We show the existence of four
-periodic solutions of the nonlinear Hamiltonian system with some conditions. We prove
this problem by investigating the geometry of the sublevels of the functional and
two pairs of sphere-torus variational linking inequalities of the functional and applying
the critical point theory induced from the limit relative category.
1. Introduction and Statements of Main Results
Let
be a
function defined on
which is
-periodic with respect to the first variable
.In this paper, we investigate the number of
-periodic nontrivial solutions of the following nonlinear Hamiltonian system
(11)where
,
,
(12)
is the identity matrix on
,
, and
is the gradient of
. Let
,
Then (1.1) can be rewritten as
(13)We assume that
satisfies the following conditions.
(H1)There exist constants
such that
(14)(H2)Let
and
be integers and
,
be any numbers (without loss of generality, we may assume
) such that
. Suppose that there exist
and
such that
and
(15)(H3)
,
, and
such that
(16)(H4)
is
-periodic with respect to
.
We are looking for the weak solutions of (1.1). Let
. The
-periodic weak solution
of (1.3) satisfies
(17)and coincides with the critical points of the induced functional
(18)where
.
Our main results are the following.
Theorem 1.1.
Assume that
satisfies conditions
–
. Then there exists a number
such that for any
and
with
,
, system (1.1) has at least four nontrivial
-periodic solutions.
Theorem 1.2.
Assume that
satisfies conditions
–
. Then there exists a number
such that for any
and
, and
,
, system (1.1) has at least four nontrivial
-periodic solutions.
Chang proved in [1] that, under conditions
–
,system (1.1) has at least two nontrivial
-periodic solutions. He proved this result by using the finite dimensional variational
reduction method. He first investigate the critical points of the functional on the
finite dimensional subspace and the
condition of the reduced functional and find one critical point of the mountain pass
type. He also found another critical point by the shape of graph of the reduced functional.
For the proofs of Theorems 1.1 and ,1.2 we first separate the whole space
into the four mutually disjoint four subspaces
,
,
,
which are introduced in Section 3 and then we investigate two pairs of sphere-torus
variational linking inequalities of the reduced functional
and
of
on the submanifold with boundary
and
, respectively, and translate these two pairs of sphere-torus variational links of
and
into the two pairs of torus-sphere variational links of
and
, where
and
are the restricted functionals of
to the manifold with boundary
and
, respectively. Since
and
are strongly indefinite functinals, we use the notion of the
condition and the limit relative category instead of the notion of
condition and the relative category, which are the useful tools for the proofs of
the main theorems. We also investigate the limit relative category of torus in (torus,
boundary of torus) on
and
, respectively. By the critical point theory induced from the limit relative category
theory we obtain two nontrivial
-periodic solutions in each subspace
and
, so we obtain at least four nontrivial
-periodic solutions of (1.1).
In Section 2, we introduce some notations and some notions of
condition and the limit relative category and recall the critical point theory on
the manifold with boundary. We also prove some propositions. In Section 3, we prove
Theorem 1.1 and in Section 4, we prove Theorem 1.2.
2. Recall of the Critical Point Theory Induced from the Limit Relative Category
Let
The scalar product in
naturally extends as the duality pairing between
and
. It is known that if
is
-periodic, then it has a Fourier expansion
with
and
:
is the closure of such functions with respect to the norm
(21)Let us set the functional
,(22)so that
(23)Let
denote the usual bases in
and set
(24)Then
and
are the subspaces of
on which
is null, positive definite and negative definite, and these spaces are orthogonal
with respect to the bilinear form
(25)associated with
. Here,
and
If
and
, then the bilinear form is zero and
. We also note that
, and
are mutually orthogonal in
. Let
be the projection from
onto
and
the one from
onto
. Then the norm in
is given by
(26)which is equivalent to the usual one. The space
with this norm is a Hilbert space.
We need the following facts which are proved in [2].
Proposition 2.1.
