Skip to main content

The existence of solutions of periodic BVP for second order impulsive differential equations

Abstract

In this paper, we study the existence of solutions of periodic boundary value problems for impulsive differential equations depending on a parameter λ. By employing an existing critical point theorem, we find the range of the control parameter in which the boundary value problem admits at least one non-zero weak solution. An example illustrates our results.

MSC:34B15, 34B18, 34B37, 58E30.

1 Introduction

The well-known impulsive differential equations serve as basic models to study the dynamics of processes that are subject to sudden changes in their states, which are often investigated in various fields of science and technology [13]. For example, in the motion of spacecraft, one has to consider instantaneous impulses at a position with jump discontinuities in velocity, but no change in the position [47]. This motivates us to consider the following particular periodic boundary value problems:

{ u ( t ) + u ( t ) = λ f ( t , u ( t ) ) , t t j , t [ 0 , 1 ] , Δ u ( t j ) = I j ( u ( t j ) ) , j = 1 , 2 , , m , u ( 0 ) u ( 1 ) = u ( 0 ) u ( 1 ) = 0 ,
(1.1)

where f:[0,1]×RR, I j C(R,R), 0= t 0 < t 1 < t 2 << t m < t m + 1 =1, λ is a positive real parameter and the operator Δ is defined as Δ u ( t j )= u ( t j + ) u ( t j ), where u ( t j + )( u ( t j )) denotes the right-hand (left-hand) limit of u at t j .

In the literature, some classical tools have been used to study impulsive differential equations. These classical techniques include some fixed point theorems, the lower and upper solutions and the coincidence degree theory [810]. Moreover, in the last few years, some researchers have gradually paid more attention to applying variational methods to deal with the existence of solutions for impulsive differential equation boundary value problems [1116]. The same tool has also already been used for a Neumann nonlinear differential problem in [17] (see also [18, 19] and [20] for two-point and mixed problems). In this paper, we use critical point theory and variational methods to establish the existence of at least one weak solution for problem (1.1).

The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we present several definitions and main tools. In Section 3, under suitable hypotheses, we prove that problem (1.1) possesses at least one non-zero weak solution when λ lies in an exactly determined open interval. Finally, an example is provided to verify our results.

2 Preliminaries

In the following, we first introduce some notations. Take X:={u(t)|u(t) W 1 , 2 ([0,1]),u(0)=u(1)}, in which we consider the inner product

(u,v)= 0 1 u (t) v (t)dt+ 0 1 u(t)v(t)dt,

and the norm

u X = ( 0 1 | u ( t ) | 2 d t + 0 1 | u ( t ) | 2 d t ) 1 2 .

Note that this norm is equivalent to the usual norm

u= ( 0 1 | u ( t ) | 2 d t ) 1 2 .

Definition 2.1 f:[0,1]×RR is an L 1 -Carathéodory function if:

  1. (i)

    tf(t,u) is measurable for every uR;

  2. (ii)

    uf(t,u) is continuous for almost every t[0,1];

  3. (iii)

    for every s>0, there exists a function l s L 1 ([0,1]) such that

    sup | u | s | f ( t , u ) | l s (t)for a.e. t[0,1].

Definition 2.2 The function u:[0,1]R is called a weak solution of problem (1.1) if uX and

0 1 u (t) v (t)dt+ 0 1 u(t)v(t)dt+ j = 1 m I j ( u ( t j ) ) v( t j )=λ 0 1 f ( t , u ( t ) ) v(t)dt

for all vX.

Note that if f is continuous, each weak solution is a classical solution of problem (1.1), i.e., u C 2 ( t j 1 , t j ), satisfies the equation of (1.1) a.e. on t[0,1], the limits u ( t j + ), u ( t j ), j=1,2,,m, exist and Δ u ( t j )= I j (u( t j )) holds.

We recall the following inequality which will be used later.

Lemma 2.3 If uX, then

u 2 u X ,
(2.1)

where u = max t [ 0 , 1 ] |u(t)|.

Proof The proof follows easily from the mean value theorem and the Hölder inequality, so we omit it here. □

Next we define a functional φ λ as

φ λ (u)=Φ(u)λΨ(u),uX,
(2.2)

where

Φ(u)= 1 2 u X 2 + j = 1 m 0 u ( t j ) I j (s)ds
(2.3)

and

Ψ(u)= 0 1 F ( t , u ( t ) ) dt,
(2.4)

with

F(t,u)= 0 u ( t ) f(t,s)ds.

