Skip to main content

Advertisement

Lazer-Leach type condition for second order differential equations at resonance with impulsive effects via variational method

Article metrics

  • 768 Accesses

  • 1 Citations

Abstract

In this paper, we study the existence of periodic solutions of second order impulsive differential equations at resonance with impulsive effects. We prove the existence of periodic solutions under a generalized Lazer-Leach type condition by using variational method. The impulses can generate a periodic solution.

1 Introduction

We are concerned with the periodic boundary value problem of second order impulsive differential equations at resonance

{ x ( t ) + m 2 x ( t ) + g ( x ( t ) ) = e ( t ) , a.e.  t [ 0 , 2 π ] , x ( 0 ) x ( 2 π ) = x ( 0 ) x ( 2 π ) = 0 , x ( t j + ) = x ( t j ) , Δ x ( t j ) : = x ( t j + ) x ( t j ) = I j ( t j , x ( t j ) ) , j = 1 , 2 , , p ,
(1.1)

where mN, g:RR is a continuous function, e L 1 (0,2π), 0< t 1 < t 2 << t p <2π, and I j :[0,2π]×RR is continuous for every j.

When Δ x ( t j )0, problem (1.1) becomes the well-known periodic boundary value problem at resonance

{ x ( t ) + m 2 x ( t ) + g ( x ( t ) ) = e ( t ) , a.e.  t [ 0 , 2 π ] , x ( 0 ) x ( 2 π ) = x ( 0 ) x ( 2 π ) = 0 .
(1.2)

Assume that

lim x ± g(x)=g(±)
(g)

exist and are finite. Lazer and Leach [1] proved that (1.2) has at least one 2π-periodic solution provided that the following condition holds:

2 [ g ( + ) g ( ) ] 0 2 π e(t)sin(mt+θ)dt,θR.
(1.3)

From then on, a series of relevant resonant problems were studied (see [2]–[5] and the references cited therein) by some classical tools such as topological degree method, variational method, etc. Recently, the periodic problem of the second order differential equation with impulses has been widely studied because of its background in applied sciences (see [6]–[18] and the references cited therein). In this paper, we investigate problem (1.1) under a more general Lazer-Leach type condition. Define

G(x)= 0 x g(s)ds

and for j=1,2,,p,

J j (t,x)= 0 x I j (t,s)ds.

Throughout this paper, we give the following fundamental assumptions.

(H1): The limits

lim x ± G ( x ) x =G(±)

exist and are finite.

(H2): There exist continuous, 2π-periodic functions K 1 (t), K 2 (t),, K p (t) such that for j=1,2,,p,

lim | x | I j ( t , x ) x = K j (t)uniformly for tR.

(H3): For all θR,

2 [ G ( + ) G ( ) ] 0 2 π e(t)sin(mt+θ)dt+ j = 1 p K j ( t j )sin(m t j +θ).

For the sake of convenience, we decompose (H3) into the following two conditions.

( H 3 + ): For all θR,

2 [ G ( + ) G ( ) ] > 0 2 π e(t)sin(mt+θ)dt+ j = 1 p K j ( t j )sin(m t j +θ).

( H 3 ): For all θR,

2 [ G ( + ) G ( ) ] < 0 2 π e(t)sin(mt+θ)dt+ j = 1 p K j ( t j )sin(m t j +θ).

We now can state the main theorems of this paper.

Theorem 1.1

Assume that conditions (H1), (H2) and ( H 3 + ) hold. Then problem (1.1) has at least one 2π-periodic solution.

Theorem 1.2

Assume that conditions (H1), (H2) and ( H 3 ) hold. Then problem (1.1) has at least one 2π-periodic solution.

From Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 1.2, we obtain the following theorem.

Theorem 1.3

Assume that conditions (H1), (H2) and (H3) hold. Then problem (1.1) has at least one 2π-periodic solution.

Moreover, we have the following corollary.

Corollary 1.4

Assume that conditions (H1) and

( H 3 ): for allθR,

2 [ G ( + ) G ( ) ] 0 2 π e(t)sin(mt+θ)dt
(1.4)

hold. Then problem (1.2) has at least one 2π-periodic solution.

