Skip to main content

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Matsaev type inequalities on smooth cones

This article was retracted on 10 March 2020

This article has been updated


Our aim in this paper is to obtain Matsaev type inequalities about harmonic functions on smooth cones, which generalize the results obtained by Xu, Yang and Zhao in a half space.

Introduction and results

Let R and \({\mathbf{R}}_{+}\) be the set of all real numbers and the set of all positive real numbers, respectively. We denote by \({\mathbf{R}}^{n}\) (\(n\geq2\)) the n-dimensional Euclidean space. A point in \({\mathbf{R}}^{n}\) is denoted by \(P=(X,x_{n})\), \(X=(x_{1},x_{2},\ldots,x_{n-1})\). The Euclidean distance between two points P and Q in \({\mathbf{R}}^{n}\) is denoted by \(|P-Q|\). Also \(|P-O|\) with the origin O of \({\mathbf{R}}^{n}\) is simply denoted by \(|P|\). The boundary and the closure of a set S in \({\mathbf{R}}^{n}\) are denoted by ∂S and \(\overline{S}\), respectively.

We introduce a system of spherical coordinates \((r,\Theta)\), \(\Theta=(\theta_{1},\theta_{2},\ldots,\theta_{n-1})\), in \({\mathbf{R}}^{n}\) which are related to Cartesian coordinates \((x_{1},x_{2},\ldots,x_{n-1},x_{n})\) by \(x_{n}=r\cos\theta_{1}\).

The unit sphere and the upper half unit sphere in \({\mathbf{R}}^{n}\) are denoted by \({\mathbf{S}}^{n-1}\) and \({\mathbf{S}}^{n-1}_{+}\), respectively. For simplicity, a point \((1,\Theta)\) on \({\mathbf{S}}^{n-1}\) and the set \(\{\Theta; (1,\Theta)\in\Omega\}\) for a set Ω, \(\Omega\subset{\mathbf{S}}^{n-1}\), are often identified with Θ and Ω, respectively. For two sets \(\Xi\subset{\mathbf{R}}_{+}\) and \(\Omega\subset{\mathbf{S}}^{n-1}\), the set \(\{(r,\Theta)\in{\mathbf{R}}^{n}; r\in\Xi,(1,\Theta)\in\Omega\}\) in \({\mathbf{R}}^{n}\) is simply denoted by \(\Xi\times\Omega\). In particular, the half space \({\mathbf{R}}_{+}\times{\mathbf{S}}^{n-1}_{+}=\{(X,x_{n})\in{\mathbf{R}}^{n}; x_{n}>0\}\) will be denoted by \({T}_{n}\).

For \(P\in{\mathbf{R}}^{n}\) and \(r>0\), let \(B(P,r)\) denote the open ball with center at P and radius r in \({\mathbf{R}}^{n}\). \(S_{r}=\partial{B(O,r)}\). By \(C_{n}(\Omega)\), we denote the set \({\mathbf{R}}_{+}\times\Omega\) in \({\mathbf{R}}^{n}\) with the domain Ω on \({\mathbf{S}}^{n-1}\). We call it a cone. Then \(T_{n}\) is a special cone obtained by putting \(\Omega={\mathbf{S}}^{n-1}_{+}\). We denote the sets \(I\times\Omega\) and \(I\times\partial{\Omega}\) with an interval on R by \(C_{n}(\Omega;I)\) and \(S_{n}(\Omega;I)\). By \(S_{n}(\Omega; r)\) we denote \(C_{n}(\Omega)\cap S_{r}\). By \(S_{n}(\Omega)\) we denote \(S_{n}(\Omega; (0,+\infty))\) which is \(\partial{C_{n}(\Omega)}-\{O\}\).

We use the standard notations \(u^{+}=\max\{u,0\}\) and \(u^{-}=-\min\{u,0\}\). Further, we denote by \(w_{n}\) the surface area \(2\pi^{n/2}\{\Gamma(n/2)\}^{-1}\) of \({\mathbf{S}}^{n-1}\), by \({\partial}/{\partial n_{Q}}\) denotes the differentiation at Q along the inward normal into \(C_{n}(\Omega)\), by \(dS_{r}\) the \((n-1)\)-dimensional volume elements induced by the Euclidean metric on \(S_{r}\) and by dw the elements of the Euclidean volume in \({\mathbf{R}}^{n}\).