Note that φ λ is Fréchet differentiable at any uX and for any vX, we have

φ λ ( u ) ( v ) = 0 1 ( u ( t ) v ( t ) + u ( t ) v ( t ) ) d t + j = 1 m I j ( u ( t j ) ) v ( t j ) λ 0 1 f ( t , u ( t ) ) v ( t ) d t .
(2.5)

Obviously, φ λ is continuous and a critical point of φ λ , by (2.5), gives a weak solution of problem (1.1).

For all r 1 , r 2 R, with r 1 < r 2 , we define

β( r 1 , r 2 )= inf v Φ 1 ( ( r 1 , r 2 ) ) sup u Φ 1 ( ( r 1 , r 2 ) ) Ψ ( u ) Ψ ( v ) r 2 Φ ( v ) ,
(2.6)
α( r 1 , r 2 )= sup v Φ 1 ( ( r 1 , r 2 ) ) Ψ ( v ) sup u Φ 1 ( ( , r 1 ) ) Ψ ( u ) Φ ( v ) r 1 .
(2.7)

Note that for all r 1 , r 2 R, with r 1 < r 2 , we have β( r 1 , r 2 )0, α( r 1 , r 2 )0.

To prove our main results, we need the following critical point theorem.

Theorem 2.4 [[21], Theorem 5.1]

Let X be a reflexive real Banach space. Let Φ:XR be a sequentially weakly lower semicontinuous, coercive and continuously Gâteaux differentiable functional whose Gâteaux derivative admits a continuous inverse on X ; let Ψ:XR be a continuously Gâteaux differentiable functional whose Gáteaux derivative is compact. Put φ λ =ΦλΨ and assume that there are r 1 , r 2 R, with r 1 < r 2 , such that

β( r 1 , r 2 )<α( r 1 , r 2 ),
(2.8)

where β and α are given by (2.6) and (2.7). Then, for each λ(1/α( r 1 , r 2 ),1/β( r 1 , r 2 )), there is u 0 , λ Φ 1 (( r 1 , r 2 )) such that φ λ ( u 0 , λ ) φ λ (u) for all u Φ 1 (( r 1 , r 2 )) and φ λ ( u 0 , λ )=0.

For the sake of convenience, we list the following conditions.

(H1) f is an L 1 -Carathéodory function.

(H2) 0 0 u I j (s)ds< | u | 2 2 m , uR, j=1,2,,m.

3 Main results

In this section, we establish existence results for the periodic boundary value problem (1.1).

Given three nonnegative constants c 1 , c 2 , d, with c 1 < 2 d<2d< c 2 , put

a( c 2 ,d)=4 0 1 max | u ( t ) | c 2 F ( t , u ( t ) ) d t 0 1 F ( t , d ) d t c 2 2 4 d 2
(3.1)

and

b( c 1 ,d)=4 0 1 F ( t , d ) d t 0 1 max | u ( t ) | c 1 F ( t , u ( t ) ) d t 4 d 2 c 1 2 .
(3.2)

Theorem 3.1 Assume that (H1), (H2) are satisfied and there exist three nonnegative constants c 1 , c 2 , d, with c 1 < 2 d<2d< c 2 , such that

a( c 2 ,d)<b( c 1 ,d).
(3.3)

Then, for each λ(1/b( c 1 ,d),1/a( c 2 ,d)), problem (1.1) admits at least one weak solution u(t), t[0,1], such that 6 c 1 /6< u X < 2 c 2 /2.

Proof By (2.3) and (2.4), we have that Φ is a nonnegative Gâteaux differentiable, coercive and sequentially weakly lower semicontinuous functional whose Gâteaux derivative admits a continuous inverse on X , and Ψ is a continuously Gâteaux differentiable functional whose Gâteaux is compact. Let

r 1 = c 1 2 4 , r 2 = c 2 2 4 , u 0 (t)=d,for t[0,1].
(3.4)

By condition (H2), we have

Φ ( u 0 ) = 1 2 u 0 X 2 + j = 1 m 0 u 0 ( t j ) I j ( s ) d s = 1 2 d 2 + j = 1 m 0 d I j ( s ) d s d 2 ,
(3.5)

and

Φ( u 0 ) d 2 2 .
(3.6)

Combining c 1 < 2 d<2d< c 2 , (3.4), (3.5) and (3.6), we have

r 1 <Φ( u 0 )< r 2 .

