections, and $`H_4`$ generated by four reflections. Coxeter groups generated by two reflections are infinitely many: they are the symmetry groups of regular polygons with any number of vertices but 2, 3, 4, and 6. (The latter ones are of crystallographic type). In addition to $`H_3`$ and $`H_4`$, it is natural to consider in this article also the lowest of the 2-reflection groups, called here $`H_2`$, the symmetry group of regular pentagons and decagons. In more familiar physics terminology $`H_2`$ is the dihedral group of order 10, while $`H_3`$ is the icosahedral group of order 120. A description of the three groups suitable for our problem can be found in Section 2.

The group $`H_4`$, which is of order $`\mathrm{14\hspace{0.17em}400}`$, does not have a standard name in physics, nevertheless on a few occasions it appeared in the physics literature either in the context of the physics of amorphous solids , biophysics , quasicrystals , or general mathematical physics . The group $`H_4`$ contains all point groups familiar in 3-dimensional crystallography, besides the inclusions $`H_4H_3H_2`$. Moreover there is the remarkable relation (see  and references therein) of $`H_4`$ to the largest exceptional simple Lie group $`E_8`$ encountered in particle physics . Therefore it is possible that $`H_4`$ and/or its affinisation $`H_4^{aff}`$ will play a basic role in physics in not too distant future.

For further information about the non-extended groups, see e.g. . The diagrams representing our affine extended groups correspond to graphs related to regular polytopes . We remark that different generalizations of finite Coxeter groups and related diagrams appear also in .

Affine extensions $`H_2^{aff}`$, $`H_3^{aff}`$, and $`H_4^{aff}`$ of the groups $`H_2`$, $`H_3`$, and $`H_4`$, unlike the affine extensions of the Weyl groups, have apparently been considered neither in the physics nor in the mathematics literature before. In this article we first describe the affine extensions of the three groups, pointing out particularly their uniqueness and the close analogy to the affinisation of the Weyl groups.

In Section 2 we recall the way in which root lattices are constructed in Lie theory based on affine Weyl groups, and as a straightforward obvious analogy we emphasize the point set $`L`$ arising from the application of $`H_k^{aff}`$ groups in a similar way. Unlike the crystallographic cases, the set $`L`$ covers densely the entire space $`^k`$. Therefore some new elements have to be brought into consideration, which allow to select a suitable subset $`\mathrm{\Lambda }L`$ for an application one may have in mind. We point out here three possible ways how that can be done, and pursue further one of them.

The first one is the common cut-and-project method. It has been used for many years and its construction does not require any visible presence of affine Coxeter groups. Indeed, in this context $`L`$ arises as a result of a projection of points of a higher dimensional crystallographic lattice on a suitable subspace. That is particularly visible in the algebraic definition of this projection (see  and references therein). The desired subset of $`L`$ is obtained by retaining only the points which, under a complementary projection, fall into a bounded ‘acceptance’ region prescribed for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

The presence of an affine group becomes visible when only a finite number of specifically affine transformations (translations) is required. An example of such a case may be an algebraic formation of so called carbon nanotubes and similar polytopes with non-spherical symmetry in $`^k`$. Another example could be the modelling of concentric, ‘onion-like’, shell structures of carbon with $`H_3`$ symmetry . Obviously, every shell is one or several different $`H_3`$-orbits, and transformations from shell to shell could be provided by $`H_3^{aff}`$.

In this paper we pursue yet another way in which $`H_k^{aff}`$ can be exploited. We use it to get a finite subset $`Q\mathrm{\Lambda }L`$, which lies in a bounded region of the space $`V`$ and is a subset of a suitably defined fragment of a cut-and-project set. For that, we start from a seed point and allow no more than a finite number $`n<\mathrm{}`$ of translations, while any number of reflections from $`H_k`$ is admissible. Thus the value of $`n`$ plays a similar role as does the acceptance window in the cut-and-project case. In order to find their relation, we use the star map , providing an explicit correspondence between the points of the set $`Q`$ and the points of the corresponding ‘acceptance’ window.

The construction proposed here uses the basic reflections of $`H_2^{aff}`$, $`H_3^{aff}`$, and $`H_4^{aff}`$ which are defined by the simple roots encoded in the extended Cartan matrices, or equivalently in the extended Coxeter diagram. Any such extension corresponds to a Coxeter group of infinite order. The latter are obtained here similarly as in the framework of Kac-Moody algebras , where affine semisimple Lie algebras are considered in parallel with the affine extensions of the corresponding Weyl groups (crystallographic Coxeter groups). The extension allows to identify a translation operation $`T`$ in $`H_k^{aff}`$. An iterative application of the basic reflections of $`H_k`$ and the operator $`TH_k^{aff}`$ to a seed point in $`^k`$ then leads to a family of point sets $`Q_k(n)`$. The members of the families depend on an integer valued cut-off parameter $`n`$, which has simultaneously two roles: (i) the value of $`n`$ determines the size of $`Q_k(n)`$, and it plays a role similar to the acceptance window for cut-and-project quasicrystals. In particular, it prevents $`Q_k(n)`$ from becoming dense. We stress that for $`n<\mathrm{}`$, the point sets $`Q_k(n)`$ are of finite size, which distinguishes them from cut-and-project quasicrystals which are generically infinite structures. A comparison with cut-and-project models shows furthermore that $`H_k^{aff}`$-fragments $`Q_k(n)`$ are subsets of cut-and-project sets with simply connected convex $`H_k`$-symmetric acceptance windows.

The case of $`H_2^{aff}`$-induced quasicrystals is discussed in detail. Some properties, including bounds on minimal next nearest neighbour distances are discussed analytically. We remark, that combined dilation-rotation symmetries for this type of point sets have been investigated in  via wavelet analysis.

Since the technique for the derivation of the affine extensions of noncrystallographic Coxeter groups is similar to the one underlying the crystallographic case, it is instructive to briefly review the latter. We will do this for the example of $`sl(3)`$, because like $`H_2`$, it has 2 simple roots of the same length.

We then treat the noncrystallographic case indicating explicitly the Cartan matrices for $`H_2^{aff}`$, $`H_3^{aff}`$ and $`H_4^{aff}`$. We construct mathematical models for $`H_k^{aff}`$-induced fragments of quasicrystals with particular emphasis on the case $`k=2`$, which is investigated analytically and compared with the cut-and-project scheme.

## 2. A short review of affine extensions based on the case of $`sl(3)`$

For convenience of the reader not familiar with the concept of affine extensions, we briefly review the standard results for the Weyl group of $`sl(3,)`$ and of its affine extension. Our treatment of the noncrystallographic case makes use of similar considerations.

The simple roots $`\alpha _1`$, $`\alpha _2`$ of $`sl(3,)`$ span a real Euclidean space $`V`$. All roots of $`sl(3,)`$ are of the same length. In this section we adopt their normalization, $`(\alpha _k|\alpha _k)=2`$, which is standard in Lie theory. Matrix elements $`a_{ij}`$ of the Cartan matrix $`A`$ of $`sl(3,)`$ are given in terms of their scalar products,

(1)
$$A:=(a_{ij})=\left(\frac{2(\alpha _i\alpha _j)}{(\alpha _j|\alpha _j)}\right)=((\alpha _i|\alpha _j))=\left(\begin{array}{cc}2& 1\\ 1& 2\end{array}\right),i,j=1,2.$$

Simultaneously with the basis of simple roots $`\{\alpha _1,\alpha _2\}`$, it is convenient to work with the basis of fundamental weights $`\{\omega _1,\omega _2\}`$, defined by

$$(\alpha _j|\omega _k)=\frac{1}{2}(\alpha _j|\alpha _j)\delta _{jk}=\delta _{jk}.$$

One has

(2)
$$\alpha _j=\underset{k=1}{\overset{2}{}}a_{jk}\omega _k,\omega _j=\underset{k=1}{\overset{2}{}}(a^1)_{jk}\alpha _k,A^1=\frac{1}{3}\left(\begin{array}{cc}2& 1\\ 1& 2\end{array}\right),$$

where $`(a^1)_{jk}`$ are the matrix elements of the inverse Cartan matrix $`A^1`$. Thus elements of the $`j`$th row of the Cartan matrix are the coordinates of the simple root $`\alpha _j`$ in the $`\omega `$-basis, namely, $`\alpha _1=2\omega _1\omega _2`$ and $`\alpha _2=\omega _1+2\omega _2`$.

