Fredholm-type theorem for boundary value problems for systems of nonlinear functional differential equations

Robert Hakl; Manuel Zamora

doi:10.1186/1687-2770-2014-113

Impact Factor 0.819

Research

Open Access

Fredholm-type theorem for boundary value problems for systems of nonlinear functional differential equations

Robert Hakl¹Email author and
Manuel Zamora²

Boundary Value Problems20142014:113

https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-2770-2014-113

Received: 30 January 2014

Accepted: 29 April 2014

Published: 13 May 2014

Abstract

A Fredholm-type theorem for boundary value problems for systems of nonlinear functional differential equations is established. The theorem generalizes results known for the systems with linear or homogeneous operators to the case of systems with positively homogeneous operators.

MSC:34K10.

Keywords

functional-differential equations boundary value problems existence of solutions

1 Statement of the problem

Consider the system of functional-differential equations

u_{i}^{'} (t) = p_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) (t) + f_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) (t) for a.e. t \in [a, b] (i = 1, \dots, n)

(1)

together with the boundary conditions

ℓ_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) = h_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) (i = 1, \dots, n) .

(2)

Here,

p_{i}, f_{i} : C ([a, b]; R^{n}) \to L ([a, b]; R)

are continuous operators satisfying Carathéodory conditions, i.e. for every

r > 0

there exists

q_{r} \in L ([a, b]; R_{+})

such that

\sum_{i = 1}^{n} (| p_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) (t) | + | f_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) (t) |) \leq q_{r} (t) for a.e. t \in [a, b], \sum_{i = 1}^{n} {∥ u_{i} ∥}_{C} \leq r,

and

ℓ_{i}, h_{i} : C ([a, b]; R^{n}) \to R

are continuous functionals which are bounded on every ball by a constant, i.e. for every

r > 0

there exists

M_{r} > 0

such that

\sum_{i = 1}^{n} (| ℓ_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) | + | h_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) |) \leq M_{r} whenever \sum_{i = 1}^{n} {∥ u_{i} ∥}_{C} \leq r .

Furthermore, we assume that

p_{i}

and

ℓ_{i}

satisfy the following condition: there exist positive real numbers

λ_{i j}

and

μ_{i}

such that

λ_{i j} λ_{j m} = λ_{i m}

whenever

i, j, m \in {1, \dots, n}

, and for every

c > 0

and

{(u_{k})}_{k = 1}^{n} \in C ([a, b]; R^{n})

we have

c p_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) (t) = p_{i} (c^{λ_{i 1}} u_{1}, \dots, c^{λ_{i n}} u_{n}) (t) for a.e. t \in [a, b],

(3)

c^{μ_{i}} ℓ_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) = ℓ_{i} (c^{λ_{i 1}} u_{1}, \dots, c^{λ_{i n}} u_{n}) .

(4)

Remark 1 From the above-stated assumptions it follows that $λ_{i i} = 1$ , $λ_{i j} = 1 / λ_{j i}$ for every $i, j \in {1, \dots, n}$ .

In the case when $p_{i}$ and $ℓ_{i}$ are linear bounded operators and $f_{i} (\cdot, \dots, \cdot) (t) \equiv q_{i} (t)$ , $h_{i} (\cdot, \dots, \cdot) \equiv c_{i}$ , the relationship between the existence of a solution to problem (1), (2) and the existence of only the trivial solution to its corresponding homogeneous problem, so-called Fredholm alternative, is well known; for more details see e.g. [1–8] and references therein.

In 1966, Lasota established the Fredholm-type theorem in the case when $p_{i}$ and $ℓ_{i}$ are homogeneous operators (see [9]). Recently, Fredholm-type theorems in the case when $p_{i}$ and $ℓ_{i}$ are positively homogeneous operators were established by Kiguradze, Půža, Stavroulakis in [10] and also by Kiguradze, Šremr in [11].

In this paper we unify the ideas used in [11] and [9] to obtain a new Fredholm-type theorem for the case when $p_{i}$ and $ℓ_{i}$ are positively homogeneous operators. The consequences of the obtained result for particular cases of problem (1), (2) are formulated at the end of the paper.