Clearly, we have Ψ( u 0 )= 0 1 F(t, u 0 (t))dt= 0 1 F(t,d)dt. From Lemma 2.3, the estimate Φ(u)< r 2 , uX, implies that

| u ( t ) | 2 2 u X 2 2×2Φ(u)<4 r 2 = c 2 2 ,t[0,1],

and

0 1 F ( t , u ( t ) ) dt 0 1 max | u ( t ) | c 2 F(t,u)dt.

Therefore

sup u Φ 1 ( ( r 1 , r 2 ) ) Ψ(u) sup u Φ 1 ( ( , r 2 ) ) Ψ(u) 0 1 max | u ( t ) | c 2 F ( t , u ( t ) ) dt.

For uX with Φ(u)< r 1 , one can similarly obtain

sup u Φ 1 ( ( , r 1 ) ) Ψ(u) 0 1 max | u ( t ) | c 1 F ( t , u ( t ) ) dt.

Therefore, we have

β ( r 1 , r 2 ) sup u Φ 1 ( ( , r 2 ) ) Ψ ( u ) Ψ ( u 0 ) r 2 Φ ( u 0 ) 4 0 1 max | u ( t ) | c 2 F ( t , u ( t ) ) d t 0 1 F ( t , d ) d t c 2 2 4 d 2 = a ( c 2 , d ) .

On the other hand, we have

α ( r 1 , r 2 ) Ψ ( u 0 ) sup u Φ 1 ( ( , r 1 ) ) Ψ ( u ) Φ ( u 0 ) r 1 4 0 1 F ( t , d ) d t 0 1 max | u ( t ) | c 1 F ( t , u ( t ) ) d t 4 d 2 c 1 2 = b ( c 1 , d ) .

So, by (3.3), we induce

β( r 1 , r 2 )<α( r 1 , r 2 ).

Therefore, by Theorem 2.4, for each λ(1/b( c 1 ,d),1/a( c 2 ,d)), we have that ΦλΨ admits at least one critical point u such that r 1 <Φ(u)< r 2 . Combining (2.3), we get

c 1 2 4 < 1 2 u X 2 + j = 1 m 0 u ( t j ) I j (s)ds 3 2 u X 2 ,

and

1 2 u X 2 1 2 u X 2 + j = 1 m 0 u ( t j ) I j (s)ds< c 2 2 4 .

So, problem (1.1) admits at least one weak solution u(t), t[0,1], such that 6 6 c 1 < u X < 2 2 c 2 . □

Theorem 3.2 Assume that (H1), (H2) hold and there exist two positive constants c, d, with 2d<c, such that

( 0 1 max | u ( t ) | c F ( t , u ( t ) ) d t ) / c 2 < ( 0 1 F ( t , d ) d t ) /4 d 2 .
(3.7)

Then, for each λ( d 2 / 0 1 F(t,d)dt, c 2 /4 0 1 max | u ( t ) | c F(t,u(t))dt), problem (1.1) admits at least one nontrivial weak solution u(t), t[0,1], such that u X < 2 2 c.

Proof Let c 1 =0 and c 2 =c, then by (3.1) and (3.2) we get

a ( c 2 , d ) = 4 0 1 max | u ( t ) | c 2 F ( t , u ( t ) ) d t 0 1 F ( t , d ) c 2 2 4 d 2 4 0 1 max | u ( t ) | c F ( t , u ( t ) ) d t 4 d 2 c 2 0 1 max | u ( t ) | c F ( t , u ( t ) ) c 2 4 d 2 = 4 0 1 max | u ( t ) | c F ( t , u ( t ) ) d t c 2 ,

and

b( c 1 ,d)=4 0 1 F ( t , d ) d t 4 d 2 .