The reflections $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$, generating the Weyl group of $`sl(3,)`$, act on a vector $`v=v_1\omega _1+v_2\omega _2`$ according to

(3)
$$r_jv=v\left(\frac{2(v|\alpha _j)}{(\alpha _j|\alpha _j)}\right)\alpha _j=v(v|\alpha _j)\alpha _j=vv_j\alpha _j.$$

Due to the Weyl group symmetry of the root system, we can consider also reflections with respect to planes orthogonal to the other roots. An affine extension $`W_a`$ of $`W`$ is obtained by introducing the affine reflection $`r_H^{aff}`$ as follows, where $`\alpha _H=\alpha _1+\alpha _2=\omega _1+\omega _2`$ is the highest root:

(4)
$$r_H^{aff}v=v+\alpha _H(v|\alpha _H)\alpha _H.$$

From the particular cases $`r_H^{aff}0=\alpha _H`$, $`r_H^{aff}\alpha _H=0`$, $`r_H^{aff}\omega _1=\omega _1`$, and $`r_H^{aff}\omega _2=\omega _2`$, we see that $`r_H^{aff}`$ is a reflection in a plane orthogonal to $`\alpha _H`$ and passing through the point $`\frac{1}{2}\alpha _H`$ as well as through the points $`\omega _1,\omega _2`$ rather than through the origin. Consequently, $`W_a`$ contains the translation by $`\alpha _H`$, formed as the product of two reflections with respect to parallel mirrors:

(5)
$$Tv:=r_H^{aff}r_Hv=r_H^{aff}\{v(v|\alpha _H)\alpha _H\}=v+\alpha _H.$$

The extended Cartan matrix arises by adding to the simple roots also the root $`\alpha _0:=\alpha _H`$, using otherwise the same conventions. It leads to

(6)
$$(a_{ij})=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}2& 1& 1\\ 1& 2& 1\\ 1& 1& 2\end{array}\right),i,j\{0,1,2\}.$$

Note that such a matrix is subject to the following general requirements:

(7)
$$a_{ii}=2,a_{ij}=a_{ji},a_{ij}^0(ij),det(a_{ij})=0.$$

Although the extended Cartan matrix cannot be inverted, one still could define the dual basis independently in a similar way. In particular,

$$\alpha _0=2\omega _0\omega _1\omega _2,\alpha _1=\omega _0+2\omega _1\omega _2,\alpha _2=\omega _0\omega _1+2\omega _2.$$

The affine Weyl group operations $`r_1`$, $`r_2`$, and $`T`$ act on a vector $`v=v_1\omega _1+v_2\omega _2`$ according to

(8) $`Tv`$ $`=v+\alpha _H`$ $`=(v_1+1)\omega _1+(v_2+1)\omega _2`$ $`=(v_1+1,v_2+1)`$
$`r_1v`$ $`=v(v|\alpha _1)\alpha _1`$ $`=v_1\omega _1+(v_1+v_2)\omega _2)`$ $`=(v_1,v_1+v_2)`$
$`r_2v`$ $`=v(v|\alpha _2)\alpha _2`$ $`=(v_1+v_2)\omega _1v_2\omega _2`$ $`=(v_1+v_2,v_2).`$
These transformations generate the 2-dimensional root lattice of $`sl(3,)`$ from any single root or from zero. The reflections $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$ are subject to the defining identities of the Weyl group of $`sl(3,)`$, see (21) below. The translation $`T`$ is not a cyclic operation, it can be repeated any number of times.

## 3. The noncrystallographic Coxeter groups

The Cartan matrices corresponding to the three noncrystallographic Coxeter groups differ from the crystallographic ones by the fact that their entries are from the extension ring $`[\tau ]:=\{a+\tau ba,b\}`$, where the irrationality is the golden mean

$$\tau :=\frac{1}{2}(1+\sqrt{5}),\tau ^{}:=\frac{1}{2}(1\sqrt{5})=1\tau =\frac{1}{\tau }.$$

Thus the conditions (7) on the extended Cartan matrices become

(9)
$$a_{ii}=2,a_{ij}=a_{ji},a_{ij}[\tau ]^{}:=\{x[\tau ]x0\},det(a_{ij})=0.$$

Introducing again the additional root via $`\alpha _0=\alpha _H`$ where $`\alpha _H`$ is the highest root, the extended Cartan matrices are obtained from the Cartan matrices of $`H_j`$, $`j=2,3,4`$. The corresponding groups will be denoted as $`H_j^{aff}`$, $`j=2,3,4`$, respectively. A direct calculation shows that such matrices are the unique ones fulfilling all requirements (9). We stress that the condition $`a_{ij}[\tau ]^{}`$ is crucial for uniqueness. Without it, several Cartan matrices can be found which fulfill all other conditions. Such matrices are shown in Appendix A.

We now discuss the three cases separately. We describe the $`H_2`$ case in details. The other two, $`H_3`$ and $`H_4`$, are exact analogies. There we provide important steps and the result of the considerations.

Furthermore, note that it is not possible to obtain $`H_j^{aff}`$, $`j=2,3,4`$ via a projection from a group with $`2(k+1)`$ simple roots, which has a Cartan matrix obeying (7); it would be necessary to relax the third assumption and admit also positive entries $`a_{ij}`$.

Unlike the crystallographic case, we normalize the simple roots of $`H_k`$ to be of length one. Note that Cartan matrices do not depent on root normalization.

### 3.1. The case of $`H_2^{aff}`$ as an affine extension of $`H_2`$.

The Coxeter group $`H_2`$ is isomorphic to the dihedral group of order 10 and its root system can be modeled in the complex plane by the 10th roots of unity. The root system $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ is the union of the sets of positive and negative roots. Choosing the simple roots as $`\alpha _1=1`$ and $`\alpha _2=\mathrm{exp}(\frac{4\pi i}{5})`$, the roots

(10)
$$\mathrm{\Delta }_2=\{\pm \alpha _1,\pm \alpha _2,\pm (\alpha _1+\tau \alpha _2),\pm (\tau \alpha _1+\alpha _2),\pm (\tau \alpha _1+\tau \alpha _2)\}$$

form the vertex set of a regular decagon inscribed into the unit circle. Now $`(\alpha |\alpha )=1`$ for any $`\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }_2`$. From (1) we find the Cartan matrix and its inverse,

(11)
$$A=\left(\frac{2(\alpha _i|\alpha _j)}{(\alpha _j|\alpha _j)}\right)=2((\alpha _i|\alpha _j))=\left(\begin{array}{cc}2& \tau \\ \tau & 2\end{array}\right),A^1=\frac{1}{3\tau }\left(\begin{array}{cc}2& \tau \\ \tau & 2\end{array}\right).$$

Here, as before, $`\omega _1`$ and $`\omega _2`$ are the basis vectors of the $`\omega `$-basis defined by $`2(\alpha _j|\omega _k)=\delta _{jk}`$. It follows that

$`\alpha _1`$ $`=2\omega _1\tau \omega _2,`$ $`\alpha _2`$ $`=\tau \omega _1+2\omega _2;`$
$`\omega _1`$ $`=\frac{1}{3\tau }(2\alpha _1+\tau \alpha _2),`$ $`\omega _2`$ $`=\frac{1}{3\tau }(\tau \alpha _1+2\alpha _2).`$
The highest root is $`\alpha _H=\tau (\alpha _1+\alpha _2)=\tau ^{}(\omega _1+\omega _2)`$.

Taking the extension root as $`\alpha _0:=\alpha _H`$ and letting the indices in (11) take the values $`0`$, $`1`$, and $`2`$, the Cartan matrix of the affine extension $`H_2^{aff}`$ and its simple roots in the $`\omega `$-basis turn out to be

(12)
$$\left(\begin{array}{ccc}2& \tau ^{}& \tau ^{}\\ \tau ^{}& 2& \tau \\ \tau ^{}& \tau & 2\end{array}\right);\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \alpha _0& =2\omega _0+\tau ^{}\omega _1+\tau ^{}\omega _2,\hfill \\ \hfill \alpha _1& =\tau ^{}\omega _0+2\omega _1\tau \omega _2,\hfill \\ \hfill \alpha _2& =\tau ^{}\omega _0\tau \omega _1+2\omega _2.\hfill \end{array}$$

Indeed, using $`2(\alpha _0|\alpha _1)=2(\alpha _H|\alpha _1)=2((\tau \alpha _1+\tau \alpha _2)|\alpha _1)=2\tau +\tau ^2=\tau ^{}`$ in (11), we get the matrix elements of (12).

The corresponding Coxeter diagram is given in Fig. 1.

The nodes of the diagram stand for the simple roots. A direct link between two nodes indicates that the two roots are not orthogonal in the Euclidean plane spanned by them. Two roots are orthogonal if there is no direct link between the corresponding nodes. The label attached to a link is determined by the off-diagonal matrix element of the Cartan matrix: no label is shown if such element is $`1`$; if it is $`\tau `$, the link is labeled by $`\tau `$; if the matrix element is $`\tau ^{}`$, the label is $`\tau ^{}`$.

