Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Research
  • Open Access

Behavior of solutions of a third-order dynamic equation on time scales

Journal of Inequalities and Applications20132013:47

https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2013-47

  • Received: 6 November 2012
  • Accepted: 4 February 2013
  • Published:

Abstract

In this paper, we will establish some sufficient conditions which guarantee that every solution of the third-order nonlinear dynamic equation

( r 1 ( t ) ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ ) Δ + P ( t , x ( t ) , x Δ ( t ) ) + F ( t , x ( t ) ) = 0

oscillates or converges to zero on an arbitrary time scale T .

Keywords

  • Dynamic Equation
  • Positive Function
  • Oscillatory Behavior
  • Product Rule
  • Scale Interval

1 Introduction

The theory of time scales, which has recently received a lot of attention, was introduced by Stefan Hilger in his Ph.D. Thesis [1] in order to unify continuous and discrete analysis. A time scale T is an arbitrary nonempty closed subset of the reals, and the cases when this time scale is equal to the reals or to the integers represent the classical theories of differential and of difference equations. A book on the subject of time scales by Bohner and Peterson [2] summarizes and organizes much of the time scale calculus. Many other interesting time scales exist and they give rise to plenty of applications, among them the study of population dynamic models (see [3]). In the last few years, there has been much research activity concerning the oscillation and nonoscillation of solutions of some dynamic equations on time scales, and we refer the reader to the papers [321].

Following this trend, in this paper, we will consider the third-order nonlinear dynamic equation
( r 1 ( t ) ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ ) Δ + P ( t , x ( t ) , x Δ ( t ) ) + F ( t , x ( t ) ) = 0 , t t 0 ,
(1)
where r 1 ( t ) , r 2 ( t ) are positive, real-valued, rd-continuous functions defined on the time scale interval [ a , b ] (throughout a , b T with a < b ). We assume throughout that:
  1. (i)

    F : T × R R is a function such that u F ( t , u ) > 0 , F ( t , u ) u f ( t ) for u 0 ,

     
  2. (ii)

    P : T × R 2 R is a function such that P ( t , u , v ) u q ( t ) , u P ( t , u , v ) > 0 for u 0 ,

     
  3. (iii)

    q , f : T R are rd-continuous functions such that q ( t ) + f ( t ) > 0 for all t T .

     

Since we are interested in oscillatory behavior, we suppose that the time scale under consideration is not bounded above, i.e., it is a time scale interval of the form [ a , ) . By a solution of (1), we mean a nontrivial real-valued function satisfying equation (1) for t a . A solution x ( t ) of (1) is said to be oscillatory if it is neither eventually positive nor eventually negative; otherwise, it is called nonoscillatory. Equation (1) is said to be oscillatory if all its solutions are oscillatory. Our attention is restricted to those solutions of (1) which exist on some half-line [ t x , ) and satisfy sup { | x ( t ) | : t > t 0 } > 0 for any t 0 t x .

2 Some lemmas

In this section, we state and prove some lemmas which we will need in the proofs of our main results.

Lemma 2.1 Suppose that x is an eventually positive solution of (1) and
t 0 1 r 1 ( t ) Δ t = , t 0 1 r 2 ( t ) Δ t = .
(2)
Then there is a t 1 [ t 0 , ) such that either
  1. (i)

    x ( t ) > 0 , x Δ ( t ) > 0 , ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ > 0 , t [ t 1 , ) , or

     
  2. (ii)

    x ( t ) > 0 , x Δ ( t ) < 0 , ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ > 0 , t [ t 1 , ) .

