Abstract
Keywords:
boundedness of solutions; singularity; small twist theorem1 Introduction and main result
In 1991, Levi [1] considered the following equation:
where satisfies some growth conditions and . The author reduced the system to a normal form and then applied Moser twist theorem to prove the existence of quasiperiodic solution and the boundedness of all solutions. This result relies on the fact that the nonlinearity can guarantee the twist condition of KAM theorem. Later, several authors improved the Levi’s result; we refer to [24] and the references therein.
Recently, Capietto, Dambrosio and Liu [5] studied the following equation:
with is a πperiodic function and , where , and ν is a positive integer. Under the LazerLeach assumption that
they prove the boundedness of solutions and the existence of quasiperiodic solution by KAM theorem. It is the first time that the equation of the boundedness of all solution is treated in case of a singular potential.
We observe that in (1.2) is smooth and bounded, so a natural question is to find sufficient conditions on such that all solutions of (1.2) are bounded when is unbounded. The purpose of this paper is to deal with this problem.
Motivated by the papers [1,5,6], we consider the following equation:
where is a πperiodic function,
We suppose LazerLeach assumption hold:
Our main result is the following theorem.
Theorem 1Under the assumptions (1.5) and (1.6), all the solutions of (1.4) are bounded.
The main idea of our proof is acquired from [6]. The proof of Theorem 1 is based on a small twist theorem due to Ortega [7]. It mainly consists of two steps. The first one is to transform (1.4) into a perturbation of integrable Hamilton system. The second one is to show that Poincaré map of the equivalent system satisfies Ortega’s twist theorem, then some desired result can be obtained.
Moreover, we have the following theorem on solutions of AubryMather type.
Theorem 2Assume thatsatisfies (1.6); then, there is ansuch that, for any, tequation (1.4) has a solutionof the Mather type with rotation numberω. More precisely:
Case 1: is rational. The solutions, are independent periodic solutions of periodicqπ; moreover, in this case,
Case 2: ωis irrational. The solutionis either a usual quasiperiodic solution or a generalized one.
We will apply AubryMather theory, more precisely, the theorem in [8], to prove this theorem.
2 Proof of theorem
2.1 Actionangle variables and some estimates
Observe that (1.4) is equivalent to the following Hamiltonian system:
with the Hamiltonian function
In order to introduce action and angle variables, we first consider the auxiliary autonomous equation:
which is an integrable Hamiltonian system with Hamiltonian function
The closed curves are just the integral curves of (2.2).
Denote by the time period of the integral curve of (2.2) defined by and by I the area enclosed by the closed curve for every . Let be such that . It is easy to see that
and
By direct computation, we get
so
We then have
where
Similar in estimating in [5], we have the estimation of functions and .
Lemma 1We have
and
where, . Note that here and below we always useC, orto indicate some constants.
Remark 1 It follows from the definitions of , and Lemma 1 that
Thus the time period is dominated by when h is sufficiently large. From the relation between and , we know is dominated by when h is sufficiently large.
Remark 2 It also follow from the definition of , , and Remark 1 that
Remark 3 Note that is the inverse function of . By Remark 2, we have
We now carry out the standard reduction to the actionangle variables. For this purpose, we define the generating function , where C is the part of the closed curve connecting the point on the yaxis and point .
We define the wellknow map by
which is symplectic since
From the above discussion, we can easily get
and
In the new variables , the system (2.1) is
where
In order to estimate , we need the following lemma.
Lemma 2 [[5], Lemma 2.2]
ForIsufficient large and, the following estimates hold:
2.2 New action and angle variables
Now we are concerned with the Hamiltonian system (2.5) with Hamiltonian function given by (2.6). Note that
This means that if one can solve I from (2.6) as a function of H (θ and t as parameters), then
is also a Hamiltonian system with Hamiltonian function I and now the action, angle and time variables are H, t and θ.
From (2.6) and Lemma 1, we have
So, we assume that I can be written as
where R satisfies . Recalling that is the inverse function of , we have
which implies that
As a consequence, R is implicitly defined by
Lemma 3The functionsatisfies the following estimates:
Proof Case . By (2.8), Lemma 2 and noticing that as , we have
Case . Derivative both sides of (2.8) with respect to H, we have
By Remark 2, Lemma 2 and the estimate of R, we have
Since
we have
We suppose that
holds where . We will prove (2.9) also holds where , .
By direct calculation, we have
Since
by Lemma 1 and (2.9), when , we have
By (2.11) and (2.12), we have
By (2.13), we have
By (2.10), (2.14) and Lemma 2, we have (2.9) holds where . Thus, we prove Lemma 3. □
Analogously, one may obtain, by a direct but cumbersome commutation, the following estimates.
Lemma 4The functionsatisfies the following estimates:
Moreover, by the implicit function theorem, there exists a function such that
Since
By Lemmas 1 and 4, we have the estimates on .
For concision, in the estimates and the calculation below, we only consider the case , since the case have the similar result.
For the estimates of , we need the estimates on . By Lemmas 1 and 5, noticing that , we have the following lemma.
Now the new Hamiltonian function is written in the form
The system (2.7) is of the form
Introduce a new action variable and a parameter by . Then . Under this transformation, the system (2.15) is changed into the form
which is also Hamiltonian system with the new Hamiltonian function
Obviously, if , the solution of (2.16) with the initial date is defined in the interval and . So the Poincaré map of (2.16) is well defined in the domain .
Lemma 7 [[6], Lemma 5.1]
The Poincaré map of (2.16) has intersection property.
The proof is similar to the corresponding one in [6].
For convenience, we introduce the notation and . We say a function if f is smooth in and for ,
for some constant which is independent of the arguments t, ρ, θ, ϵ.
Similarly, we say if f is smooth in and for ,
2.3 Poincaré map and twist theorems
We will use Ortega’s small twist theorem to prove that the Poincaré map P has an invariant closed curve, if ϵ is sufficiently small. Let us first recall the theorem in [7].
Lemma 8 (Ortega’s theorem)
Letbe a finite cylinder with universal cover. The coordinate inis denoted by. Consider a map
We assume that the map has the intersection property. Suppose that, is a lift ofand it has the form
whereNis an integer, is a parameter. The functions, , andsatisfy
In addition, we assume that there is a functionsatisfying
and
Moreover, suppose that there are two numbers, andsuch thatand
where
Then there existandsuch that, ifand
the mappinghas an invariant curve in. The constantϵis independent ofδ.
We make the ansatz that the solution of (2.16) with the initial condition is of the form
Then the Poincaré map of (2.16) is
where , . By Lemmas 4, 6 and 7, we know that
Hence, for , we may choose ϵ sufficiently small such that
Moreover, we can prove that
Lemma 9The following estimates hold:
Proof
Let
By Lemma 2 and (2.25), we have
Take the derivative with respect to in the both sides of , we have
Using Lemma 2 and noticing , we have
Analogously, one may obtain, by a direct but cumbersome commutation that
which means that
The estimates for follow from a similar argument, we omit it here. Thus, Lemma 9 is proved. □
Now we turn to give an asymptotic expression of Poincaré map of (2.15), that is, we study the behavior of the functions and at as . In order to estimate and , we need introduce the following definition and lemma. Let
Lemma 10
Proof This lemma was proved in [5], so we omit the details. □
For estimate and , we need the estimates of x and .
When , by the definition of θ, we have
which yields that
Now we can give the estimates of and .
Lemma 11The following estimates hold true:
Proof Firstly, we consider . By Lemmas 2, 6 and (2.23), we have
Thus, Lemma 11 is proved. □
2.4 Proof of Theorem 1
Let
Then there are two functions and such that the Poincaré map of (2.16), given by (2.22), is of the form
Let
Then
The other assumptions of Ortega’s theorem are easily verified. Hence, there is an invariant curve of P in the annulus which imply that the boundedness of our original equation (1.4). Then Theorem 1 is proved.
2.5 Proof of Theorem 2
We apply AubryMather theory. By Theorem B in [8] and the monotone twist property of the Poincaré map P guaranteed by . It is straightforward to check that Theorem 2 is correct.
Remark 4 In [9], the authors study the multiplicity of positive periodic solutions of singular Duffing equations
where satisfies the semilinear condition at infinity and the time map satisfies an oscillation condition, and prove that the given equation possesses infinitely many positive 2πperiodic solutions by using the PoincaréBirkhoff theorem. By the methods and techniques in [9], we can also prove the existence of 2πperiodic solutions of (1.4) where satisfies the sublinear condition.
Competing interests
The author declares that they have no competing interests.
Acknowledgements
Thanks are given to referees whose comments and suggestions were very helpful for revising our paper.
References