Remark 1.5

It is easy to find a function g(x) such that (g) is not satisfied and (H1) holds. For example, we can take g(x)=cosx. Hence, Corollary 1.4 improves the related results in the literature mentioned above. Moreover, since we consider the problem with impulses, Theorem 1.3 is also a complement of the pioneering works.

Remark 1.6

When condition ( H 3 ) is not satisfied, i.e., there exists θ 0 R such that

2 [ G ( + ) G ( ) ] = 0 2 π e(t)sin(mt+ θ 0 )dt,

problem (1.2) may have no solution. For example, we consider the resonant differential equation

x + m 2 x+arctanx=4cosmt.
(1.5)

Obviously, g(x)=arctanx, e(t)=4cosmt and G(+)= π 2 , G()= π 2 . We have

2 [ G ( + ) G ( ) ] 0 2 π e ( t ) sin ( m t + θ ) d t = 2 π 4 0 2 π cos m t sin ( m t + θ ) d t = 2 π 4 π sin θ .

We take θ 0 R such that sin θ 0 = 1 2 . Then ( H 3 ) is not satisfied. From now on, we prove that (1.5) has no 2π-periodic solution by contradiction. Assume that (1.5) has 2π-periodic solution. Multiplying both sides of (1.5) by cosmt and integrating over [0,2π], we get

4π= 0 2 π arctanxcosmtdt 0 2 π |arctanxcosmt|dt π 2 0 2 π dt= π 2 ,

which is impossible. Hence, problem (1.2) may have no solution if condition ( H 3 ) is not satisfied. Now, we give the following boundary value condition:

x(0)x(2π)= x (0) x (2π)=0
(1.6)

and the impulsive condition

Δ x ( π m ) =3π.
(1.7)

Clearly, p=1 and K 1 ( π m )=3π. Then

2 [ G ( + ) G ( ) ] 0 2 π e ( t ) sin ( m t + θ ) d t K 1 ( π m ) sin ( m π m + θ ) = 2 π 4 π sin θ + 3 π sin θ = 2 π π sin θ 0 for  θ R .

Hence, (H1), (H2) and (H3) hold. Equivalently, Eq. (1.5) with conditions (1.6) and (1.7) has at least one 2π-periodic solution. Therefore, the impulses in problem (1.1) can generate a periodic solution.

The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we shall state some notations, some necessary definitions and a saddle theorem due to Rabinowitz. In Section 3, we shall prove Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 1.2.

2 Preliminaries

In the following, we introduce some notations and some necessary definitions.

Define

H= { x H 1 ( 0 , 2 π ) : x ( 0 ) = x ( 2 π ) } ,

with the norm

x= ( 0 2 π ( x 2 ( t ) + x 2 ( t ) ) d t ) 1 2 .

Consider the functional φ(x) defined on H by

φ ( x ) = 1 2 0 2 π x 2 ( t ) d t m 2 2 0 2 π x 2 ( t ) d t 0 2 π G ( x ( t ) ) d t + 0 2 π e ( t ) x ( t ) d t + j = 1 p J j ( t j , x ( t j ) ) .
(2.1)

Similarly as in [18], φ(x) is continuously differentiable on H, and

φ ( x ) v ( t ) = 0 2 π x ( t ) v ( t ) d t m 2 0 2 π x ( t ) v ( t ) d t 0 2 π g ( x ( t ) ) v ( t ) d t + 0 2 π e ( t ) v ( t ) d t + j = 1 p I j ( t j , x ( t j ) ) v ( t j ) for  v ( t ) H .
(2.2)

Now, we have the following lemma.

Lemma 2.1

IfxHis a critical point of φ, then x is a 2π-periodic solution of Eq. (1.1).

The proof of Lemma 2.1 is similar to Lemma 2.1 in [9], so we omit it.

We say that φ satisfies (PS) if every sequence ( x n ) for which φ( x n ) is bounded in and φ ( x n )0 (as n) possesses a convergent subsequence.

