Abstract
We consider a fourth order Hamiltonian system with some singular nonlinear term and multiplicity result. We get two theorems which show the number of weak solutions of this problem. The first theorem is a result which shows that there exists a weak solution for this problem and the second one is an improved result of the first result, which shows that there exist infinitely many weak solutions for this problem. We get the first result by a variational method and critical point theory, and we get the second result by homology theory.
Similar content being viewed by others
1 Introduction
Let \(\bar{N}_{\epsilon}(\theta)\) be a closure of an ϵ-neighborhood of \(\theta=(0,\ldots,0)\), \(\epsilon>0\) be a fixed small number, and D be an open subset in \(R^{n}\) with compact complement \(\bar{N}_{\epsilon}(\theta)=R^{n}\setminus D\), \(n\ge2\). Let \(c\in R\) and \(\vert \cdot \vert \) be a norm in \(R^{n}\). In this paper we consider the weak solutions \(z(t)=(z_{1}(t),\ldots,z_{n}(t))\in C^{4}([0,2\pi], D)\) of a fourth order Hamiltonian system with singular nonlinear term
Our problems are characterized as a singular fourth order Hamiltonian system with singularity at \(\{z(t)=\theta\}\), \(\theta=(0,\ldots,0)\). The motivation of this paper is the fourth order elliptic problem with singular potential. We recommend the book [1] for the singular elliptic problems. Many authors considered the fourth order elliptic boundary value problem. In particular, Choi and Jung [2] showed that the problem
has at least two nontrivial solutions when \(c<\lambda_{1}\), \(\lambda_{1}(\lambda_{1}-c)< b<\lambda_{2}(\lambda_{2}-c)\), and \(s<0\) or when \(\lambda_{1}< c<\lambda_{2}\), \(b<\lambda_{1}(\lambda_{1}-c)\), and \(s>0\). We obtained these results by using a variational reduction method. We [3] also proved that when \(c<\lambda_{1}\), \(\lambda_{1}(\lambda_{1}-c)< b<\lambda_{2}(\lambda_{2}-c)\), and \(s<0\), (1.2) has at least three nontrivial solutions by using degree theory. Tarantello [4] also studied
She showed that if \(c<\lambda_{1}\) and \(b\ge\lambda_{1}(\lambda _{1}-c)\), then (1.3) has a negative solution. She obtained this result by degree theory. Micheletti and Pistoia [5] also proved that if \(c<\lambda_{1}\) and \(b\ge \lambda_{2}(\lambda_{2}-c)\) then (1.3) has at least three solutions by the variational linking theorem and Leray-Schauder degree theory.
The eigenvalue problem
has many eigenvalues \(\lambda_{j}\), \(j\ge1\), and corresponding eigenfunctions \(\phi_{j}\), \(j\ge 1\), suitably normalized with respect to \(L^{2}([0,2\pi])\) inner product and each eigenvalue \(\lambda_{j}\) is repeated as often as its multiplicity. The eigenvalue problem
has also infinitely many eigenvalues \(\mu_{j}=\lambda_{j}(\lambda_{j}-c)\), \(j\ge1\), and corresponding eigenfunctions \(\phi_{j}\), \(j\ge1\). We note that \(\mu_{1}<\mu_{2}\le\mu_{3},\ldots, \mu_{j} \to +\infty\).
In this paper we are trying to find the weak solutions \(z(t)\in C^{4}([0,2\pi],D)\cap\Lambda D\) of the system (1.1) satisfying
for all \(\phi(t)\in C^{4}([0,2\pi],D)\cap\Lambda D\), where ΛD is introduced in Section 2.
Theorem 1.1
Assume that \(\lambda _{j}< c<\lambda_{j+1}\), \(j\ge1\). Then the system (1.1) has at least one nontrivial weak solution.
Moreover, we improve Theorem 1.1 as follows.
Theorem 1.2
Assume that \(\lambda _{j}< c<\lambda_{j+1}\), \(j\ge1\). Then the system (1.1) has infinitely many nontrivial weak solutions.
