Abstract
Sufficient conditions are established guaranteeing the existence of a positive ωperiodic solution to the equation
where are continuous functions with possible singularities at zero and is a Carathéodory function. The results obtained are rewritten for the equation of the type
where , , δ are nonnegative constants, c, μ, ν, γ are real numbers, and . The last equation also covers the socalled RayleighPlesset equation, frequently used in fluid mechanics to model the bubble dynamics in liquid. In the paper, the case when , i.e., the case which covers the attractive singularity of the function g, is studied. The results obtained assure that there exists a positive ωperiodic solution to the abovementioned equation if the power μ or ν is sufficiently large.
MSC: 34C25, 34B16, 34B18, 76N15.
Keywords:
RayleighPlesset equation; singular equation; periodic solution; upper and lower function1 Introduction
The topic of singular boundary value problems has been of substantial and rapidly growing interest for many scientists and engineers. The importance of such investigation is emphasized by the fact that numerical simulations of solutions to such problems usually break down near singular points.
On the other hand, problems of this type arise frequently in applied science. Namely, in fluid mechanics, since 1917 the physicists have used the Rayleigh equation,
to model the bubble dynamics in liquid, where is the ratio of the bubble at the time t, ρ is the liquid density, is the pressure in the liquid at a large distance from the bubble, and is the pressure in the liquid at the bubble boundary. In 1949, Plesset proposed to use a more exact equation involving the surfacetension constant S and the coefficient of the liquid viscosity , which was finally improved by adding a term with polytropic coefficient k in 1977, nowadays known as a RayleighPlesset equation (see [1])
The transformation in the previous equation leads to the equation
Consequently, the class of equations
with nonnegative constants , , δ, real numbers c, μ, ν, γ, and , plays an important role in fluid mechanics. Therefore, the equation
subjected to the periodic conditions
is investigated in the presented paper. Here, are continuous, having possible singularities at zero, and is a Carathéodory function, i.e., is measurable for all , is continuous for a.e. , and for every , there exists a nonnegative function such that for a.e. and all . By a solution to (1.2), (1.3) we understand a function which is positive, absolutely continuous together with its first derivative, satisfies (1.2) almost everywhere on , and verifies (1.3). In spite of the fact that the problem (1.2), (1.3) was investigated by many mathematicians (see, e.g., [227]), most of the mentioned works deal with the repulsive case and/or when f has no singularity. However, the physical model, covered by equation (1.1), justifies considering the types of equations with a singular frictionlike term.
A particular case of (1.1) is the equation
studied by Lazer and Solimini. Their results were published in 1987 (see [11]) and they proved, among others, that (1.4), (1.3) has at least one solution if and only if , provided is bounded. Recently, we have proved (see [28]) that this result cannot be extended to the case when is a general integrable (and so unbounded) function unless some additional conditions are introduced. In particular, (1.4), (1.3) is solvable for any with if ; and, moreover, for any , there exists a function with such that (1.4), (1.3) has no solution. At this point, we would like to emphasize the important fact that the condition can be weakened if (1.4) is generalized to equation (1.1), see Remark 2.2 below.
The structure of the paper is as follows. After the introduction and basic notation, we recall the definition of lower and upper functions to the problem (1.2), (1.3), and we formulate the classical theorem on the existence of a solution to (1.2), (1.3) in the case when there exists a couple of wellordered lower and upper functions. In Section 2, we establish our main results and their consequences. Sections 3 and 4 are devoted to auxiliary propositions and proofs of the main results, respectively.
For convenience, we finish the introduction with a list of notations which are used throughout the paper:
ℕ is the set of all natural numbers, ℝ is the set of all real numbers, , , .
is the Banach space of continuous functions with the norm
, resp. , is the set of continuous functions , resp. .
is the set of functions which are continuous together with their first derivative.
is a set of all functions such that u and are absolutely continuous.
is the Banach space of the Lebesgue integrable functions endowed with the norm
For a given , its mean value is defined by