For each
, E is compactly embedded in
. In particular, there is an
such that
(27)for all
.
Proposition 2.2.
Assume that
. Then
is
, that is,
is continuous and Fréchet differentiable in
with Fréchet derivative
(28)where
and
Moreover, the functional
is 
Proof.
For
,
(29)We have
(210)Thus, we have
(211)Next, we prove that
is continuous. For
,
(212)Similarly, it is easily checked that
is
.
Now, we consider the critical point theory on the manifold with boundary induced from
the limit relative category. Let
be a Hilbert space and
be the closure of an open subset of
such that
can be endowed with the structure of
manifold with boundary. Let
be a
functional, where
is an open set containing
. The
condition and the limit relative category (see [3]) are useful tools for the proof of the main theorem.
Let
be a sequence of a closed finite dimensional subspace of
with the following assumptions:
where
,
for all
(
and
are subspaces of
),
,
,
are dense in
. Let
, for any
, be the closure of an open subset of
and has the structure of a
manifold with boundary in
. We assume that for any
there exists a retraction
. For a given
, we will write
. Let
be a closed subspace of
.
Definition 2.3.
Let
be a closed subset of
with
. Let
be the relative category of
in
. We define the limit relative category of
in
, with respect to
, by
(213)We set
(214)We have the following multiplicity theorem (for the proof, see [4]).
Theorem 2.4.
Let
and assume that
(1)
,
(2)
,
(3)the
condition with respect to
holds.
Then there exists a lower critical point
such that
. If
(215)then
(216)Now, we state the following multiplicity result (for the proof, see [4, Theorem 4.6]) which will be used in the proofs of our main theorems.
Theorem 2.5.
Let
be a Hilbert space and let
, where
,
,
are three closed subspaces of
with
,
of finite dimension. For a given subspace
of
, let
be the orthogonal projection from
onto
. Set
(217)and let
be a
function defined on a neighborhood
of
. Let
,
. One defines
(218)Assume that
(219)and that the
condition holds for
on
, with respect to the sequrnce
, for all
, where
(220)Moreover, one assumes
and
has no critical points
in
with
. Then there exist two lower critical points
,
for
on
such that
,
.
3. Proof of Theorem 1.1
We assume that
. Let
denote the usual bases in
and set
(31)Then
is the topological direct sum of subspaces
,
,
and
, where
and
are finite dimensional subspaces. We also set
(32)We have the following two pairs of the sphere-torus variational linking inequalities.
Lemma 3.1. (First Sphere-Torus Variational Linking).
Assume that
satisfies the conditions
,
,
, and the condition
(H2)′
suppose that there exist
and
such that
and
(33)Then there exist
,
,
, and
such that
, and for any
and
with
and 
(34)Proof.
Let
. By
we have
(35)for some
. Since
, there exists
such that if
, then
. Thus,
. Moreover, if
, then
, so we have
. Next, we will show that there exist
,
and
such that if
, then
. Let
with
,
,
, where
is a small number. Let
for some
and
. Then
and
. By
, there exists
such that
(36)Since
,
, and
, there exist a small number
and
with
and
such that if
and
, then
. Thus, we have
. Moreover, if
and
, then we have
. Thus,
. Thus, we prove the lemma.
Lemma 3.2.
Let
be the number introduced in Lemma 3.1. Then for any
and
with
and
, if
is a critical point for
, then
.
Proof.
We notice that from Lemma 3.1, for fixed
, the functional
is weakly convex in
, while, for fixed
, the functional
is strictly concave in
. Moreover,
is the critical point in
with
. So if
is another critical point for
, then we have
(37)So we have
.
Let
be the orthogonal projection from
onto
and
(38)Then
is the smooth manifold with boundary. Let
. Let us define a functional
by
(39)We have
(310)Let us define the functional
by
(311)Then
. We note that if
is the critical point of
and lies in the interior of
, then
is the critical point of
. We also note that
(312)Let us set
(313)We note that 

and
have the same topological structure as
,
,
and
, respectively.