For the proof of Theorem 1.1 we follow the approach of the variational method and use a minimax method in critical point theory on the loop space ΛD, and for the proof of Theorem 1.2 we follow homology theory. In Section 2, we introduce a loop subspace ΛD of the Banach space, and we prove that the associated functional J of (1.1) satisfies the \((P.S.)\) condition on the loop subspace ΛD. In Section 3, we use a minimax method and critical point theory for the existence of a nontrivial weak solution of (1.1) and prove Theorem 1.1. We also prove Theorem 1.2 by using critical point theory and homology theory to prove the existence of infinitely many nontrivial weak solutions.
2 Variational approach
Let \(L^{2}([0,2\pi],R)\) be a square integrable function space defined on \([0,2\pi]\). Any element x in \(L^{2}([0,2\pi],R)\) can be written as
We shall denote the subset of \(L^{2}([0,2\pi],R)\) satisfying the 2π-periodic condition, by \(L^{2}(S^{1},R)\). Similar notations will be used for other 2π-periodic function spaces. We define a subspace W of \(L^{2}(S^{1},R)\) as follows:
Then this is a complete normed space with a norm
Let
Then \(W=W^{-}\oplus W^{+}\), for \(x\in W\), \(x=x^{-}+x^{+}\in W^{-}\oplus W^{+}\). Let E be the n Cartesian product space of W, i.e.,
Let \(E^{+}\) and \(E^{-}\) be the subspaces on which the functional
is positive definite and negative definite, respectively. Then
Let \(P^{+}\) be the projection from E onto \(E^{+}\) and \(P^{-}\) the projection from E onto \(E^{-}\). The norm in E is given by
where \(\Vert P^{+}z\Vert ^{2}_{E}=\sum^{n}_{i=1}\Vert P^{+}z_{i}\Vert ^{2}_{W}\), \(\Vert P^{-}z\Vert ^{2}_{E}=\sum^{n}_{i=1}\Vert P^{-}z_{i}\Vert ^{2}_{W}\), \(z=(z_{1},\ldots,z_{n})\). Let \(\nu^{1}_{\mu_{i}}, \nu^{2}_{\mu_{i}}, \ldots, \nu ^{n}_{\mu_{i}}\) be the eigenvalues of the matrix
that is,
Let \((c^{1}_{1,\mu_{i}},\ldots,c^{1}_{n,\mu_{i}}), (c^{2}_{1,\mu _{i}},\ldots,c^{2}_{n,\mu_{i}}), \ldots, (c^{n}_{1,\mu _{i}},\ldots,c^{n}_{n,\mu_{i}})\) be the eigenvectors of the matrix
corresponding to the eigenvalues \(\nu ^{1}_{\mu_{i}}\), \(\nu^{2}_{\mu_{i}}, \ldots, \nu^{n}_{\mu _{i}}\), respectively. Since \(\nu^{k}_{\mu_{i}}=\mu_{i}\) for all \(k=1, 2, \ldots, n\), \((c^{1}_{1,\mu_{i}},\ldots,c^{1}_{n,\mu _{i}})=\cdots=(c^{n}_{1,\mu_{i}},\ldots,c^{n}_{n,\mu_{i}})\). Let us set
Let us set
We note that
and
Let us introduce an open set of the Hilbert space E as follows:
Let us consider the functional on ΛD
The Euler equation for J is (1.1).
By Lemma 2.1, \(J\in C^{1}(\Lambda D,R)\), and so the weak solutions of system (1.1) coincide with the critical points of the associated functional \(J(z)\).
Lemma 2.1
\(J(z)\) is continuous and Fréchet differentiable in ΛD with Fréchet derivative
Moreover, \(DJ\in C\). That is, \(J\in C^{1}\).
Proof
First we prove that \(J(z)\) is continuous. For \(z, w\in\Lambda D\),
We have
Thus we have
Next we shall prove that \(J(z)\) is Fréchet differentiable in ΛD. For \(z, w\in\Lambda D\),
Thus by (2.3), we have
Similarly, it is easily checked that \(J\in C^{1}\). □
Lemma 2.2
Assume that \(\lambda _{j}< c<\lambda_{j+1}\), \(j\ge1\). Let \(\{z_{k}\}\subset\Lambda D\), \(z_{k}(t)\in Z\), and \(z_{k}\rightharpoonup z\) weakly in ΛD with \(z\in\partial \Lambda D\). Then \(J(z_{k})\to\infty\), where Z is a neighborhood of \(\theta=(0,\ldots,0)\).