The reflection $`r_0`$ with respect to the plane orthogonal to $`\alpha _H`$ and passing through the origin is defined by the general formula (3), where now one has to use the roots of $`H_k`$ rather than those of $`sl(3,)`$. Similarly, the affine reflection $`r_H^{aff}`$ is defined as the reflection in the plane orthogonal to $`\alpha _H`$ and passing through the point $`\frac{1}{2}\alpha _H`$. Due to the different normalization of the bases $`\{\alpha _j\}`$ and $`\{\omega _k\}`$, some modification appears in the corresponding formulas. Thus instead of (4), we now have

$$r_H^{aff}v=v+\left\{12(v|\alpha _H)\right\}\alpha _H.$$

Note the instructive particular cases

$$r_H^{aff}0=\alpha _H,r_H^{aff}\alpha _H=0,\text{and}r_H^{aff}\left(\frac{1}{\tau }\omega _j\right)=\left(\frac{1}{\tau }\omega _j\right),j=1,2.$$

The product of the reflections $`r_H^{aff}r_0`$ is the translation operator $`T`$.

(13) $`Tv=r_H^{aff}r_0`$ $`=r_H^{aff}\left\{(v2(v|\alpha _H)\alpha _H)\right\}`$
$`=v2(v|\alpha _H)\alpha _H+\left\{12(v2(v|\alpha _H)\alpha _H|\alpha _H)\right\}\alpha _H`$
$`=v+\alpha _H.`$
Explicitly in the $`\omega `$-basis, we have

(14) $`Tv`$ $`=v+\alpha _H`$ $`=(v_1\tau ^{})\omega _1+(v_2\tau ^{})\omega _2`$ $`=(v_1\tau ^{},v_2\tau ^{})`$
$`r_1v`$ $`=v2(v|\alpha _1)\alpha _1`$ $`=v_1\omega _1+(\tau v_1+v_2)\omega _2`$ $`=(v_1,\tau v_1+v_2)`$
$`r_2v`$ $`=v2(v|\alpha _2)\alpha _2`$ $`=(v_1+\tau v_2)\omega _1v_2\omega _2`$ $`=(v_1+\tau v_2,v_2).`$
The reflections are subject to the $`H_2`$ group identities (21), namely,

(15)
$$r_1^2=r_2^2=1,(r_1r_2)^5=1.$$

In contrast to $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$, the translation $`T`$ can be repeated any number of times without producing the same points.

Below, these transformations are used in order to build 2-dimensional quasicrystalline point sets similarly as in the previous case for the $`sl(3,)`$ root lattice. Straightforwardly repeated applications of the three operations in every possible sequence, without further restrictions, would produce a dense point set covering the whole plane. Note that if the coordinates $`v_1,v_2`$ of the seed point $`v`$ are in $`Z[\tau ]`$, every point of the set has its coordinates in $`Z[\tau ]`$.

### 3.2. The case of $`H_3^{aff}`$ as an affine extension of $`H_3`$

The root system of $`H_3`$ consists of 30 roots; they can be found in . Relative to an orthonormal basis, normalized to length $`1`$ rather than $`\sqrt{2}`$ like in the preceeding subsection, they can be modeled as

(16)
$$\mathrm{\Delta }_3=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}(\pm 1,0,0)& \text{ and all permutations }\hfill \\ \frac{1}{2}(\pm 1,\pm \tau ^{},\pm \tau )& \text{ and all even permutations }\hfill \end{array}\right\}.$$

Geometrically, the root polytope of $`H_3`$ is formed by 12 equilateral pentagons and 20 equilateral triangles. It has 30 vertices given by the elements in $`\mathrm{\Delta }_3`$ and 60 edges. It is possible and sometimes advantageous to consider the roots of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_3`$ given in (16) as purely imaginary quaternions of special kind, called icosians .

A possible choice of simple roots in the orthonormal basis is

$$\alpha _1=(0,0,1),\alpha _2=\frac{1}{2}(\tau ^{},\tau ,1),\alpha _3=(0,1,0).$$

The Cartan matrix of $`H_3`$ and its inverse,

$$A=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}2& 1& 0\\ 1& 2& \tau \\ 0& \tau & 2\end{array}\right),A^1=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}2+\tau & 2+2\tau & 1+2\tau \\ 2+2\tau & 4+4\tau & 2+4\tau \\ 1+2\tau & 2+4\tau & 3+3\tau \end{array}\right),$$

are used to find

$`\alpha _1`$ $`=2\omega _1\omega _2,`$ $`\omega _1`$ $`=\frac{1}{2}((2+\tau )\alpha _1+2\tau ^2\alpha _2+\tau ^3\alpha _3),`$
$`\alpha _2`$ $`=\omega _1+2\omega _2\tau \omega _3,`$ $`\omega _2`$ $`=\tau ^2\alpha _1+2\tau ^2\alpha _2+\tau ^3\alpha _3,`$
$`\alpha _3`$ $`=\tau \omega _2+2\omega _3,`$ $`\omega _3`$ $`=\frac{1}{2}(\tau ^3\alpha _1+2\tau ^3\alpha _2+3\tau ^2\alpha _3).`$
The highest root is $`\alpha _H=\tau \alpha _1+2\tau \alpha _2+\tau ^2\alpha _3=\tau ^{}\omega _2=(1,0,0)`$.

The affine extension of the Cartan matrix, $`H_3^{aff}`$, and the simple roots in the $`\omega `$-basis are

$$\left(\begin{array}{cccc}2& 0& \tau ^{}& 0\\ 0& 2& 1& 0\\ \tau ^{}& 1& 2& \tau \\ 0& 0& \tau & 2\end{array}\right);\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \alpha _0& =2\omega _0+\tau ^{}\omega _2\hfill \\ \hfill \alpha _1& =2\omega _1\omega _2\hfill \\ \hfill \alpha _2& =\tau ^{}\omega _0\omega _1+2\omega _2\tau \omega _3\hfill \\ \hfill \alpha _3& =\tau \omega _2+2\omega _3.\hfill \end{array}$$

This corresponds to the graph in Fig. 2.

The reflections $`r_1`$, $`r_2`$, $`r_3`$ as well as $`T`$ are built from the general expressions (3) and (4), where the indices run through three values and the roots of $`H_3`$ are used. They act on $`v=(v_1,v_2,v_3)`$ in the $`\omega `$-basis according to

(17) $`Tv`$ $`=v+\alpha _H`$ $`=(v_1,v_2\tau ^{},v_3)`$
$`r_1v`$ $`=v2(v|\alpha _1)\alpha _1`$ $`=(v_1,v_1+v_2,v_3)`$
$`r_2v`$ $`=v2(v|\alpha _2)\alpha _2`$ $`=(v_1+v_2,v_2,v_3+\tau v_2)`$
$`r_3v`$ $`=v2(v|\alpha _3)\alpha _3`$ $`=(v_1,v_2+\tau v_3,v_3).`$
### 3.3. The case of $`H_4^{aff}`$ as an affine extension of $`H_4`$

The root system $`\mathrm{\Delta }_4`$ of $`H_4`$ contains 120 roots, they are found in  in terms of simple roots. They can be modeled  as the set,

(18)
$$\mathrm{\Delta }_4=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{1}{2}(\pm 1,\pm 1,\pm 1,\pm 1),(\pm 1,0,0,0)& \text{ and all permutations }\hfill \\ \frac{1}{2}(0,\pm 1,\pm \tau ^{},\pm \tau )& \text{ and all even permutations }\hfill \end{array}\right\}$$

in an orthonormal basis, or equivalently as quaternions . Equipped with quaternionic multiplication, they stand for the elements of the icosahedral group.