The following notation is used throughout the paper.

ℕ is the set of all natural numbers;

ℝ is the set of all real numbers, $R_{+} = [0, + \infty)$ ;

R^{n}

is the linear space of vectors

x = {(x_{i})}_{i = 1}^{n}

with the elements

x_{i} \in R

endowed with the norm

∥ x ∥ = \sum_{i = 1}^{n} | x_{i} |;

C ([a, b]; R^{n})

is the Banach space of continuous vector-valued functions

u = {(u_{i})}_{i = 1}^{n} : [a, b] \to R^{n}

with the norm

{∥ u ∥}_{C} = \sum_{i = 1}^{n} max {| u_{i} (t) | : t \in [a, b]};

$A C ([a, b]; R^{n})$ is the set of absolutely continuous vector-valued functions $u : [a, b] \to R^{n}$ ;

L ([a, b]; R)

is the Banach space of Lebesgue integrable functions

p : [a, b] \to R

with the norm

{∥ p ∥}_{L} = \int_{a}^{b} | p (s) | d s;

$L ([a, b]; R_{+}) = {p \in L ([a, b]; R) : p (t) \geq 0 for a.e. t \in [a, b]}$ ;

if Ω is a set then measΩ, intΩ, $\bar{Ω}$ , and ∂ Ω denotes the measure, interior, closure, and boundary of the set Ω, respectively.

By a solution to (1), (2) we understand a function ${(u_{i})}_{i = 1}^{n} \in A C ([a, b]; R^{n})$ satisfying (1) almost everywhere in $[a, b]$ and (2).

Notation 1 Define, for every

i \in {1, \dots, n}

, the following functions:

\begin{matrix} q_{i} (t, ρ) \overset{def}{=} sup {| f_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) (t) | : {∥ u_{k} ∥}_{C} \leq ρ^{λ_{i k}}, k = 1, \dots, n} for a.e. t \in [a, b], \\ η_{i} (ρ) \overset{def}{=} sup {| h_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) | : {∥ u_{k} ∥}_{C} \leq ρ^{\frac{λ_{i k}}{μ_{i}}}, k = 1, \dots, n} . \end{matrix}

2 Main result

Theorem 1 Let

\begin{aligned} lim_{ρ \to + \infty} \int_{a}^{b} \frac{q_{i} (s, ρ)}{ρ} d s = 0, \\ lim_{ρ \to + \infty} \frac{η_{i} (ρ)}{ρ} = 0 (i = 1, \dots, n) . \end{aligned}

(5)

If the problem

\begin{matrix} u_{i}^{'} (t) = (1 - δ) p_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) (t) - δ p_{i} (- u_{1}, \dots, - u_{n}) (t) \\ for a.e. t \in [a, b] (i = 1, \dots, n), \end{matrix}

(6)

(1 - δ) ℓ_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) - δ ℓ_{i} (- u_{1}, \dots, - u_{n}) = 0 (i = 1, \dots, n)

(7)

has only the trivial solution for every $δ \in [0, 1 / 2]$ , then problem (1), (2) has at least one solution.

The proof of Theorem 1 is based on the following result by Krasnosel’skii (see [[12], Theorem 41.3, p.325]). We will formulate it in a form suitable for us.

Theorem 2 Let X be a Banach space,

Ω \subseteq X

be a symmetric^a bounded domain with

0 \in int Ω

. Let, moreover,

A : \bar{Ω} \to \bar{Ω}

be a compact^b continuous operator which has no fixed point on ∂ Ω. If, in addition,

\frac{A (x) - x}{∥ A (x) - x ∥} \neq \frac{A (- x) + x}{∥ A (- x) + x ∥} for x \in \partial Ω

then A has a fixed point in Ω, i.e. there exists $x_{0} \in Ω$ such that $x_{0} = A (x_{0})$ .

Furthermore, to prove Theorem 1 we will need the following lemma.

