Skip to main content

Existence of solutions for weighted p(r)-Laplacian impulsive system mixed type boundary value problems

Abstract

This paper investigates the existence of solutions for weighted p(r)-Laplacian impulsive system mixed type boundary value problems. The proof of our main result is based upon Gaines and Mawhin's coincidence degree theory. Moreover, we obtain the existence of nonnegative solutions.

1 Introduction

In this paper, we mainly consider the existence of solutions for the weighted p(r)-Laplacian system

- ( w ( r ) u p ( r ) - 2 u ( r ) ) + f ( r , u ( r ) , ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) ) = 0 , r ( 0 , T ) , r r i ,
(1)

where u: [0, T] → N , with the following impulsive boundary conditions

lim r r i + u ( r ) - lim r r i - u ( r ) = A i ( lim r r i - u ( r ) , lim r r i - ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) ) , i = 1 , , k ,
(2)
lim r r i + w ( r ) u p ( r ) - 2 u ( r ) - lim r r i - w ( r ) u p ( r ) - 2 u ( r ) = B i ( lim r r i - u ( r ) , lim r r i - ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) ) , i = 1 , , k ,
(3)
a u ( 0 ) - b lim r 0 + ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) = 0 , and c u ( T ) + d lim r T - w ( r ) u p ( r ) - 2 u ( r ) = 0 ,
(4)

where p C ([0, T], ) and p(r) > 1, -Δp(r)u:= -(w(r) |u'|p(r)-2u'(r))' is called weighted p(r)-Laplacian; 0 < r1 < r2 < < r k < T; A i , B i C( N × N , N ); a, b, c, d [0, +∞), ad + bc > 0.

Throughout the paper, o(1) means functions which uniformly convergent to 0 (as n → +∞); for any v N , vj will denote the j-th component of v; the inner product in N will be denoted by 〈·,·〉; |·| will denote the absolute value and the Euclidean norm on N . Denote J = [0, T], J' = [0, T]\{r0, r1,..., rk+1}, J0 = [r0, r1], J i = (r i , ri+1], i = 1, ..., k, where r0 = 0, rk+1= T. Denote J i o the interior of J i , i = 0, 1,..., k. Let PC(J, N ) = {x: J N | x C(J i , N ), i = 0, 1,..., k, and lim r r i + x ( r ) exists for i = 1,..., k}; w PC(J, ) satisfies 0 < w(r), r J', and ( w ( ) ) - 1 p ( ) - 1 L 1 ( 0 , T ) ; P C 1 ( J , N ) = { x P C ( J , N ) x C ( J i o , N ) , lim r r i + w ( r ) x p ( r ) - 2 x ( r ) and lim r r i + 1 - w ( r ) x p ( r ) - 2 x ( r ) exists for i = 0, 1,..., k}. For any x = (x1,..., xN ) PC(J, N ), denote |xi |0 = suprJ'|xi (r)|. Obviously, PC(J, N ) is a Banach space with the norm x 0 = ( i = 1 N x i 0 2 ) 1 2 , PC1(J, N ) is a Banach space with the norm x 1 =x 0 + ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 x 0 . In the following, PC(J, N ) and PC1(J, N ) will be simply denoted by PC and PC1, respectively. Let L1 = L1(J, N ) with the norm x L 1 = ( i = 1 N x i L 1 2 ) 1 2 , x L1, where x i L 1 = 0 T x i ( r ) dr. We will denote

u ( r i + ) = lim r r i + u ( r ) , u ( r i - ) = lim r r i - u ( r ) ,
w ( 0 ) u p ( 0 ) - 2 u ( 0 ) = lim r 0 + w ( r ) u p ( r ) - 2 u ( r ) , w ( T ) u p ( T ) - 2 u ( T ) = lim r T - w ( r ) u p ( r ) - 2 u ( r ) .

The study of differential equations and variational problems with nonstandard p(r)-growth conditions is a new and interesting topic. It arises from nonlinear elasticity theory, electro-rheological fluids, image processing, etc. (see [14]). Many results have been obtained on this problems, for example [125]. If p(r) ≡ p (a constant), (1) is the well-known p-Laplacian system. If p(r) is a general function, -Δp(r)represents a nonhomogeneity and possesses more nonlinearity, thus -Δp(r)is more complicated than -Δ p ; for example, if Ω N is a bounded domain, the Rayleigh quotient

λ p ( ) = inf u W 0 1 , p ( x ) ( Ω ) \ { 0 } Ω 1 p ( x ) u p ( x ) d x Ω 1 p ( x ) u p ( x ) d x

is zero in general, and only under some special conditions λp(·)> 0 (see [8, 1719]), but the property of λ p > 0 is very important in the study of p-Laplacian problems.

Impulsive differential equations have been studied extensively in recent years. Such equations arise in many applications such as spacecraft control, impact mechanics, chemical engineering and inspection process in operations research (see [2628] and the references therein). It is interesting to note that p(r)-Laplacian impulsive boundary problems are about comparatively new applications like ecological competition, respiratory dynamics and vaccination strategies. On the Laplacian impulsive differential equation boundary value problems, there are many results (see [2937]). There are many methods to deal with this problem, e.g., subsupersolution method, fixed point theorem, monotone iterative method and coincidence degree. Because of the nonlinearity of -Δ p , results on the existence of solutions for p-Laplacian impulsive differential equation boundary value problems are rare (see [38, 39]). On the Laplacian (p(x) ≡ 2) impulsive differential equations mixed type boundary value problems, we refer to [30, 32, 34].

In [39], Tian and Ge have studied nonlinear IBVP

- ( ρ ( t ) Φ p ( x ( t ) ) ) + s ( t ) Φ p ( x ( t ) ) = f ( t , x ( t ) ) , t t i , a . e . t [ a , b ] , lim t t i + ρ ( t ) Φ p ( x ( t ) ) - lim t t i - ρ ( t ) Φ p ( x ( t ) ) = I i ( x ( t i ) ) , i = 1 , , l , α x ( a ) - β x ( a ) = σ 1 , γ x ( b ) + σ x ( b ) = σ 2 ,
(5)

where Φ p (x) = |x|p-2x, p > 1, ρ, s L [a, b] with essin f[a, b]ρ > 0, and essin f[a,b]s > 0, 0 < ρ(a), p(b) <∞, σ1 ≤ 0, σ2 ≥ 0, α, β, γ, σ > 0, a = t0 < t1 < < tl < tl+1 = b, I i C([0, +∞), [0, ∞)), i = 1,..., l, f C ([a, b] × [0, +∞), [0, ∞)), f(·, 0) is nontrivial. By using variational methods, the existence of at least two positive solutions was obtained.

In [24, 25], the present author investigates the existence of solutions of p(r)-Laplacian impulsive differential equation (1-3) with periodic-like or multi-point boundary value conditions.

In this paper, we consider the existence of solutions for the weighted p(r)-Laplacian impulsive differential system mixed type boundary value condition problems, when p(r) is a general function. The proof of our main result is based upon Gaines and Mawhin's coincidence degree theory. Since the nonlinear term f in (5) is independent on the first-order derivative, and the impulsive conditions are simpler than (2), our main results partly generalized the results of [30, 32, 34, 39]. Since the mixed type boundary value problems are different from periodic-like or multi-point boundary value conditions, and this paper gives two kinds of mixed type boundary value conditions (linear and nonlinear), our discussions are different from [24, 25] and have more difficulties. Moreover, we obtain the existence of nonnegative solutions. This paper was motivated by [2426, 38, 40].

Let N ≥ 1, the function f: J × N × N N is assumed to be Caratheodory; by this, we mean:

  1. (i)

    for almost every t J, the function f(t, ·, ·) is continuous;

  2. (ii)

    for each (x, y) N × N , the function f(·, x, y) is measurable on J;

  3. (iii)

    for each R > 0, there is a α R L 1 (J, ), such that, for almost every t J and every (x, y) N × N with |x| ≤ R, |y| ≤ R, one has

    f ( t , x , y ) α R ( t ) .

We say a function u: J N is a solution of (1) if u PC1 with w(·) |u'|p(·)-2u'(·) absolutely continuous on every J i o , i = 0, 1,..., k, which satisfies (1) a.e. on J.

This paper is divided into three sections; in the second section, we present some preliminary. Finally, in the third section, we give the existence of solutions and nonnegative solutions of system (1)-(4).