As simple roots, one may choose

(19) $`\alpha _1`$ $`=\frac{1}{2}(\tau ^{},\tau ,0,1),`$ $`\alpha _2=\frac{1}{2}(0,\tau ^{},\tau ,1),`$
$`\alpha _3`$ $`=\frac{1}{2}(0,1,\tau ^{},\tau ),`$ $`\alpha _4=\frac{1}{2}(0,1,\tau ^{},\tau ).`$
The highest root of $`H_4`$ is then $`\alpha _H=2\tau \alpha _1+\sqrt{5}\tau ^2\alpha _2+2\tau ^3\alpha _3+\tau ^4\alpha _4=\tau ^{}\omega _1=(1,0,0,0)`$. The $`H_4`$-Cartan matrix and its inverse are as follows:

$$A=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}2& 1& 0& 0\\ 1& 2& 1& 0\\ 0& 1& 2& \tau \\ 0& 0& \tau & 2\end{array}\right),A^1=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}2+2\tau & 3+4\tau & 4+6\tau & 3+5\tau \\ 3+4\tau & 6+8\tau & 8+12\tau & 6+10\tau \\ 4+6\tau & 8+12\tau & 12+18\tau & 9+15\tau \\ 3+5\tau & 6+10\tau & 9+15\tau & 8+12\tau \end{array}\right).$$

As generalized Cartan matrix and simple roots in the $`\omega `$-basis, we obtain

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccccc}2& \tau ^{}& 0& 0& 0\\ \tau ^{}& 2& 1& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& 2& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 1& 2& \tau \\ 0& 0& 0& \tau & 2\end{array}\right),\begin{array}{cccc}\hfill \alpha _0& =\frac{1}{2}(2\omega _0+\tau ^{}\omega _1),\hfill & & \alpha _1=\frac{1}{2}(\tau ^{}\omega _0+2\omega _1\omega _2),\hfill \\ \hfill \alpha _2& =\frac{1}{2}(\omega _1+2\omega _2\omega _3),\hfill & & \alpha _3=\frac{1}{2}(\omega _2+2\omega _3\tau \omega _4),\hfill \\ \hfill \alpha _4& =\frac{1}{2}(\tau \omega _3+2\omega _4),\hfill \end{array}$$

and the corresponding Coxeter diagram is depicted in Fig. 3.

The translation and the four reflections act in 4-space on a point $`v=(v_0,v_1,v_2,v_3,v_4)`$ with coordinates in the $`\omega `$-basis according to:

(20) $`Tv`$ $`=(v_1\tau ^{},v_2,v_3,v_4)`$
$`r_1v`$ $`=(v_1,v_1+v_2,v_3,v_4)`$
$`r_2v`$ $`=(v_1+v_2,v_2,v_2+v_3,v_4)`$
$`r_3v`$ $`=(v_1,v_2+v_3,v_3,v_4+\tau v_3)`$
$`r_4v`$ $`=(v_1,v_2,v_3+\tau v_4,v_4).`$
Here, as in (8),(14),(17), the reflections are cyclic operations of order two, while the translation $`T`$ can be repeated any number of times. Products of two reflections are rotations around the origin. Their order is determined by the matrix elements of the corresponding Cartan matrix

(21)
$$(r_jr_k)^M=1\text{where}\{\begin{array}{cccc}M=1& \text{if}& a_{jk}& =2\\ M=2& \text{if}& a_{jk}& =0\\ M=3& \text{if}& a_{jk}& =1\\ M=5& \text{if}& a_{jk}& =\tau ,\tau ^{}\end{array}$$

## 4. Construction of $`H^{aff}`$-induced quasicrystals

In this section, we illustrate an application of the transformations (14), (17) and (20) in order to generate point sets in Euclidean spaces of dimensions 2, 3, and 4, respectively, which resemble fragments of quasicrystals. More precisely, the number of allowed translations plays a similar role as the acceptance window of a cut-and-project quasicrystal and a certain neighbourhood of the seed point contains all the points of such a quasicrystal and only at the periphery the fragment has fewer points. The idea ofthe construction is to use the reflections on a given seed point in every possible way, while using the translation $`T`$ only for a fixed finite number of times.

We start by describing the construction in detail for the case of $`H_2^{aff}`$, after that the other two cases are straightforward.

Transformations (14) acting in 2-space can be represented using $`2\times 2`$ matrices. For notational convenience, we use the symbol $`v=v_1\omega _1+v_2\omega _2`$ also for the column matrix $`(v_1v_2)^T`$:

$$Tv=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)v\tau ^{}\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ 1\end{array}\right)=(v_1\tau ^{})\omega _1+(v_2\tau ^{})\omega _2,$$

(22)
$$r_1v:=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ \tau & 1\end{array}\right)v=v_1\omega _1+(\tau v_1+v_2)\omega _2,$$

$$r_2v:=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& \tau \\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)v=(v_1+\tau v_2)v_2\omega _2.$$

A straightforward calculation shows that also

$$(r_1r_2)^5=\left(\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ \tau & 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& \tau \\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)\right)^5=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& \tau \\ \tau & \tau \end{array}\right)^5=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right).$$

In order to change to Cartesian coordinates, a further transformation is needed:

(23)
$$x:=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& r\\ 1& \frac{\tau }{2}\end{array}\right)v,r=\sqrt{1\frac{\tau ^2}{4}}.$$

Note that the transformations $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$ act as reflections at the mirrors perpendicular to the simple roots of $`H_2`$, which are collinear with the $`\omega `$-basis and intersecting at the origin. Their relative angle is $`2\pi /10`$ and $`T`$ defines a translation along their bisector.

The iterate action of the transformations $`T`$, $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$ in arbitrary order starting from the origin leads to a point set which fills the plane densely after an infinite number of iterations. If the iteration is stopped after a finite number of steps, a discrete point set is obtained. The application of $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$ transforms a point within the same $`H_2`$-orbit. They are equidistant from the origin. Points translated by $`T`$ are on different $`H_2`$-orbits. All the points generated by the three operators from one seed point are within one $`H_2^{aff}`$-orbit.

###### Definition 4.1.

A point $`v`$ is said to be dominant precisely if its coordinates in the $`\omega `$-basis are non-negative.

It is convenient to characterize an orbit of $`H_k`$ by its unique point (dominant point) which is the only one in its orbit with non-negative coordinates in the $`\omega `$-basis. It is easily recognizable by this property. Since dominant points encode the information about the whole $`H_k`$-orbit, they are a useful tool for the construction and analysis of the point sets.

The size of an $`H_2`$-orbit is readily found from its dominant representative by the following rule:

$$\begin{array}{cccccccc}& \mathrm{orbit}\mathrm{size}\hfill & 10\hfill & :\hfill & & v=(ab)^T,\hfill & & a>0,b>0\hfill \\ & \mathrm{orbit}\mathrm{size}\hfill & 5\hfill & :\hfill & & v=(a0)^T\mathrm{or}v=(0b)^T,\hfill & & a>0,b>0\hfill \\ & \mathrm{orbit}\mathrm{size}\hfill & 1\hfill & :\hfill & & v=(\mathrm{0\; 0})^T.\hfill & & \end{array}$$

Here, $`(ab)^T`$ denotes the transposition of the row matrix $`(ab)`$.

For example, applying $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$ to $`v=(a0)^T`$, $`a>0`$, according to (22), one gets the following five points of the $`H_2`$ orbit, which correspond to the vertices of an equilateral pentagon centered at the origin:

(24)
$$\left(\begin{array}{c}a\\ 0\end{array}\right),\left(\begin{array}{c}a\\ a\tau \end{array}\right),\left(\begin{array}{c}a\tau \\ a\tau \end{array}\right),\left(\begin{array}{c}a\tau \\ a\end{array}\right),\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ a\end{array}\right).$$

Similarly starting from the point $`v=(0a)^T`$, $`a>0`$, one gets another $`5`$-point orbit consisting of the negatives of (24). Any further application of $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$ would bring no new point.

The square length of the vectors given in the $`\omega `$-basis is calculated using the inverse of the Cartan matrix (11):

$$2(a\omega _1+b\omega _2|a\omega _1+b\omega _2)=\frac{1}{3\tau }\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}2& \tau \\ \tau & 2\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}a\\ b\end{array}\right)=\frac{2(a^2+ab\tau +b^2)}{3\tau }.$$

###### Definition 4.2.

Let $`O`$ denote the origin of coordinates, and let $`s^m(T,r_1,r_2)`$ denote the set of all words formed by the letters $`T`$, $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$ in which $`T`$ appears precisely $`m`$ times. The set of points

(25)
$$Q_2(n):=\{s^m(T,r_1,r_2)Omn\}$$

is called an $`H_2^{aff}`$-induced quasicrystal fragment; $`n`$ is the cut-off-parameter.

Due to the identities (21), the point set $`Q_2(n)`$ is finite and $`H_2`$-symmetric with respect to the origin. More precisely, the fact that we allow an arbitrary number of actions of $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$ after each translation enforces the finite patches to have circular boundaries. We make this assumption here in view of applications, because this is the situation one encounters e.g. for carbon onions in the study of fullerenes, or, this is what we expect for the growth process of a quasicrystal fragment which is not exposed to any particular obstacles. We remark that it is possible to change (25) by requiring that after the last translation, no further actions of $`r_1`$ or $`r_2`$ take place. In this case, $`H_2`$-symmetry with respect to the origin would no longer be present in the model.