     
Proof Let x be an eventually positive solution of (1). Then there exists t 1 [ t o , ) such that x ( t ) > 0 for t [ t 1 , ) . From (1) we have
( r 1 ( t ) ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ ) Δ = P ( t , x ( t ) , x Δ ( t ) ) F ( t , x ( t ) ) x ( t ) q ( t ) x ( t ) f ( t ) < 0
for t [ t 1 , ) . Hence, r 1 ( t ) ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ is strictly decreasing on [ t 1 , ) . We claim that r 1 ( t ) ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ > 0 on [ t 1 , ) . Assume not, then there is a t 2 [ t 1 , ) such that r 1 ( t ) ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ < 0 , t [ t 2 , ) . Then we can choose a negative constant c and t 3 [ t 2 , ) such that r 1 ( t ) ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ c < 0 for t [ t 3 , ) . Dividing by r 1 ( t ) and integrating from t 3 to t, we obtain
r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) r 2 ( t 3 ) x Δ ( t 3 ) + c t 3 t Δ s r 1 ( s ) .
Letting t , then r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) by (2). Thus, there is a t 4 [ t 3 , ) such that for t [ t 4 , ) , r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) r 2 ( t 4 ) x Δ ( t 4 ) < 0 . Dividing by r 2 ( t ) and integrating from t 4 to t, we obtain
x ( t ) x ( t 4 ) r 2 ( t 4 ) x Δ ( t 4 ) t 4 t Δ s r 2 ( s ) ,
which implies that x ( t ) as t by (2), a contradiction with the fact that x ( t ) > 0 . Hence, we have
( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ > 0 , t [ t 1 , ) .

This implies that r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) is strictly increasing on [ t 1 , ) . It follows from this that either r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) < 0 on [ t 1 , ) or r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) is eventually positive and the proof is complete. □

Lemma 2.2 Assume that
t 0 φ ( t ) Δ t = ,
(3)

where φ ( t ) = q ( t ) + f ( t ) and x ( t ) is a solution of (1) that satisfies Case (ii) in Lemma  2.1. Then lim t x ( t ) = 0 .

Proof Let x be a solution of (1) satisfying Case (ii) in Lemma 2.1, that is,
x ( t ) > 0 , x Δ ( t ) < 0 , ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ > 0 , t [ t 1 , ) .
Then lim t x ( t ) = b 0 . Assume b > 0 and we now show that this leads to a contradiction. From (1) and x b ,
( r 1 ( t ) ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ ) Δ = P ( t , x ( t ) , x Δ ( t ) ) F ( t , x ( t ) ) x ( t ) q ( t ) x ( t ) f ( t ) = x ( t ) ( q ( t ) + f ( t ) ) b φ ( t ) ,
where φ ( t ) = q ( t ) + f ( t ) , for t [ t 1 , ) . Now let
u ( t ) = r 1 ( t ) ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ , t [ t 1 , ) ,
then we have
u Δ ( t ) b φ ( t ) , t [ t 1 , ) .
Integrating the last inequality from t 1 to t, we have
u ( t ) u ( t 1 ) b t 1 t φ ( s ) Δ s .

Using (3) it is possible to choose a t 2 [ t 1 , ) , sufficiently large, such that u ( t ) < 0 for all t [ t 2 , ) , which is a contradiction, and this completes the proof. □

Lemma 2.3 Assume that x ( t ) is a solution of (1) satisfying Case (i) of Lemma  2.1. Then there exists t 1 [ t 0 , ) such that
x Δ ( t ) δ ( t , t 1 ) r 1 ( t ) r 2 ( t ) ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ for t t 1 ,
(4)

where δ ( t , t 1 ) = t 1 t Δ s r 1 ( s ) .

Proof From Case (i) of Lemma 2.1, we have x ( t ) as a solution of (1) satisfying
x ( t ) > 0 , x Δ ( t ) > 0 , ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ > 0
for t t 1 . Using x ( t ) is a solution of (1), we get ( r 1 ( t ) ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ ) Δ < 0 and hence r 1 ( t ) ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ is decreasing on [ t 1 , ) . Hence,
r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) = r 2 ( t 1 ) x Δ ( t 1 ) + t 1 t r 1 ( s ) ( r 2 ( s ) x Δ ( s ) ) Δ r 1 ( s ) Δ s r 1 ( t ) δ ( t , t 1 ) ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ , t t 1 ,

and this leads to (4) and the proof is complete. □

3 Main results

In this section, we establish some sufficient conditions which guarantee that every solution x ( t ) of (1) oscillates on [ t 0 , ) or converges as t .

Theorem 3.1 Assume that (2) holds. Furthermore, assume that there exists a positive function z ( t ) such that z Δ ( t ) is rd-continuous on [ t 0 , ) and if
lim sup t t 1 t ( z ( s ) φ ( s ) ( z Δ ( s ) ) 2 4 Q ( s , t 1 ) ) Δ s = ,
(5)

for all sufficiently large t 1 , where Q ( t , t 1 ) = z ( t ) δ ( t , t 1 ) r 2 ( t ) , φ ( t ) = q ( t ) + f ( t ) , then every solution x ( t ) of (1) is oscillatory or lim t x ( t ) exists (finite).