Let Ω be a domain on \({\mathbf{S}}^{n-1}\) with smooth boundary. Consider the Dirichlet problem

$$\begin{aligned}& (\Lambda_{n}+\lambda)\varphi=0\quad \text{on } \Omega, \\& \varphi=0 \quad \text{on } \partial{\Omega}, \end{aligned}$$

where \(\Lambda_{n}\) is the spherical part of the Laplace operator \(\Delta_{n}\),

$$\Delta_{n}=\frac{n-1}{r}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}+\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial r^{2}}+ \frac{\Lambda_{n}}{r^{2}}. $$

We denote the least positive eigenvalue of this boundary value problem by λ and the normalized positive eigenfunction corresponding to λ by \(\varphi(\Theta)\), \(\int_{\Omega}\varphi^{2}(\Theta)\, dS_{1}=1\). In order to ensure the existence of λ and a smooth \(\varphi(\Theta)\). We put a rather strong assumption on Ω: if \(n\geq3\), then Ω is a \(C^{2,\alpha}\)-domain (\(0<\alpha<1\)) on \({\mathbf{S}}^{n-1}\) surrounded by a finite number of mutually disjoint closed hypersurfaces (e.g. see [1], pp.88-89, for the definition of \(C^{2,\alpha}\)-domain). Then \(\varphi\in C^{2}(\overline{\Omega})\) and \({\partial\varphi}/{\partial n}>0\) on Ω (here and below, \({\partial}/{\partial n}\) denotes differentiation along the interior normal).

We note that each function

$$r^{\aleph^{\pm}}\varphi(\Theta) $$

is harmonic in \(C_{n}(\Omega)\), belongs to the class \(C^{2}(C_{n}(\Omega )\backslash\{O\})\) and vanishes on \(S_{n}(\Omega)\), where

$$2\aleph^{\pm}=-n+2\pm\sqrt{(n-2)^{2}+4\lambda}. $$

In the sequel, for the sake of brevity, we shall write χ instead of \(\aleph^{+}-\aleph^{-}\). If \(\Omega={\mathbf{S}}^{n-1}_{+}\), then \(\aleph^{+}=1\), \(\aleph^{-}=1-n\), and \(\varphi(\Theta)=(2n w_{n}^{-1})^{1/2}\cos\theta_{1}\).

Let \(G_{\Omega}(P,Q)\) (\(P=(r,\Theta)\), \(Q=(t,\Phi)\in C_{n}(\Omega)\)) be the Green function of \(C_{n}(\Omega)\). Then the ordinary Poisson kernel relative to \(C_{n}(\Omega)\) is defined by

$$\mathcal{PI}_{\Omega}(P,Q)=\frac{1}{c_{n}}\frac{\partial}{\partial n_{Q}}G_{\Omega}(P,Q), $$

where \(Q\in S_{n}(\Omega)\) and

$$c_{n}=\left \{ \begin{array}{l@{\quad}l} 2\pi & \mbox{if } n=2, \\ (n-2)w_{n} & \mbox{if } n\geq3. \end{array} \right . $$

The estimate we deal with has a long history which can be traced back to Matsaev’s estimate of harmonic functions from below (see, for example, Levin [2], p.209).

Theorem A

Let \(A_{1}\)be a constant, \(u(z)\) (\(|z|=R\)) be harmonic on \(T_{2}\)and continuous on \({\partial T}_{2}\). Suppose that

$$u(z)\leq A_{1}R^{\rho}, \quad z\in T_{2}, R>1, \rho>1 $$


$$\bigl\vert u(z)\bigr\vert \leq A_{1}, \quad R\leq1, z\in{ \overline{T}}_{2}. $$


$$u(z)\geq-A_{1}A_{2}\bigl(1+R^{\rho}\bigr) \sin^{-1}\alpha, $$

where \(z=Re^{i\alpha}\in{T}_{2}\)and \(A_{2}\)is a constant independent of \(A_{1}\), R, α, and the function \(u(z)\).