Levi, M: Quasiperiodic motions in superquadratic timeperiodic potential. Commun. Math. Phys.. 144, 43–82 (1991)

Kupper, T, You, J: Existence of quasiperiodic solutions and Littlewood’s boundedness problem of Duffing equations with subquadratic potentials. Nonlinear Anal.. 35, 549–559 (1999). Publisher Full Text

Li, X: Boundedness of solutions for Duffing’s equations with semilinear potentials. J. Differ. Equ.. 176, 248–268 (2001). Publisher Full Text

Wang, Y: Boundedness for sublinear Duffing equations with timedependent potential. J. Differ. Equ.. 247, 104–118 (2009). Publisher Full Text

Capietto, A, Dambrosio, W, Liu, B: On the boundedness of solutions to a nonlinear singular oscillator. Z. Angew. Math. Phys.. 60(6), 1007–1034 (2009). Publisher Full Text

Liu, B: Quasiperiodic solutions of forced isochronous oscillators at resonance. J. Differ. Equ.. 246, 3471–3495 (2009). Publisher Full Text

Ortega, R: Boundedness in a piecewise linear oscillator and a variant of the small twist theorem. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc.. 79, 381–413 (1999). Publisher Full Text

Pei, ML: AubryMather sets for finitetwist maps of a cylinder and semilinear Duffing equations. J. Differ. Equ.. 113, 106–127 (1994). Publisher Full Text

Wang, Z, Ma, T: Existence and multiplicity of periodic solutions of semilinear resonant Duffing equations with singularities. Nonlinearity. 25, 279–307 (2012). Publisher Full Text