Open Access

On sufficient conditions for Carathéodory functions with applications

Journal of Inequalities and Applications20132013:191

https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2013-191

Received: 25 November 2012

Accepted: 16 January 2013

Published: 19 April 2013

Abstract

In the present paper, we derive some interesting relations associated with the Carathéodory functions which yield sufficient conditions for the Carathéodory functions in the open unit disk U = { z : | z | < 1 } . Some interesting applications of the main results are also obtained.

MSC:30C45, 30C80.

Keywords

analytic functions starlike functions convex functions spirallike functions Carathéodory functions

1 Introduction

Let P denote the class of functions of the form
p ( z ) = n = 0 p n z n ,
which are analytic in the unit disc U = { z : | z | < 1 } . The function p ( z ) is called a Carathéodory function if it satisfies the condition
Re ( p ( z ) ) > 0 .
Moreover, let A denote the class of functions of the form
f ( z ) = z + n = 2 a n z n ,
(1.1)

which are analytic in the unit disc U .

A function f ( z ) A is in K, the class of convex functions, if it satisfies
Re ( 1 + z f ( z ) f ( z ) ) > 0 ( z U ) .
(1.2)
Also, a function f ( z ) A is in S λ ( | λ | < π 2 ), the class of λ-spirallike functions, if it satisfies
Re ( e i λ z f ( z ) f ( z ) ) > 0 ( z U ) .
(1.3)

Moreover, we denote by S = S 0 the class of starlike functions in U .

Definition 1.1 Let f ( z ) and F ( z ) be analytic functions. The function f ( z ) is said to be subordinate to F ( z ) , written f ( z ) F ( z ) , if there exists a function w ( z ) analytic in U , with w ( 0 ) = 0 and | w ( z ) | 1 , and such that f ( z ) = F ( w ( z ) ) . If F ( z ) is univalent, then f ( z ) F ( z ) if and only if f ( 0 ) = F ( 0 ) and f ( U ) F ( U ) .

Definition 1.2 Let D be the set of analytic functions q ( z ) and injective on U ¯ E ( q ) , where
E ( q ) = { ζ U : lim z ζ q ( z ) = }

and q ( ζ ) 0 for ζ U E ( q ) . Further, let D a = { q ( z ) D : q ( 0 ) = a } .

Many authors have obtained several relations of Carathéodory functions, e.g., see ([113]).

In the present paper, we derive some relations associated with the Carathéodory functions which yield the sufficient conditions for Carathéodory functions in U . Some applications of the main results are also obtained.

2 Main results

To prove our results, we need the following lemma due to Miller and Mocanu [[14], p.24]

Lemma 2.1 Let q ( z ) D a and let
p ( z ) = b + b n z n +
(2.1)
be analytic in U with p ( z ) b . If p ( z ) q ( z ) , then there exist points z 0 U and ζ 0 U E ( q ) and on m n 1 for which
  1. (i)

    p ( z 0 ) = q ( ζ 0 ) ,

     
  2. (ii)

    z 0 p ( z 0 ) = m ζ 0 q ( ζ 0 ) .

     
Theorem 2.1 Let
P : U C
with
Re ( a ¯ P ( z ) ) > 0 ( a C ) .
If p ( z ) is an analytic function in U with p ( 0 ) = 1 and
Re ( p ( z ) + P ( z ) z p ( z ) ) > E 2 | a | 2 Re ( a ¯ P ( z ) ) ,
(2.2)
then
Re ( a p ( z ) ) > 0 ,
where
E = ( Re ( a ) ) ( Re ( a ¯ P ( z ) ) ) 2 + 2 Re ( a ¯ P ( z ) ) ( Im ( a ) ) 2 + ( Re ( a ) ) ( Im ( a ) ) 2
(2.3)

with Re ( a ) > 0 .

Proof Let us define both q ( z ) and h ( z ) as follows:
q ( z ) = a p ( z )
and
h ( z ) = a + a ¯ z 1 z ( Re ( a ) > 0 ) ,
where p ( z ) is defined by (2.1) since q ( z ) and h ( z ) are analytic functions in U with q ( 0 ) = h ( 0 ) = a C with
h ( U ) = { w : Re ( w ) > 0 } .
Now, we suppose that q ( z ) h ( z ) . Therefore, by using Lemma 2.1, there exist points
z 0 U and ζ 0 U { 1 }

such that q ( z 0 ) = h ( ζ 0 ) and z 0 q ( z 0 ) = m ζ 0 h ( ζ 0 ) , m n 1 .