Proof Let x ( t ) be a nonoscillatory solution of (1). We only consider the case when x ( t ) is eventually positive, since the case when x ( t ) is eventually negative is similar. By Lemma 2.1 either Case (i) or Case (ii) in Lemma 2.1 holds. Assume x ( t ) satisfies Case (i) in Lemma 2.1. Define the Riccati-type function w ( t ) by
w ( t ) = z ( t ) r 1 ( t ) ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ x ( t ) , t t 1 .
(6)
By the product rule,
w Δ ( t ) = r 1 ( σ ( t ) ) ( r 2 x Δ ( t ) ) Δ ( σ ( t ) ) [ z ( t ) x ( t ) ] Δ + z ( t ) x ( t ) ( r 1 ( t ) ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ ) Δ = r 1 ( σ ( t ) ) ( r 2 x Δ ( t ) ) Δ ( σ ( t ) ) [ z ( t ) x ( t ) ] Δ + z ( t ) x ( t ) ( P ( t , x ( t ) , x Δ ( t ) ) F ( t , x ( t ) ) ) .
Using (1) we have
w Δ ( t ) z ( t ) q ( t ) z ( t ) f ( t ) + z Δ ( t ) w σ ( t ) z σ ( t ) z ( t ) x Δ ( t ) x ( t ) x σ ( t ) ( r 1 ( t ) ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ ) σ .
Using (4) and x Δ ( t ) > 0 , we obtain
w Δ ( t ) z ( t ) q ( t ) z ( t ) f ( t ) + z Δ ( t ) w σ ( t ) z σ ( t ) z ( t ) r 1 ( t ) ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ ( r 1 ( t ) ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ ) σ δ ( t , t 1 ) r 2 ( t ) ( x σ ( t ) ) 2 .
Since r 1 ( t ) ( r 2 ( t ) x Δ ( t ) ) Δ is decreasing, we have
w Δ ( t ) z ( t ) φ ( t ) + z Δ ( t ) w σ ( t ) z σ ( t ) z ( t ) δ ( t , t 1 ) r 2 ( t ) ( w σ ( t ) ) 2 ( z σ ( t ) ) 2 = z ( t ) φ ( t ) + z Δ ( t ) w σ ( t ) z σ ( t ) Q ( t , t 1 ) ( w σ ( t ) ) 2 ( z σ ( t ) ) 2 ,
(7)
where φ ( t ) = q ( t ) + f ( t ) and Q ( t , t 1 ) = z ( t ) δ ( t , t 1 ) r 2 ( t ) . From (7) we have
w Δ ( t ) z ( t ) φ ( t ) + ( z Δ ( t ) ) 2 4 Q ( t , t 1 ) [ Q ( t , t 1 ) w σ ( t ) z σ ( t ) 1 2 1 Q ( t , t 1 ) z Δ ( t ) ] 2 [ z ( t ) φ ( t ) ( z Δ ( t ) ) 2 4 Q ( t , t 1 ) ] .
(8)
Integrating (8) from t 1 to t, we obtain
w ( t 1 ) w ( t ) w ( t 1 ) t 1 t [ z ( s ) φ ( s ) ( z Δ ( s ) ) 2 4 Q ( s , t 1 ) ] Δ s ,
(9)
which yields
t 1 t [ z ( s ) φ ( s ) ( z Δ ( s ) ) 2 4 Q ( s , t 1 ) ] Δ s w ( t 1 )
(10)

for all large t. This is contrary to (5) and so Case (i) is not possible. If Case (ii) in Lemma 2.1 holds, then clearly lim t x ( t ) exists (finite). □

On the basis of Lemma 2.2 and Theorem 3.1, we have the following results.

Corollary 3.2 If (2) and (3) hold, then every solution of (1) is either oscillatory or lim t x ( t ) = 0 .

Corollary 3.3 Assume that (2) holds. If
lim sup t t 1 t ( s φ ( s ) r 2 ( s ) 4 s δ ( s , t 1 ) ) Δ s = ,

then every solution of (1) is either oscillatory or lim t x ( t ) exists.