2 Preliminary

Let X and Y be two Banach spaces and L: D(L) XY be a linear operator, where D(L) denotes the domain of L. L will be a Fredholm operator of index 0, i.e., ImL is closed in Y and the linear spaces KerL and coImL have the same dimension which is finite. We define X1 = KerL and Y1 = coImL, so we have the decompositions X = X1 coKerL and Y = Y1 ImL. Now, we have the linear isomorphism Λ: X1Y1 and the continuous linear projectors P: XX1 and Q: YY1 with KerQ = ImL and ImP = X1.

Let Ω be an open bounded subset of X with Ω ∩ D(L) ≠ . Operator S: Ω ¯ Y be a continuous operator. In order to define the coincidence degree of (L, S) in Ω, as in [40, 41], denoted by d(L - S, Ω), we assume that

L x S x for all  x Ω .

It is easy to see that the operator M: Ω ¯ X, M = (L + ΛP)-1 (S + ΛP) is well defined, and

L x * = S x *  if and only if  x * = M x * .

If M is continuous and compact, then S is called L-compact, and the Leray-Schauder degree of I X - M (where I X is the identity mapping of X) is well defined in Ω, and we will denote it by d LS (I X - M, Ω, 0). This number is independent of the choice of P, Q and Λ (up to a sign) and we can define

d ( L - S , Ω ) : = d L S ( I X - M , Ω , 0 ) .

Definition 2.1. (see [40, 41]) The coincidence degree of (L, S) in Ω, denoted by d(L - S, Ω), is defined as d(L - S, Ω) = d LS (I X - M, Ω, 0).

There are many papers about coincidence degree and its applications (see [4043]).

Proposition 2.2. (see [40]) (i) (Existence property). If d(L - S, Ω) ≠ 0, then there exists x Ω such that Lx = Sx.

  1. (ii)

    (Homotopy invariant property). If H: Ω ¯ × [ 0 , 1 ] Y is continuous, L-compact and LxH(x, λ) for all x ∂Ω and λ [0, 1], then d(L - H (·, λ), Ω) is independent of λ.

The effect of small perturbations is negligible, as is proved in the next Proposition (see [41] Theorem III.3, page 24).

Proposition 2.3. Assume that LxSx for each x ∂Ω. If S ε is such that supx∂Ω||S ε x|| Y is sufficiently small, then LxSx + S ε x for all x ∂Ω and d(L - S - S ε , Ω) = d(L - S, Ω).

For any (r, x) (J × N ), denote φp(r)(x) = |x|p(r)-2x. Obviously, φ has the following properties

Proposition 2.4 (see [41]) φ is a continuous function and satisfies

  1. (i)

    For any r [0, T], φ p(r)(·) is strictly monotone, i.e.,

    φ p ( r ) ( x 1 ) - φ p ( r ) ( x 2 ) , x 1 - x 2 > 0 , x 1 , x 2 N , x 1 x 2 ;
  2. (ii)

    There exists a function η: [0, +∞) → [0, +∞), η(s) → +∞ as s → +∞, such that

    φ p ( r ) ( x ) , x η ( x ) x , for all  x N .

It is well known that φp(r)(·) is a homeomorphism from N to N for any fixed r J. Denote

φ p ( r ) - 1 ( x ) = x 2 - p ( r ) p ( r ) - 1 x , for x N \ { 0 } , φ p ( r ) - 1 ( 0 ) = 0 .

It is clear that φ p ( r ) - 1 ( ) is continuous and sends bounded sets to bounded sets, and φ p ( r ) - 1 ( ) = φ q ( r ) ( ) where 1 p ( r ) + 1 q ( r ) 1. Let X = {(x1, x2) | x1 PC, x2 PC} with the norm ||(x1, x2)|| X = || x1||0 + ||x2||0, Y = L1 × L1 × 2(k + 1)N, and we define the norm on Y as

( y 1 , y 2 , z 1 , , z 2 ( k + 1 ) ) Y = y 1 L 1 + y 2 L 1 + m = 1 2 ( k + 1 ) z m , ( y 1 , y 2 , z 1 , , z 2 ( k + 1 ) ) Y ,

where y1, y2 L1, z m N , m = 1,..., 2(k + 1), then X and Y are Banach spaces.

Define L: D(L) XY and S: XY as the following

L x = ( x 1 , x 2 , Δ x 1 ( r i ) , Δ x 2 ( r i ) , 0 , 0 ) ,
S x = φ q ( r ) x 2 w ( r ) , f ( r , x 1 , φ q ( r ) ( x 2 ) ) , A i , B i , a x 1 ( 0 ) - b φ q ( 0 ) ( x 2 ( 0 ) ) , c x 1 ( T ) + d x 2 ( T ) ,

where

Δ x j ( r i ) = x j ( r i + ) - x j ( r i - ) , j = 1 , 2 , i = 1 , , k ; A i = A i ( x 1 ( r i - ) , φ q ( r i ) ( x 2 ( r i - ) ) ) , B i = B i ( x 1 ( r i - ) , φ q ( r i ) ( x 2 ( r i - ) ) ) , i = 1 , , k .
(6)

Obviously, the problem (1)-(4) can be written as Lx = Sx, where L: XY is a linear operator, S: XY is a nonlinear operator, and X and Y are Banach spaces.

Since

I m L = { ( y 1 , y 2 , a i , b i , 0 , 0 ) y 1 , y 2 L 1 , a i , b i N , i = 1 , , k } ,

we have dimKerL = dim(Y/ImL) = 2N < +∞ is even and ImL is closed in Y, then L is a Fredholm operator of index zero. Define

P : X X , ( x 1 , x 2 ) ( x 1 ( 0 ) , x 2 ( 0 ) ) , Q : Y Y , ( y 1 , y 2 , a i , b i , h 1 , h 2 ) ( 0 , 0 , 0 , 0 , h 1 , h 2 ) , y 1 , y 2 L 1 , a i , b i , h 1 , h 2 N , i = 1 , , k ,

at the same time the projectors P: XX and Q: YY satisfy

d i m ( I m P ) = d i m ( K e r L ) = d i m ( Y I m L ) = d i m ( I m Q ) .

Since ImQ is isomorphic to KerL, there exists an isomorphism Λ: KerLImQ. It is easy to see that L |D(L)∩KerP: D(L) ∩ KerPImL is invertible. We denote the inverse of that mapping by K p , then K p : ImLD(L) ∩ KerP as

K p z = 0 t y 1 ( r ) d r + r i < t a i , 0 t y 2 ( r ) d r + r i < t b i , z = ( y 1 , y 2 , a i , b i , 0 , 0 ) I m L ,

then

K p ( I Q ) S x = ( 0 t φ q ( r ) ( ( w ( r ) ) 1 x 2 ) d r + r i < t A i ( x 1 ( r i ) , φ q ( r i ) ( x 2 ( r i ) ) ) , 0 t f ( r , x 1 , φ q ( r ) ( x 2 ) ) d r + r i < t B i ( x 1 ( r i ) , φ q ( r i ) ( x 2 ( r i ) ) ) ) .

Proposition 2.5 (i) K p (·) is continuous;

  1. (ii)

    K p (I - Q)S is continuous and compact.

Proof. (i) It is easy to see that K p (·) is continuous. Moreover, the operator Ψ ( y ) = 0 t y ( r ) d r sends equi-integrable set of L1 to relatively compact set of PC.

  1. (ii)

    It is easy to see that K p (I - Q)Sx X, x X. Since ( w ( r ) ) - 1 p ( r ) - 1 L 1 and f is Caratheodory, it is easy to check that S is a continuous operator from X to Y, and the operators (x 1, x 2) → φ q(r)((w(r))-1 x 2) and (x 1, x 2) → f (r, x 1, φ q(r)((w(r))-1 x 2)) both send bounded sets of X to equi-integrable set of L 1. Obviously, A i , B i and QS are compact continuous. Since f is Caratheodory, by using the Ascoli-Arzela theorem, we can show that the operator K p ( I - Q ) S: Ω ¯ X is continuous and compact. This completes the proof.

Denote

S ( x , λ ) = λ φ q ( r ) x 2 w ( r ) , λ p ( r ) f ( r , x 1 , φ q ( r ) ( x 2 ) ) , λ 2 A i , λ p ( r i ) B i , a x 1 ( 0 ) - b φ q ( 0 ) ( x 2 ( 0 ) ) , c x 1 ( T ) + d x 2 ( T ) ,

where A i , B i are defined in (6), i = 1,..., k.

Consider

L x = S ( x , λ ) .