The following definitions of lower and upper functions are suitable for us. For more general definitions, one can see, e.g., [[12], Definition 8.2].
Definition 1.1 A function is called a lower function to the problem (1.2), (1.3) if for every and
Definition 1.2 A function is called an upper function to the problem (1.2), (1.3) if for every and
The following theorem is well known in the theory of differential equations (see, e.g., [[12], Theorem 8.12]).
Theorem 1.1Letαandβbe lower and upper functions to the problem (1.2), (1.3) such that
Then there exists a solutionuto the problem (1.2), (1.3) such that
2 Main results
Theorem 2.1Letandbe nondecreasing functions, , andbe such that
Let, moreover, there existsuch that
and let either
or
Furthermore, let us suppose thatfulfills at least one of the following conditions:
(a) there exists a sequenceof positive numbers such that
and there exist, , andsuch that
(b) the functionis nonincreasing and
wherefor almost everyandσis given by (2.11).
Besides, let us suppose thatfulfills at least one of the following conditions:
(c) there exists a sequenceof positive numbers such that
(d) the functionis nonincreasing and
Then there exists at least one solution to the problem (1.2), (1.3).
Remark 2.1 Note that there exists a suitable such that (2.10) holds, e.g., if
For equation (1.1), from Theorem 2.1 we get the following assertion.
If
then (1.1), (1.3) has at least one solution.
Remark 2.2 In [28], it is proved, among others, that the equation
with and , has a positive ωperiodic solution if . Moreover, there is also an example introduced showing that for any , there exists with such that (2.13), (1.3) has no positive solution.
Corollary 2.1 says that if a frictionlike term or sublinear term are added to (2.13), the condition can be weakened. For example,
has a positive solution satisfying (1.3) for any if , provided . Also, the equation
subjected to the boundary conditions (1.3) is solvable for any if , provided .
Example 2.1 As it was mentioned in the introduction, the particular case of (1.1) is the socalled RayleighPlesset equation frequently used in fluid mechanics. This equation has the following form:
where , c, , are positive constants and (see [9,10]).
The results dealing with the existence of positive ωperiodic solutions of (2.14) were established in [10] provided is bounded from above (see [[10], Theorems 4.4, 4.6, 4.7]). However, Corollary 2.1 says that in the case when , the problem (2.14), (1.3) is solvable if one of the following items is fulfilled:
Thus, Corollary 2.1 assures that the boundedness of is not necessary.
Corollary 2.2Let, , , . Let, moreover, eitheror
Then the problem (1.1), (1.3) withhas at least one solution.
Remark 2.3 According to [29] and Theorem 1.1, it can be easily verified that the problem
with and , has a positive solution if and only if the inclusion holds (see notation in [29]).
Indeed, according to [[29], Definition 1.1], the inclusion implies the existence of a positive solution v to the problem
Therefore there exist constants and such that for . By setting
one can easily realize that α and β are, respectively, lower and upper functions to (2.16) satisfying (1.5). Now, the existence of a positive solution to (2.16) follows from Theorem 1.1.
On the other hand, the existence of a positive solution to (2.16) implies the inclusion (see [[29], Theorem 2.1]).
However, one of the optimal effective conditions guaranteeing such an inclusion is and
(see [[29], Corollary 2.5]). Therefore, the condition (2.15) is natural in a certain sense.
When the righthand side of equation (1.3) does not depend on u, i.e., when , then (1.3) has the form
From Theorem 2.1, for equation (2.17) we get the following assertion.
Corollary 2.3Let there existandsuch that
and let
Let, moreover, either
or
Then there exists at least one solution to the problem (2.17), (1.3).
In the following result, the assumptions do not depend on the frictionlike term. On the other hand, a certain smallness of oscillation of the primitive to is supposed. Clearly, Theorems 2.1 and 2.2 are independent.
Theorem 2.2Letandbe nondecreasing functions, , andbe such that
Let, moreover,
Besides, let us suppose thatfulfills at least one of the conditions (c) or (d) of Theorem 2.1. Then there exists at least one solution to the problem (1.2), (1.3).
In the particular case, when equation (1.2) has the form (1.1), the following assertion immediately follows from Theorem 2.2.
Corollary 2.4Let, and letbe such that
Let, moreover,
Then the problem (1.1), (1.3) has at least one solution.
Remark 2.4 The consequence of Theorem 2.2 for the problem (2.17), (1.3) coincides with the result obtained in [[10], Theorem 3.6].
3 Auxiliary propositions
In what follows, we will show the existence of a solution to the equation
