Laplacian, on the Arrowhead Curve

Abstract


 In terms of analysis on fractals, the Sierpinski gasket stands out as one of the most studied example.
 The underlying aim of those studies is to determine a differential operator equivalent to the classic Laplacian.
 The classically adopted approach is a bidimensional one, through a sequence of so-called prefractals, i.e. a sequence of graphs that converges towards the considered domain.
 The Laplacian is obtained through a weak formulation, by means of Dirichlet forms, built by induction on the prefractals.
 
 It turns out that the gasket is also the image of a Peano curve, the so-called Arrowhead one, obtained by means of similarities from a starting point which is the unit line.
 This raises a question that appears of interest. Dirichlet forms solely depend on the topology of the domain, and not of its geometry.
 Which means that, if one aims at building a Laplacian on a fractal domain as the aforementioned curve, the topology of which is the same as, for instance, a line segment, one has to find a way of taking account its specific geometry.
 
 Another difference due to the geometry, is encountered may one want to build a specific measure.
 For memory, the sub-cells of the Kigami and Strichartz approach are triangular and closed: the similarities at stake in the building of the Curve called for semi-closed trapezoids.
 As far as we know, and until now, such an approach is not a common one, and does not appear in such a context.
 
 It intererestingly happens that the measure we choose corresponds, in a sense, to the natural counting measure on the curve.
 Also, it is in perfect accordance with the one used in the Kigami and Strichartz approach.
 In doing so, we make the comparison -- and the link -- between three different approaches, that enable one to obtain the Laplacian on the arrowhead curve: the natural method; the Kigami and Strichartz approach, using decimation; the Mosco approach.