Recently, Xu et al. [35] considered Theorem A in the n-dimensional (\(n\geq2\)) case and obtained the following result.

Theorem B

Let \(A_{3}\)be a constant, \(u(P)\) (\(|P|=R\)) be harmonic on \(T_{n}\)and continuous on \(\overline{T}_{n}\). If

$$ u(P)\leq A_{3}R^{\rho}, \quad P\in T_{n}, R>1, \rho>n-1 $$


$$ \bigl\vert u(P)\bigr\vert \leq A_{3}, \quad R\leq1, P\in \overline{T}_{n}, $$


$$u(P)\geq-A_{3}A_{4}\bigl(1+R^{\rho}\bigr) \cos^{1-n}\theta_{1}, $$

where \(P\in T_{n}\)and \(A_{4}\)is a constant independent of \(A_{3}\), R, \(\theta_{1}\), and the function \(u(P)\).

Now we have the following.

Theorem 1

LetKbe a constant, \(u(P)\) (\(P=(R,\Theta)\)) be harmonic on \(C_{n}(\Omega)\)and continuous on \(\overline{C_{n}(\Omega)}\). If

$$ u(P)\leq KR^{\rho(R)}, \quad P=(R,\Theta)\in C_{n}\bigl( \Omega;(1,\infty)\bigr), \rho(R)>\aleph^{+} $$


$$ u(P)\geq-K, \quad R\leq1, P=(R,\Theta) \in \overline{C_{n}(\Omega)}, $$


$$u(P)\geq -KM \biggl(1+\biggl(\frac{N+1}{N}R\biggr)^{\rho(\frac{N+1}{N}R)} \biggr) \varphi ^{1-n}\theta, $$

where \(P\in C_{n}(\Omega)\), N (≥1) is a sufficiently large number, \(\rho(R)\)is nondecreasing in \([1,+\infty)\)andMis a constant independent ofK, R, \(\varphi(\theta)\), and the function \(u(P)\).

By taking \(\rho(R)\equiv\rho\), we obtain the following corollary, which generalizes Theorem B to the conical case.


LetKbe a constant, \(u(P)\) (\(P=(R,\Theta)\)) be harmonic on \(C_{n}(\Omega)\)and continuous on \(\overline{C_{n}(\Omega)}\). If

$$u(P)\leq KR^{\rho},\quad P=(R,\Theta)\in C_{n}\bigl(\Omega;(1, \infty)\bigr), \rho>\aleph^{+} $$


$$u(P)\geq-K, \quad R\leq1, P=(R,\Theta) \in \overline{C_{n}(\Omega)}, $$


$$u(P)\geq-KM\bigl(1+R^{\rho}\bigr)\varphi^{1-n}\theta, $$

where \(P\in C_{n}(\Omega)\), Mis a constant independent ofK, R, \(\varphi(\theta)\), and the function \(u(P)\).


From the corollary, we know that conditions (1.1) and (1.2) may be replaced with the weaker conditions

$$u(P)\leq A_{3}R^{\rho}, \quad P\in T_{n}, R>1, \rho>1 $$


$$u(P)\geq-A_{3}, \quad R\leq1, P\in\overline{T}_{n}, $$



Throughout this paper, let M denote various constants independent of the variables in question, which may be different from line to line.

Carleman’s formula (see [6]) connects the modulus and the zeros of a function analytic in a complex plane (see, for example, [7], p.224). I Miyamoto and H Yoshida generalized it to subharmonic functions in an n-dimensional cone (see [8, 9]).