Therefore, owing to (3.6) we have a(c,d)<b(0,d). Moreover, by Theorem 3.1, we have that for each λ( d 2 / 0 1 F(t,d)dt, c 2 /4 0 1 max | u ( t ) | c F(t,u(t))dt), problem (1.1) admits at least one nontrivial weak solution u such that u X < 2 2 c. □

Now, when the nonlinear term of problem (1.1) is with separable variables, we have the following results. To be precise, let α L 1 ([0,1]) be such that α(t)0 a.e. t[0,1], α0, and let g:RR be a nonnegative continuous function. Consider the boundary value problem

{ u ( t ) + u ( t ) = λ α ( t ) g ( u ( t ) ) , t t j , t [ 0 , 1 ] , Δ u ( t j ) = I j ( u ( t j ) ) , j = 1 , 2 , , m , u ( 0 ) u ( 1 ) = u ( 0 ) u ( 1 ) = 0 .
(3.8)

Put

G(u)= 0 u ( t ) g(s)dsfor uX.

Corollary 3.3 Assume that (H2) is satisfied and there exist three nonnegative constants c 1 , c 2 , d, with c 1 < 2 d<2d< c 2 , such that

G ( c 2 ) G ( d ) c 2 2 4 d 2 < G ( d ) G ( c 1 ) 4 d 2 c 1 2 .
(3.9)

Then, for each λ((4 d 2 c 1 2 )/4 α 1 (G(d)G( c 1 )),( c 2 2 4 d 2 )/4 α 1 (G( c 2 )G(d))), where α 1 = 0 1 |α(t)|dt, problem (3.8) admits at least one weak solution u(t), t[0,1], such that 6 6 c 1 < u X < 2 2 c 2 .

Proof Let f(t,u)=α(t)g(u) for all (t,u)[0,1]×R. It is clear that F(t,u)=α(t)G(u) for all (t,u)[0,1]×X. Moreover, G is a nondecreasing function about u. So, we have

a( c 2 ,d)=4 α 1 G ( c 2 ) G ( d ) c 2 2 4 d 2 <4 α 1 G ( d ) G ( c 1 ) 4 d 2 c 1 2 =b( c 1 ,d).

So, for each λ((4 d 2 c 1 2 )/4 α 1 (G(d)G( c 1 )),( c 2 2 4 d 2 )/4 α 1 (G( c 2 )G(d))), problem (3.8) admits at least one weak solution u(t), t[0,1], such that 6 6 c 1 < u X < 2 2 c 2 . □

Corollary 3.4 Assume that (H2) is satisfied and there exist two positive constants c, d, with c>2d, such that

G ( c ) c 2 < G ( d ) 4 d 2 .
(3.10)

Then, for each λ( d 2 /G(d) α 1 , c 2 /4G(c) α 1 ), problem (3.8) admits at least one weak solution u(t) such that |u(t)|<c for all t[0,1].

Proof Let f(t,u)=α(t)g(u) for all (t,u)[0,1]×R. It is clear that F(t,u)=α(t)G(u) for all (t,u)[0,1]×X. Moreover, G is a nondecreasing function about u. So, we have

0 1 max | u ( t ) | c F ( t , u ( t ) ) d t c 2 = α 1 G ( c ) c 2 < α 1 G ( d ) 4 d 2 = 0 1 F ( t , d ) d t 4 d 2 , d 2 0 1 F ( t , d ) d t = d 2 G ( d ) α 1 , c 2 4 0 1 max | u ( t ) | c F ( t , u ( t ) ) d t = c 2 4 G ( c ) α 1 .

Therefore, by Theorem 3.2, for each λ( d 2 /G(d) α 1 , c 2 /4G(c) α 1 ), problem (3.8) admits at least one weak solution u(t) such that |u(t)|<c for all t[0,1]. □

4 An example

In this section, we give an example to illustrate our main results.

Example 4.1 Consider the boundary value problem

{ u ( t ) + u = 2 λ t e u , t t 1 , t [ 0 , 1 ] , Δ u ( t 1 ) = 1 2 u ( t 1 ) , t 1 = 1 2 , u ( 0 ) u ( 1 ) = u ( 0 ) u ( 1 ) = 0 .
(4.1)

Compared to problem (3.8), α(t)=2t, g(u)= e u , I j (u)= 1 2 u. Clearly, (H2) is satisfied and α L 1 ([0,1]) such that α(t)0 a.e. t[0,1], α0, and g:RR is a nonnegative continuous function. Choose d=0.5, c=2. By simple calculations, we obtain

G ( c ) c 2 0.2162 < G ( d ) 4 d 2 0.3934 , d 2 G ( d ) α 1 0.6355 , c 2 4 G ( c ) α 1 1.1566 .