Note that due to $`H_2`$-symmetry, each $`Q_2(n)`$ can be decomposed into concentric shells containing all the points at the same distance from the origin. In general each shell is a union of several decagons and pentagons, except for the origin which alone is a one-point shell. The outer most shell of $`Q_2(n)`$ is the equilateral decagon with dominant point $`T\mathrm{}TO`$, where $`n`$ translation operators $`T`$ are applied to the origin.

Clearly $`Q_2(0)`$ is just one point, the dominant point $`O=(0,0)`$. The set $`Q_2(1)`$ contains the origin and the vertices of the decagon of $`H_2`$ roots. Among the latter the highest root $`TO`$ is the dominant one. Thus $`Q_2(1)`$ contains eleven points. It is the union of $`Q_2(0)`$ and the orbit of the roots of $`H_2`$:

(26)
$$\begin{array}{cc}& O,TO=\tau \alpha _1+\tau \alpha _2,r_1TO=\tau \alpha _1+\alpha _2,r_2TO=\alpha _1+\tau \alpha _2,\hfill \\ & r_1r_2TO=\alpha _1,r_2r_1TO=\alpha _2,r_1r_2r_1TO=\alpha _2,r_2r_1r_2TO=\alpha _1,\hfill \\ & r_2r_1r_2r_1TO=\tau \alpha _1\alpha _2,r_1r_2r_1r_2TO=\alpha _1\tau \alpha _2,\hfill \\ & r_1r_2r_1r_2r_1TO=r_2r_1r_2r_1r_2TO=\tau \alpha _1\tau \alpha _2.\hfill \end{array}$$

The equality of the words here and the absence of words involving $`r_j^2`$ are consequences of the defining identities (21) of the group $`H_2`$. Further applications of $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$ yield no new points.

The set $`Q_2(2)`$ is obtained by shifting $`Q_2(1)`$ by $`T`$, i.e. by the highest root $`\alpha _H`$, and by applying to the result all possible $`r`$’s. It contains 61 distinct points.

It decomposes into the sum of four orbits of 10 points with the dominant points

(27)
$$\begin{array}{cccccc}\hfill 2\alpha _H& =& 2\tau (\alpha _1+\alpha _2)\hfill & \hfill \tau \alpha _H& =& \tau ^2(\alpha _1+\alpha _2)\hfill \\ \hfill \alpha _H& =& \tau (\alpha _1+\alpha _2)\hfill & \hfill (\tau ^{})\alpha _H& =& \alpha _1+\alpha _2,\hfill \end{array}$$

four orbits of 5 points with dominant points

(28)
$$\begin{array}{cccccc}\hfill r_1(\alpha _1+\alpha _H)& =& 2\alpha _1+\tau \alpha _2\hfill & \hfill r_2(\alpha _2+\alpha _H)& =& 2\alpha _2+\tau \alpha _1\hfill \\ \hfill \tau ^2\alpha _1+2\tau \alpha _2& & & \hfill \tau ^2\alpha _2+2\tau \alpha _1,& & \end{array}$$

and the origin.

Compare with Fig. 4, where $`Q_2(2)`$ is depicted.

In our construction $`n`$ plays a similar role as the acceptance windows for cut-and-project quasicrystals, because it ensures that instead of a dense set, a discrete point set is obtained. It is therefore interesting to identify $`Q_2(n)`$ as a subset of points of a cut-and-project set as far as possible.

Recall that a cut-and-project point set is completely determined by its acceptance window. There is a 1–1 map between the points of the window and of the cut-and-project set. A finite fragment of an (infinite) cut-and-project point set allows to determine its acceptance window only within certain bounds . The larger is the fragment, the tighter are the bounds on the window. All the points of $`Q_2(n)`$ are found inside of the decagon formed by the outermost shell whose points are at the distance $`n\tau |\alpha _1+\alpha _2|`$ from the origin, where $`\tau |\alpha _1+\alpha _2|`$ corresponds to the length of any $`H_2`$ root.

Note that $`Q_2(n)`$ is invariant under 10-fold rotational symmetry by construction. It would also be possible to define an aperiodic point set based on the operations $`T`$, $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$ which does not have this property. One may e.g. take instead of $`s^r(T,r_1,r_2)`$ all sequences which end after the operation $`T`$ in order to break this symmetry.

## 5. Generalization to $`H_3^{aff}`$ and $`H_4^{aff}`$

An extension of the previous construction to 3 and 4 dimensions is straightforward. In analogy to the previous section, we obtain the following operators $`T`$ and $`r_j`$ from (17) and (20).

1. For $`H_3^{aff}`$ and a vector $`v=(v_1v_2v_3)^T`$ with coordinates in the $`\omega `$-basis we have:

(29)
$$Tv:=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right)v\tau ^{}\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 1\\ 0\end{array}\right)=v_1\omega _1+(v_2\tau ^{})\omega _2+v_3\omega _3,$$

(30)
$$r_1v=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 0& 0\\ 1& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right)v,r_2v=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 1& 0\\ 0& 1& 0\\ 0& \tau & 1\end{array}\right)v,r_3v=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& \tau \\ 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right)v.$$
2. For $`H_4^{aff}`$ and a vector $`v=(v_1v_2v_3v_4)^T`$ with coordinates in the $`\omega `$-basis we have:

(31)
$$T(v_0)v:=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}1& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right)v\tau ^{}\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ 0\\ 0\\ 0\end{array}\right)=(v_1\tau ^{})\omega _1+v_2\omega _2+v_3\omega _3+v_4\omega _4,$$

(32)
$$r_1v:=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}1& 0& 0& 0\\ 1& 1& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right)v,r_2v:=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}1& 1& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right)v,$$

(33)
$$r_3v:=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}1& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& \tau & 1\end{array}\right)v,r_4v:=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}1& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 1& \tau \\ 0& 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right)v,$$

In both cases, the orbit sizes can be found in .

###### Definition 5.1.

Let $`s^m(T,r_1,\mathrm{},r_k)`$ denote the set of all sequences formed by the operators $`T`$ and $`r_1,\mathrm{},r_k`$ in which $`T`$ appears precisely $`m`$ times; O denotes the origin of coordinates. Then

(34)
$$Q_k(n):=\{s^m(T,r_1,\mathrm{},r_k)Omn\}$$

is called $`H_k^{aff}`$-induced quasicrystal fragment for $`k=3,4`$; $`n`$ is the cut-off-parameter.

Note that $`Q_k(n)`$ describes a $`k`$-dimensional point set.

## 6. Investigation of $`H_2^{aff}`$-induced quasicrystals $`Q_2(n)`$

In this section we analyze the point sets $`Q_2(n)`$ which have been defined in Def. 4.2. Recall that the set $`Q_2(n)`$ was obtained from the origin via an application of three operations, the translation $`T`$ and the reflections $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$ subject to the condition that the operation $`T`$ occurs precisely $`k`$ times, whereas any number of reflections is permitted. As pointed out before, the point set is characterized by its dominant points.

### 6.1. The dominant points $`(ab)^T`$ with $`a=b`$:

We start by an investigation of the dominant points $`(ab)^T`$ with $`a=b`$. Note that they are given by multiples of the highest root $`\alpha _H=\tau (\alpha _1+\alpha _2)`$ and are thus located on the line $`\alpha _H`$. We introduce the notation $`L_{\alpha _H}(n)`$ for the finite point set given as the intersection of the 2-dimensional point set $`Q_2(n)`$ with the line $`\alpha _H`$:

(35)
$$L_{\alpha _H}(n):=\alpha _HQ_2(n).$$

The first step in our analysis of $`Q_2(n)`$ will be a description and analysis of $`L_{\alpha _H}(n)`$.

For the remainder of this paper, we model the root system of $`H_2`$ in (10) in the complex plane by $`\xi ^j`$ where

(36)
$$\xi :=\mathrm{exp}i\frac{\pi }{5},$$

that is $`\xi ^0,\mathrm{},\xi ^9`$ number the roots of unity anticlockwise starting from $`\xi ^0=1`$. We remark that due to the 10-fold rotational symmetry of $`Q_2(n)`$, the set $`L_{\alpha _H}(n)`$ in (35) coincides – when viewed as a 1 dimensional point set – with the sets

(37)
$$L_{\xi ^j}(n):=\xi ^jQ_2(n)\text{ for }\xi ^j\mathrm{\Delta }_2.$$

Thus, the results obtained for any $`L_{\xi ^j}(n)`$ with $`\xi ^j\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ translate immediately into each other.

#### 6.1.1. Description of $`L_{\alpha _H}(n)`$:

We start by expressing the points in $`Q_2(n)`$ in a more convenient way. For this, recall that by definition

(38)
$$xQ_2(n)x=R_lTR_{l1}T\mathrm{}TR_1TO,ln$$

where $`O`$ denotes the origin and $`R_j`$ for $`j=1,\mathrm{},n`$ denotes a product of basic reflections $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$, i.e. an element of $`H_2`$. We remark that this way of expressing points in $`Q_2(n)`$ is not unique, and different choices of $`R_j`$ from $`H_2`$ may lead to the same points in $`Q_2(n)`$.