To prove the main result, we will use the following saddle point theorem due to Rabinowitz [19] (or see [20]).

Theorem 2.2

Letφ C 1 (H,R)andH= H H + , dim( H )<, dim( H + )=. We suppose that:

  1. (a)

    there exist a bounded neighborhood D of 0 in H and a constant α such that φ | D α;

  2. (b)

    there exists a constant β>α such that φ | H + β;

  3. (c)

    φ satisfies (PS).

Then the functional φ has a critical point in H.

3 The proof of the main results

In this section, we first show that the functional φ satisfies the Palais-Smale condition.

Lemma 3.1

Assume that conditions (H1), (H2) and (H3) hold. Then φ defined by (2.1) satisfies (PS).

Proof

Let M>0 be a constant and { x n }H be a sequence satisfying

| φ ( x n ) | = | 1 2 0 2 π x n 2 d t m 2 2 0 2 π x n 2 d t 0 2 π G ( x n ) d t + 0 2 π e ( t ) x n ( t ) d t + j = 1 p J j ( t j , x n ( t j ) ) | M
(3.1)

and

lim n φ ( x n ) =0.
(3.2)

We first prove that { x n } is bounded in H by contradiction. Assume that { x n } is unbounded. Let { z k } be an arbitrary sequence bounded in H. It follows from (3.2) that, for any kN,

lim n | φ ( x n ) z k | lim n φ ( x n ) z k =0.

Thus

lim n φ ( x n ) z k =0uniformly for kN.

Hence

lim n ( 0 2 π ( x n z k m 2 x n z k ) d t 0 2 π ( g ( x n ) z k e ( t ) z k ) d t + j = 1 p I j ( t j , x n ( t j ) ) z k ( t j ) ) = 0 .
(3.3)

By (H1) and (H2), we have

lim n ( 0 2 π g ( x n ) z k e ( t ) z k x n d t j = 1 p I j ( t j , x n ( t j ) ) z k ( t j ) x n ) =0.
(3.4)

From (3.3) and (3.4), we obtain

lim n 0 2 π ( x n x n z k m 2 x n x n z k ) dt=0.
(3.5)

Set

y n = x n x n .

Then we have

lim n 0 2 π ( y n z k m 2 y n z k ) dt=0,

and furthermore,

lim n i 0 2 π [ ( y n y i ) z k m 2 ( y n y i ) z k ] dt=0.
(3.6)

Replacing z k in (3.6) by ( y n y i ), we get

lim n i ( y n y i 2 ( m 2 + 1 ) y n y i 2 2 ) =0.

Due to the compact imbedding H L 2 (0,2π), going to a subsequence,

y n y 0 weakly in H, y n y 0 in  L 2 (0,2π).

Therefore,

lim n i y n y i 2 2 =0.

Furthermore, we have

lim n i y n y i 2 =0,

which implies that { y n } is a Cauchy sequence in H. Thus, y n y 0 in H. It follows from (3.5) and the usual regularity argument for ordinary differential equations (see [21]) that

y 0 = k 1 sinmt+ k 2 cosmt,
(3.7)

where k 1 2 + k 2 2 = 1 ( m 2 + 1 ) π ( y 0 =1). (Different subsequences of { y n } correspond to different k 1 and k 2 .)

Write (3.7) as

y 0 = 1 ( m 2 + 1 ) π sin(mt+θ),

where θ satisfies sinθ= k 2 k 1 2 + k 2 2 and cosθ= k 1 k 1 2 + k 2 2 .