Lemma 1 Let, for every

δ \in [0, 1 / 2]

, problem (6), (7) has only the trivial solution. Then there exists

r > 0

such that for any

{(u_{i})}_{i = 1}^{n} \in A C ([a, b]; R^{n})

and any

δ \in [0, 1 / 2]

, the a priori estimate

\sum_{k = 1}^{n} {∥ u_{k} ∥}_{C}^{λ_{k 1}} \leq r \sum_{i = 1}^{n} ({∥ {\tilde{f}}_{i} ∥}_{L}^{λ_{i 1}} + {| {\tilde{h}}_{i} |}^{\frac{λ_{i 1}}{μ_{i}}})

(8)

holds, where

\begin{matrix} {\tilde{f}}_{i} (t) \overset{def}{=} u_{i}^{'} (t) - (1 - δ) p_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) (t) + δ p_{i} (- u_{1}, \dots, - u_{n}) (t) \\ for a.e. t \in [a, b] (i = 1, \dots, n), \\ {\tilde{h}}_{i} \overset{def}{=} (1 - δ) ℓ_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) - δ ℓ_{i} (- u_{1}, \dots, - u_{n}) (i = 1, \dots, n) . \end{matrix}

Proof Suppose on the contrary that for every

m \in N

there exist

{(u_{i m})}_{i = 1}^{n} \in A C ([a, b]; R^{n})

and

δ_{m} \in [0, 1 / 2]

such that

\sum_{k = 1}^{n} {∥ u_{k m} ∥}_{C}^{λ_{k 1}} > m \sum_{i = 1}^{n} ({∥ {\tilde{f}}_{i m} ∥}_{L}^{λ_{i 1}} + {| {\tilde{h}}_{i m} |}^{\frac{λ_{i 1}}{μ_{i}}}),

(9)

where

\begin{matrix} {\tilde{f}}_{i m} (t) \overset{def}{=} u_{i m}^{'} (t) - (1 - δ_{m}) p_{i} (u_{1 m}, \dots, u_{n m}) (t) + δ_{m} p_{i} (- u_{1 m}, \dots, - u_{n m}) (t) \\ for a.e. t \in [a, b] (i = 1, \dots, n), \end{matrix}

(10)

{\tilde{h}}_{i m} \overset{def}{=} (1 - δ_{m}) ℓ_{i} (u_{1 m}, \dots, u_{n m}) - δ_{m} ℓ_{i} (- u_{1 m}, \dots, - u_{n m}) (i = 1, \dots, n) .

(11)

Put

ρ_{m} = \sum_{k = 1}^{n} {∥ u_{k m} ∥}_{C}^{λ_{k 1}} for m \in N,

(12)

v_{i m} (t) = \frac{u_{i m} (t)}{ρ_{m}^{λ_{1 i}}} for t \in [a, b], m \in N .

(13)

Then

\sum_{i = 1}^{n} {∥ v_{i m} ∥}_{C}^{λ_{i 1}} = 1 for m \in N

(14)

and from (10) and (11), in view of (3), (4), (12), and (13), we get

\begin{matrix} \frac{{\tilde{f}}_{i m} (t)}{ρ_{m}^{λ_{1 i}}} = v_{i m}^{'} (t) - (1 - δ_{m}) p_{i} (v_{1 m}, \dots, v_{n m}) (t) + δ_{m} p_{i} (- v_{1 m}, \dots, - v_{n m}) (t) \\ for a.e. t \in [a, b] (i = 1, \dots, n; m \in N), \end{matrix}

(15)

\frac{{\tilde{h}}_{i m}}{ρ_{m}^{λ_{1 i} μ_{i}}} = (1 - δ_{m}) ℓ_{i} (v_{1 m}, \dots, v_{n m}) - δ_{m} ℓ_{i} (- v_{1 m}, \dots, - v_{n m}) (i = 1, \dots, n; m \in N) .

