Fractals, Vol. 4, No. 3 (1996) 237-239 © World Scientific Publishing Company — FRACTAL FORM ANALYSIS MASUO SUZUKI Department of Physics, University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113 Abstract The concept of fractal form analysis is introduced, in which fractal metrication is defined for partial objects of fractals as acm or 6 m? with the fractal dimension- ality D. 1. FRACTAL METRICATION As is well known,! the fractal dimensionality D is defined by the self-similar scaling exponent of an infinite object. Here, we study a finite fractal object, namely, fractals in a finite region For example, we consider the Koch curve in a finite region, say, 1 cm. Then, we call” this partial fractal object the Koch curve of 1 em. This naming seems quite natural, compared with ordinary geometrical objects. This fractal metrication cm? (or m2, etc.) will be very convenient for studying finite fractal objects theoretically and experimentally. When the unit of metrication is changed, we have the following relation: (3 em)? = 32cm? = 4 cm? () in the Koch curve, because 3 = 4 in this case. In general we can define addition and subtraction of finite fractals with the same dimen- sionality D as: acm? +b em? = (a+5)em? (2) A geometrical interpretation of Eq. (2) is clear, when the fractal forms of the two relevant systems are completely the same. Note that a “negative fractal” appears when a < 6. In this case, (a — b)em? = (-)(b - a)em? (3) 237238M. Suzuki Namely, when F is an ordinary “positive fractal”, (—)F is called a negetive fractal and it may be interpreted physically as anti-matter, because F+(-)F=0. (4) Next we introduce multiplication of two partial fractal objects with the metries a em?" and bcm”? by: acm”! x bcm? = abcm?+22. (5) For example, a Koch surface will be constructed by moving the Koch curve in another dimension, namely, we have: acm? x bem =abcm?+! (6) ‘These will be used in the following section. 2. FORM ANALYSIS In order to introduce the concept of fractal form analysis, we define? the norm of a partial fractal F in terms of its metrication. For example, the norm |F| of a partial fractal F with the metrication a cm? is defined as: \F\ ‘Thus, the magnitude of the norm |F| depends on the unit (say, cm? or m?). ‘The continuity of the pattern which depends on the parameter «x is defined by the condition: (0) Jim |F(@) = F()|=0 or fim Fy) = F(z). i) ‘The derivative of the fractal form F(x) with respect to the form F(z) and the parameter x, is defined? by: Are 5 Ji, FE+ NF) (9) Using this differential operation, we can study the change of a fractal object with respect to the relevant parameter 2. A differential equation of the fractal object F(x) can be constructed and the solution of such an equation can be given using the integral defined by the inverse operation: S(x) f ” F(a)at (10) This kind of analysis is called? the fractal form analysis. 3. CONCEPTUAL RELATION BETWEEN THE FRACTAL FORM ANALYSIS AND THE CAM THEORY It will be instructive to state the conceptual relation between the fractal form analysis and the CAM theory. In the CAM theory, the mean-field critical coefficients obtained in a systematic series of generalized cluster mean-field approximations, show a coherent anomaly as the corresponding approximate critical points approach the true cFractal Form Analysis 239 ‘These mean-field critical coefficients correspond conceptually to the norm of a fractal object. Critical exponents correspond to fractal dimensions.” 4. FRACTAL DECOMPOSITION OF EXPONENTIAL OPERATORS AND THE CAM SCHEME Here we discuss the relation between the basic concept of the fractal decomposition of exponential operators*"™ and the CAM scheme.‘ In general, the higher-order decompo- sition scheme proposed by the present author, an mth order product formula, does not show any fractal property for finite m, but it becomes fractal in the infinite limit of m. Similarly, cluster mean-field approximations by themselves give only classical (non-fractal) critical exponents, but a systematic procedure of the CAM yields the asymptotic estimate of nonclassical true critical exponents. ‘Thus, the two schemes have the above common feature. REFERENCES 1. B.B. Mandelbrot, The Fractal Geometry of Nature (Freeman, San Francisco, 1982). 2, M, Suzuki, in Mathematical Approach to Fluctuations, Vol. 2 ed. T. Hida (World Scientific, Singapore, 1995). M. Suzuki, Statistical Mechanics (Iwanami, Tokyo, 1994 and English translation, Springer, 1997). M. Suzuki, J. Phys. Soe. Jpn. 55, 4205 (1986). M. Suzuki, M. Katori and X. Hu, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 56, 3092 (1987). M. Suzuki, X. Hu, M. Katori, A. Lipowski, N. Hatano, K. Minami and Y. Nonomura, Coherent Anomaly Method — Mean Field, Fluctuations and Systematics (World Scientific, Singapore, 1995). M. Suzuki, Prog. Theor. Phys. 69, 65 (1983). M. Suzuki, Phys, Lett. A146, 319 (1990); ibid A165, 387 (1992) M. Suzuki, J. Math. Phys. 82, 400 (1991). M. Suzuki, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 61, 3015 (1992). M. Suzuki, in Fractals and Disorder, ed. A. Bunde (North-Holland, 1992) Physica A191, 501 (1992) 12. M. Suznki, Proc. Japan Acad. 69, Ser. B. 161 (1993). 13. M. Suzuki, Physica A205, 65 (1994) and references cited therein. 14, M. Suauki, Phys. Lett. A201, 425 (1995).