satisfying the boundary conditions (1.3). Here, is a nondecreasing function, , and . Together with (3.1), for every , consider the auxiliary equation
where
Obviously,
and
The following three results can be found in [10].
Lemma 3.1 (see [[10], Corollary 2.17])
Let, moreover, there exist a sequenceof positive numbers such that
and let there existandsuch that
wherefor almost every. Then there exists an upper functionβto the problem (3.1), (1.3) satisfying
Lemma 3.2 (see [[10], Corollary 2.18])
Letandbe such that (3.6) holds. Ifis a nonincreasing function such that
wherefor almost every, then there exists an upper functionβto the problem (3.1), (1.3) satisfying (3.8).
Lemma 3.3 (see [[10], Corollary 2.11])
Then there exists a lower functionαto the problem (2.17), (1.3) with
Lemma 3.4Letandbe such that (2.2) holds. Let, moreover, there exist a sequenceof positive numbers such that (3.7) is fulfilled, and let there existandsuch that
wherefor almost every. Then there existand an upper functionβto the problems (3.2), (1.3) forsatisfying (3.8).
Proof
Put
Then, obviously, in view of (3.3), we have
and, consequently, on account of (2.2), (3.5), (3.10), and (3.13), there exists such that
Therefore, according to Lemma 3.1, there exists an upper function β to (3.2), (1.3) with satisfying (3.8). Obviously, in view of (3.4) and the nonnegativity of , it follows that β is also an upper function to (3.2), (1.3) for . □
Lemma 3.5Letandbe such that (2.2) holds. Ifis a nonincreasing function such that
wherefor almost every, then there existand an upper functionβto the problems (3.2), (1.3) forsatisfying (3.8).
Proof Define , , and by (3.11) and (3.12). Then, obviously, in view of (3.3), we have that (3.13) holds and, consequently, on account of (2.2), (3.5), (3.13), and (3.16), there exists such that (3.14) is valid and
Therefore, according to Lemma 3.2, there exists an upper function β to (3.2), (1.3) with satisfying (3.8). Obviously, in view of (3.4) and the nonnegativity of , it follows that β is also an upper function to (3.2), (1.3) for . □
Lemma 3.6Let
and let either
or
Then, for every, there exists a constantsuch that for anyand any positive solutionuof (3.2), (1.3) with
we have the estimate
Proof Assume that (3.20) is fulfilled. Let u be a positive solution to (3.2), (1.3) satisfying (3.21). Then there exist such that
Define the operator ϑ of ωperiodic prolongation by
Then, obviously, from (3.2) and (1.3) it follows that
The integration of (3.25) from to t, on account of (3.23), yields
From (3.21), (3.23), and (3.24) it follows that
Put
According to (3.18), we have
Thus, using (3.3), (3.20), (3.21), and (3.27)(3.29) in (3.26), we arrive at
Put
Then, on account of (3.24) and (3.30), we have
On the other hand, the integration of (3.25) from t to , with respect to (3.23), results in
Now, using (3.3), (3.20), (3.21), and (3.27)(3.29) in (3.32), we obtain
Therefore, in view of (3.24), from (3.33) we get
Consequently, (3.31) and (3.34) result in (3.22).
Now, suppose that (3.19) is fulfilled. Put
Then, according to (3.2), we have
where
Analogously to the aboveproved, using (3.19) instead of (3.20), we obtain
with
Thus, (3.35) and (3.37) yield (3.22). □
Lemma 3.7Let
and let either
or
Then, for every, there exists a constantsuch that for anyand any positive solutionuof (3.2), (1.3) satisfying (3.21), we have the estimate
Proof Let u be a positive solution to (3.2), (1.3) satisfying (3.21). Thus, the integration of (3.2) from 0 to ω, in view of (1.3) and (3.4), yields
On the other hand, (3.38) implies the existence of such that
Obviously, either
or
Obviously, it is sufficient to show the estimate (3.41) is valid just in the case when (3.45) is fulfilled. Let, therefore, (3.45) hold.
If for , then applying (3.43) in (3.42) we obtain a contradiction. Thus, there exist points such that
where ϑ is the operator defined by (3.24). Obviously, (3.25) holds.
Assume that (3.39) holds. Then, according to Lemma 3.6, there exists such that (3.22) holds. The integration of (3.25) from to , in view of (3.4), (3.21), (3.22), (3.39), (3.43), (3.44), and (3.46), results in
Note that in view of (3.46), we have . Consequently, from (3.48) we obtain
where
Note that does not depend on k. Therefore, if we apply (3.39) in (3.49), it can be easily seen, with respect to (3.44), that there exists a constant such that (3.41) holds.
If (3.40) holds, we integrate (3.25) from to and apply similar steps as above, just using (3.47) instead of (3.46). Finally, we arrive at
with
Therefore, also in this case, there exists a constant such that (3.41) holds. □
Lemma 3.8Letandbe such that (2.2) holds. Let, moreover, (3.38) be fulfilled, and let either (3.39) or (3.40) be valid. Let, in addition, there exist a sequenceof positive numbers such that (3.7) holds, and let there existandsuch that (3.10) is fulfilled, wherefor almost every. Then there exists a positive solutionuto (3.1), (1.3).