We note that
ζ 0 = h 1 ( q ( z 0 ) ) = q ( z 0 ) a q ( z 0 ) + a ¯
(2.4)
and
ς 0 h ( ς 0 ) = | q ( z 0 ) a | 2 2 Re ( a q ( z 0 ) ) .
(2.5)
We have h ( ζ 0 ) = ρ i ( ρ R ); therefore,
(2.6)
where
and
C = Re ( a ¯ p ( z 0 ) ) 2 Re ( a ) .
We can see that the function g ( ρ ) in (2.6) takes the maximum value at ρ 1 given by
ρ 1 = Im ( a ) ( 1 + Re ( a ) Re ( a ¯ p ( z 0 ) ) ) .
Hence, we have
Re ( p ( z 0 ) + P ( z 0 ) z p ( z 0 ) ) g ( ρ 1 ) = E 2 | a | 2 Re ( a ¯ P ( z ) ) ,

where E is defined by (2.3). This is a contradiction to (2.2). Then we obtain Re ( a p ( z ) ) > 0 . □

Theorem 2.2 Let p ( z ) be a nonzero analytic function in U and p ( 0 ) = 1 . If
γ 1 < Im ( p ( z ) + z p ( z ) p ( z ) ) < γ 2 ,
(2.7)
where
γ 1 = | a | 2 + 2 ( Re ( a ) ) 2 Im ( a ) Re a
and
γ 2 = | a | 2 + 2 ( Re ( a ) ) 2 + Im ( a ) Re ( a ) ,
then
Re ( a p ( z ) ) > 0 ,

where Re ( a ) > 0 .

Proof Let us define both q ( z ) and h ( z ) as follows:
q ( z ) = a p ( z )
and
h ( z ) = a + a ¯ z 1 z ( Re ( a ) > 0 ) ,
where p ( z ) is defined by (2.1) since q ( z ) and h ( z ) are analytic functions in U with q ( 0 ) = h ( 0 ) = a C with
h ( U ) = { w : Re ( w ) > 0 } .
Now, we suppose that q ( z ) h ( z ) . Therefore, by using Lemma 2.1, there exist points
z 0 U and ζ 0 U { 1 }

such that q ( z 0 ) = h ( ζ 0 ) and z 0 q ( z 0 ) = m ζ 0 h ( ζ 0 ) , m n 1 .

We note that
ζ 0 h ( ζ 0 ) = | q ( z 0 ) a | 2 2 Re ( a q ( z 0 ) ) .
(2.8)
We have h ( ζ 0 ) = ρ i ( ρ R ); therefore,
Im ( p ( z 0 ) + z 0 p ( z 0 ) p ( z 0 ) ) = Im ( q ( z 0 ) + z 0 q ( z 0 ) q ( z 0 ) ) = Im ( h ( ζ 0 ) a + m ζ 0 h ( ζ 0 ) h ( ζ 0 ) ) = Im ( ρ i a m | ρ i a | 2 2 Re ( a ) ρ i ) = ρ | a | 2 Re ( a ) + m | ρ i a | 2 2 ρ Re ( a ) .
For the case ρ > 0 , we obtain
Im ( p ( z 0 ) + z 0 p ( z 0 ) p ( z 0 ) ) ρ | a | 2 Re ( a ) + | ρ i a | 2 2 ρ Re ( a ) = 1 2 ρ Re ( a ) [ ( 1 + 2 ( Re ( a ) | a | ) 2 ) ρ 2 + 2 Im ( a ) ρ + | a | ] = g ( ρ ) .
(2.9)
We can see that the function g ( ρ ) in (2.9) takes the minimum value at ρ 1 given by
ρ 1 = | a | 2 | a | 2 + 2 ( Re ( a ) ) 2 .
Hence, we have
Im ( p ( z 0 ) + z 0 p ( z 0 ) p ( z 0 ) ) g ( ρ 1 ) = γ 2 .

This is a contradiction to (2.7). Then we obtain Re ( a p ( z ) ) > 0 .

For the case ρ < 0 , we obtain
Im ( p ( z 0 ) + z 0 p ( z 0 ) p ( z 0 ) ) ρ | a | 2 Re ( a ) + | ρ i a | 2 2 ρ Re ( a ) = 1 2 ρ Re ( a ) [ ( 1 + 2 ( Re ( a ) | a | ) 2 ) ρ 2 + 2 Im ( a ) ρ + | a | 2 ] = g ( ρ ) .
(2.10)
We can see that the function g ( ρ ) in (2.10) takes the maximum value at ρ 2 given by
ρ 2 = | a | 2 | a | 2 + 2 ( Re ( a ) ) 2 .
Hence, we have
Im ( p ( z 0 ) + z 0 p ( z 0 ) p ( z 0 ) ) g ( ρ 2 ) = γ 1 .