Then one has based on (36):

###### Proposition 6.1.

(39)
$$Q_2(n)=\{\underset{j=0}{\overset{9}{}}n_j\xi ^jn_j^0,\underset{j=0}{\overset{9}{}}n_j=ln\}.$$

Thus, $`Q_2(n)`$ consists of all linear combinations of up to $`n`$ (not necessarily different) roots from $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$.

###### Proof.

It is a consequence of the fact that $`T`$ in (38) is a translation by a root from $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ and the fact that $`R_j`$, $`(j=1,\mathrm{},k)`$, act as linear transformations on $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$. In particular, for any tuple $`(k_0,\mathrm{},k_9)`$, there exists a tuple $`(m_0,\mathrm{},m_9)`$ with $`_jk_j=_jm_j`$ such that

(40)
$$R_j\underset{j=0}{\overset{9}{}}k_j\xi ^j=\underset{j=0}{\overset{9}{}}m_j\xi ^j.$$

Thus, there exists a tuple $`(n_0,\mathrm{},n_9)`$ with

(41)
$$R_lTR_{l1}T\mathrm{}TR_1T0=\underset{j=0}{\overset{9}{}}n_j\xi ^j$$

and the claim follows from (38) since the $`R_j`$ in (41) may represent any element of $`H_2`$. ∎

Hence, according to (35) and Proposition 6.1, we know that $`L_{\alpha _H}(n)`$ is the point set which corresponds to all points which are obtained by a linear combinations of up to $`n`$ elements from $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ and lie on the line $`\alpha _H`$:

(42)
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill L_{\alpha _H}(n)& =& \alpha _H\{_{j=0}^9n_j\xi ^jn_j^0,_{j=0}^9n_j=ln\}\hfill \\ & =& \{\gamma \alpha _H(n_0,\mathrm{},n_9)\text{ such that }\gamma \alpha _H=_{j=0}^9n_j\xi ^j,\gamma \}\hfill \end{array}$$

The point set $`L_{\alpha _H}(n)`$ is thus characterized by the values $`\gamma `$ in (42). It is our aim to determine the values of $`\gamma `$ in the following, and we aim at finding for given $`n`$ all $`\gamma `$ with

(43)
$$\gamma =\underset{j=0}{\overset{9}{}}n_j\xi ^j$$

where $`ln`$, $`n_j^0`$ and $`_{j=0}^9n_j=l`$.

We remark that in order to facilitate notation, we will consider in the following the set $`L_{\alpha _1}(n)`$ where $`\alpha _1=\xi ^0=1`$ is one of the simple roots. As mentioned before, it coincides with $`L_{\alpha _H}(n)`$ when viewed as a one-dimensional point set without orientation in $`^2`$, and the advantage of considering this set lies in the fact that all points are multiplied by $`\alpha _1=1`$ instead of $`\alpha _H`$.

We start by setting up some terminology:

###### Definition 6.2.

Let $`\widehat{L}_{\alpha _1}(n):=L_{\alpha _1}(n)L_{\alpha _1}(n1)`$. Then we call the parameter $`n`$ in $`\widehat{L}_{\alpha _1}(n)`$ the (growth-) level of $`L_{\alpha _1}(n)`$ and the points in $`\widehat{L}_{\alpha _1}(n)`$ are called points of level $`n`$.

Observe that the $`n`$th level consists of all points which are linear combinations of exactly $`n`$ elements from $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$, i.e.

(44)
$$x\widehat{L}_{\alpha _1}(n)x=\underset{j=0}{\overset{9}{}}n_j\xi ^j\text{ with }n_j^0,\underset{j=0}{\overset{9}{}}n_j=n.$$

Then we have

###### Proposition 6.3.

$`\widehat{L}_{\alpha _1}(2)`$ consists of the points $`\{\pm 2,\pm \tau ,\pm \tau ^{}\}`$.

###### Proof.

$`\pm 2`$ corresponds to $`\pm 2\xi ^0`$, $`\tau `$ corresponds to $`\xi ^1+\xi ^9`$, $`\tau `$ to $`\xi ^4+\xi ^6`$, $`\tau ^{}`$ to $`\xi ^2+\xi ^8`$ and $`\tau ^{}`$ to $`\xi ^3+\xi ^7`$. No other combinations are possible. ∎

###### Definition 6.4.

A combination $`_{j=0}^9n_j\xi ^j=\gamma `$ is called reducible if it can be decomposed as $`\gamma =\gamma _1+\gamma _2`$ where $`\gamma _s=_{j=0}^9n_j^s\xi ^j`$, $`s=1,2`$ and $`_{j=0}^9(n_j^1+n_j^2)=_{j=0}^9n_j`$. Otherwise, it is called nontrivial.

###### Lemma 6.5.

If a nontrivial combination exists on level $`k3`$, then it is a combination of elements from $`\{\xi ^1,\xi ^4,\xi ^7,\xi ^8\}`$.

###### Proof.

Any combination which contains any of the pairs $`\{\xi ^1,\xi ^9\}`$, $`\{\xi ^2,\xi ^8\}`$, $`\{\xi ^3,\xi ^7\}`$, $`\{\xi ^4,\xi ^6\}`$, or, at least one of the roots $`\xi ^0`$ and $`\xi ^5`$, is necessarily reducible by Proposition 6.3 to configurations on level 2 and 1. Furthermore, any combination containing simultaneously $`\xi ^j`$ and $`\xi ^{(j+5)\text{mod}10}`$ is reducible to a combination on level $`n2`$. Thus only combinations from $`\{\xi ^1,\xi ^4,\xi ^7,\xi ^8\}`$ or $`\{\xi ^2,\xi ^3,\xi ^6,\xi ^9\}`$ are potentially leading to nontrivial combinations on level $`n3`$. Since both sets give rise to the same one-dimensional point set, the claim is proven. ∎

###### Theorem 6.6.

There is no nontrivial combination on level $`n3`$.

###### Proof.

According to Lemma 6.5 any nontrivial combination on level $`n3`$ would be of the form

(45)
$$\lambda _1\xi ^1+\lambda _2\xi ^4+\lambda _3\xi ^7+\lambda _4\xi ^8,\lambda _j,j=1,\mathrm{},4.$$

Denote the lattice spanned by $`\xi ^1`$ and $`\xi ^4`$ as $`X`$ and the one spanned by $`\xi ^7`$ and $`\xi ^8`$ as $`Y`$ (see Fig. 5, 6), i.e. define

(46)
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill X& :=& \{\frac{\gamma }{2}x_a+\frac{\lambda }{2}x_b\gamma ,\lambda \{\gamma ,\gamma 1,\mathrm{},(\gamma 1),\gamma \}\}\hfill \\ \hfill Y& :=& \{\frac{\gamma }{2}y_a+\frac{\lambda }{2}y_b\gamma ,\lambda \{\gamma ,\gamma 1,\mathrm{},(\gamma 1),\gamma \}\}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Here $`x_a`$ and $`x_b`$, as well as $`y_a`$ and $`y_b`$ denote the diagonals of the parallelograms which constitute the lattices $`X`$ and $`Y`$, respectively.

They serve as an orthogonal basis for the lattices $`X`$ and $`Y`$ and are of the following lengths:

(47)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill l(x_a)=\sqrt{3\tau }& l(x_b)=\tau \hfill \\ \hfill l(y_a)=\sqrt{2+\tau }& l(y_b)=\tau 1.\hfill \end{array}$$

A necessary condition for a nontrivial combination to exist is thus that there exist $`\gamma _j`$ and $`\lambda _j`$ as in (46) such that

(48)
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \frac{\gamma _1}{2}l(x_a)& =& \frac{\gamma _2}{2}l(x_b)\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{\lambda _1}{2}l(y_a)& =& \frac{\lambda _2}{2}l(y_b).\hfill \end{array}$$

However, this implies $`\lambda _1=\lambda _2=0`$ and $`\gamma _1=\gamma _2=0`$, which proves the claim. ∎

Based on Theorem 6.6 we have

###### Corollary 6.7.

(49)
$$L_{\alpha _1}(n)=\{(a+c)+(bc)\tau a,b,c,|a|+2|b|+2|c|n\}$$

###### Proof.

Follows via $`a+b\tau +c\tau ^{}=(a+c)+(bc)\tau `$ from a decomposition of each level into the contributions from level 2 and 1. ∎

Note, that correspondingly

(50)
$$L_{\alpha _H}(n)=\{((a+c)+(bc)\tau )\alpha _Ha,b,c,|a|+2|b|+2|c|n\}$$

describes the dominant points $`(ab)^T`$ with $`a=b`$.