Proof According to Lemma 3.4, there exist and an upper function β to the problems (3.2), (1.3) for satisfying (3.8). On the other hand, in view of (3.4) and (3.38), there exists for such that
Thus, if we put for , according to Theorem 1.1, there exists a solution to (3.2), (1.3) for satisfying
Moreover, according to Lemmas 3.6 and 3.7, in view of (3.50), there exist constants , , and , not depending on k, such that
where
Therefore, according to the ArzelàAscoli theorem, there exist and such that
Moreover, since are solutions to (3.2), (1.3), in view of (3.3), (3.52), and (3.54), we have , , and is a positive solution to (3.1), (1.3). □
The following assertion can be proved analogously to Lemma 3.8, just Lemma 3.5 is used instead of Lemma 3.4.
Lemma 3.9Letandbe such that (2.2) holds. Let, moreover, (3.38) be fulfilled, and let either (3.39) or (3.40) be valid. Let, in addition, be a nonincreasing function and let (3.16) be fulfilled, wherefor almost every. Then there exists a positive solutionuto (3.1), (1.3).
Lemma 3.10Letbe nondecreasing, , andbe such that (2.2) holds. Let, moreover, there existsuch that (2.4) and (2.5) are valid, and let either (2.6) or (2.7) be fulfilled. Let, in addition, there exist a sequenceof positive numbers such that (2.8) holds and let there exist, , andsuch that (2.9) and (2.10) are fulfilled, wherefor almost everyandσis given by (2.11). Then there exists a lower functionαto the problem (3.1), (1.3).
Proof Because is a positive function, from (2.4) and (2.11) we obtain that σ is a positive increasing function. Therefore, there exists an inverse function to σ which is also increasing. Moreover, in view of (2.4) and (2.11), it follows that
Consider the auxiliary equation
Put , . Then from (2.2) we get
and, in view of (3.55), from (2.5) we have
Furthermore, the substitution in (2.6), resp (2.7), with respect to (2.11) yields
resp.
Moreover, put for . Then from (2.8), in view of (3.55), we get
Finally, (2.10) results in
and so, since is a nondecreasing function, from (2.9) we obtain
Therefore, applying Lemma 3.8, according to (3.57)(3.62), there exists a positive solution u to the problem (3.56), (1.3).
Now, we put for , i.e., in view of (2.11),
Obviously, is a positive function and
Thus, it can be easily seen that α is a lower function to the problem (3.1), (1.3). □
Analogously to the proof of Lemma 3.10, one can prove the following assertion applying Lemma 3.9 instead of Lemma 3.8.
Lemma 3.11Letbe nondecreasing, , andbe such that (2.2) holds. Let, moreover, there existsuch that (2.4) and (2.5) are valid, and let either (2.6) or (2.7) be fulfilled. Let, in addition, be a nonincreasing function and let (2.12) be fulfilled, wherefor almost everyandσis given by (2.11). Then there exists a lower functionαto the problem (3.1), (1.3).
4 Proofs of the main results
Proof of Theorem 2.1 According to Lemmas 3.1, 3.2, 3.10, and 3.11, the conditions of the theorem guarantee a wellordered couple of lower and upper functions, therefore the result is a direct consequence of Theorem 1.1. □
Proof of Corollary 2.1 It follows from Theorem 2.1 with , , , and such that
Then items (a) and (c) of Theorem 2.1 are fulfilled. □
Proof of Corollary 2.2 It follows from Theorem 2.1 with , , and such that , . Then items (b) and (d) of Theorem 2.1 are fulfilled. □
Proof of Corollary 2.3 It immediately follows from Theorem 2.1 with , (). □
Proof of Theorem 2.2
Put
Because is a positive function, from (2.20) and (4.1) we obtain that σ is an increasing function. Therefore, there exists an inverse function to σ which is also increasing.
Consider the auxiliary equation
Put , . Then from (2.20) and (2.21), in view of (4.1), we get
Therefore, according to Lemma 3.3, there exists a lower function w to the problem (4.2), (1.3) satisfying
Now, we put for , i.e., in view of (4.1),
Obviously, with respect to (4.3), is a positive function satisfying (3.9), and
Thus, on account of (2.18), (3.9), and (4.2), it can be easily seen that α is a lower function to the problem (1.2), (1.3).
The existence of an upper function β to (1.2), (1.3) satisfying
follows from (2.19) and Lemma 3.1, resp. 3.2.
Obviously, in view of (3.9) and (4.4), we have that (1.5) holds. Thus the theorem follows from Theorem 1.1. □
Proof of Corollary 2.4 It follows from Theorem 2.2 with , , and . □
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Authors’ contributions
RH and MZ obtained the results in a joint research. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Acknowledgements
The first author was supported by RVO: 67985840; the second author was supported by Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia, Spain, project MTM201123652.
References