This is a contradiction to (2.7). Then we obtain Re ( a p ( z ) ) > 0 . □

Theorem 2.3 Let p ( z ) be a nonzero analytic function in U with p ( 0 ) = 1 . If
| p ( z ) + z p ( z ) p ( z ) 1 | < 3 Re ( a ) 2 | a | ,
then
Re ( a p ( z ) ) > 0 ,

where Re ( a ) > 0 .

Proof Let us define both q ( z ) and h ( z ) as follows:
q ( z ) = a p ( z )
and
h ( z ) = a + a ¯ z 1 z ( Re ( a ) > 0 ) ,
where p ( z ) is defined by (2.1) since q ( z ) and h ( z ) are analytic functions in U with q ( 0 ) = h ( 0 ) = a C with
h ( U ) = { w : Re w > 0 } .
Now, we suppose that q ( z ) h ( z ) . Therefore, by using Lemma 2.1, there exist points
z 0 U and ζ 0 U { 1 }

such that q ( z 0 ) = h ( ζ 0 ) and z 0 q ( z 0 ) = m ζ 0 h ( ζ 0 ) , m n 1 .

We note that
ζ 0 h ( ζ 0 ) = | q ( z 0 ) a | 2 2 Re ( a q ( z 0 ) ) .
(2.11)

We have h ( ζ 0 ) = ρ i ( ρ R ).

Therefore,
| p ( z 0 ) + z p ( z 0 ) p ( z 0 ) 1 | | p ( z 0 ) | = | ρ i a m a | a i ρ | 2 2 Re ( a ) 1 | 1 | a | | m | a i ρ | 2 2 Re ( a ) + Re ( a ) | 1 | a | ( | a i ρ | 2 2 Re ( a ) + Re ( a ) ) 1 2 | a | Re ( a ) ( 3 ( Re ( a ) ) 2 + ( Im ( a ) ρ ) 2 ) 3 Re ( a ) 2 | a | .

This is a contradiction to (2.7). Then we obtain Re ( a p ( z ) ) > 0 . □

3 Applications and examples

Putting P ( z ) = β ( β > 0 ; real) in Theorem 2.1, we have the following corollary.

Corollary 3.1 If p ( z ) is an analytic function in U with p ( 0 ) = 1 and
Re ( p ( z ) + β z p ( z ) ) > E 2 β | a | 2 Re ( a ) ,
then
Re ( a p ( z ) ) > 0 ,
where
E = ( Re ( a ) ) [ β 2 ( Re ( a ) ) 2 + ( 1 + 2 β ) ( Im ( a ) ) 2 ]

with Re ( a ) > 0 .

Putting β = 1 in Corollary 3.1, we obtain the following corollary.

Corollary 3.2 If p ( z ) is an analytic function in U with p ( 0 ) = 1 and
Re ( p ( z ) + z p ( z ) ) > 3 2 2 ( Re ( a ) | a | ) 2 ,
then
Re ( a p ( z ) ) > 0 ,

where Re ( a ) > 0 .

Putting p ( z ) = f ( z ) g ( z ) and P ( z ) = g ( z ) z g ( z ) in Theorem 2.1, we have the following corollary.

Corollary 3.3 Let f ( z ) A , g ( z ) S and
Re ( f ( z ) g ( z ) ) > 3 2 2 ( Re ( a ) | a | ) 2 .
Then
Re ( a f ( z ) g ( z ) ) > 0 ,

where Re ( a ) > 0 .

Example 3.1 Let f ( z ) A satisfy the following relation:
Re ( f ( z ) ) > 3 2 2 ( Re ( a ) | a | ) 2 .
Then
Re ( a f ( z ) z ) > 0 ,

where Re ( a ) > 0 .

Example 3.2 Let f ( z ) A satisfy the following relation:
Re ( ( 2 + z f ( z ) f ( z ) z f ( z ) f ( z ) ) z f ( z ) f ( z ) ) > 3 2 2 ( Re ( a ) | a | ) 2 .
Then
Re ( a z f ( z ) f ( z ) ) > 0 ,

where Re ( a ) > 0 .

Remark 3.1
  1. (i)

    Putting a = e i λ ( | λ | < π 2 ) in Theorem 2.1, we have Theorem 1 due to Kim and Cho [3].