Lemma 1

If \(R>1\)and \(u(t,\Phi)\)is a subharmonic function on a domain containing \(C_{n}(\Omega;(1,R))\), then

$$\begin{aligned}& \int_{C_{n}(\Omega;(1,R))} \biggl(\frac{1}{t^{-\aleph^{-}}}-\frac {t^{\aleph^{+}}}{R^{\chi}} \biggr) \varphi\Delta u \, dw \\& \quad =\chi\int_{S_{n}(\Omega;R)}\frac{u\varphi}{R^{1-\aleph^{-}}} \, d S_{R} + \int_{S_{n}(\Omega;(1,R))}u \biggl(\frac{1}{t^{-\aleph^{-}}}-\frac {t^{\aleph^{+}}}{R^{\chi}} \biggr) \frac{\partial\varphi}{\partial n} \, d\sigma_{Q}+d_{1}+ \frac{d_{2}}{R^{\chi}}, \end{aligned}$$


$$d_{1}=\int_{S_{n}(\Omega;1)}\aleph^{-}u\varphi- \varphi\frac{\partial u}{\partial n} \, dS_{1} \quad \textit{and} \quad d_{2}=\int_{S_{n}(\Omega;1)}\varphi \frac{\partial u}{\partial n}- \aleph^{+}u\varphi \, dS_{1}. $$

Lemma 2

(see [8, 9])

$$ \mathcal{PI}_{\Omega}(P,Q)\leq M r^{\aleph^{-}}t^{\aleph^{+}-1}\varphi( \Theta)\frac{\partial \varphi( \Phi)}{\partial n_{\Phi}} $$

for any \(P=(r,\Theta)\in C_{n}(\Omega)\)and any \(Q=(t,\Phi)\in S_{n}(\Omega)\)satisfying \(0<\frac{t}{r}\leq\frac{4}{5}\),

$$ \mathcal{PI}_{\Omega}(P,Q)\leq M\frac{\varphi(\Theta)}{t^{n-1}}\frac{\partial\varphi( \Phi)}{\partial n_{\Phi}}+M \frac{r\varphi(\Theta)}{|P-Q|^{n}}\frac{\partial\varphi( \Phi)}{\partial n_{\Phi}} $$

for any \(P=(r,\Theta)\in C_{n}(\Omega)\)and any \(Q=(t,\Phi)\in S_{n}(\Omega; (\frac{4}{5}r,\frac{5}{4}r))\).

Let \(G_{\Omega,R}(P,Q)\)be the Green function of \(C_{n}(\Omega,(0,R))\). Then

$$ \frac{\partial G_{\Omega,R}(P,Q)}{\partial R}\leq M r^{\aleph^{+}}R^{\aleph^{-}-1}\varphi(\Theta)\varphi( \Phi), $$

where \(P=(r,\Theta)\in C_{n}(\Omega)\)and \(Q=(R,\Phi)\in S_{n}(\Omega;R)\).

Proof of Theorem 1

Lemma 1 applied to \(u=u^{+}-u^{-}\) gives

$$\begin{aligned}& \chi\int_{S_{n}(\Omega;R)}\frac{u^{+}\varphi}{R^{1-\aleph^{-}}}\, d S_{R}+\int _{S_{n}(\Omega;(1,R))}u^{+} \biggl(\frac{1}{t^{-\aleph ^{-}}}- \frac{t^{\aleph^{+}}}{R^{\chi}} \biggr) \frac{\partial\varphi}{\partial n} \, d\sigma_{Q}+d_{1}+ \frac{d_{2}}{R^{\chi}} \\& \quad =\chi\int_{S_{n}(\Omega;R)}\frac{u^{-}\varphi}{R^{1-\aleph^{-}}} \, d S_{R}+\int _{S_{n}(\Omega;(1,R))}u^{-} \biggl(\frac{1}{t^{-\aleph ^{-}}}- \frac{t^{\aleph^{+}}}{R^{\chi}} \biggr) \frac{\partial\varphi}{\partial n} \, d\sigma_{Q}. \end{aligned}$$