Applying Corollary 3.4, when λ(0.6355,1.1566), system (4.1) has at least one weak solution u such that |u(t)|<2 for all t[0,1].

References

  1. Benchohra M, Henderson J, Ntouyas S Contemporary Mathematics and Its Applications 2. In Theory of Impulsive Differential Equations and Inclusions. Hindawi Publishing Corporation, New York; 2006.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Bainov DD, Simeonov PS: Systems with Impulse Effect: Stability Theory and Applications. Ellis Horwood, Chichester; 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Jing G, Lu Q: Impulsive state feedback control of a predator-prey model. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2007, 200: 193–207. 10.1016/j.cam.2005.12.013

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Agarwal RP, Franco D, Regan DO: Singular boundary value problems for first and second order impulsive differential equations. Aequ. Math. 2005, 69: 83–96. 10.1007/s00010-004-2735-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Carter TE: Necessary and sufficient conditions for optimal impulsive rendezvous with linear equations of motion. Dyn. Control 2000, 10: 219–227. 10.1023/A:1008376427023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Carter TE: Optimal impulsive space trajectories based on linear equations. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 1991, 70: 277–297. 10.1007/BF00940627

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Prado AFBA: Bi-impulsive control to build a satellite constellation. Nonlinear Dyn. Syst. Theory 2005, 5: 169–175.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Agarwal RP, Regan DO: A multiplicity result for second order impulsive differential equations via the Leggett Williams fixed point theorem. Appl. Math. Comput. 2005, 161: 433–439. 10.1016/j.amc.2003.12.096

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

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

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Shen J, Wang B: Impulsive boundary value problems with nonlinear boundary conditions. Nonlinear Anal. 2008, 69: 4055–4062. 10.1016/j.na.2007.10.036

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Marek G, Szymon G: On the discrete boundary value problem for anisotropic equation. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2012, 386: 956–965. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2011.08.053

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Nieto JJ, Regan DO: Variational approach to impulsive differential equations. Nonlinear Anal., Real World Appl. 2009, 10: 680–690. 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2007.10.022

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Tian Y, Ge W: Applications of variational methods to boundary-value problem for impulsive differential equations. Proc. Edinb. Math. Soc. 2008, 51: 509–527.

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

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

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Zhang X, Tang X: Subharmonic solutions for a class of non-quadratic second order Hamiltonian systems. Nonlinear Anal., Real World Appl. 2012, 13: 113–130. 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2011.07.013

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Zhang Z, Yuan R: Applications of variational methods to Dirichlet boundary value problem with impulses. Nonlinear Anal., Real World Appl. 2010, 11: 155–162. 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2008.10.044

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Bonanno G, Pizzimenti PF: Neumann boundary value problems with not coercive potential. Mediterr. J. Math. 2010, 33: 173–191.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Bonanno G, Sciammetta A: An existence result of one non-trivial solution for two point boundary value problems. Bull. Aust. Math. Soc. 2011, 84: 288–299. 10.1017/S0004972711002255

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Aguì GD: Existence results for a mixed boundary value problem with Sturm-Liouville equation. Adv. Pure Appl. Math. 2011, 2: 237–248.

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Aguì GD: Multiplicity results for nonlinear mixed boundary value problem. Bound. Value Probl. 2012., 2012: Article ID 134

    Google Scholar 

  21. Bonanno G: A critical point theorem via the Ekeland variational principle. Nonlinear Anal. 2012, 75: 2992–3007. 10.1016/j.na.2011.12.003

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the referees for their valuable comments and suggestions, which greatly improved the presentation of this paper. This work is supported by Hunan Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China (No: 11JJ3012), Major Project of Science Research Fund of Education Department in Hunan (No: 11A095).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhiguo Luo.

Additional information

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors’ contributions

JX drafted the manuscript and joined discussion with ZL. ZL read the draft and provided comments. Both authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Xie, J., Luo, Z. The existence of solutions of periodic BVP for second order impulsive differential equations. J Inequal Appl 2013, 406 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2013-406

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2013-406

Keywords

  • critical point theorem
  • impulsive equations
  • boundary value problem