#### 6.1.2. Comparison with cut-and-project quasicrystals:

The advantage of expressing $`L_{\alpha _1}(n)`$ as in (49) is the fact that it facilitates comparison with the cut-and-project scheme. For this purpose, we briefly recall the definition of a one-dimensional cut-and-project quasicrystal associated with the irrationality $`\tau `$ ( see  and references within):

Consider the algebraic number field $`[\sqrt{5}]`$ and its nontrivial automorphism denoted by  and defined by $`a+b\sqrt{5}ab\sqrt{5}`$ with $`a,b`$. In particular,  transforms $`\tau `$ into $`\tau ^{}=\frac{1}{2}(1\sqrt{5})`$. Furthermore, denote the ring of integers of $`[\sqrt{5}]`$ by $`[\tau ]=+\tau `$. Then we have:

###### Definition 6.8.

Let $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ be a bounded interval. The point set

(51)
$$\mathrm{\Sigma }(\mathrm{\Omega }):=\{x[\tau ]x^{}\mathrm{\Omega }\}$$

is called cut-and-project quasicrystal, and the interval $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is called the acceptance window of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(\mathrm{\Omega })`$.

Based on this, we obtain:

###### Proposition 6.9.

(52)
$$L_{\alpha _1}(n)\mathrm{\Sigma }([n,n])[n,n]$$

###### Proof.

Clearly, $`xL_{\alpha _1}(n)`$ implies $`x[\tau ]`$. Furthermore, $`|x^{}|n`$ and $`|x|n`$, thus $`x\mathrm{\Sigma }([n,n])[n,n]`$. ∎

Note that the opposite inclusion does not hold, so that the two sets are not equal:

###### Lemma 6.10.

The inclusion in Proposition 6.9 is a true inclusion. Deficiencies occur for $`n3`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`x:=x_1+\tau x_2\mathrm{\Sigma }([n,n])[n,n]`$ and suppose w.l.o.g. that $`x_2>0`$. Then $`x_1`$ is bounded by

(53)
$$n\tau ^{}x_2x_1n\tau x_2.$$

Fix the $`x_2`$-component. Then a sufficient condition for the existence of an $`x_1`$ fulfilling (53) is

(54)
$$n\tau x_21n\tau ^{}x_2$$

which implies

(55)
$$x_2\left[\frac{2n1}{\tau \tau ^{}}\right]=:N_n.$$

On the other hand, for $`L_n:=\{(b,c)\times 2|b|+2|c|n\}`$ we have

(56)
$$\underset{(b,c)L_n}{\mathrm{max}}(bc)=:M_n$$

where

(57)
$$M_n=\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{n}{2}\hfill & n\text{ even }\hfill \\ \frac{n1}{2}\hfill & n\text{ odd }.\hfill \end{array}$$

Since $`M_n<N_n`$ for $`n3`$, deficiencies occur. ∎

We remark that for $`n=1,2`$, the point sets coincide and that deficiencies indeed occur only for $`n3`$.

Example:

In the case $`n=3`$, $`N_3=2`$ and $`M_3=1`$, which is consistent with $`1+2\tau \mathrm{\Sigma }([3,3])[3,3]`$ but $`1+2\tau L_{\alpha _1}(3)`$.

###### Corollary 6.11.

$`L_{\alpha _1}(n)`$ does not correspond to a cut-and-project quasicrystal with connected acceptance window for $`n3`$.

Note that as a consequence of Proposition 6.9 we obtain a lower bound for the minimal distance between adjacent points in $`L_{\alpha _1}(n)`$:

###### Lemma 6.12.

The minimal distance in $`L_{\alpha _1}(n)`$ is greater or equal to the one in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }([n,n])`$.

We remark that the latter has been determined in  and varies in dependence on the size of the acceptance window.

Finally, let us make a remark about the repetitivity and scaling properties of patterns $`P`$ in $`L_{\alpha _1}(n)`$. As follows from (49) we have:

* For any pattern $`P`$ with $`PL_{\alpha _1}(r)`$ and $`xL_{\alpha _1}(s)`$ we have $`(P+x)L_{\alpha _1}(r+s)`$. Thus, multiple pattern repetitions occur with growing $`n`$.
* For any $`n`$ there exists $`l`$, $`l2n`$, such that $`\tau L_{\alpha _1}(n)L_{\alpha _1}(l)`$, as follows from

(58)
$$\tau L_{\alpha _1}(n)=\{(bc)+(a+b)\tau a,b,c,|a|+2|b|+2|c|n\}.$$

### 6.2. Implications for dominant points $`(ab)^T`$ with $`ab`$

In this subsection, we use the information on the dominant points $`(ab)^T`$ with $`a=b`$ derived previously in order to infer information also about the $`ab`$ case.

We start by showing:

###### Theorem 6.13.

For each $`xQ_2(n)`$ there exist $`yL_{\xi ^0}(n)`$ and $`zL_{\xi ^1}(n)`$ such that $`x=y+z`$.

Note that the above statement is trivial if we replace $`Q_2(n)`$ by $`Q_2(2n)`$ and needs to be proven only for the case that the cut-off parameter of the ($`L`$-)subspaces coincides with the cut-off of the two-dimensional ($`Q`$-)setting.

###### Proof.

Let $`xQ_2(n)`$. Then $`x=_{j=0}^4\beta _j\xi ^j`$, where $`_{j=0}^4|\beta _j|n`$ with $`\beta _j`$ and $`\xi ^j\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ as in (36). Expressing $`\xi ^j`$ for $`j2`$ in terms of $`\xi ^0`$ and $`\xi ^1`$ leads to

(59)
$$x=\{(\beta _0\beta _2)\tau (\beta _3+\beta _4)\}\xi ^0+\{(\beta _1+\beta _4)+\tau (\beta _2+\beta _3)\}\xi ^1.$$

On the other hand,

(60)
$$y+z=\{(a_1+c_1)+\tau (b_1c_1)\}\xi ^0+\{(a_2+c_2)+\tau (b_2c_2)\}\xi ^1$$

where $`|a_j|+2|b_j|+2|c_j|n`$.

We thus have to show that for all $`\beta _j`$ with $`_{j=0}^4|\beta _j|n`$ there exist $`a_j`$, $`b_j`$ and $`c_j`$ with $`|a_j|+2|b_j|+2|c_j|n`$ such that the following equalities hold:

(61)
$$\begin{array}{cccccc}\hfill \beta _0\beta _2& =& a_1+c_1\hfill & \hfill (\beta _3+\beta _4)& =& b_1c_1\hfill \\ \hfill \beta _1+\beta _4& =& a_2+c_2\hfill & \hfill \beta _2+\beta _3& =& b_2c_2.\hfill \end{array}$$

With the definitions

(62)
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill f(c_1)& :=& |a_1(\beta _0,\beta _2,c_1)|+2|b_1(\beta _3,\beta _4,c_1)|+2|c_1|\hfill \\ & =& |\beta _0\beta _2c_1|+2|c_1(\beta _3+\beta _4)|+2|c_1|\hfill \\ \hfill g(c_2)& :=& |a_2(\beta _1,\beta _4,c_2)|+2|b_2(\beta _2,\beta _3,c_2)|+2|c_2|\hfill \\ & =& |\beta _1+\beta _4c_2|+2|c_2+\beta _2+\beta _3|+2|c_2|\hfill \end{array}$$

this is equivalent to showing that for all $`\beta _j`$ with $`_{j=0}^4|\beta _j|n`$ there exist $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$ such that $`f(c_1)n`$ and $`g(c_2)n`$.