It immediately follows from (1.3) that

$$ \chi\int_{S_{n}(\Omega;R)}\frac{u^{+}\varphi}{R^{1-\aleph^{-}}}\, d S_{R} \leq MKR^{\rho(R)-\aleph^{+}} $$


$$\begin{aligned}& \int_{S_{n}(\Omega;(1,R))}u^{+} \biggl( \frac{1}{t^{-\aleph^{-}}}-\frac {t^{\aleph^{+}}}{R^{\chi}} \biggr) \frac{\partial\varphi}{\partial n} \, d \sigma_{Q} \\& \quad \leq \int_{S_{n}(\Omega;(1,R))}Kt^{\rho(t)+\aleph^{+}} \biggl( \frac {1}{t^{\chi}}-\frac{1}{R^{\chi}} \biggr) \frac{\partial\varphi}{\partial n} \, d \sigma_{Q} \\& \quad \leq MK\int_{1}^{R} \biggl(r^{\rho(r)-\aleph^{+}-1}- \frac{r^{\rho(r)-\aleph ^{-}-1}}{R^{\chi}} \biggr) \frac{\partial\varphi}{\partial n} \, dr \\& \quad \leq MK\int_{1}^{R} r^{\rho(R)-\aleph^{+}-1} \, dr \\& \quad \leq \frac{MK}{\rho(R)-\aleph^{+}}R^{\rho(R)-\aleph^{+}} \\& \quad \leq MKR^{\rho(R)-\aleph^{+}}. \end{aligned}$$

Notice that

$$ d_{1}+\frac{d_{2}}{R^{\chi}} \leq MKR^{\rho(R)-\aleph^{+}}. $$

Hence from (3.1), (3.2), (3.3), and (3.4) we have

$$ \chi\int_{S_{n}(\Omega;R)}\frac{u^{-}\varphi}{R^{1-\aleph^{-}}} \, d S_{R} \leq MKR^{\rho(R)-\aleph^{+}} $$


$$ \int_{S_{n}(\Omega;(1,R))}u^{-} \biggl(\frac{1}{t^{-\aleph^{-}}}- \frac {t^{\aleph^{+}}}{R^{\chi}} \biggr) \frac{\partial\varphi}{\partial n}\, d\sigma_{Q} \leq MKR^{\rho(R)-\aleph^{+}}. $$

Equation (3.6) gives

$$\begin{aligned}& \int_{S_{n}(\Omega;(1,R))}u^{-}t^{\aleph^{-}}\frac{\partial\varphi }{\partial n} \, d\sigma_{Q} \\& \quad \leq \frac{(N+1)^{\chi}}{(N+1)^{\chi}-N^{\chi}}\int_{S_{n}(\Omega ;(1,\frac{N+1}{N}R))}u^{-} \biggl(\frac{1}{t^{-\aleph^{-}}}-\frac {t^{\aleph^{+}}}{(\frac{N+1}{N}R)^{\chi}} \biggr) \frac{\partial\varphi}{\partial n} \, d \sigma_{Q} \\& \quad \leq \frac{(N+1)^{\chi}}{(N+1)^{\chi}-N^{\chi}}MK\biggl(\frac {N+1}{N}R\biggr)^{\rho(\frac{N+1}{N}R)-\aleph^{+}} \\& \quad \leq MK\biggl(\frac{N+1}{N}R\biggr)^{\rho(\frac{N+1}{N}R)-\aleph^{+}}. \end{aligned}$$


$$ \int_{S_{n}(\Omega;(1,R))}u^{-}t^{\aleph^{-}}\frac{\partial\varphi }{\partial n}\, d\sigma_{Q} \leq MK\biggl(\frac{N+1}{N}R\biggr)^{\rho(\frac{N+1}{N}R)-\aleph^{+}}. $$

By the Riesz decomposition theorem (see [7]), for any \(P=(r,\Theta)\in C_{n}(\Omega;(0,R))\) we have

$$\begin{aligned} -u(P) =&\int_{S_{n}(\Omega;(0,R))}\mathcal{PI}_{\Omega }(P,Q)-u(Q)\, d \sigma_{Q} \\ &{}+\int_{S_{n}(\Omega;R)}\frac{\partial G_{\Omega ,R}(P,Q)}{\partial R}-u(Q)\, dS_{R}. \end{aligned}$$

Now we distinguish three cases.