Proof
Since \(\frac{1}{z(t)^{2p}}\) has a singular point \(\theta =(0,\ldots,0)\) in \(R^{n}\), the conclusion follows. □
Now, we shall prove that \(J(z)\) satisfies \((P.S.)_{\gamma}\) condition for any \(\gamma\in R\).
Lemma 2.3
Assume that \(\lambda _{j}< c<\lambda_{j+1}\), \(j\ge1\). Then if \(\Vert z_{k}\Vert _{E}\to\infty\), then there exist \((z_{h_{k}})_{k}\) and z in ΛD such that
Proof
Let \(\Vert z_{k}\Vert _{E}\to\infty\). Then \(\frac{1}{| z_{k}(t)|^{2p}}\) is bounded, it follows that
Since
by (2.5), we have
Thus the sequence \((\int^{2\pi}_{0}\frac{\operatorname{grad}_{z}\frac{1}{\vert z_{k}(t)\vert ^{2p}} \cdot z_{k}(t)}{\Vert z_{k}\Vert _{E}} \,dt)_{k}\) is bounded. It follows from (2.6) that there exists a subsequence \((z_{h_{k}})_{k}\) such that
Since \(\operatorname{grad}_{z}\frac{1}{\vert z_{k}(t)\vert ^{2p}}\) is bounded when \(\Vert z_{k}\Vert _{E}\to\infty\), it follows from (2.7) that there exists z in ΛD such that
Thus the lemma is proved. □
Lemma 2.4
Assume that \(\lambda _{j}< c<\lambda_{j+1}\), \(j\ge1\). Then \(J(z)\) satisfies the \((P.S.)_{\gamma}\) condition for any \(\gamma\in R\).
Proof
Let \(\gamma\in R\) and \((z_{k})_{k}\subset\Lambda D\) be a sequence such that \(J(z_{k})\to\gamma\) and
or equivalently
where \(D_{tttt}z_{k}(t)=\ddddot{z_{k}}(t)\), \((D_{tttt}+cD_{tt})^{-1}\) is a compact operator. We shall show that \((z_{k})_{k}\) has a convergent subsequence. We claim that \(\{z_{k}\}\) is bounded in ΛD. By contradiction, we suppose that \(\Vert z_{k}\Vert _{E}\to\infty\) and set \(w_{k}=\frac{z_{k}}{\Vert z_{k}\Vert _{E}}\). Since \((w_{k})_{k}\) is bounded, up to a subsequence, \((w_{k})_{k}\) converges weakly to some \(w_{0}\) in ΛD. Since \(J(z_{k})\to\gamma\) and \(DJ(z_{k})\to0\), we have
Thus we have
By Lemma 2.3 and (2.8), there exist \((z_{h_{k}})_{k}\) and z in ΛD such that
Thus we have \(w_{0}=0\), which is absurd because \(\Vert w_{0}\Vert _{E}=1\). Thus \(\{z_{k}\}\) is bounded in ΛD. Thus \((z_{k})_{k}\) has a convergent subsequence converging weakly to some z in ΛD. We claim that this subsequence of \((z_{k})_{k}\) converges strongly to z. By \(DJ(z_{k})\to\theta\), we have
We claim that the mapping \(z_{k}\to\mapsto (\operatorname{grad}_{z}\frac{1}{\vert z_{k}(t)\vert ^{2p}})_{k}\) is compact. Since the embedding \(\Lambda D\hookrightarrow C^{2}([0,2\pi]\times \Lambda D,R^{n})\) is compact, the sequence \((\int^{2\pi}_{0}[\operatorname{grad}_{z}\frac{1}{\vert z_{k}(t)\vert ^{2p}}\cdot z_{k}(t)\,dt)_{n}\) has a convergent subsequence which converges to \(\int^{2\pi}_{0} [\operatorname{grad}_{z}\frac{1}{\vert z(t)\vert ^{2p}} \cdot z(t)\,dt\). Because \(\{z_{k}\}\) is bounded and the subsequence of \((z_{k})_{k}\) converges weakly to some z in ΛD, \((\operatorname{grad}_{z}\frac{1}{\vert z_{k}(t)\vert ^{2p}})_{k}\) is bounded. Since \((D_{tttt}+cD_{tt})^{-1}\) is compact, by (2.8), \((P_{+}z_{k})_{k}\) and \((P_{-}z_{k})_{k}\) have subsequences converging strongly. Thus \((z_{k})_{k}\) has a subsequence converging strongly. Thus the lemma is proved. □
3 Proofs of Theorems 1.1 and 1.2
Lemma 3.1
There exists a sequence of integers
such that \(H_{b_{i}}(\Lambda D)\neq0\).