(16)

On the other hand, from (9) and (12) we have

\sum_{i = 1}^{n} ({∥ \frac{{\tilde{f}}_{i m}}{ρ_{m}^{λ_{1 i}}} ∥}_{L}^{λ_{i 1}} + | \frac{{\tilde{h}}_{i m}}{ρ_{m}^{λ_{1 i} μ_{i}}} |^{\frac{λ_{i 1}}{μ_{i}}}) < \frac{1}{m} for m \in N,

(17)

whence, according to [[13], Corollary IV.8.11] it follows that

lim_{meas E \to 0} \int_{E} \frac{{\tilde{f}}_{i m} (s)}{ρ_{m}^{λ_{1 i}}} d s = 0 uniformly for m \in N (i = 1, \dots, n) .

(18)

Therefore, (14), (15), and (18) imply that the sequences

{v_{i m}}_{m = 1}^{+ \infty}

(

i = 1, \dots, n

) are uniformly bounded and equicontinuous. Thus, according to Arzelà-Ascoli theorem, without loss of generality we can assume that there exist

{(v_{i 0})}_{i = 1}^{n} \in C ([a, b]; R^{n})

and

δ_{0} \in [0, 1 / 2]

such that

lim_{m \to + \infty} δ_{m} = δ_{0}, lim_{m \to + \infty} {∥ v_{i m} - v_{i 0} ∥}_{C} = 0 (i = 1, \dots, n) .

(19)

Furthermore, (15)-(17) yield

{(v_{i 0})}_{i = 1}^{n} \in A C ([a, b]; R^{n})

and show that it is a solution to (6), (7). However, (14) and (19) result in

\sum_{i = 1}^{n} {∥ v_{i 0} ∥}_{C}^{λ_{i 1}} = 1,

which contradicts our assumptions. □

Proof of Theorem 1 Let

X = C ([a, b]; R^{n}) \times R^{n}

and for

x \in X

, i.e.

x = (u, α) = ({(u_{i})}_{i = 1}^{n}, {(α_{i})}_{i = 1}^{n})

, define the norm

∥ x ∥ = {∥ u ∥}_{C} + ∥ α ∥ .

Then

(X, ∥ \cdot ∥)

is a Banach space. Let the operators

T, F, A : X \to X

be defined as follows:

T (x) \overset{def}{=} ({(u_{i} (a) + α_{i} + \int_{a}^{t} p_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) (s) d s)}_{i = 1}^{n}, {(α_{i} + ℓ_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}))}_{i = 1}^{n}),

(20)

F (x) \overset{def}{=} ({(\int_{a}^{t} f_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) (s) d s)}_{i = 1}^{n}, {(- h_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}))}_{i = 1}^{n}),

(21)

A (x) \overset{def}{=} T (x) + F (x),

(22)

and consider the operator equation

x = A (x) .

(23)

It can easily be seen that problem (1), (2), and (23) are equivalent in the following sense: if $x = (u, α)$ is a solution to (23), then $α_{i} = 0$ ( $i = 1, \dots, n$ ) and ${(u_{i})}_{i = 1}^{n}$ is a solution to (1), (2); and vice versa if ${(u_{i})}_{i = 1}^{n}$ is a solution to (1), (2), then $x = (u, 0)$ is a solution to (23).

Let

r > 0

be such that the conclusion of Lemma 1 is valid. According to (5) we can choose

ρ_{0} > 0

such that

\frac{1}{ρ_{0}} \sum_{i = 1}^{n} ({∥ q_{i} (\cdot, ρ_{0}^{λ_{1 i}}) ∥}_{L}^{λ_{i 1}} + | η_{i} (ρ_{0}^{λ_{1 i} μ_{i}}) |^{\frac{λ_{i 1}}{μ_{i}}}) < \frac{1}{r} .

(24)

Let, moreover,

Ω = {x \in X : \sum_{k = 1}^{n} ({∥ u_{k} ∥}_{C}^{λ_{k 1}} + | α_{k} |) < ρ_{0}} .

(25)

Now we will show that the operator A has a fixed point in Ω. According to Theorem 2 it is sufficient to show that

A (x) - x \neq ν (A (- x) + x) for x \in \partial Ω, ν \in (0, 1] .