Define M ( , ) : Ω ¯ × [ 0 , 1 ] X as M(·, ·) = (L + ΛP)-1 (S(·, ·) + ΛP), then

M ( , λ ) = ( L + Λ P ) - 1 ( S ( , λ ) + Λ P ) = ( K p + Λ - 1 ) ( ( I - Q ) S ( , λ ) + Q S ( , λ ) + Λ P ) = K p ( I - Q ) S ( , λ ) + Λ - 1 ( Q S ( , λ ) + Λ P ) = K p ( I - Q ) S ( , λ ) + Λ - 1 Q S ( , λ ) + P .

Since (I - Q)S(·, 0) = 0 and K p (0) = 0, we have

d ( L - S ( , 0 ) , Ω ) = d L S ( I X - M ( , 0 ) , Ω , 0 ) = d L S ( I X - Λ - 1 Q S ( , 0 ) - P , Ω , 0 ) .

It is easy to see that all the solutions of Lx = S(x, 0) belong to KerL, then

d L S ( I X - Λ - 1 Q S ( , 0 ) - P , Ω , 0 ) = d B ( I K e r L - Λ - 1 Q S ( , 0 ) - P K e r L , Ω K e r L , 0 ) .

Notice that P | KerL = I KerL , then

d ( L - S ( , 0 ) , Ω ) = d L S ( I X - M ( , 0 ) , Ω , 0 ) = d B ( Λ - 1 Q S ( , 0 ) , Ω K e r L , 0 ) .

Proposition 2.6 (continuation theorem) (see [40]). Suppose that L is a Fredholm operator of index zero and S is L-compact on Ω ¯ , where Ω is an open bounded subset of X. If the following conditions are satisfied,

  1. (i)

    for each λ (0, 1), every solution x of

    L x = S ( x , λ )

is such that x ∂Ω;

  1. (ii)

    QS(x, 0) ≠ 0 for x ∂Ω ∩ KerL and d B -1 QS(·,0), Ω ∩ KerL, 0) ≠ 0, then the operator equation Lx = S(x, 1) has one solution lying in Ω ¯ .

The importance of the above result is that it gives sufficient conditions for being able to calculate the coincidence degree as the Brouwer degree (denoted with d B ) of a related finite dimensional mapping. It is known that the degree of finite dimensional mappings is easier to calculate. The idea of the proof is the use of the homotopy of the problem Lx = S(x, 1) with the finite dimensional one Lx = S(x, 0).

Let us now consider the following simple impulsive problem

( w ( r ) φ p ( r ) ( u ( r ) ) ) = g ( r ) , r J , lim r r i + u ( r ) - lim r r i - u ( r ) = a i , i = 1 , , k , lim r r i + w ( r ) φ p ( r ) ( u ( r ) ) - lim r r i - w ( r ) φ p ( r ) ( u ( r ) ) = b i , i = 1 , , k , a u ( 0 ) - b lim r 0 + ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) = 0 , and c u ( T ) + d lim r T - w ( r ) u p ( r ) - 2 u ( r ) = 0 ,
(7)

where J' = [0, T]\{r0, r1, ..., rk+1}, a i , b i N ; g L1.

If u is a solution of (7), then we have

w ( r ) φ p ( r ) ( u ( r ) ) = w ( 0 ) φ p ( 0 ) ( u ( 0 ) ) + r i < r b i + 0 r g ( t ) d t , r J .
(8)

Denote ρ0 = w(0)φp(0)(u'(0)). Obviously, ρ0 is dependent on g, a i , b i . Define F: L1PC as

F ( g ) ( r ) = 0 r g ( t ) d t , r J , g L 1 .

By (8), we have

u ( r ) = u ( 0 ) + r i < r a i + F φ q ( r ) ( w ( r ) ) - 1 ρ 0 + r i < r b i + F ( g ) ( r ) ( r ) , r J .
(9)

If a ≠ 0, then the boundary condition a u ( 0 ) - b lim r 0 + ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) = 0 implies that

u ( r ) = b a φ q ( 0 ) ( ρ 0 ) + r i < r a i + F φ q ( r ) ( w ( r ) ) - 1 ρ 0 + r i < r b i + F ( g ) ( r ) ( r ) , r J .

The boundary condition cu ( T ) +d lim r T - w ( r ) u p ( r ) - 2 u ( r ) =0 implies that

c b a φ q ( 0 ) ( ρ 0 ) + c i = 1 k a i + c F φ q ( r ) ( w ( r ) ) - 1 ρ 0 + r i < r b i + F ( g ) ( r ) ( T ) + d ρ 0 + i = 1 k b i + F ( g ) ( T ) = 0 .

Denote H = L1 × 2kNwith the norm

h H = g L 1 + i = 1 k a i + i = 1 k b i , h = ( g , a i , b i ) H ,

then H is a Banach space. For fixed h H, we denote

Θ h ( ρ ) = c b a φ q ( 0 ) ( ρ ) + c i = 1 k a i + c F φ q ( r ) ( w ( r ) ) - 1 ρ + r i < r b i + F ( g ) ( r ) ( T ) + d ρ + i = 1 k b i + F ( g ) ( T ) .

Lemma 2.7 The mapping Θ h (·) has the following properties

  1. (i)

    For any fixed h H, the equation

    Θ h ( ρ ) = 0
    (10)

has a unique solution ρ(h) N .

  1. (ii)

    The mapping ρ: H N , defined in (i), is continuous and sends bounded sets to bounded sets. Moreover, ρ ( h ) 3N [ ( 2 N E + 1 E i = 1 k a i ) p # - 1 + i = 1 k b i + g L 1 ] , where h = (g, a i , b i ) H, E= 0 T ( w ( r ) ) - 1 p ( r ) - 1 dr, the notation p# means C p # - 1 = C p + - 1 , C > 1 C p - - 1 , C 1 .

Proof. (i) From Proposition 2.4, it is immediate that

Θ h ( ρ 1 ) - Θ h ( ρ 2 ) , ρ 1 - ρ 2 > 0 , f o r ρ 1 ρ 2 ,

and hence, if (10) has a solution, then it is unique.

Let R 0 =3N [ ( 2 N E + 1 E i = 1 k a i ) p # - 1 + i = 1 k b i + g L 1 ] . Since ( w ( r ) ) - 1 p ( r ) - 1 L 1 ( 0 , T ) and F(g) PC, if |ρ| > R0, it is easy to see that there exists a j0 such that, the j0-th component ρ j 0 of ρ satisfies

ρ j 0 1 N ρ .
(11)

Obviously,

| r i < r b i + F ( g ) ( r ) | r i < r b i + | F ( g ) ( r ) | i = 1 k | b i | + g L 1 , r 0, T ] ,

then

r i < r b i + F ( g ) ( r ) i = 1 k b i + g L 1 R 0 3 N < ρ 3 N , r [ 0 , T ] ,
(12)

and

ρ + r i < r b i + F ( g ) ( r ) ρ + r i < r b i + F ( g ) ( r ) < 4 ρ 3 , r [ 0 , T ] .
(13)

By (11) and (12), the j0-th component of ρ+ r i < r b i +F ( g ) ( r ) keeps the same sign of ρ j 0 on J and

ρ j 0 + r i < r b i j 0 + F ( g ) j 0 ( r ) ρ j 0 - r i < r b i j 0 + F ( g ) j 0 ( r ) > 2 ρ 3 N , r J .
(14)

Combining (13) and (14), the j0-th component φ q ( r ) j 0 ( w ( r ) ) - 1 ρ + r i < r b i + F ( g ) ( r ) of φ q ( r ) ( w ( r ) ) - 1 ρ + r i < r b i + F ( g ) ( r ) satisfies

φ q ( r ) j 0 ( ρ + r i < r b i + F ( g ) ( r ) ) = ρ + r i < r b i + F ( g ) ( r ) q ( r ) - 2 ρ j 0 + r i < r b i j 0 + F ( g ) j 0 ( r ) > 2 3 N ρ + r i < r b i + F ( g ) ( r ) q ( r ) - 2 ρ > 1 2 N ρ + r i < r b i + F ( g ) ( r ) q ( r ) - 1 .

From the definition φ q ( r ) ( ) = φ p ( r ) - 1 ( ) , we have 1 p ( r ) + 1 q ( r ) 1, then q ( r ) -1= 1 p ( r ) - 1 , and

φ q ( r ) j 0 ρ + r i < r b i + F ( g ) ( r ) > 1 2 N ρ + r i < r b i + F ( g ) ( r ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 1 2 N ρ - r i < r b i + F ( g ) ( r ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 1 2 N 2 N E + 1 E i = 1 k a i p # - 1 1 p ( r ) - 1 1 2 N 2 N E + 1 E i = 1 k a i = E + 1 E i = 1 k a i .