Taking z k = 1 ( m 2 + 1 ) π sin(mt+θ), we get, for any nN,

0 2 π ( x n z k m 2 x n z k ) dt=0.
(3.8)

Thus, it follows from (3.3) and (3.8) that

lim n [ 0 2 π ( g ( x n ) e ( t ) ) 1 ( m 2 + 1 ) π sin ( m t + θ ) d t j = 1 p I j ( t j , x n ( t j ) ) 1 ( m 2 + 1 ) π sin ( m t j + θ ) ] = 0 .
(3.9)

By (H1) and (H2), we obtain

lim n [ 0 2 π ( g ( x n ) e ( t ) ) ( 1 ( m 2 + 1 ) π sin ( m t + θ ) y n ) d t j = 1 p I j ( t j , x n ( t j ) ) ( 1 ( m 2 + 1 ) π sin ( m t j + θ ) y n ( t j ) ) ] = 0 .
(3.10)

It follows from (3.9) and (3.10) that

lim n [ 0 2 π ( g ( x n ) e ( t ) ) y n d t j = 1 p I j ( t j , x n ( t j ) ) y n ( t j ) ] =0.

Hence, replacing z k in (3.3) by y n , we have

lim n 0 2 π ( x n x n x n m 2 x n x n x n ) dt=0.
(3.11)

Now, dividing (3.1) by x n , we get

| 1 2 0 2 π ( x n 2 x n m 2 x n 2 x n ) dt 0 2 π G ( x n ) e ( t ) x n x n dt+ j = 1 p J j ( t j , x n ( t j ) ) x n | M x n .

Passing to the limits, we have

0 = lim n 0 2 π ( G ( x n ) e ( t ) x n ) d t x n lim n j = 1 p J j ( t j , x n ( t j ) ) x n = lim n 0 2 π G ( x n ) x n x n x n d t lim n 0 2 π e ( t ) x n x n d t lim n j = 1 p J j ( t j , x n ( t j ) ) x n ( t j ) x n ( t j ) x n .

Noting that x n x n 1 ( m 2 + 1 ) π sin(mt+θ) in H as n and

lim n x n (t)= { + , t I + , , t I ,

where I + :={t[0,2π]sin(mt+θ)>0}, I :={t[0,2π]sin(mt+θ)<0}, we get from the Lebesgue domain convergence theorem that

0 = I + G ( + ) 1 ( m 2 + 1 ) π sin + ( m t + θ ) d t I + G ( ) 1 ( m 2 + 1 ) π sin ( m t + θ ) d t 0 2 π e ( t ) 1 ( m 2 + 1 ) π sin ( m t + θ ) d t j = 1 p K j ( t j ) 1 ( m 2 + 1 ) π sin ( m t j + θ ) ,

i.e.,

0=2 [ G ( + ) G ( ) ] 0 2 π e(t)sin(mt+θ)dt j = 1 p K j ( t j )sin(m t j +θ),

which contradicts (H3). This implies that the sequence { x n } is bounded. Thus, there exists x 0 H such that x n x 0 weakly in H. Due to the compact imbedding H L 2 (0,2π) and HC(0,2π), going to a subsequence,

x n x 0 in  L 2 (0,2π), x n x 0 in C(0,2π).

From (3.3), we obtain

lim n i ( 0 2 π ( ( x n x i ) z k m 2 ( x n x i ) z k ) d t 0 2 π ( g ( x n ) g ( x i ) ) z k d t + j = 1 p ( I j ( t j , x n ( t j ) ) I j ( t j , x i ( t j ) ) ) z k ( t j ) ) = 0 .

Replacing z k by x n x i in the above equality, we get

lim n i ( 0 2 π ( ( x n x i ) 2 m 2 ( x n x i ) 2 ) d t 0 2 π ( g ( x n ) g ( x i ) ) ( x n x i ) d t + j = 1 p ( I j ( t j , x n ( t j ) ) I j ( t j , x i ( t j ) ) ) ( x n ( t j ) x i ( t j ) ) ) = 0 .
(3.12)

By (H1) and (H2), we have

lim n i 0 2 π ( g ( x n ) g ( x i ) ) ( x n x i )dt=0
(3.13)

and

lim n i j = 1 p ( I j ( t j , x n ( t j ) ) I j ( t j , x i ( t j ) ) ) ( x n ( t j ) x i ( t j ) ) =0.
(3.14)

Thus, it follows from (3.12), (3.13) and (3.14) that

lim n i 0 2 π [ ( x n x i ) 2 m 2 ( x n x i ) 2 ] dt=0.