Assume on the contrary that there exist

x_{0} = ({(u_{i 0})}_{i = 1}^{n}, {(α_{i 0})}_{i = 1}^{n}) \in \partial Ω

and

ν_{0} \in (0, 1]

such that

A (x_{0}) - x_{0} = ν_{0} (A (- x_{0}) + x_{0}) .

(26)

Then from (26), in view of (20)-(22) we obtain

x_{0} = (1 - δ_{0}) T (x_{0}) - δ_{0} T (- x_{0}) + (1 - δ_{0}) F (x_{0}) - δ_{0} F (- x_{0}),

where

δ_{0} = ν_{0} / (1 + ν_{0}) \in (0, 1 / 2]

, i.e.

\begin{matrix} u_{i 0} (t) = u_{i 0} (a) + α_{i 0} + (1 - δ_{0}) \int_{a}^{t} p_{i} (u_{10}, \dots, u_{n 0}) (s) d s \\ - δ_{0} \int_{a}^{t} p_{i} (- u_{10}, \dots, - u_{n 0}) (s) d s + (1 - δ_{0}) \int_{a}^{t} f_{i} (u_{10}, \dots, u_{n 0}) (s) d s \\ - δ_{0} \int_{a}^{t} f_{i} (- u_{10}, \dots, - u_{n 0}) (s) d s for t \in [a, b] (i = 1, \dots, n), \end{matrix}

(27)

\begin{matrix} α_{i 0} = α_{i 0} + (1 - δ_{0}) ℓ_{i} (u_{10}, \dots, u_{n 0}) - δ_{0} ℓ_{i} (- u_{10}, \dots, - u_{n 0}) \\ - (1 - δ_{0}) h_{i} (u_{10}, \dots, u_{n 0}) + δ_{0} h_{i} (- u_{10}, \dots, - u_{n 0}) (i = 1, \dots, n) . \end{matrix}

(28)

Now from (27) and (28) it follows that

{(u_{i})}_{i = 1}^{n} \in A C ([a, b]; R^{n})

,

α_{i 0} = 0 (i = 1, \dots, n),

(29)

\begin{matrix} u_{i 0}^{'} (t) = (1 - δ_{0}) p_{i} (u_{10}, \dots, u_{n 0}) (t) - δ_{0} p_{i} (- u_{10}, \dots, - u_{n 0}) (t) \\ + (1 - δ_{0}) f_{i} (u_{10}, \dots, u_{n 0}) (t) - δ_{0} f_{i} (- u_{10}, \dots, - u_{n 0}) (t) \\ for a.e. t \in [a, b] (i = 1, \dots, n), \end{matrix}

(30)

\begin{matrix} (1 - δ_{0}) ℓ_{i} (u_{10}, \dots, u_{n 0}) - δ_{0} ℓ_{i} (- u_{10}, \dots, - u_{n 0}) \\ = (1 - δ_{0}) h_{i} (u_{10}, \dots, u_{n 0}) - δ_{0} h_{i} (- u_{10}, \dots, - u_{n 0}) (i = 1, \dots, n) . \end{matrix}

(31)

Moreover, since

x_{0} \in \partial Ω

, on account of (25) and (29) we have

ρ_{0} = \sum_{k = 1}^{n} {∥ u_{k 0} ∥}_{C}^{λ_{k 1}} .

(32)

Now the equality (32), according to Notation 1, implies

\begin{matrix} | (1 - δ_{0}) f_{i} (u_{10}, \dots, u_{n 0}) (t) - δ_{0} f_{i} (- u_{10}, \dots, - u_{n 0}) (t) | \leq q_{i} (t, ρ_{0}^{λ_{1 i}}) \\ for a.e. t \in [a, b] (i = 1, \dots, n), \end{matrix}

(33)

| (1 - δ_{0}) h_{i} (u_{10}, \dots, u_{n 0}) - δ_{0} h_{i} (- u_{10}, \dots, - u_{n 0}) | \leq η_{i} (ρ_{0}^{λ_{1 i} μ_{i}}) (i = 1, \dots, n) .