Without loss of generality, we may assume that ρ j 0 >0, then we have

F j 0 φ q ( r ) ( w ( r ) ) - 1 ρ + r i < r b i + F ( g ) ( r ) ( T ) > ( E + 1 ) i = 1 k a i i = 1 k a i j 0 .

Therefore, the j0-th component of i = 1 k a i +F { φ q ( r ) [ ( w ( r ) ) - 1 ( ρ + r i < r b i + F ( g ) ( r ) ) ] } ( T ) keeps the same sign of ρ j 0 . Since the j0-th component of ρ+ i = 1 k b i +F ( g ) ( T ) keeps the same sign of ρ j 0 , a, b, c, d [0, +∞) and ad + bc > 0, we can easily see that the j0-th component of Θ h (ρ) keeps the same sign of ρ j 0 , and thus

Θ h ( ρ ) 0 .

Let us consider the equation

λ Θ h ( ρ ) + ( 1 - λ ) ρ = 0 , λ [ 0 , 1 ] .
(15)

According to the above discussion, all the solutions of (15) belong to b(R0 + 1) = {x N | |x| < R0 + 1}. So, we have

d B [ Θ h ( ρ ) , b ( R 0 + 1 ) , 0 ] = d B [ I , b ( R 0 + 1 ) , 0 ] 0 .

It means the existence of solutions of Θ h (ρ) = 0.

In this way, we define a mapping ρ(h): H N , which satisfies

Θ h ( ρ ( h ) ) = 0 .
  1. (ii)

    By the proof of (i), we also obtain ρ sends bounded set to bounded set, and

    ρ ( h ) 3 N 2 N E + 1 E i = 1 k a i p # - 1 + i = 1 k b i + g L 1 .

It only remains to prove the continuity of ρ. Let {u n } is a convergent sequence in H and u n u, as n → +∞. Since {ρ(u n )} is a bounded sequence, it contains a convergent subsequence { ρ ( u n j ) } satisfies ρ ( u n j ) ρ * as j → +∞. Since Θ h (ρ) consists of continuous functions, and

Θ u n j ( ρ ( u n j ) ) = 0 ,

Letting j → +∞, we have

Θ u ( ρ * ) =0 ,

from (i) we get ρ* = ρ(u), it means that ρ is continuous.

This completes the proof.

If a = 0, the boundary condition au ( 0 ) -b lim r 0 + ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) =0 implies that

lim r 0 + ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) = 0 .

Since ad + bc > 0, we have c > 0. Thus,

u ( r ) = u ( 0 ) + r i < r a i + F φ q ( r ) ( w ( r ) ) - 1 r i < r b i + F ( g ) ( r ) ( r ) , r J ,

the boundary condition cu ( T ) +d lim r T - w ( r ) u p ( r ) - 2 u ( r ) =0 implies that

u ( 0 ) + i = 1 k a i + F φ q ( r ) ( w ( r ) ) - 1 r i < r b i + F ( g ) ( r ) ( T ) + d c i = 1 k b i + F ( g ) ( T ) = 0 .

Denote G: H N as

G ( h ) = - i = 1 k a i - F φ q ( r ) ( w ( r ) ) - 1 r i < r b i + F ( g ) ( r ) ( T ) - d c i = 1 k b i + F ( g ) ( T ) .

It is easy to see that

Lemma 2.8 The function G(·) is continuous and sends bounded sets to bounded sets. Moreover, G ( h ) 3 N ( c + d ) c [ i = 1 k a i + E ( i = 1 k b i + g L 1 ) 1 p * - 1 + i = 1 k b i + g L 1 ] , where E= 0 T ( w ( r ) ) - 1 p ( r ) - 1 dr, the notation p* means C 1 p * - 1 = C 1 p + - 1 , C 1 C 1 p - - 1 , C > 1 .

3 Main results and proofs

In this section, we will apply coincidence degree to deal with the existence of solutions for (1)-(4). In the following, we always use C and C i to denote positive constants, if it cannot lead to confusion.

Theorem 3.1 Assume that Ω is an open bounded set in X such that the following conditions hold.

(10) For each λ (0, 1) the problem

Lx=S ( x , λ )
(16)

has no solution on ∂Ω.

(20) (0, 0) Ω.

Then, problem (1)-(4) has a solution u satisfies ( u , v ) Ω ¯ , where v = w(r)φp(r)(u'(r)), r J'.

Proof. Let us consider the following operator equation

L x = S ( x , λ ) .
(17)

It is easy to see that x = (x1, x2) is a solution of Lx = S(x, 1) if and only if x1(r) is a solution of (1)-(4) and x 2 ( r ) =w ( r ) φ p ( r ) ( x 1 ( r ) ) , r J'.

According to Proposition 2.5, we can conclude that S(·, ·) is L-compact from X × [0, 1] to Y. We assume that for λ = 1, (16) does not have a solution on ∂Ω, otherwise we complete the proof. Now from hypothesis (10), it follows that (16) has no solutions for (x, λ) ∂Ω × (0, 1]. For λ = 0, (17) is equivalent to Lx = S(x, 0), namely the following usual problem

x 1 = 0 , r ( 0 , T ) , x 2 = 0 , r ( 0 , T ) , a x 1 ( 0 ) - b φ q ( 0 ) ( x 2 ( 0 ) ) = 0 , c x 1 ( T ) + d x 2 ( T ) = 0 .

The problem (??) is a usual differential equation. Hence,

x 1 c 1 , x 2 c 2 ,

where c1, c2 N are constants. The boundary value condition of (??) holds,

a c 1 - b φ q ( 0 ) ( c 2 ) = 0 , c c 1 + d c 2 = 0 .

Since (ad + bc) > 0, we have

c 1 = 0 , c 2 = 0 ,

which together with hypothesis (20), implies that (0, 0) Ω. Thus, we have proved that (16) has no solution on ∂Ω × [0, 1]. It means that the coincidence degree d[L - S(·, λ), Ω] is well defined for each λ [0, 1]. From the homotopy invariant property of that degree, we have

d [ L - S ( , 1 ) , Ω ] = d [ L - S ( , 0 ) , Ω ] .
(18)

Now, it is clear that the following problem

L x = S ( x , 1 )
(19)

is equivalent to problem (1)-(4), and (18) tells us that problem (19) will have a solution if we can show that

d [ L - S ( , 0 ) , Ω ] 0.

Since by hypothesis (20), this last degree

d [ L - S ( , 0 ) , Ω ] = d B [ ω * , Ω 2 N , 0 ] 0 ,

where ω*(c1, c2) = (ac1 - q(0)(c2), cc1 + dc2). This completes the proof.

Our next theorem is a consequence of Theorem 3.1. Denote

z - = min r J z ( r ) , z + = max r J z ( r ) , for z C ( J , ) .

Theorem 3.2 Assume that the following conditions hold

(10) a > 0;

(20) lim|u| + |v| → +∞(f(r, u, v)/(|u| + |v|)β(r) -1) = 0, for r J uniformly, where β(r) C(J, ), and 1<β -β+ < p-;

(30) i = 1 k A i ( u , v ) C 1 ( u + v ) θ when |u| + |v| is large enough, where 0<θ< p - - 1 p + - 1 ;

(40) i = 1 k B i ( u , v ) C 2 ( u + v ) ε when |u| + |v| is large enough, where 0 ≤ ε < β+ - 1.

Then, problem (1)-(4) has at least one solution.