Proof
Let \(\epsilon>0\) be a fixed small number such that \(\bar {N}_{\epsilon}(\theta)\) contains θ, and choose \(R>0\) such that \(\bar{N}_{\epsilon}(\theta)\subset\operatorname{int}(B_{R})\). Then we have
Since \(R^{n}\setminus B_{R}\) is a deformation retract of \(R^{n}\setminus\{\theta\}\), \(\Lambda(R^{n}\setminus B_{R})\) is a deformation retract of \(\Lambda(R^{n}\setminus\{\theta\})\), so \(\Lambda(R^{n}\setminus B_{R})\) is a deformation retract of λD. Then we have
By [6], the Poincaré series of \(\Lambda(S^{n-1})\) is written as
with \(Z_{2}\) coefficients. Thus the lemma is proved. □
Let us set a level set
and
Lemma 3.2
Assume that \(\lambda _{j}< c<\lambda_{j+1}\), \(j\ge1\). For each \(\gamma>0\), there exists a finite dimensional singular complex \(\Omega=\Omega_{\gamma}\) such that the level set \(J_{\gamma}\) is deformed into Ω.
Proof
Let us choose \(z\in J_{\gamma}\). Then \(z\in\Lambda D\) and we have
We note that there exists a constant \(R_{0}>0\) such that
We also note that there exists a neighborhood Z of \(\bar {N}_{\epsilon}(\theta)\) such that
It follows that there exists a constant \(\gamma_{0}>0\) such that
i.e., we have
Since the number of elements of the set \(\{\lambda_{i}-c\mid \lambda_{i}-c<0\}\) is finite and \(\lambda_{i}-c\to\infty\) as \(i\in \infty\), there exists a constant \(\gamma_{1}>0\) such that
By Lemma 2.2, there exists \(\epsilon_{0}=\epsilon(\gamma,\gamma _{1})\) such that
Let us choose an integer \(M=M_{\gamma}>2\pi\frac{\gamma_{1}^{\frac {1}{2}}}{\epsilon_{0}}\) and let
Let us define a broken line
\(\forall t\in[t_{i-1},t_{i}]\), \(i=0, 1, 2,\ldots, M\), \(\forall x\in J_{\gamma}\). Let
The corresponding \(\bar{z}\mapsto(z(t_{1}),z(t_{2}),\ldots,z(t_{M}))\) define a homeomorphism between Ω and a certain open subset of the M-fold product \(D\times D\times\cdots\times D\). We first claim that \(\Omega\subset\Lambda D\). In fact, \(\forall z\in J_{\gamma}\), for \(t_{2}>t_{1}\), by (3.3), we have
Therefore
\(\forall s\in[t_{i-1},t_{i}]\), \(i=0, 1, 2,\ldots,M\). We next claim that there exists \(\nu\in C([0,1]\times J_{\gamma },\Lambda D)\) such that \(\nu(0,\cdot)=\operatorname{id}\), and \(\nu (1,J_{\gamma})=\Omega\). In fact, let us choose \(z(t)\in\Lambda D\) and let us define ν as follows:
Then \(\nu(0,\cdot)=\operatorname{id}\), and \(\nu(1,J_{\gamma})=\Omega\). Thus we prove that \(J_{\gamma}\) is deformed into Ω in the loop space ΛD. Thus the lemma is proved. □
Proof of Theorem 1.1 (Existence of a weak solution)
We shall show that the functional \(J(z)\) has a critical value by the generalized mountain pass theorem. Thus we first shall show that \(J(z)\) satisfies the geometric assumptions of the generalized mountain pass theorem.