Case 1. \(P=(r,\Theta)\in C_{n}(\Omega;(\frac {5}{4},\infty))\) and \(R=\frac{5}{4}r\).

Since \(-u(x)\leq u^{-}(x)\), we obtain

$$ -u(P)=\sum_{i=1}^{4} I_{i}(P) $$

from (3.8), where

$$\begin{aligned}& I_{1}(P)=\int_{S_{n}(\Omega;(0,1])}\mathcal{PI}_{\Omega }(P,Q)-u(Q) \, d\sigma_{Q}, \\& I_{2}(P)=\int_{S_{n}(\Omega;(1,\frac {4}{5}r])} \mathcal{PI}_{\Omega}(P,Q)-u(Q)\, d\sigma_{Q}, \\& I_{3}(P)=\int_{S_{n}(\Omega;(\frac{4}{5}r,R))}\mathcal{PI}_{\Omega }(P,Q)-u(Q) \, d\sigma_{Q} \quad \text{and} \\& I_{4}(P)=\int _{S_{n}(\Omega ;R)}\mathcal{PI}_{\Omega}(P,Q)-u(Q)\, d \sigma_{Q}. \end{aligned}$$

Then from (2.1) and (3.7) we have

$$ I_{1}(P)\leq MK\varphi(\Theta) $$


$$\begin{aligned} I_{2}(P) \leq& r^{\aleph^{-}}\varphi(\Theta) \biggl( \frac{4}{5}r\biggr)^{\chi-1}\int_{S_{n}(\Omega;(1,\frac{4}{5}r])}-u(Q)t^{\aleph^{-}} \frac{\partial \varphi( \Phi)}{\partial n_{\Phi}}\, d\sigma_{Q} \\ \leq& MK\biggl(\frac{N+1}{N}R\biggr)^{\rho(\frac{N+1}{N}R)}\varphi(\Theta). \end{aligned}$$

By (2.2), we consider the inequality

$$ I_{3}(P)\leq I_{31}(P)+I_{32}(P), $$


$$I_{31}(P)=M\int_{S_{n}(\Omega;(\frac{4}{5}r,R))}\frac{-u(Q) \varphi (\Theta)}{t^{n-1}} \frac{\partial\varphi( \Phi)}{\partial n_{\Phi}}\, d\sigma_{Q} $$


$$I_{32}(P)=Mr\varphi(\Theta)\int_{S_{n}(\Omega;(\frac {4}{5}r,R))} \frac{-u(Q) r\varphi(\Theta)}{|P-Q|^{n}}\frac{\partial \varphi( \Phi)}{\partial n_{\Phi}}\, d\sigma_{Q}. $$

We first have

$$\begin{aligned} I_{31}(P) \leq& M\varphi(\Theta)r^{1-n-\aleph^{-}}\int _{S_{n}(\Omega;(\frac {4}{5}r,R))}-u(Q)t^{\aleph^{-}}\frac{\partial \varphi( \Phi)}{\partial n_{\Phi}} \, d \sigma_{Q} \\ \leq& MK\biggl(\frac{N+1}{N}R\biggr)^{\rho(\frac{N+1}{N}R)}\varphi(\Theta) \end{aligned}$$

from (3.7). Next, we shall estimate \(I_{32}(P)\). Take a sufficiently small positive number k such that \(S_{n}(\Omega;(\frac{4}{5}r,R))\subset B(P,\frac{1}{2}r)\) for any \(P=(r,\Theta)\in\Pi(k)\), where

$$\Pi(k)=\Bigl\{ P=(r,\Theta)\in C_{n}(\Omega); \inf_{(1,z)\in\partial \Omega} \bigl\vert (1,\Theta)-(1,z)\bigr\vert < k, 0<r<\infty\Bigr\} , $$

and divide \(C_{n}(\Omega)\) into two sets \(\Pi(k)\) and \(C_{n}(\Omega)-\Pi(k)\).