Proof. Now, we consider the following operator equation

L x = S ( x , λ ) .
(20)

For any λ (0, 1], x = (x1, x2) = (u, v) is a solution of (20) if and only if v ( r ) = 1 λ p ( r ) - 1 w ( r ) φ p ( r ) ( u ( r ) ) ( r J ) and u(r) is a solution of the following

1 λ p ( r ) - 1 w ( r ) φ p ( r ) ( u ( r ) ) ) = λ p ( r ) f ( r , u , 1 λ ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ) r ( 0 , T ) , r r i , lim r r i + u ( r ) - lim r r i - u ( r ) = λ 2 A i ( lim r r i - u ( r ) , 1 λ lim r r i - ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) ) , i = 1 , , k , lim r r i + 1 λ p ( r ) - 1 w ( r ) φ p ( r ) ( u ( r ) ) - lim r r i - 1 λ p ( r ) - 1 w ( r ) φ p ( r ) ( u ( r ) ) = λ p ( r i ) B i ( lim r r i - u ( r ) , 1 λ lim r r i - ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) ) , i = 1 , , k , a u ( 0 ) - b 1 λ ( w ( 0 ) ) 1 p ( 0 ) - 1 u ( 0 ) = 0 , and c u ( T ) + d 1 λ p ( T ) - 1 w ( T ) u p ( T ) - 2 u ( T ) = 0 .
(21)

We claim that all the solutions of (21) are uniformly bounded for λ (0, 1]. In fact, if it is false, we can find a sequence (u n , λ n ) of solutions for (21), such that ||u n ||1 > 1 and ||u n ||1 → +∞ when n → +∞, λ n (0, 1]. Since (u n , λ n ) are solutions of (21), we have

w ( r ) u n p ( r ) - 2 u n ( r ) = λ n p ( r ) - 1 1 λ n p ( 0 ) - 1 ρ n + r i < r λ n p ( r i ) B i + 0 r λ n p ( t ) f t , u n , 1 λ n ( w ( t ) ) 1 p ( t ) - 1 u n d t ,

for any r J', where ρ n =w ( 0 ) φ p ( 0 ) ( u n ( 0 ) ) and

A i = A i lim r r i - u n ( r ) , 1 λ n lim r r i - ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u n ( r ) , B i = B i lim r r i - u n ( r ) , 1 λ n lim r r i - ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u n ( r ) .

By computation, we have

r i < r λ n 2 A i C 1 λ n 2 u n 0 + 1 λ n ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u n 0 θ λ n C 3 u n 1 θ , r i < r λ n p ( r i ) B i C 2 λ n p ( r i ) u n 0 + 1 λ n ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u n 0 β + - 1 C 4 u n 1 β + - 1 , 0 T λ n p ( r ) f r , u n , 1 λ n ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u n d r C 5 λ n p - u n 0 + 1 λ n ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u n 0 β + - 1 C 5 u n 1 β + - 1 .
(22)

Denote

Γ n ( r ) = 1 λ n p ( 0 ) - 1 ρ n + r i < r λ n p ( r i ) B i + 0 r λ n p ( t ) f t , u n , 1 λ n ( w ( t ) ) 1 p ( t ) - 1 u n d t , r J .

We claim that

1 λ n p ( 0 ) - 1 ρ n 3 N C 6 u n 1 θ * ( p + - 1 ) + u n 1 β + - 1 , n = 1 , 2 , , where  θ * θ , p - - 1 p + - 1 .
(23)

If it is false, without loss of generality, we may assume that

1 λ n p ( 0 ) - 1 ρ n > 3 N ( C 4 + C 5 ) u n 1 θ * ( p + - 1 ) + u n 1 β + - 1 , n = 1 , 2 , ,

then for any n = 1, 2, ..., there is a j n {1, ..., N} such that the j n -th component ρ n j n of ρ n satisfies

1 λ n p ( 0 ) - 1 ρ n j n > 3 ( C 4 + C 5 ) u n 1 θ * ( p + - 1 ) + u n 1 β + - 1 , n = 1 , 2 ,

Thus, when n is large enough, the j n -th component Γ n j n ( r ) of Γ n (r) keeps the same sign as ρ n j n and satisfies

Γ n j n ( r ) > ( C 4 + C 5 ) u n 1 θ * ( p + - 1 ) + u n 1 β + - 1 , r J , n = 1 , 2 ,

When n is large enough, we can conclude that the j n -th component F j n { φ q ( r ) [ Γ n ( r ) ] } ( T ) of F{φq(r) n (r)]} (T) keeps the same sign as ρ n j n and satisfies

F j n { φ q ( r ) [ Γ n ( r ) ] } > C 7 u n 1 θ * , r J .
(24)

Since

u n ( r ) = u n ( 0 ) + r i < r λ n 2 A i + λ n F { φ q ( r ) ( w ( r ) ) - 1 Γ n ( r ) } = b a φ q ( 0 ) 1 λ n p ( 0 ) - 1 ρ n + r i < r λ n 2 A i + λ n F { φ q ( r ) [ ( w ( r ) ) - 1 Γ n ( r ) ] } , r J , n = 1 , 2 , ,

from (22) and (24), we can see that u n j n ( r ) ( r J ) keeps the same sign as ρ n j n , when n is large enough.

But the boundary value conditions (4) mean that

c u n ( T ) + d 1 λ n p ( T ) - 1 lim r T - w ( r ) u n p ( r ) - 2 u n ( r ) = c u n ( T ) + d Γ n ( T ) = 0 , n = 1 , 2 ,

It is a contradiction. Thus (23) is valid. Therefore,

w ( r ) u n ( r ) p ( r ) - 1 C 7 u n 1 θ * ( p + - 1 ) + u n 1 β + - 1 , r J .

It means that

( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u n 0 o ( 1 ) u n 1 ,  where  o ( 1 )  tends to  0  uniformly as  n .
(25)

From (22), (23) and (25), for any r J, we have

u n ( r ) = u n ( 0 ) + 0 r u n ( t ) d t + r i < r λ n 2 A i u n ( 0 ) + 0 r u n ( t ) d t + r i < r λ n 2 A i u n ( 0 ) + 0 r ( w ( t ) ) - 1 p ( t ) - 1 ( w ( t ) ) 1 p ( t ) - 1 u n ( t ) d t + C 3 u n 1 θ b a 1 λ n ( w ( 0 ) ) 1 p ( 0 ) - 1 u n ( 0 ) + E ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u n ( r ) 0 + C 3 u n 1 θ o ( 1 ) u n 1 , where  o ( 1 )  tends to  0  uniformly as  n ,

then

u n 0 o ( 1 ) u n 1 , where  o ( 1 )  tends to  0  uniformly as  n .
(26)

From (25) and (26), we get that all the solutions of (20) are uniformly bounded for any λ (0, 1].

When λ = 0, if (x1, x2) is a solution of (20), then (x1, x2) is a solution of the following usual equation

x 1 = 0 , r ( 0 , T ) , x 2 = 0 , r ( 0 , T ) , a x 1 ( 0 ) - b φ q ( 0 ) ( x 2 ( 0 ) ) = 0 , c x 1 ( T ) + d x 2 ( T ) = 0 ,

we have

( x 1 , x 2 ) = ( 0 , 0 ) .

Thus, there exists a large enough R0 > 0 such that all the solutions of (20) belong to B(R0) = {x X | || x || X < R0}. Thus, (20) has no solution on ∂B (R0). From theorem 3.1, we obtain that (1)-(4) has at least one solution. This completes the proof.

Theorem 3.3 Assume that the following conditions hold

(10) a = 0;

(20) lim|u| + |v| → +∞f(r, u, v)/(|u| + |v|)ε = 0 for r J uniformly, where 0 ≤ ε min(1, p- - 1);

(30) i = 1 k A i ( u , v ) C 1 ( u + v ) θ when |u| + |v| is large enough, where 0 < θ < 1;

(40) i = 1 k B i ( u , v ) C 2 ( u + v ) ε when |u| + |v| is large enough, where 0 ≤ ε < min(1, p- - 1).

Then, problem (1)-(4) has at least one solution.

Proof Now, we consider the following operator equation

L x = S ( x , λ ) .
(27)

If (x1, x2) is a solution of (27) when λ = 0, then (x1, x2) is a solution of the following usual equation

x 1 = 0 , r ( 0 , T ) , x 2 = 0 , r ( 0 , T ) , a x 1 ( 0 ) - b φ q ( 0 ) ( x 2 ( 0 ) ) = 0 , c x 1 ( T ) + d x 2 ( T ) = 0 .

Then, we have

( x 1 , x 2 ) = ( 0 , 0 ) .

For any λ (0, 1], x = (x1, x2) = (u, v) is a solution of (27) if and only if v ( r ) = 1 λ p ( r ) - 1 w ( r ) φ p ( r ) ( u ( r ) ) ( r J ) and u(r) is a solution of the following

( 1 λ p ( r ) - 1 w ( r ) φ p ( r ) ( u ( r ) ) ) = λ p ( r ) f ( r , u , 1 λ ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ) , r ( 0 , T ) , r r i , lim r r i + u ( r ) - lim r r i - u ( r ) = λ 2 A i ( lim r r i - u ( r ) , 1 λ lim r r i - ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) ) , i = 1 , , k , lim r r i + 1 λ p ( r ) - 1 w ( r ) φ p ( r ) ( u ( r ) ) - lim r r i - 1 λ p ( r ) - 1 w ( r ) φ p ( r ) ( u ( r ) ) = λ p ( r i ) B i ( lim r r i - u ( r ) , 1 λ lim r r i - ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) ) , i = 1 , , k , lim r 0 + ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) = 0 , and  c u ( T ) + d 1 λ p ( T ) - 1 lim r T - w ( r ) u p ( r ) - 2 u ( r ) = 0 .
(28)

We only need to prove that all the solutions of (28) are uniformly bounded for λ (0, 1].