Example 3.4

We consider the third-order dynamic equation
x Δ 3 ( t ) + a ( 1 + ( x Δ ( t ) ) 2 ) t x ( t ) + b t x ( t ) = 0 , a > 0 , b > 0 , t 1 ,
(11)

where r 1 ( t ) = r 2 ( t ) = 1 , P ( t , x ( t ) , x Δ ( t ) ) = a ( 1 + ( x Δ ( t ) ) 2 ) x ( t ) / t , F ( t , x ( t ) ) = b x ( t ) / t . Let f ( t ) = b / t and q ( t ) = a / t . It is not difficult to verify that all conditions of Corollary 3.3 are satisfied. Hence, every solution of equation (11) is oscillatory or satisfies lim t x ( t ) = 0 .

Now we establish a Kamenev-type (see [18]) oscillation criterion for (1).

Theorem 3.5 Assume that (2) holds. Furthermore, assume that there is a positive function z ( t ) such that z Δ ( t ) is rd-continuous on [ t 0 , ) , and for all sufficient large t 1 ,
lim sup t 1 t m t 1 t ( t s ) m [ z ( s ) φ ( s ) ( z Δ ( s ) ) 2 4 Q ( s , t 1 ) ] Δ s = ,
(12)

where m 1 , Q ( t , t 1 ) and φ ( t ) are as in Theorem  3.1. Then every solution of (1) is either oscillatory or lim t x ( t ) exists.

Proof Proceeding as in Theorem 3.1, we assume that (1) has a nonoscillatory solution, say x ( t ) > 0 for all t t 1 , where t 1 is chosen so large that Lemma 2.1 and Lemma 2.3 hold. By Lemma 2.1 there are two possible cases. First, if Case (i) holds, then by defining again w ( t ) by (6) as in Theorem 3.1, we have w ( t ) > 0 and (8), that is,
[ z ( t ) φ ( t ) ( z Δ ( t ) ) 2 4 Q ( t , t 1 ) ] w Δ ( t ) .
Therefore,
t 1 t ( t s ) m [ z ( s ) φ ( s ) ( z Δ ( s ) ) 2 4 Q ( s , t 1 ) ] Δ s t 1 t ( t s ) m w Δ ( s ) Δ s .
(13)
Integrating by parts of the right-hand side leads to
t 1 t ( t s ) m w Δ ( s ) Δ s = ( t s ) m w ( s ) | t 1 t t 1 t h ( t , s ) w σ ( s ) Δ s = ( t t 1 ) m w ( t 1 ) t 1 t h ( t , s ) w σ ( s ) Δ s ,
(14)
where h ( t , s ) : = ( ( t s ) m ) Δ s . Note that
h ( t , s ) = { m ( t s ) m 1 , μ ( s ) = 0 ; ( t σ ( s ) ) m ( t s ) m μ ( s ) , μ ( s ) > 0 ,
and m 1 , h ( t s ) 0 for t σ ( s ) . It follows from (14) that
t 1 t ( t s ) m w Δ ( s ) Δ s ( t t 1 ) m w ( t 1 ) .
Then from (13) we have
t 1 t ( t s ) m [ z ( s ) φ ( s ) ( z Δ ( s ) ) 2 4 Q ( s , t 1 ) ] Δ s ( t t 1 ) m w ( t 1 ) .
Then
1 t m t 1 t ( t s ) m [ z ( s ) φ ( s ) ( z Δ ( s ) ) 2 4 Q ( s , t 1 ) ] Δ s ( t t 1 t ) m w ( t 1 ) .
Hence,
lim sup t 1 t m t 1 t ( t s ) m [ z ( s ) φ ( s ) ( z Δ ( s ) ) 2 4 Q ( s , t 1 ) ] Δ s w ( t 1 ) ,

which is a contradiction of (12). If Case (ii) holds, then, as before, lim t x ( t ) exists and the proof is complete. □

Declarations

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Research Fund of the Erciyes University. Project Number: FBA-11-3391. The author is grateful to the anonymous referee for a careful checking of the details and for helpful comments that improved this paper.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, Erciyes University, Kayseri, 38039, Turkey