Lemma 3.3.
satisfies the
condition with respect to
for every real number
such that
(314)Proof.
Let
be a sequence such that
,
be a sequence in
such that
, for all
,
and
. Set
(and hence
) and
. We first consider the case in which
, for all
. Since for
large
, we have
(315)By (3.9) and (3.10),
(316)In the first case, the claim follows from the limit Palais-Smale condition for
. In the second case,
. We claim that
is bounded. By contradiction, we suppose that
and set
. Up to a subsequence
weakly for some
. By the asymptotically linearity of
, we have
(317)We have
(318)where
. Passing to the limit we, get
(319)Since
and
are bounded and
in
,
. On the other hand, we have
(320)Moreover, we have
(321)Since
converges to 0 weakly and
is bounded,
. Since
,
converges to 0 strongly, which is a contradiction. Hence,
is bounded. Up to a subsequence, we can suppose that
converges to
for some
. We claim that
converges to
strongly. We have
(322)By
and the boundedness of
,
(323)That is,
converges. Since
,
converges, so
converges to
strongly. Therefore, we have
(324)So we proved the first case.
We consider the case
, that is,
. Then
, for all
. In this case,
and
. Thus, by the same argument as the first case, we obtain the conclusion. So we prove
the lemma.
Proposition 3.4.
Assume that
satisfies the conditions
,
,
,
. Then there exists a number
such that for any
and
with
and
, there exist at least two nontrivial critical points
,
, in
for the functional
such that
(325)where
,
, and
are introduced in Lemma 3.1.
Proof.
First, we will find two nontrivial critical points for
. By Lemma 3.1,
satisfies the torus-sphere variational linking inequality, that is, there exist
,
,
, and
such that
, and for any
and
with
and 
(326)By Lemma 3.3,
satisfies the
condition with respect to
for every real number
such that
(327)Thus by Theorem 2.5, there exist two critical points
,
for the functional
such that
(328)Setting
,
, we have
(329)We claim that
, that is
, which implies that
are the critical points for
in
, so
are the critical points for
in
. For this we assume by contradiction that
. From (3.12),
, namely,
,
, are the critical points for
. By Lemma 3.2,
, which is a contradiction for the fact that
(330)Lemma 3.2 implies that there is no critical point
such that
(331)Hence,
,
. This proves Proposition 3.4.
Lemma 3.5. (Second Sphere-Torus Variational Linking).
Assume that
satisfies the conditions
,
,
, and the condition
(H2)′′
suppose that there exist
and
such that
and
(332)Then there exist
,
,
, and
such that
, and for any
and
with
and
,
(333)Proof.
Let
. By
we have
(334)for some
. Since
, there exists
such that if
, then
. Thus we have
. Moreover, if
, then
, so we have
. Next, let
with
, where
is a small number. We also let
and
. Then
and
. By
, there exists
such that
(335)Since
and
, there exist a small number
and
with
and
such that if
and
, then
. Thus we have
.
Moreover, if
, then
. Thus we have
. Thus we prove the lemma.
Lemma 3.6.
For any
there exists a constant
such that for any
and
with
and
, if
is a critical point for
with
, then
.
Proof.
By contradiction, we can suppose that there exist
, a sequence
,
such that
,
with
, and a sequence
in
such that
and
. We claim that
is bounded. If we do not suppose that
, let us set
. We have up to a subsequence, that
weakly for some
. Furthermore,
(336)so we have
(337)Moreover,
(338)so we have
(339)Adding (3.37) and (3.39), we have
(340)From (3.40) we have
(341)We also have
(342)Dividing by
and going to the limit, we have
(343)Thus
(344)which is a contradiction since
. So
is bounded and we can suppose that
for
. From (3.42), we have
(345)From (3.40),
(346)Thus,
converges to
strongly. We claim that
. Assume that
. By (H1)
, for some
and
. If
with
for
and
,
(347)If
,
, and
(348)Thus, we have
(349)which is absurd because of
and
. Thus
. We proved the lemma.