Plesset, MS, Prosperetti, A: Bubble dynamics and cavitation. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.. 9, 145–185 (1977). Publisher Full Text

Habets, P, Sanchez, L: Periodic solutions of some Liénard equations with singularities. Proc. Am. Math. Soc.. 109, 1135–1144 (1990). Publisher Full Text

Bonheure, D, Fabry, C, Smets, D: Periodic solutions of forced isochronous oscillators at resonance. Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst.. 8(4), 907–930 (2002)

Bonheure, D, De Coster, C: Forced singular oscillators and the method of upper and lower solutions. Topol. Methods Nonlinear Anal.. 22, 297–317 (2003)

Martins, RF: Existence of periodic solutions for secondorder differential equations with singularities and the strong force condition. J. Math. Anal. Appl.. 317, 1–13 (2006). Publisher Full Text

Mawhin, J: Topological degree and boundary value problems for nonlinear differential equations. In: Furi M, Zecca P (eds.) Topological Methods for Ordinary Differential Equations, pp. 74–142. Springer, Berlin (1993)

Omari, P, Ye, W: Necessary and sufficient conditions for the existence of periodic solutions of secondorder ordinary differential equations with singular nonlinearities. Differ. Integral Equ.. 8, 1843–1858 (1995)

Yuan, R, Zhang, Z: Existence of positive periodic solutions for the Liénard differential equations with weakly repulsive singularity. Acta Appl. Math.. 111, 171–178 (2010). Publisher Full Text