References

  1. Hilger S: Analysis on measure chains - a unified approach to continuous and discrete calculus. Results Math. 1990, 18: 18–56.MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Bohner M, Peterson A: Dynamic Equations on Time Scales: an Introduction with Applications. Birkhäuser, Boston; 2001.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Guseinov GSh, Kaymakçalan B: On a disconjugacy criterion for second order dynamic equations on time scales. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2002, 141: 187–196. Special issue on ‘Dynamic Equations on Time Scales’ (R.P. Agarwal, M. Bohner and D. O’Regan, eds.) 10.1016/S0377-0427(01)00445-9MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Bohner EA, Hoffacker J: Oscillation properties of an Emden-Fowler type equation on discrete time scales. J. Differ. Equ. Appl. 2003, 9(6):603–612. 10.1080/1023619021000053575MATHView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Bohner M, Došlý O, Kratz W: An oscillation theorem for discrete eigenvalue problems. Rocky Mt. J. Math. 2003, 33(4):1233–1260. 10.1216/rmjm/1181075460MATHView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Bohner M, Saker SH: Oscillation of second order nonlinear dynamic equations on time scales. Rocky Mt. J. Math. 2004, 34(4):1239–1254. 10.1216/rmjm/1181069797MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Došlý O, Hilger S: A necessary and sufficient condition for oscillation of the Sturm-Liouville dynamic equation on time scales. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2002, 141: 147–158. Special issue on ‘Dynamic Equations on Time Scales’ (R.P. Agarwal, M. Bohner and D. O’Regan, eds.) 10.1016/S0377-0427(01)00442-3MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Erbe L: Oscillation criteria for second order linear equations on a time scale. Can. Appl. Math. Q. 2001, 9: 1–31.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. Erbe L, Peterson A: Positive solutions for a nonlinear differential equation on a measure chain. Math. Comput. Model. 2000, 32: 571–585. 10.1016/S0895-7177(00)00154-0MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Erbe L, Peterson A: Riccati equations on a measure chain. 3. In Proceedings of Dynamic Systems and Applications. Edited by: Ladde GS, Medhin NG, Sambandham M. Dynamic Publishers, Atlanta; 2001:193–199.Google Scholar
  11. Erbe L, Peterson A: Boundedness and oscillation for nonlinear dynamic equations on a time scale. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 2004, 132: 735–744. 10.1090/S0002-9939-03-07061-8MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Erbe L, Peterson A, Rehak P: Comparison theorems for linear dynamic equations on time scales. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2002, 275: 418–438. 10.1016/S0022-247X(02)00390-6MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Erbe L, Peterson A, Saker SH: Oscillation criteria for second-order nonlinear dynamic equations on time scales. J. Lond. Math. Soc. 2003, 67: 701–714. 10.1112/S0024610703004228MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Huff S, Olumolode G, Pennington N, Peterson A: Oscillation of an Euler-Cauchy dynamic equation. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Dynamical Systems and Differential Equations, Wilmington, Discrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems 2002, 24–27.Google Scholar
  15. Saker SH: Oscillation of nonlinear dynamic equations on time scales. Appl. Math. Comput. 2004, 148(1):81–91. 10.1016/S0096-3003(02)00829-9MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Grace SR, Agarwal RP, Zafer A: Oscillation of higher order nonlinear dynamic equations on time scales. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2012., 2012: Article ID 67. doi:10.1186/1687–1847–2012–67Google Scholar
  17. Agarwal RP, Akin-Bohner E, Sun S: Oscillation criteria for fourth-order nonlinear dynamic equations. Commun. Appl. Nonlinear Anal. 2011, 18: 1–16.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. Kamenev IV: An integral criterion for oscillation of linear differential equations of second order. Mat. Zametki 1978, 23: 249–251.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. Agarwal RP, Grace SR, O’Regan D: Oscillation Theory for Difference and Functional Differential Equations. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht; 2000.MATHView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. Agarwal RP, Grace SR, O’Regan D Series in Mathematical Analysis and Applications 5. In Oscillation Theory for Second Order Dynamic Equations. Taylor & Francis, London; 2003.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. Şenel MT: Kamenev-type oscillation criteria for the second order nonlinear dynamic equations with damping on time scales. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2012., 2012: Article ID 253107. doi:10.1155/2012/253107Google Scholar

Copyright

Advertisement