Let
be the orthogonal projection from
onto
and
(350)Then
is the smooth manifold with boundary. Let
. Let us define a functional
by
(351)We have
(352)Let us define the functional
by
(353)Then
. We note that if
is the critical point of
and lies in the interior of
, then
is the critical point of
. We also note that
(354)Let us set
(355)We note that 

and
have the same topological structure as
,
,
, and
, respectively.
We have the following lemma whose proof has the same arguments as that of Lemma 3.5
except the space
,
,
instead of the space
,
,
.
Lemma 3.7.
satisfies the
condition with respect to
for every real number
such that
(356)where
,
, and
are introduced in Lemma 3.5.
Proposition 3.8.
Assume that
satisfies the conditions
,
,
, and
. Then there exists a small number
such that for any
and
with
and
, there exist at least two nontrivial critical points
,
, in
for the functional
such that
(357)where
,
, and
are introduced in Lemma 3.5.
Proof.
It suffices to find the critical points for
. By Lemma 3.5,
satisfies the torus-sphere variational linking inequality, that is, there exist
,
,
, and
such that
, and for any
and
with 
(358)By Lemma 3.7,
satisfies the
condition with respect to
for every real number
such that
(359)Then by Theorem 2.5, there exist two critical points
,
for the functional
such that
(360)Setting
,
, we have
(361)We claim that
, that is
, which implies that
are the critical points for
, so
are the critical points for
. For this we assume by contradiction that
. From (3.54),
, namely,
,
, are the critical points for
. By Lemma 3.6,
, which is a contradiction for the fact that
(362)It follows from Lemma 3.6 that there is no critical point
such that
(363)Hence,
,
. This proves Proposition 3.8.
Proof of Theorem 1.1.
Assume that
satisfies conditions
–
. By Proposition 3.4, there exist
,
,
, and
such that for any
and
with
,(1.1) has at least two nontrivial solutions
,
, in
for the functional
such that
(364)By Proposition 3.8, there exist
,
,
, and
such that for any
and
with
and
, (1.1) has at least two nontrivial solutions
,
, in
for the functional
such that
(365)Let
(366)Then for any
and
with
and
, (1.1) has at least four nontrivial solutions, two of which are in
and two of which are in
.
4. Proof of Theorem 1.2
Assume that
satisfies conditions
–
with
. Let us set
(41)Then the space
is the topological direct sum of the subspaces
,
,
, and
, where
and
are finite dimensional subspaces.
Proof of Theorem 1.2.
By the same arguments as that of the proof of Theorem 1.1, there exist
,
,
,
,
, and
such that for any
and
with
, (1.1) has at least four nontrivial solutions, two of which are nontrivial solutions
,
, in
with
(42)and two of which are nontrivial solutions
,
,in
with
(43)Acknowledgment
This research is supported in part by Inha University research grant.
References
-
Chang, K-C: Infinite-Dimensional Morse Theory and Multiple Solution Problems, Progress in Nonlinear Differential Equations and their Applications,p. x+312. Birkhäuser, Boston, Mass, USA (1993)
-
Rabinowitz, PH: Minimax Methods in Critical Point Theory with Applications to Differential Equations, CBMS Regional Conference Series in Mathematics,p. viii+100. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, USA (1986)
-
Fournier, G, Lupo, D, Ramos, M, Willem, M: Limit relative category and critical point theory. Dynamics Reported, pp. 1–24. Springer, Berlin, Germany (1994).
-
Micheletti, AM, Saccon, C: Multiple nontrivial solutions for a floating beam equation via critical point theory. Journal of Differential Equations. 170(1), 157–179 (2001). Publisher Full Text