(34)

Therefore, in view of Lemma 1, with respect to (30)-(34) we obtain

ρ_{0} \leq r \sum_{i = 1}^{n} ({∥ q_{i} (\cdot, ρ_{0}^{λ_{1 i}}) ∥}_{L}^{λ_{i 1}} + | η_{i} (ρ_{0}^{λ_{1 i} μ_{i}}) |^{\frac{λ_{i 1}}{μ_{i}}}) .

However, the latter inequality contradicts (24). □

3 Corollaries

If the operators

p_{i}

and

ℓ_{i}

are homogeneous, i.e. if moreover

\begin{matrix} p_{i} (- u_{1}, \dots, - u_{n}) (t) = - p_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) (t) \\ for a.e. t \in [a, b], {(u_{k})}_{k = 1}^{n} \in C ([a, b]; R^{n}) (i = 1, \dots, n), \end{matrix}

(35)

ℓ_{i} (- u_{1}, \dots, - u_{n}) = - ℓ_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}), {(u_{k})}_{k = 1}^{n} \in C ([a, b]; R^{n}) (i = 1, \dots, n),

(36)

then from Theorem 1 we obtain the following assertion.

Corollary 1 Let (5), (35), and (36) be fulfilled. If the problem

u_{i}^{'} (t) = p_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) (t) for a.e. t \in [a, b] (i = 1, \dots, n),

(37)

ℓ_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) = 0 (i = 1, \dots, n)

(38)

has only the trivial solution then problem (1), (2) has at least one solution.

For a particular case when

p_{i}

are defined by

\begin{matrix} p_{i} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) (t) \overset{def}{=} {\tilde{p}}_{i} (t) | u_{i + 1} (τ_{i} (t)) |^{λ_{i}} sgn u_{i + 1} (τ_{i} (t)) \\ for a.e. t \in [a, b] (i = 1, \dots, n - 1), \end{matrix}

(39)

p_{n} (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n}) (t) \overset{def}{=} {\tilde{p}}_{n} (t) | u_{1} (τ_{n} (t)) |^{λ_{n}} sgn u_{1} (τ_{n} (t)) for a.e. t \in [a, b],

(40)

where ${\tilde{p}}_{i} \in L ([a, b]; R)$ and $τ_{i} : [a, b] \to [a, b]$ are measurable functions, we have the following assertion.

Corollary 2 Let (5), (36), (39), and (40) be fulfilled. Let, moreover,

\prod_{i = 1}^{n} λ_{i} = 1,

and let problem (37), (38) have only the trivial solution. Then problem (1), (2) has at least one solution.

Namely, for a two-dimensional system of ordinary equations and a particular case of boundary conditions we get the following.

Corollary 3 Let

λ_{1} λ_{2} = 1

, and let

\begin{aligned} u_{1}^{'} = {\tilde{p}}_{1} (t) {| u_{2} |}^{λ_{1}} sgn u_{2}, u_{2}^{'} = {\tilde{p}}_{2} (t) {| u_{1} |}^{λ_{2}} sgn u_{1}, \\ u_{1} (a) - c_{1} u_{1} (b) = 0, u_{2} (a) - c_{2} u_{2} (b) = 0 \end{aligned}

with

{\tilde{p}}_{1}, {\tilde{p}}_{2} \in L ([a, b]; R)

,

c_{1}, c_{2} \in R

have only the trivial solution. Then the problem

\begin{matrix} u_{1}^{'} = {\tilde{p}}_{1} (t) {| u_{2} |}^{λ_{1}} sgn u_{2} + f_{1} (t), u_{2}^{'} = {\tilde{p}}_{2} (t) {| u_{1} |}^{λ_{2}} sgn u_{1} + f_{2} (t), \\ u_{1} (a) - c_{1} u_{1} (b) = h_{1}, u_{2} (a) - c_{2} u_{2} (b) = h_{2} \end{matrix}

has at least one solution for every $f_{1}, f_{2} \in L ([a, b]; R)$ and $h_{1}, h_{2} \in R$ .