Hakl, R, Torres, P, Zamora, M: Periodic solutions of singular second order differential equations: the repulsive case. Topol. Methods Nonlinear Anal.. 39, 199–220 (2012)

Hakl, R, Torres, P, Zamora, M: Periodic solutions of singular second order differential equations: upper and lower functions. Nonlinear Anal.. 74, 7078–7093 (2011). Publisher Full Text

Lazer, AC, Solimini, S: On periodic solutions of nonlinear differential equations with singularities. Proc. Am. Math. Soc.. 99, 109–114 (1987). Publisher Full Text

Rachůnková, I, Staněk, S, Tvrdý, M: Solvability of Nonlinear Singular Problems for Ordinary Differential Equations, Hindawi Publishing Corporation, New York (2008)

Zhang, M: Periodic solutions of Liénard equations with singular forces of repulsive type. J. Math. Anal. Appl.. 203, 254–269 (1996). Publisher Full Text

Chu, J, Li, M: Positive periodic solutions of Hill’s equation with singular nonlinear perturbations. Nonlinear Anal.. 69, 276–286 (2008). Publisher Full Text

Chu, J, Nieto, JJ: Recent existence results for secondorder singular periodic differential equations. Bound. Value Probl.. 2009, Article ID 540863 (2009)

Chu, J, Torres, PJ: Applications of Schauder’s fixed point theorem to singular differential equations. Bull. Lond. Math. Soc.. 39, 653–660 (2007). Publisher Full Text

Chu, J, Torres, PJ, Zhang, M: Periodic solutions of second order nonautonomous singular dynamical systems. J. Differ. Equ.. 239, 196–212 (2007). Publisher Full Text

Franco, D, Torres, PJ: Periodic solutions of singular systems without the strong force condition. Proc. Am. Math. Soc.. 136, 1229–1236 (2008)

Franco, D, Webb, JRL: Collisionless orbits of singular and nonsingular dynamical systems. Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst.. 15, 747–757 (2006)

Hakl, R, Torres, P: On periodic solutions of secondorder differential equations with attractiverepulsive singularities. J. Differ. Equ.. 248, 111–126 (2010). PubMed Abstract  Publisher Full Text  PubMed Central Full Text

Rachůnková, I, Tvrdý, M, Vrkoč, I: Existence of nonnegative and nonpositive solutions for second order periodic boundary value problems. J. Differ. Equ.. 176, 445–469 (2001). Publisher Full Text

Torres, PJ: Existence of onesigned periodic solutions of some second order differential equations via a Kranoselskii fixed point theorem. J. Differ. Equ.. 190, 643–662 (2003). Publisher Full Text

Torres, PJ: Noncollision periodic solutions of forced dynamical systems with weak singularities. Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst.. 11, 693–698 (2004)

Torres, PJ: Weak singularities may help periodic solutions to exists. J. Differ. Equ.. 232, 277–284 (2007). Publisher Full Text

Torres, PJ: Existence and stability of periodic solutions for second order semilinear differential equations with a singular nonlinearity. Proc. R. Soc. Edinb., Sect. A, Math.. 137, 195–201 (2007)

Yan, P, Zhang, M: Higher order nonresonance for differential equations with singularities. Math. Methods Appl. Sci.. 26, 1067–1074 (2003). Publisher Full Text

Zhang, M: Periodic solutions of equations of EmarkovPinney type. Adv. Nonlinear Stud.. 6, 57–67 (2006)

Hakl, R, Zamora, M: On the open problems connected to the results of Lazer and Solimini. Proc. R. Soc. Edinb., Sect. A, Math. (to appear) http://www.math.cas.cz/fichier/preprints/IM_20120709132356_18.pdf

Hakl, R, Torres, P: Maximum and antimaximum principles for a second order differential operator with variable coefficients of indefinite sign. Appl. Math. Comput.. 217, 7599–7611 (2011). Publisher Full Text