In fact, if it is false, we can find a sequence (u n , λ n ) of solutions for (28), such that ||u n ||1 > 1 and ||u n ||1 → +∞ when n → +∞. Since (u n , λ n ) are solutions of (28), we have

w ( r ) u n p ( r ) - 2 u n ( r ) = λ n p ( r ) - 1 r i < r λ n p ( r i ) B i + 0 r λ n p ( t ) f t , u n , 1 λ n ( w ( t ) ) 1 p ( t ) - 1 u n d t , r J ,

where B i = B i ( lim r r i - u n ( r ) , 1 λ n lim r r i - ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u n ( r ) ) .

From conditions (20) and (40), we have

r i < r λ n p ( r i ) B i C 2 λ n p - u n 0 + 1 λ n ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u n 0 ε C 4 u n 1 ε , 0 T λ n p ( r ) f ( r , u n ( r ) , 1 λ n ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u n ( r ) ) d r C 5 λ n p - u n 0 + 1 λ n ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u n 0 ε C 5 u n 1 ε .

Thus,

w ( r ) u n ( r ) p ( r ) - 1 C 6 u n 1 ε , r J , n = 1 , 2 , , ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u n 0 o ( 1 ) u n 1 , n = 1 , 2 ,
(29)

Denote

ϒ n ( r ) = r i < r λ n p ( r i ) B i + F λ n p ( r ) f ( r , u n ( r ) , 1 λ n ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u n ( r ) ) ( r ) , r J , n = 1 , 2 ,

By solving u n (r), we have

u n ( r ) = u n ( 0 ) + r i < r λ n 2 A i + λ n F φ q ( r ) ( w ( r ) ) - 1 ϒ n ( r ) , r J , x
(30)

where A i = A i ( lim r r i - u n ( r ) , 1 λ n lim r r i - ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u n ( r ) ) .

From condition (30), we have

r i < r λ n 2 A i C 1 λ n 2 u n 0 + 1 λ n ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u n 0 θ λ n C 3 u n 1 θ .

The boundary value condition implies

u n ( 0 ) + i = 1 k λ n 2 A i + λ n F φ q ( r ) ( w ( r ) ) - 1 ϒ n ( r ) ( T ) = - d c ϒ n ( T ) .
(31)

From (31) and conditions (20), (30) and (40), we have

u n ( 0 ) o ( 1 ) u n 1 ,  where  o ( 1 )  tends to  0  uniformly as  n .
(32)

From (30) and (32), we have

u n 0 o ( 1 ) u n 1 , n = 1 , 2 ,
(33)

From (29) and (33), we can conclude that {||u n ||1} is uniformly bounded for λ (0, 1]. This completes the proof.

Now, let us consider the following mixed type boundary value condition

a u ( 0 ) - b lim r 0 + ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) = 0 ,  and  c u ( T ) + d lim r T - ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) = 0 .
(34)

Theorem 3.4 Assume that the following conditions hold

(10) lim u + v + ( f ( r , u , v ) ( u + v ) β ( r ) - 1 ) =0, for r J uniformly, where β(r) C(J, ), and 1 < β-β +< p-;

(20) i = 1 k A i ( u , v ) C 1 ( u + v ) θ when |u| + |v| is large enough, where 0<θ< p - - 1 p + - 1 ;

(30) i = 1 k B i ( u , v ) C 2 ( u + v ) ε when |u| + |v| is large enough, where 0 ≤ ε < β+ - 1.

Then, problem (1) with (2), (3) and (34) has at least one solution.

Proof. It is similar to the proof of Theorem 3.2 and Theorem 3.3, we omit it.

Denote

f δ ( r , u , v ) = f ( r , u , v ) + δ f * ( r , u , v ) ,

where f* (r, u, v) is Caratheodory.

Let us consider

- ( w ( r ) u p ( r ) - 2 u ( r ) ) + f δ ( r , u ( r ) , ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) ) = 0 , r J .
(35)

Theorem 3.5 Under the conditions of Theorem 3.2, Theorem 3.3 or Theorem 3.4, then (35) with (2), (3) and (4) or (34) has at least a solution when δ is small enough.

Proof We only need to prove the existence of solutions under the conditions of Theorem 3.2, the rest is similar. If δ = 0, the proof of Theorem 3.2 means that all the solutions of (35) with (2), (3) and (4) are bounded and belong to U(R0) = {u PC1| ||u||1 < R0}. Define S δ : XY as

S δ x = φ q ( r ) x 2 w ( r ) , f δ ( r , x 1 , φ q ( r ) ( x 2 ) ) , A i , B i , a x 1 ( 0 ) - b φ q ( 0 ) ( x 2 ( 0 ) ) , c x 1 ( T ) + d x 2 ( T ) ,

where A i = A i ( x 1 ( r i - ) , φ q ( r i ) ( x 2 ( r i - ) ) ) , B i = B i ( x 1 ( r i - ) , φ q ( r i ) ( x 2 ( r i - ) ) ) .

Since f* (r, u, v) is a Caratheodory function, we have ||S δ x - S0x|| Y → 0 as δ → 0, for x U ( R 0 ) ¯ uniformly. According to Proposition 2.3, we get the existence of solutions.

In the following, we will consider the existence of nonnegative solutions. For any x = (x1, ..., xN ) N , the notation x ≥ 0 means xi ≥ 0 for any i = 1, ..., N.

Theorem 3.6 We assume

  1. (i)

    f(r, u, v) ≤ 0, (r, u, v) J × N × N ;

  2. (ii)

    for any i = 1, ..., k, B i (u, v) ≤ 0,(u, v) N × N ;

  3. (iii)

    for any i = 1, ..., k, j = 1, ..., N, A i j ( u , v ) v j 0(u, v) N × N .

Then, the solution u in Theorem 3.2, Theorem 3.3 or Theorem 3.4 is nonnegative.

Proof We only need to prove that the solution u in Theorem 3.2 is nonnegative, and the rest is similar. Denote

N f ( u ) = f ( r , u ( r ) , ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) ) , D = c b a φ q ( 0 ) ( ρ ) + c i = 1 k A i + c F φ q ( r ) ( w ( r ) ) - 1 ρ + r i < r B i + F ( N f ( u ) ) ( r ) ( T ) + d ρ + i = 1 k B i + F ( N f ( u ) ) ( T ) ,

where

A i = A i ( lim r r i - u ( r ) , lim r r i - ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) ) , i = 1 , , k , B i = B i ( lim r r i - u ( r ) , lim r r i - ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) ) , i = 1 , , k .

Similar to (8) and (9), we have

w ( r ) φ p ( r ) ( u ( r ) ) = ρ + r i < r B i + F ( N f ( u ) ) ( r ) , r J , u ( r ) = u ( 0 ) + r i < r A i + F φ q ( r ) ( w ( r ) ) - 1 ρ + r i < r B i + F ( N f ( u ) ) ( r ) ( r ) , r J ,
(36)

where

u ( 0 ) = b a φ q ( 0 ) ( ρ ) ,

and ρ is the solution (unique) of

D = 0 .
(37)

Denote

Φ ( r ) = w ( r ) φ p ( r ) ( u ( r ) ) , r J .

From (i), (ii) and (36), we can see that Φ(r) is decreasing, namely

Φ ( t 2 ) - Φ ( t 1 ) 0 , t 2 , t 1 J , t 2 > t 1 .
(38)

We claim that

ρ 0 .
(39)

If it is false, then there exists some j0 {1, ..., N}, such that the j0-th component ρ j 0 of ρ satisfies

ρ j 0 < 0 .
(40)

Combining (i), (ii), (iii) and (40), we can see that the j0-th component D j 0 of D is negative. It is a contradiction to (37). Thus, (39) is valid. So, we have

u ( 0 ) = b a φ q ( 0 ) ( ρ ) 0 .