The particular case of the system discussed in Corollary 3 is so-called second-order differential equation with λ-Laplacian. Therefore, in the case when ${\tilde{p}}_{1} \equiv 1$ , Corollary 3 yields the following.

Corollary 4 Let the problem

\begin{matrix} {(Φ_{λ} (u^{'} (t)))}^{'} = p (t) Φ_{λ} (u (t)), \\ u (a) - c_{1} u (b) = 0, u^{'} (a) - c_{2} u^{'} (b) = 0 \end{matrix}

with

p \in L ([a, b]; R)

,

Φ_{λ} (x) = {| x |}^{λ} sgn x

,

c_{1}, c_{2} \in R

have only the trivial solution. Then the problem

\begin{matrix} {(Φ_{λ} (u^{'} (t)))}^{'} = p (t) Φ_{λ} (u (t)) + f (t), \\ u (a) - c_{1} u (b) = h_{1}, u^{'} (a) - c_{2} u^{'} (b) = h_{2} \end{matrix}

has at least one solution for every $f \in L ([a, b]; R)$ and $h_{1}, h_{2} \in R$ .

Endnotes

^aIf $x \in Ω$ then $- x \in Ω$ .

^bIt transforms bounded sets into relatively compact sets.

Notes

Declarations

Acknowledgements

Robert Hakl has been supported by RVO: 67985840. Manuel Zamora has been supported by Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia, Spain, project MTM2011-23652, and by a postdoctoral grant from University of Granada.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)

Institute of Mathematics, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic

(2)

Departamento de Matemática, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad del Bío-Bío

References

Azbelev NV, Maksimov VP, Rakhmatullina LF: Introduction to the Theory of Functional Differential Equations. Nauka, Moscow; 1991.Google Scholar
Azbelev NV, Maksimov VP, Rakhmatullina LF: Methods of Modern Theory of Linear Functional Differential Equations. R&C Dynamics, Moscow; 2000.Google Scholar
Bravyi E: A note on the Fredholm property of boundary value problems for linear functional differential equations. Mem. Differ. Equ. Math. Phys. 2000, 20: 133-135.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Hakl R, Lomtatidze A, Stavroulakis IP: On a boundary value problem for scalar linear functional differential equations. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2004, 9(1):45-67.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Hakl R, Mukhigulashvili S: On a boundary value problem for n -th order linear functional differential systems. Georgian Math. J. 2005, 12(2):229-236.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Kiguradze I, Půža B: On boundary value problems for systems of linear functional differential equations. Czechoslov. Math. J. 1997, 47(2):341-373. 10.1023/A:1022829931363View ArticleGoogle Scholar
Kiguradze I, Půža B Folia Facult. Scien. Natur. Univ. Masarykiana Brunensis. Mathematica 12. In Boundary Value Problems for Systems of Linear Functional Differential Equations. Masaryk University, Brno; 2003.Google Scholar
Schwabik Š, Tvrdý M, Vejvoda O: Differential and Integral Equations: Boundary Value Problems and Adjoints. Academia, Praha; 1979.Google Scholar
Lasota A: Une généralisation du premier théorème de Fredholm et ses applications à la théorie des équations différentielles ordinaires. Ann. Pol. Math. 1966, 18: 65-77.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Kiguradze I, Půža B, Stavroulakis IP: On singular boundary value problems for functional differential equations of higher order. Georgian Math. J. 2001, 8(4):791-814.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Kiguradze I, Šremr J: Solvability conditions for non-local boundary value problems for two-dimensional half-linear differential systems. Nonlinear Anal. TMA 2011, 74(17):6537-6552. 10.1016/j.na.2011.06.038View ArticleGoogle Scholar
Krasnosel’skii MA, Zabreiko PP: Geometricheskie metody nelineinogo analiza. Nauka, Moscow; 1975.Google Scholar
Dunford N, Schwartz JT: Linear Operators: General Theory. Wiley-Interscience, New York; 1961.Google Scholar

Copyright

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.