If \(P=(r,\Theta)\in C_{n}(\Omega)-\Pi(k)\), then there exists a positive \(k'\) such that \(|P-Q|\geq{k}'r\) for any \(Q\in S_{n}(\Omega)\), and hence

$$\begin{aligned} I_{32}(P) \leq&M \int_{S_{n}(\Omega;(\frac{4}{5}r,R))} \frac{-u(Q) \varphi(\Theta)}{t^{n-1}}\frac{\partial\varphi( \Phi)}{\partial n_{\Phi}}\, d\sigma_{Q} \\ \leq& MK\biggl(\frac{N+1}{N}R\biggr)^{\rho(\frac{N+1}{N}R)}\varphi(\Theta), \end{aligned}$$

which is similar to the estimate of \(I_{31}(P)\).

We shall consider the case \(P=(r,\Theta)\in\Pi(k)\). Now put

$$H_{i}(P)=\biggl\{ Q\in S_{n}\biggl(\Omega;\biggl( \frac{4}{5}r,R\biggr)\biggr); 2^{i-1}\delta(P) \leq|P-Q|< 2^{i}\delta(P)\biggr\} , $$

where \(\delta(P)=\inf_{Q\in\partial{C_{n}(\Omega)}}|P-Q|\).

Since \(S_{n}(\Omega)\cap\{Q\in{\mathbf{R}}^{n}: |P-Q|< \delta(P)\}=\varnothing\), we have

$$I_{32}(P)=M\sum_{i=1}^{i(P)}\int _{H_{i}(P)}\frac{-u(Q)r\varphi(\Theta )}{|P-Q|^{n}}\frac{\partial\varphi( \Phi)}{\partial n_{\Phi}}\, d \sigma_{Q}, $$

where \(i(P)\) is a positive integer satisfying \(2^{i(P)-1}\delta(P)\leq\frac{r}{2}<2^{i(P)}\delta(P)\).

Since \(r\varphi(\Theta)\leq M\delta(P)\) (\(P=(r,\Theta)\in C_{n}(\Omega)\)), similar to the estimate of \(I_{31}(P)\) we obtain

$$\begin{aligned}& \int_{H_{i}(P)}\frac{-u(Q)r\varphi(\Theta)}{|P-Q|^{n}}\frac {\partial \varphi( \Phi)}{\partial n_{\Phi}}\, d \sigma_{Q} \\& \quad \leq \int_{H_{i}(P)}r\varphi(\Theta)\frac{-u(Q)}{(2^{i-1}\delta (P))^{n}} \frac{\partial \varphi( \Phi)}{\partial n_{\Phi}}\, d\sigma_{Q} \\& \quad \leq M2^{(1-i)n}\varphi^{1-n}(\Theta) \int _{H_{i}(P)}t^{1-n}-u(Q)\frac{\partial\varphi( \Phi)}{\partial n_{\Phi}}\, d \sigma_{Q} \\& \quad \leq MK\biggl(\frac{N+1}{N}R\biggr)^{\rho(\frac{N+1}{N}R)}\varphi ^{1-n}(\Theta) \end{aligned}$$

for \(i=0,1,2,\ldots,i(P)\).


$$ I_{32}(P)\leq MK\biggl(\frac{N+1}{N}R\biggr)^{\rho(\frac{N+1}{N}R)}\varphi ^{1-n}(\Theta). $$

From (3.12), (3.13), (3.14), and (3.15) we see that

$$ I_{3}(P)\leq MK\biggl(\frac{N+1}{N}R\biggr)^{\rho(\frac{N+1}{N}R)}\varphi ^{1-n}(\Theta). $$

On the other hand, we have from (2.3) and (3.5) that

$$\begin{aligned} I_{4}(P) \leq&M r^{\aleph^{+}}\varphi(\Theta)\int _{S_{n}(\Omega;R)}\frac {-u(Q)\varphi}{R^{1-\aleph^{-}}}\, d S_{R} \\ \leq& MKR^{\rho(R)}\varphi(\Theta). \end{aligned}$$

We thus obtain (3.10), (3.11), (3.16), and (3.17) that

$$ -u(P)\leq MK \biggl(1+\biggl(\frac{N+1}{N}R\biggr)^{\rho(\frac{N+1}{N}R)} \biggr) \varphi^{1-n}(\Theta). $$

Case 2. \(P=(r,\Theta)\in C_{n}(\Omega;(\frac{4}{5},\frac{5}{4}])\) and \(R=\frac{5}{4}r\).