Therefore,

lim n i x n x i 2 =0,

which implies x n x 0 in H. It shows that φ satisfies (PS). □

Remark 3.2

If conditions (H1), (H2) and ( H 3 + ) (or ( H 3 )), φ defined by (2.1) still satisfies (PS).

Now, we can give the proof of Theorem 1.1.

Proof of Theorem 1.1

Denote

H =Rspan{sint,cost,sin2t,cos2t,,sinmt,cosmt}

and

H + =span { sin ( m + 1 ) t , cos ( m + 1 ) t , } .

We first prove that

lim inf x φ(x)=for x H
(3.15)

by contradiction. Assume that there exists a sequence ( x n ) H such that x n (as n) and there exists a constant c satisfying

lim inf n φ( x n ) c .
(3.16)

By (H1), we have

lim n 0 2 π G ( x n ) e ( t ) x n x n 2 dt=0.
(3.17)

By (H2), we get

lim n j = 1 p J j ( t j , x n ( t j ) ) x n 2 =0.
(3.18)

From (3.16) and the definition of φ, we obtain

lim inf n [ 1 2 0 2 π x n 2 m 2 x n 2 x n 2 d t 0 2 π G ( x n ) e ( t ) x n x n 2 d t + j = 1 p J j ( t j , x n ( t j ) ) x n 2 ] 0.
(3.19)

For x H , we get that there exist constants a 0 , a 1 ,, a m , b 1 , b 2 ,, b m such that

x(t)= j = 0 m a j cosjt+ j = 1 m b j sinjt.

Since 0 2 π sin 2 jtdt= 0 2 π cos 2 jtdt for j=1,2, , we have, for x H ,

0 2 π x 2 d t = 0 2 π j = 1 m j 2 a j 2 sin 2 j t d t + 0 2 π j = 1 m j 2 b j 2 cos 2 j t d t m 2 [ 0 2 π j = 1 m a j 2 sin 2 j t d t + 0 2 π j = 1 m b j 2 cos 2 j t d t ] = m 2 [ 0 2 π j = 1 m a j 2 cos 2 j t d t + 0 2 π j = 1 m b j 2 sin 2 j t d t ] m 2 0 2 π x 2 d t .

Hence, for x H ,

0 2 π ( x 2 m 2 x 2 ) dt0.
(3.20)

The equality in (3.20) holds only for

x= 1 ( m 2 + 1 ) π sin(mt+θ),θR.

Set y n = x n x n . Since dim H <, going to a subsequence, there exists y 0 H such that y n y 0 in H and y n y 0 in L 2 (0,2π). Then (3.17), (3.18), (3.19) and (3.20) imply that

y 0 = 1 ( m 2 + 1 ) π sin(mt+θ),θR.

By (3.16), we have, for n large enough,

1 2 0 2 π x n 2 m 2 x n 2 x n dt 0 2 π G ( x n ) e ( t ) x n x n dt+ j = 1 p J j ( t j , x n ( t j ) ) x n c x n .
(3.21)

It follows from x n H that

0 2 π x n 2 m 2 x n 2 x n 0.
(3.22)

From (3.21) and (3.22), we get, for n large enough,

c x n 0 2 π G ( x n ) e ( t ) x n x n dt+ j = 1 p J j ( t j , x n ( t j ) ) x n .

Passing to the limits and using an argument similarly as in the proof of Lemma 3.1, we get

2 [ G ( + ) G ( ) ] 0 2 π e(t)sin(mt+θ)dt+ j = 1 p K j ( t j )sin(m t j +θ),

which is a contradiction to ( H 3 + ).

Then (3.15) holds.

Next, we prove that

lim x φ(x)=for all x H + ,

and φ is bounded on bounded sets.

Because of the compact imbedding of HC(0,2π) and H L 2 (0,2π), there exist constants m 1 , m 2 such that

x m 1 x, x 2 m 2 x.