For this, we investigate minima and maxima of these functions in dependence on the parameter ranges. In particular, we have

(63)
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill f^{}(c_1)& =& \left\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 1& \beta _0\beta _2>c_1\hfill \\ \hfill 1& \beta _0\beta _2<c_1\hfill \end{array}\right\}+2\left\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 1& \beta _3+\beta _4>c_1\hfill \\ \hfill 1& \beta _3+\beta _4<c_1\hfill \end{array}\right\}+2\left\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 1& 0>c_1\hfill \\ \hfill 1& 0<c_1\hfill \end{array}\right\}\hfill \\ \hfill g^{}(c_2)& =& \left\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 1& \beta _1+\beta _4>c_2\hfill \\ \hfill 1& \beta _1+\beta _4<c_2\hfill \end{array}\right\}+2\left\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 1& (\beta _2+\beta _3)>c_2\hfill \\ \hfill 1& (\beta _2+\beta _3)<c_2\hfill \end{array}\right\}+2\left\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 1& 0>c_2\hfill \\ \hfill 1& 0<c_2\hfill \end{array}\right\}.\hfill \end{array}$$

The choices of parameters leading to different qualitative behaviour of $`f^{}(c_1)`$ and $`g^{}(c_2)`$ are discussed separately. For instance, for $`0\beta _3+\beta _4<\beta _0\beta _2`$ the minimum of the function $`f(c_1)`$ is at $`c_1=\beta _3+\beta _4`$ and we have

(64)
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill f(\beta _3+\beta _4)& =& |\beta _0\beta _2\beta _3\beta _4|+2|\beta _3+\beta _4|\hfill \\ & =& \beta _0\beta _2+\beta _3+\beta _4|\beta _j|n.\hfill \end{array}$$

The other cases can be treated analogously, which proves the claim. ∎

Let $`C(\xi ^0,\xi ^1)`$ denote the cone enclosed by the halflines $`^+\xi ^0`$ and $`^+\xi ^1`$. Then this theorem shows that any point in $`Q_2(n)C(\xi ^0,\xi ^1)`$ can be expressed as a linear combination of points from $`L_{\xi ^0}(n)`$ and $`L_{\xi ^1}(n)`$ when viewed as vectors in $`^2`$. Since the points in $`Q_2(n)C(\xi ^0,\xi ^1)`$ describe the whole point set $`Q_2(n)`$ due to 10-fold rotational symmetry, it follows that any dominant point in $`Q_2(n)`$ can be expressed as a linear combination of points from $`L_{\xi ^j}(n)`$ and $`L_{\xi ^{j+1}}(n)`$ for suitably chosen $`j\{0,\mathrm{},9\}`$. In particular, dominant points $`(ab)^T`$ with $`a>b`$ are given by linear combinations from $`L_{\xi ^1}(n)`$ and $`L_{\xi ^2}(n)`$, and dominant points $`(ab)^T`$ with $`a<b`$ are given by linear combinations from $`L_{\xi ^2}(n)`$ and $`L_{\xi ^3}(n)`$.

We remark that some of the properties proven here are rooted in the special structure of the ring of cyclotomic integers, which based on (36) is given by

(65)
$$[\xi ]=\underset{j=0}{\overset{9}{}}\xi ^j=[\tau ]+[\tau ]\xi $$

and of which $`Q_2(n)`$ is by construction a subset.

We can again embed our point set into a cut-and-project quasicrystal. For this, we indicate briefly how the setting of cut-and-project quasicrystals as introduced in Definition 6.8 can be generalized to two dimensional point sets with $`H_2`$ symmetry (see  and references within for more details):

###### Definition 6.14.

Let $`M`$ denote a $`[\tau ]`$-lattice with respect to some basis in $`^k`$. Then we call the map $`{}_{}{}^{}:M^k`$ with the property $`(ax+y)^{}=a^{}x^{}+y^{}`$ for all $`x`$, $`yM`$ and $`a[\tau ]`$ a $``$-map.

###### Definition 6.15.

Let $`M`$ be a $`[\tau ]`$-lattice in $`^k`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ a bounded region in $`^k`$, called acceptance window. Then

(66)
$$\mathrm{\Sigma }(\mathrm{\Omega })=\left\{xM\right|x^{}\mathrm{\Omega }\}$$

defines a cut-and-project quasicrystal in $`k`$ dimensions.

In order to construct a cut-and-project quasicrystal with $`H_2`$ symmetry along these lines, one takes $`M=[\tau ]\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ as $`[\tau ]`$-lattice in $`^k`$ in Def. 6.15, and as -map, one uses based on (36)

(67)
$${}_{}{}^{}:\xi \xi ^2,$$

which fulfills the requirements of a $``$-map (cf. Def. 6.14) and leaves $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ invariant:

(68)
$${}_{}{}^{}:\mathrm{\Delta }_2\mathrm{\Delta }_2^{}\mathrm{\Delta }_2.$$

With this, a cut-and-project quasicrystal as in (69) can be parameterized as

(69)
$$\mathrm{\Sigma }(\mathrm{\Omega })=\{(x_1+\tau x_2)\alpha _1+(x_3+\tau x_4)\alpha _2(x_1+\tau ^{}x_2)\alpha _1^{}+(x_3+\tau ^{}x_4)\alpha _2^{}\mathrm{\Omega }\}$$

where $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ may be any bounded region in $`^2`$.

Note in particular that $`\alpha _1^{}=(\xi ^0)^{}=\xi ^0`$ and $`\alpha _2^{}=(\xi ^4)^{}=\xi ^8`$ (compare with (36)).

Based on this, we find the following in our context:

###### Lemma 6.16.

Let $`D(n)`$ denote the convex hull of the regular decagon inscribed into a circle of radius $`n`$ around the origin and let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(D(n))`$ denote the corresponding cut-and-project quasicrystal. Then

(70)
$$Q_2(n)\mathrm{\Sigma }(D(n))D(n).$$

###### Proof.

$`xQ_2(n)`$ implies $`x=_{j=0}^9n_j\xi ^j`$ with $`\xi ^j\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$, $`n_j^0`$ and $`_{j=0}^9n_j=ln`$. Thus, $`xD(n)`$. Since $``$ leaves $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ invariant, $`x^{}D(n)`$ and the claim follows. ∎

As before, there is no equality in Lemma 6.16 and for $`n3`$ deficiencies occur. Also, minimal distances in $`Q_2(n)`$ are bounded from below by the ones in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(D(n))`$.

## 7. Conclusion

We have suggested a new way to construct mathematical models for fragments of aperiodic point sets with 10-fold symmetry. Like cut-and-project quasicrystals, they require some cut-off condition which prevents the sets from becoming dense. The special feature of these models is that they are by construction finite structures – not idealized infinite ones – which grow from a seed point as we demonstrate in Appendix B. We have shown that they are not fragments of sets obtainable via the cut-and-project scheme for convex windows. The restriction to convex windows is a plausible assumption when dealing with growth processes which are not hindered by obstacles. In the presence of obstacles, points would be generated around them and the corresponding acceptance windows would not necessarily be convex and connected. The deviation of our point sets from the cut-and-project situation with convex windows is given in terms of a set of “deficiencies”, which appear close to the boundary of the set. The occurrence of deficiencies is a novel aspect and a special feature of our models, and it has to be discussed in how far it may help to model growth deficiencies which occur in real life quasicrystals.

Finally, we remark that though our initial motivation for this study comes from the field of quasicrystals, we expect that the mathematical structures provided by the affine extension of noncrystallographic Coxeter groups will open also other fields of applications. We plan to investigate in a next step the application of our results to the study of fullerenes, in particular the description of onion like structures and nanotubes.

### Acknowledgements

J. P. acknowledges financial support by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and FCAR of Quebec and R. T. by a Marie Curie fellowship. She is grateful for the hospitality extended to her at the Centre de Recherches Mathématiques, Université de Montréal, where this work has been started.

## Appendix A

In this appendix, we indicate the generalized Cartan matrices obtained after relaxation of the condition $`(a_{ij})[\tau ]^{}`$ (compare with Section 3). In particular, let $`a:=a_1+\tau a_2`$, $`b:=b_1+\tau b_2`$, $`c:=c_1+\tau c_2`$ and $`d:=d_1+\tau d_2`$ be the entries of the matrices

(71)
$$\left(\begin{array}{ccc}2& a& b\\ a& 2& \tau \\ b& \tau & 2\end{array}\right),\left(\begin{array}{cccc}2& a& b& c\\ a& 2& 1& 0\\ b& 1& 2& \tau \\ c& 0& \tau & 2\end{array}\right)\text{ and }\left(\begin{array}{ccccc}2& a& b& c& d\\ a& 2& 1& 0& 0\\ b& 1& 2& 1& 0\\ c& 0& 1& 2& \tau \\ d& 0& 0& \tau & 2\end{array}\right).$$

Then the entries in the following tables define generalized Cartan matrices for $`H_2`$ (first matrix in (71) and Table 1), $`H_3`$ (second matrix in (71) and Table 2) and $`H_4`$ (third matrix in (71) and Table 3), respectively.

Table 1: the case of $`H_2`$

Table 2: the case of $`H_3`$

Table 3: the case of $`H_4`$

## Appendix B

In this appendix we demonstrate the growth of $`Q_2(n)`$ in dependence on $`n`$ for $`n=1,\mathrm{},6`$. Note that we display the point sets in a circle of a radius corresponding to four times the root length. Thus, the complete point set is visible only until iteration step $`n=4`$ and is truncated afterwards. Note that since the point set $`Q_2(2)`$ is displayed in Fig. 4 we omit it in this list.