We claim that

Φ ( T ) 0 .
(41)

If it is false. Then, there exists some j1 {1,..., N}, such that the j1-th component Φ j 1 ( T ) of Φ(T) satisfies

Φ j 1 ( T ) > 0 .
(42)

From (38) and (42), we have

Φ j 1 ( t ) > 0 , t J .

Combining (i), (ii), (iii) and (42), we can see that the j1-th component D j 1 of D is positive. It is a contradiction to (37). Thus, (41) is valid.

If c > 0. We have

u ( T ) = - d c Φ ( T ) 0 .

Since Φ(r) is decreasing, Φ(0) = ρ ≥ 0 and Φ(T) ≤ 0, for any j = 1, ..., N, there exists ξ j J such that

Φ j ( r ) 0 , r ( 0 , ξ j ) and Φ j ( r ) 0 , r ( ξ j , T ) .

Combining condition (iii), we can conclude that uj (r) is increasing on [0, ξ j ], and uj (r) is decreasing on (ξ j , T]. Notice that u(0) ≥ 0 and u(T) ≥ 0, then we have u(r) ≥ 0,r [0, T].

If c = 0, boundary condition (4) means that Φ(T) = 0. Since Φ(r) is decreasing, we get that Φ(r) ≥ 0. Combining condition (iii), we can conclude that u(r) is increasing on J, namely u(t2) - u(t1) ≥ 0,t2, t1 J, t2 > t1. Notice that u(0) ≥ 0, then we have u(r) ≥ 0,t J. This completes the proof.

Corollary 3.7 We assume

  1. (i)

    f(r, u, v) ≤ 0,(r, u, v) J × N × N with u ≥ 0;

  2. (ii)

    for any i = 1, ..., k, B i (u, v) ≤ 0,(u, v) N × N with u ≥ 0;

  3. (iii)

    for any i = 1, ..., k, j = 1, ..., N, A i j ( u , v ) v j 0,(u, v) N × N with u ≥ 0.

Then, we have

(10) Under the conditions of Theorem 3.2 or Theorem 3.3, (1)-(4) has a nonnegative solution.

(20) Under the conditions of Theorem 3.4, (1) with (2), (3) and (34) has a nonnegative solution.

Proof We only need to prove that (1)-(4) has a nonnegative solution under the conditions of Theorem 3.2, and the rest is similar. Define

ϕ ( u ) = ( ϕ * ( u 1 ) , , ϕ * ( u N ) ) ,

where

ϕ * ( t ) = t , t 0 0 , t < 0 .

Denote

f ̃ ( r , u , v ) = f ( r , ϕ ( u ) , v ) , ( r , u , v ) J × N × N ,

then f ̃ ( r , u , v ) satisfies Caratheodory condition, and f ̃ ( r , u , v ) 0 for any (r, u, v) J × N × N .

For any i = 1, ..., k, we denote

A ̃ i ( u , v ) = A i ( ϕ ( u ) , v ) , B ̃ i ( u , v ) = B i ( ϕ ( u ) , v ) , ( u , v ) N × N ,

then A ̃ i and B ̃ i are continuous and satisfy

B ̃ i ( u , v ) 0 , ( u , v ) N × N for any  i = 1 , , k , A ̃ i j ( u , v ) v j 0 , ( u , v ) N × N , for any  i = 1 , , k , j = 1 , , N .

Obviously, we have

(20)' lim u + v + ( f ̃ ( r , u , v ) ( u + v ) β ( r ) - 1 ) =0, for r J uniformly, where β(r) C(J, ), and1 < β-β +< p- ;

(30)' i = 1 k A ̃ i ( u , v ) C 1 ( u + v ) θ when |u| + |v| is large enough, where 0<θ< p - - 1 p + - 1 ;

(40)' i = 1 k B ̃ i ( u , v ) C 2 ( u + v ) ε when |u| + |v| is large enough, where 0 ≤ ε < β+ - 1.

Let us consider

( w ( r ) φ p ( r ) ( u ( r ) ) ) = f ̃ ( r , u ( r ) , ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) ) , r J , lim r r i + u ( r ) - lim r r i - u ( r i ) = A ̃ i ( lim r r i - u ( r ) , lim r r i - ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) ) , i = 1 , , k , lim r r i + w ( r ) φ p ( r ) ( u ( r ) ) - lim r r i - w ( r ) φ p ( r ) ( u ( r ) ) = B ̃ i ( lim r r i - u ( r ) , lim r r i - ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) ) , i = 1 , , k , a u ( 0 ) - b lim r 0 + ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) = 0 , and c u ( T ) + d lim r T - w ( r ) u p ( r ) - 2 u ( r ) = 0 .
(43)

From Theorem 3.2 and Theorem 3.6, we can see that (43) has a nonnegative solution u. Since u ≥ 0, we have ϕ(u) = u, and then

f ̃ ( r , u ( r ) , ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) ) = f ( r , u ( r ) , ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) ) , A ̃ i ( lim r r i - u ( r ) , lim r r i - ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) ) = A i ( lim r r i - u ( r ) , lim r r i - ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) ) , B ̃ i ( lim r r i - u ( r ) , lim r r i - ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) ) = B i ( lim r r i - u ( r ) , lim r r i - ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) ) .

Thus, u is a nonnegative solution of (1)-(4). This completes the proof.

4 Examples

Example 4.1. Consider the following problem

( P 1 ) ( w ( r ) φ p ( r ) ( u ( r ) ) ) = - g ( r ) - u q ( r ) - 2 u - σ w ( r ) u q ( r ) - 2 u - δ u e u + ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u , r J , lim r r i + u ( r ) - lim r r i - u ( r ) = σ lim r r i - u ( r ) - 1 2 u ( r ) + lim r r i - ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) - 1 2 ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) , lim r r i + w ( r ) u p ( r ) - 2 u ( r ) - lim r r i - w ( r ) u p ( r ) - 2 u ( r ) = σ lim r r i - ( w ( r ) ) 3 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) 2 u ( r ) - lim r r i - u ( r ) 2 u ( r ) , u ( 0 ) - lim r 0 + ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) = 0 , and u ( T ) + lim r T - w ( r ) u p ( r ) - 2 u ( r ) = 0 ,

where p(r) = 5 + cos 3r, q ( r ) =3+ 1 2 sin2r, 0 ≤ g(r) L1, e0, e1 N , w(r) = 3 + sin r, σ is a nonnegative parameter.

Obviously, g ( r ) +u q ( r ) - 2 u+σw ( r ) u q ( r ) - 2 u +δu e u + ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u is Caratheodory, q(r) ≤ 3.5 < 4 ≤ p (r) ≤ 6, then the conditions of Theorem 3.5 are satisfied, then (P1) has a solution when δ > 0 is small enough. Moreover, when σ = 0, the conditions of Corollary 3.7 are satisfied, then (P1) has a nonnegative solution.

Example 4.2. Consider the following problem

( P 2 ) ( w ( r ) φ p ( r ) ( u ( r ) ) ) = - g ( r ) - u q ( r ) - 2 u - σ w ( r ) u q ( r ) - 2 u - δ u e u + ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u , r J , lim r r i + u ( r ) - lim r r i - u ( r ) = σ lim r r i - u ( r ) - 1 2 u ( r ) + lim r r i - ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) - 1 2 ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) , lim r r i + w ( r ) u p ( r ) - 2 u ( r ) - lim r r i - w ( r ) u p ( r ) - 2 u ( r ) = σ lim r r i - ( w ( r ) ) 3 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) - 1 3 u ( r ) - lim r r i - u ( r ) - 1 3 u ( r ) , lim r 0 + ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u ( r ) = 0 , and u ( T ) + lim r T - w ( r ) u p ( r ) - 2 u ( r ) = 0 ,

where p(r) = 5 + cos 3r, q ( r ) = 3 2 + 1 4 sin2r, 0 ≤ g(r) L1, e0, e1 N , w(r) = 3+sin r, σ is a nonnegative parameter.

Obviously, g ( r ) +u q ( r ) - 2 u+σw ( r ) u q ( r ) - 2 u +δu e u + ( w ( r ) ) 1 p ( r ) - 1 u is Caratheodory, 1 < q(r) < 2 < 4 ≤ p (r) ≤ 6, then conditions of Theorem 3.5 are satisfied, then (P2) has a solution when δ > 0 is small enough. Moreover, when σ = 0, the conditions of Corollary 3.7 are satisfied, and (P2) has a nonnegative solution.