Then by (H1) and (H2), one has that there exist positive constants c g , c 1 , c 2 ,, c p such that

| φ ( x ) | = | 1 2 0 2 π x 2 d t m 2 2 0 2 π x 2 d t 0 2 π [ G ( x ) e ( t ) x ] d t + j = 1 p J j ( t j , x ( t j ) ) | 1 2 x 2 + m 2 2 m 2 2 x 2 + 0 2 π ( c g | x | + | e ( t ) | | x | ) d t + j = 1 p c j | x ( t j ) | 1 + m 2 m 2 2 2 x 2 + m 1 ( c g + e 1 ) x + j = 1 p c j m 1 x .
(3.23)

Hence, φ is bounded on the bounded sets of H.

For x H + , using an argument similar to the case x H , we have

x 2 ( ( m + 1 ) 2 + 1 ) x 2 2 .
(3.24)

Thus, from (3.23) and (3.24), we obtain

φ ( x ) = 1 2 0 2 π x 2 d t m 2 2 0 2 π x 2 d t 0 2 π [ G ( x ) e ( t ) x ] d t + j = 1 p J j ( t j , x ( t j ) ) 2 m + 1 2 ( ( m + 1 ) 2 + 1 ) x 2 m 1 ( c g + e 1 + j = 1 p c j ) x ,

which implies

lim x φ(x)=for all x H + .

Up to now, the conditions (a) and (b) of Theorem 2.2 are satisfied. According to Remark 3.2, (c) is also satisfied. Hence, by Theorem 2.2, problem (1.1) has at least one solution. This completes the proof. □

Next, we prove Theorem 1.2 slightly differently from Theorem 1.1.

Proof of Theorem 1.2

Denote

H =Rspan { sin t , cos t , sin 2 t , cos 2 t , , sin ( m 1 ) t , cos ( m 1 ) t }

and

H + =span{sinmt,cosmt,}.

We first prove that

lim inf x φ(x)=for x H .
(3.25)

For x H , we get that there exist constants a 0 , a 1 ,, a m 1 , b 1 , b 2 ,, b m 1 such that

x(t)= j = 0 m 1 a j cosjt+ j = 1 m 1 b j sinjt.

Since 0 2 π sin 2 jtdt= 0 2 π cos 2 jtdt for j=1,2, , we have, for x H ,

0 2 π x 2 d t = 0 2 π j = 1 m 1 j 2 a j 2 sin 2 j t d t + 0 2 π j = 1 m 1 j 2 b j 2 cos 2 j t d t ( m 1 ) 2 [ 0 2 π j = 1 m 1 a j 2 sin 2 j t d t + 0 2 π j = 1 m 1 b j 2 cos 2 j t d t ] = ( m 1 ) 2 [ 0 2 π j = 1 m 1 a j 2 cos 2 j t d t + 0 2 π j = 1 m 1 b j 2 sin 2 j t d t ] ( m 1 ) 2 0 2 π x 2 d t .

Hence, for x H ,

x 2 = 0 2 π ( x 2 + x 2 ) dt [ ( m 1 ) 2 + 1 ] 0 2 π x 2 dt= [ ( m 1 ) 2 + 1 ] x 2 2 .

The equality holds only for

x= 1 ( ( m 1 ) 2 + 1 ) π sin ( ( m 1 ) t + θ ) ,θR.

If x H and x, then

x 2 .

For x H , we have

0 2 π ( x 2 m 2 x 2 ) dt ( m 1 ) 2 0 2 π x 2 dt m 2 0 2 π x 2 dt=(2m1) x 2 2 .

By (H1) and (H2), we get that there exists a constant c 0 >0 such that

| 0 2 π [ G ( x ) e ( t ) x ] d t + j = 1 p J j ( t j , x ( t j ) ) | c 0 x 2 .

Hence, for x H , we obtain

φ ( x ) = 1 2 0 2 π ( x 2 m 2 x 2 ) d t 0 2 π [ G ( x ) e ( t ) x ] d t + j = 1 p J j ( t j , x ( t j ) ) 1 2 ( 2 m 1 ) x 2 2 + c 0 x 2 as  x .