Equation (3.8) gives

$$-u(P)= I_{1}(P)+I_{5}(P)+I_{4}(P), $$

where \(I_{1}(P)\) and \(I_{4}(P)\) are defined in Case 1 and

$$I_{5}(P)=\int_{S_{n}(\Omega;(1,R))}\mathcal {PI}_{\Omega}(P,Q)-u(Q) \, d\sigma_{Q}. $$

Similar to the estimate of \(I_{3}(P)\) in Case 1 we have

$$I_{5}(P)\leq MK\biggl(\frac{N+1}{N}R\biggr)^{\rho(\frac{N+1}{N}R)}\varphi ^{1-n}(\Theta), $$

which together with (3.10) and (3.17) gives (3.18).

Case 3. \(P=(r,\Theta)\in C_{n}(\Omega;(0,\frac{4}{5}])\).

It is evident from (1.4) that we have \(-u\leq K\), which also gives (3.18).

From (3.18) we finally have

$$u(P)\geq -KM \biggl(1+\biggl(\frac{N+1}{N}R\biggr)^{\rho(\frac{N+1}{N}R)} \biggr) \varphi ^{1-n}\theta, $$

which is the conclusion of Theorem 1.

Change history

  • 10 March 2020

    The Editors-in-Chief have retracted this article [1] because it significantly overlaps with a previously published article [2]. In addition, the identity of the corresponding author could not be verified: Roskilde University have confirmed that Beatriz Ychussie has not been affiliated with their institution. The authors have not responded to correspondence regarding this retraction.


  1. Gilbarg, D, Trudinger, NS: Elliptic Partial Differential Equations of Second Order. Springer, Berlin (1977)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  2. Levin, BY: Lectures on Entire Functions. Translations of Mathematical Monographs, vol. 150. Am. Math. Soc., Providence (1996)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Xu, G, Yang, P, Zhao, T: Dirichlet problems of harmonic functions. Bound. Value Probl. 2013, 262 (2013)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Xu, G, Zhou, XY: Lower estimates for certain harmonic functions in the half space. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2014, Article ID 248576 (2014)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Pan, GS, Qiao, L, Deng, GT: A lower estimate of harmonic functions. Bull. Iran. Math. Soc. 40(1), 1-7 (2014)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Carleman, T: Über die Approximation analytischer Funktionen durch lineare Aggregate von vorgegebenen Potenzen. Ark. Mat. Astron. Fys. 17, 1-30 (1923)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Levin, BY: Distribution of Zeros of Entire Functions, revised edn. Translations of Mathematical Monographs, vol. 5. Am. Math. Soc., Providence (1980)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Yoshida, H: A boundedness criterion for subharmonic function. J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2) 24, 148-160 (1981)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Yoshida, H: Nevanlinna norm of a subharmonic function on a cone or on a cylinder. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) 54(2), 267-299 (1987)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references


This work was partially supported by NSF Grant DMS-0913205.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Beatriz Ychussie.

Additional information

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors’ contributions

The main idea of this paper was proposed by the corresponding author BY. SP and BY prepared the manuscript initially and performed all the steps of the proofs in this research. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

The Editors-in-Chief have retracted this article because it significantly overlaps with a previously published article (Lei Qiao & Guoshuang Pan 2016). In addition, the identity of the corresponding author could not be verified: Roskilde University have confirmed that Beatriz Ychussie has not been affiliated with their institution. The authors have not responded to correspondence regarding this retraction.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pang, S., Ychussie, B. RETRACTED ARTICLE: Matsaev type inequalities on smooth cones. J Inequal Appl 2015, 108 (2015).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI:


  • 31B05
  • 31B10


  • Matsaev type inequality
  • harmonic function
  • cone