     
  2. (ii)

    Putting a = e i λ ( | λ | < π 2 ), P ( z ) = β ( β > 0 ; real) in Theorem 2.1, we have Corollary 1 due to Kim and Cho [3].

     
  3. (iii)

    Putting a = 0 and P ( z ) = 1 in Theorem 2.1, we have the result due to Nunokawa et al. [15].

     
  4. (iv)

    Putting a = e i λ ( | λ | < π 2 ), P ( z ) = 1 in Theorem 2.1, we have Corollary 2 due to Kim and Cho [3].

     

Putting p ( z ) = z f ( z ) f ( z ) in Theorem 2.2, we have the following corollary.

Corollary 3.4 Let f ( z ) A . If
γ 1 < Im ( 1 + z f ( z ) f ( z ) ) < γ 2 ,
where
γ 1 = | a | 2 + 2 ( Re ( a ) ) 2 Im ( a ) Re ( a )
and
γ 2 = | a | 2 + 2 ( Re ( a ) ) 2 + Im ( a ) Re ( a ) ,
then
Re ( a z f ( z ) f ( z ) ) > 0 ,

where Re ( a ) > 0 .

Putting p ( z ) = z f ( z ) f ( z ) in Theorem 2.3, we have the following corollary.

Corollary 3.5 Let p ( z ) be a nonzero analytic function in U with p ( 0 ) = 1 . If
| z f ( z ) f ( z ) | < 3 Re ( a ) 2 | a | ,
then
Re ( 1 a z f ( z ) f ( z ) ) > 0 ,

where Re ( a ) > 0 .

Remark 3.2 Putting a = e i λ ( | λ | < π 2 ) in Corollary 3.5, we have the result due to Kim and Cho [3].

Declarations

Acknowledgements

Dedicated to Professor Hari M Srivastava.

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the referees for the valuable advices to improve this paper.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, University of Mansoura
(2)
Department of Mathematics, College of Science, University of Hail
(3)
Department of Mathematics, College of Science, King Khaled University

References

  1. Cho NE, Hwa KI: Conditions for Carathéodory functions. J. Inequal. Appl. 2009., 2009: Article ID 601597Google Scholar
  2. Delsarte P, Genin Y: A simple proof of Livingston’s inequality for Carathéodory functions. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1989, 107: 1017–1020.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. Kim IH, Cho NE: Sufficient conditions for Carathéodory functions. Comput. Math. Appl. 2010, 59(6):2067–2073. 10.1016/j.camwa.2009.12.012MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Li JL, Owa S: Sufficient conditions for starlikeness. Indian J. Pure Appl. Math. 2002, 33: 313–318.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. Miller S: Differential inequalities and Carathéodory functions. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 1975, 81: 79–81. 10.1090/S0002-9904-1975-13643-3View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Nunokawa M: Differential inequalities and Carathéodory functions. Proc. Jpn. Acad., Ser. A, Math. Sci. 1989, 65: 326–328. 10.3792/pjaa.65.326MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Nunokawa M: On properties of non-Carathéodory functions. Proc. Jpn. Acad., Ser. A, Math. Sci. 1992, 68: 152–153. 10.3792/pjaa.68.152MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Nunokawa M, Owa S, Takahashi N, Saitoh H: Sufficient conditions for Carathéodory functions. Indian J. Pure Appl. Math. 2002, 33: 1385–1390.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. Obradović M, Owa S: On certain properties for some classes of starlike functions. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1990, 145: 357–364. 10.1016/0022-247X(90)90405-5MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Padmanabhan KS: On sufficient conditions for starlikeness. Indian J. Pure Appl. Math. 1990, 32: 543–550.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. Shiraishi H, Owa S, Srivastava HM: Sufficient conditions for strongly Carathéodory functions. Comput. Math. Appl. 2011, 62(8):2978–2987. 10.1016/j.camwa.2011.08.004MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Tuneski N: On certain sufficient conditions for starlikeness. Int. J. Math. Math. Sci. 2000, 23: 521–527. 10.1155/S0161171200003574MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Yang D, Owa S, Ochiai K: Sufficient conditions for Carathéodory functions. Comput. Math. Appl. 2006, 51: 467–474. 10.1016/j.camwa.2005.10.008MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Miller SS, Mocanu PT: Differential Subordination, Theory and Application. Dekker, New York; 2000.Google Scholar
  15. Nunokawa M, Owa S, Nishiwaki J, Saitoh H: Sufficient conditions for starlikeness and convexity of analytic functions with real coefficients. Southeast Asian Bull. Math. 2009, 33(6):1149–1155.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Attiya and Nasr; licensee Springer 2013

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 cited.