Therefore, (3.25) holds.

Next, we prove that

lim x φ(x)=for all x H + ,

and φ is bounded on bounded sets.

Because of the compact imbedding of HC(0,2π) and H L 2 (0,2π), there exist constants m 1 , m 2 such that

x m 1 x, x 2 m 2 x.

Then, by (H1) and (H2), one has that there exist positive constants c g , c 1 , c 2 ,, c p such that

| φ ( x ) | = | 1 2 0 2 π x 2 d t m 2 2 0 2 π x 2 d t 0 2 π [ G ( x ) e ( t ) x ] d t + j = 1 p J j ( t j , x ( t j ) ) | 1 2 x 2 + m 2 2 m 2 2 x 2 + 0 2 π ( c g | x | + | e ( t ) | | x | ) d t + j = 1 p c j | x ( t j ) | 1 + m 2 m 2 2 2 x 2 + m 1 ( c g + e 1 ) x + j = 1 p c j m 1 x .

Hence, φ is bounded on the bounded sets of H.

In what follows, we prove that

lim x φ(x)=+for x H +

by contradiction. Assume that there exists a sequence ( x n ) H such that x n (as n), and there exists a constant c + satisfying

lim sup n φ( x n ) c + .
(3.26)

By (H1), we have

lim n 0 2 π G ( x n ) e ( t ) x n x n 2 dt=0.
(3.27)

By (H2), we get

lim n j = 1 p J j ( t j , x n ( t j ) ) x n 2 =0.
(3.28)

From (3.26) and the definition of φ, we obtain

lim sup n [ 1 2 0 2 π x n 2 m 2 x n 2 x n 2 d t 0 2 π G ( x n ) e ( t ) x n x n 2 d t + j = 1 p J j ( t j , x n ( t j ) ) x n 2 ] 0.
(3.29)

For x H + , we get

0 2 π x 2 dt m 2 0 2 π x 2 dt.

Hence, for x H + , we have

0 2 π ( x 2 m 2 x 2 ) dt0.
(3.30)

The equality in (3.30) holds only for

x= 1 ( m 2 + 1 ) π sin(mt+θ),θR.

Set y n = x n x n . There exists y 0 H + such that y n y 0 weakly in H. Due to the compact imbedding H L 2 (0,2π), going to a subsequence, y n y 0 in L 2 (0,2π). Then (3.27), (3.28), (3.29) and (3.30) imply that

y 0 = 1 ( m 2 + 1 ) π sin(mt+θ),θR.

By (3.26), we have, for n large enough,

1 2 0 2 π x n 2 m 2 x n 2 x n dt 0 2 π G ( x n ) e ( t ) x n x n dt+ j = 1 p J j ( t j , x n ( t j ) ) x n c + x n .
(3.31)

It follows from x n H + that

0 2 π x n 2 m 2 x n 2 x n dt0.
(3.32)

From (3.31) and (3.32), we get, for n large enough,

c + x n 0 2 π G ( x n ) e ( t ) x n x n dt+ j = 1 p J j ( t j , x n ( t j ) ) x n .

Passing to the limits and using an argument similarly as in the proof of Lemma 3.1, we get

2 [ G ( + ) G ( ) ] 0 2 π e(t)sin(mt+θ)dt+ j = 1 p K j ( t j )sin(m t j +θ),

which is a contradiction to ( H 3 ). This completes the proof. □

References

  1. 1.

    Lazer AC, Leach DE: Bounded perturbations of forced harmonic oscillators at resonance. Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. 1969, 82(4):49-68. 10.1007/BF02410787

  2. 2.

    Capietto A, Wang Z: Periodic solutions of Liénard equations with asymmetric nonlinearities at resonance. J. Lond. Math. Soc. 2003, 68: 119-132. 10.1112/S0024610703004459

  3. 3.

    Landesman EM, Lazer AC: Nonlinear perturbations of linear elliptic boundary value problems at resonance. J. Math. Mech. 1970, 19: 609-623.

  4. 4.