References

  1. Acerbi E, Mingione G: Regularity results for a class of functionals with nonstandard growth. Arch Ration Mech Anal 2001, 156: 121-140. 10.1007/s002050100117

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Chen Y, Levine S, Rao M: Variable exponent, linear growth functionals in image restoration. SIAM J Math Anal 2006, 66(4):1383-1406. 10.1137/050624522

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Růžička M: Electrorheological fluids: modeling and mathematical theory. In Lecture Notes in Math 1748. Springer Berlin; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Zhikov VV: Averaging of functionals of the calculus of variations and elasticity theory. Math USSR Izv 1987, 29: 33-36. 10.1070/IM1987v029n01ABEH000958

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Allegretto W: Form estimates for the p ( x )-Laplacean. Proc Am Math Soc 2007, 135(7):2177-2185. 10.1090/S0002-9939-07-08718-7

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Diening L, Harjulehto P, Hästö P, Růžička M: Lebesgue and Sobolev spaces with variable exponents. In Lecture Notes in Mathematics. Volume 2017. Springer, Berlin; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Fan XL: Global C1, αregularity for variable exponent elliptic equations in divergence form. J Diff Equ 2007, 235: 397-417. 10.1016/j.jde.2007.01.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Fan XL, Zhang QH, Zhao D: Eigenvalues of p ( x )-Laplacian Dirichlet problem. J Math Anal Appl 2005, 302: 306-317. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2003.11.020

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Fan XL, Wu HQ, Wang FZ: Hartman-type results for p ( t )-Laplacian systems. Nonlinear Anal TMA 2003, 52: 585-594. 10.1016/S0362-546X(02)00124-4

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Fan XL, Zhang QH: Existence of solutions for p ( x )-Laplacian Dirichlet problem. Nonlinear Anal TMA 2003, 52: 1843-1852. 10.1016/S0362-546X(02)00150-5

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Fan XL, Zhao D: On the spaces Lp(x)(Ω) and Wm, p(x)(Ω). J Math Anal Appl 2001, 263: 424-446. 10.1006/jmaa.2000.7617

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. El Hamidim A: Existence results to elliptic systems with nonstandard growth conditions. J Math Anal Appl 2004, 300: 30-42. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2004.05.041

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Harjulehto P, Hästö P, Lê ÚV, Nuortio M: Overview of differential equations with non-standard growth. Nonlinear Anal TMA 2010, 72: 4551-4574. 10.1016/j.na.2010.02.033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kováčik O, Rákosnk J: On the spaces Lp(x)(Ω) and Wk, p(x)(Ω). Czechoslovak Math J 1991, 41: 592-618.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Mihăilescu M, Rădulescu V: Spectrum in an unbounded interval for a class of nonhomogeneous differential operators. Bull London Math Soc 2008, 40(6):972-984. 10.1112/blms/bdn079

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mihăilescu M, Rădulescu V: Continuous spectrum for a class of nonhomogeneous differential operators. Manuscripta Math 2008, 125: 157-167. 10.1007/s00229-007-0137-8

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Mihăilescu M, Rădulescu V: On a nonhomogeneous quasilinear eigenvalue problem in Sobolev spaces with variable exponent. Proc Amer Math Soc 2007, 135(9):2929-2937. 10.1090/S0002-9939-07-08815-6

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Mihăilescu M, Rădulescu V, Stancu-Dumitru D: On a Caffarelli-Kohn-Nirenberg type inequality in bounded domains involving variable exponent growth conditions and applications to PDE's. Comp Vari Elli Equ, in press.

  19. Mihăilescu M, Moroşanu G, Stancu-Dumitru D: Equations involving a variable exponent Grushin-type operator. Nonlinearity, in press.

  20. Musielak J: Orlicz spaces and modular spaces. In Lecture Notes in Math 1034. Springer, Berlin; 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Samko SG: Densness of C 0 ( N ) in the generalized Sobolev spaces Wm, p(x)( N). Dokl Ross Akad Nauk 1999, 369(4):451-454.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  22. Zhang QH: Existence of solutions for weighted p ( r )-Laplacian system boundary value problems. J Math Anal Appl 2007, 327(1):127-141. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2006.03.087

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Zhang QH: A strong maximum principle for differential equations with nonstandard p ( x )-growth conditions. J Math Anal Appl 2005, 312(1):24-32. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2005.03.013

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Zhang QH, Liu XP, Qiu ZM: Existence of solutions for weighted p ( r )-Laplacian impulsive system periodic-like boundary value problems. Nonlinear Anal TMA 2009, 71(9):3596-3611. 10.1016/j.na.2009.02.043

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. Zhang QH, Qiu ZM, Liu XP: Existence of solutions and nonnegative solutions for weighted p ( r )-Laplacian impulsive system multi-point boundary value problems. Nonlinear Anal TMA 2009, 71(9):3814-3825. 10.1016/j.na.2009.02.040

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Bainov D, Simeonov P: Systems with Impulse Effect. Ellis Horwood, Chichister; 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Fu X, Yan B, Liu Y: Introduction of Impulsive Differential Systems. Science Press, Beijing; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Lee YH, Liu XZ: Study of singular boundary value problems for second order impulsive differential equations. J Math Anal Appl 2007, 331(1):159-176. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2006.07.106

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Dong YJ: Periodic solutions for second order impulsive differential systems. Nonlinear Anal TMA 1996, 27(7):811-820. 10.1016/0362-546X(95)00068-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Guo DJ, Liu XZ: Multiple positive solutions of boundary value problems for impulsive differential equations. Nonlinear Anal TMA 1995, 25(4):327-337. 10.1016/0362-546X(94)00175-H

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Jiao JJ, Chen LS, Li LM: Asymptotic behavior of solutions of second-order nonlinear impulsive differential equations. J Math Anal Appl 2008, 337: 458-463. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2007.04.021

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  32. Kaufmann ER, Kosmatov ER, Raffoul YN: A second-order boundary value problem with impulsive effects on an unbounded domain. Nonlinear Anal TMA 2008, 69(9):2924-2929. 10.1016/j.na.2007.08.061

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  33. Liu LS, Hu LL, Wu YH: Positive solutions of two-point boundary value problems for systems of nonlinear second-order singular and impulsive differential equations. Nonlinear Anal TMA 2008, 69(11):3774-3789. 10.1016/j.na.2007.10.012

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  34. Wei ZL: Extremal solutions of boundary value problems for second order impulsive integrodifferential equations of mixed type. Nonlinear Anal TMA 1997, 28(10):1681-1688. 10.1016/S0362-546X(96)00013-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Yang T: Impulsive Systems and Control: Theory and Applications. Nova Science Publishers, Inc, Huntington, NY; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Yao MP, Zhao AM, Yan JR: Periodic boundary value problems of second-order impulsive differential equations. Nonlinear Anal TMA 2009, 70(1):262-273. 10.1016/j.na.2007.11.050

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  37. Zavalishchin ST, Sesekin AN: Dynamic Impulse Systems: Theory and Applications. Kluwer Academic Publishers Group, Dordrecht; 1997.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  38. Cabada A, Tomeček J: Extremal solutions for nonlinear functional ϕ -Laplacian impulsive equations. Nonlinear Anal TMA 2007, 67: 827-841. 10.1016/j.na.2006.06.043

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Tian Y, Ge WG: Applications of variational methods to boundary value problem for impulsive differential equations. Proc Edinburgh Math Soc 2008, 51: 509-527.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  40. Buică A: Contributions to coincidence degree theory of asymptotically homogeneous operators. Nonlinear Anal TMA 2008, 68: 1603-1610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Gaines RE, Mawhin J: The coincidence degree and nonlinear differential equations. In Lecture Notes in Mathematics. Volume 568. Springer, Berlin; 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Han ZQ: Coincidence degree and nontrivial solutions of elliptic boundary value problems at resonance. Nonlinear Anal TMA 2004, 56: 739-750. 10.1016/j.na.2003.10.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Lloyd NG: Degree Theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; 1978.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the referees very much for their helpful comments and suggestions. This study was partly supported by the National Science Foundation of China (10701066 & 10926075 & 10971087) and China Postdoctoral Science Foundation funded project (20090460969) and the Natural Science Foundation of Henan Education Committee (2008-755-65).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Qihu Zhang.

Additional information

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors' contributions

All authors typed, read and approved the final manuscript.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yin, L., Guo, Y., Zhi, G. et al. Existence of solutions for weighted p(r)-Laplacian impulsive system mixed type boundary value problems. Bound Value Probl 2011, 42 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-2770-2011-42

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-2770-2011-42

Keywords