Let
Then
Let \(z\in\Lambda D^{+}\). Then we have
Since \(\frac{1}{\vert z(t)\vert ^{2p}}\) is positive and bounded, if \(z\in \Lambda D^{+}\), then there exists a number \(r>0\) such that if \(z\in \partial B_{r}\cap\Lambda D^{+}\), then \(J(z)>0\). Thus \(\inf_{z\in \partial B_{r}\cap\Lambda D^{+}}J(z)>0\). We note that by (3.1), there exists \(R>R_{0}\) such that
and by (3.2), there exists a neighborhood Z of \(\bar{N}_{\epsilon }(\theta)\) such that
Let us choose \(e\in B_{1}\cap\Lambda D^{+}\). Let \(z\in\Lambda D^{-}\oplus\{\rho e\mid \rho>0\}\). Then \(z=x+y\), \(x\in\Lambda D^{-}\), \(y=\rho e\). Then we have
By (3.1), there exists constant \(R_{0}>0\) such that if \((t,z(t))\in [0,2\pi]\times R^{n}\setminus B_{R_{0}}\), then \(\vert \frac{1}{\vert z(t)\vert ^{2p}}\vert <+\infty\) and \(\vert \operatorname{grad}_{z}\frac{1}{\vert z(t)\vert ^{2p}}\vert <+\infty\). Thus there exist a large number \(R>R_{0}\) and a small number \(\rho>0\) such that if \(z=x+\rho e\in\partial Q=\partial (((\bar{B}_{R}\cap\Lambda D^{-})\oplus\{re\mid e\in B_{1}\cap\Lambda D^{+}, 0< r< R\})\setminus B_{R_{0}})\), then \(J(z)<0\). Thus we have \(\sup_{z\in\partial Q}J(z)<0\). By Lemma 2.1, \(J(z)\) is continuous and Fréchet differentiable in ΛD and, moreover, \(DJ\in C\). By Lemma 2.4, \(J(z)\) satisfies the \((P.S.)\) condition. Thus by the generalized mountain pass theorem [7], \(J(z)\) possesses a critical value \(c>0\), which is characterized as
where
Thus (1.1) has at least one nontrivial weak solution. Thus we prove Theorem 1.1. □
Proof of Theorem 1.2 (Existence of infinitely many weak nontrivial solutions)
By contradiction, we assume that \(J(z)\) has only finitely many critical points \(z_{1}, z_{2}, \ldots, z_{l}\) such that by the process of the proof of Theorem 1.1, we can obtain \(J(z_{j})>0\), \(1\le j\le l\). Let us set
We note that \(\dim\operatorname{ker}(D^{2}J(z_{j}))\le2n\), for all j. Letting
where \(M_{\gamma}\) is defined in the proof of Lemma 3.2, and
we have
and
It follows that
Since
which is a contradiction to Lemma 3.1. Thus \(J(z)\) has infinitely many critical points \(z_{j}\), \(j=1, 2,\ldots\) , in ΛD. □
References
Ghergu, M, Rǎdulescu, VD: Singular Elliptic Problems. Bifurcation and Asymptotic Analysis. Clarendon Press, Oxford (2008)
Choi, QH, Jung, T: Multiplicity results on nonlinear biharmonic operator. Rocky Mt. J. Math. 29(1), 141-164 (1999)
Jung, TS, Choi, QH: Multiplicity results on a nonlinear biharmonic equation. Nonlinear Anal. 30(8), 5083-5092 (1997)
Tarantello, G: A note on a semilinear elliptic problem. Differ. Integral Equ. 5(3), 561-565 (1992)
Micheletti, AM, Pistoia, A: Multiplicity results for a fourth-order semilinear elliptic problem. Nonlinear Anal. 31(7), 895-908 (1998)
Bott, R: Nondegenerate critical manifolds. Ann. Math. 60, 248-261 (1954)
Rabinowitz, PH: Minimax Methods in Critical Point Theory with Applications to Differential Equations. CBMS. Regional Conf. Ser. Math., vol. 65. Am. Math. Soc., Providence (1986)
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by Inha University Research Grant.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Authors’ contributions
All authors contributed equally to the manuscript and read and approved the final manuscript.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
About this article
Cite this article
Jung, T., Choi, QH. Fourth order Hamiltonian system with some singular nonlinear term and multiplicity result. Bound Value Probl 2016, 133 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13661-016-0638-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13661-016-0638-z