    Tomiczek P: The Duffing equation with the potential Landesman-Lazer condition. Nonlinear Anal. 2009, 70(2):735-740. 10.1016/j.na.2008.01.006

  5. 5.

    Wang Z: Lazer-Leach type conditions on periodic solutions of Liénard equation with a deviating argument at resonance. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2013., 2013:

  6. 6.

    Bogun I: Existence of weak solutions for impulsive p -Laplacian problem with superlinear impulses. Nonlinear Anal., Real World Appl. 2012, 13(6):2701-2707. 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2012.03.014

  7. 7.

    Bonanno G, Bella BD, Henderson J: Existence of solutions to second-order boundary-value problems with small perturbations of impulses. Electron. J. Differ. Equ. 2013., 2013: 10.1186/1687-1847-2013-126

  8. 8.

    Bonanno G, Bella BD, Henderson J: Infinitely many solutions for a boundary value problem with impulsive effects. Bound. Value Probl. 2013., 2013: 10.1186/1687-2770-2013-278

  9. 9.

    Ding W, Qian D: Periodic solutions for sublinear systems via variational approach. Nonlinear Anal., Real World Appl. 2010, 11(4):2603-2609. 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2009.09.007

  10. 10.

    Lakshmikantham V, Bainov DD, Simeonov PS: Theory of Impulsive Differential Equations. World Scientific, Singapore; 1989.

  11. 11.

    Nieto JJ, O’Regan D: Variational approach to impulsive differential equations. Nonlinear Anal., Real World Appl. 2009, 10(2):680-690. 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2007.10.022

  12. 12.

    Qian D, Li X: Periodic solutions for ordinary differential equations with impulsive effects. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2005, 303: 288-303. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2004.08.034

  13. 13.

    Sun H, Li Y, Nieto JJ, Tang Q: Existence of solutions for Sturm boundary value problem of impulsive differential equations. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2012., 2012:

  14. 14.

    Sun J, Chu J, Chen H: Periodic solution generated by impulses for differential equations. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2013, 404: 562-569. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2013.03.036

  15. 15.

    Tian Y, Ge W: Applications of variational methods to boundary value problem for impulsive differential equations. Proc. Edinb. Math. Soc. 2008, 2: 509-527.

  16. 16.

    Xiao J, Nieto JJ, Luo Z: Multiplicity of solutions for nonlinear second order impulsive differential equations with linear derivative dependence via variational methods. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 2012, 1: 426-432. 10.1016/j.cnsns.2011.05.015

  17. 17.

    Zhang H, Li Z: Variational approach to impulsive differential equations with periodic boundary conditions. Nonlinear Anal., Real World Appl. 2010, 11(1):67-78. 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2008.10.016

  18. 18.

    Zhang Z, Yuan R: An application of variational methods to Dirichlet boundary value problem with impulses. Nonlinear Anal., Real World Appl. 2010, 11(1):155-162. 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2008.10.044

  19. 19.

    Rabinowitz PH: Minmax Methods in Critical Point Theory with Applications to Differential Equations. Am. Math. Soc., Providence; 1986.

  20. 20.

    Mawhin J, Willem M: Critical Point Theory and Hamiltonian Systems. Springer, Berlin; 1989.

  21. 21.

    Fučík S: Solvability of Nonlinear Equations and Boundary Value Problems. Reidel, Dordrecht; 1980.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author would like to express their thanks to the editor of the journal and the referees for their careful reading of the first draft of the manuscript and making many helpful comments and suggestions which improved the presentation of the paper. This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (11401274), Science and Technology Landing Project of colleges and universities in Jiangxi Province (KJLD14092) and Natural Science Foundation Project of Science and Technology Department of Jiangxi Province (20132BAB201012, 20142BDH80027).

Author information

Correspondence to Jin Li.

Additional information

Competing interests

The author declares that they have no competing interests.

Author’s contributions

The author has contributed in obtaining new results and written the whole article.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits use, duplication, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as 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.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Keywords

  • impulsive differential equations
  • Lazer-Leach type condition
  • variational method