Abstract
We provide sufficient conditions for the existence of one positive solution for a fourth--order beam equation with a discontinuous nonlinear term. Also a multiplicity result is established. They are based on a recent generalization of the Krasnosel’skiĭ fixed point theorem in cones.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
We study the existence of positive solutions for the following fourth-order equation
where \(g\ge 0\) a.e. on \(I=[0,1]\) and \(g\in L^{1}(0,1)\) and the function \(f:[0,\infty )\rightarrow [0,\infty )\) is such that \(u\mapsto f(u)\) is measurable for every \(u\in \mathcal {C}^{2}([0,1])\) and \(f\in L^{\infty }_{loc}([0,\infty ))\).
Problem (1.1) was intensively studied in the literature (see, for example [4, 6, 13]) and it arises in many applications. For instance, fourth-order problems appear in nonlinear suspension bridge models (see [5, 13] and the references therein).
However, continuity assumptions are usually imposed about f. Our goal is to weaken this hypothesis without using monotonicity conditions and, even in that case, to obtain positive Carathéodory solutions for (1.1). We achieve an existence result when f has a superlinear or sublinear behavior. Also a result concerning the existence of two positive solutions for problem (1.1) is obtained in Sect. 4.
Our approach is based on a multivalued version of the well-known Krasnosel’skiĭ compression-expansion fixed point theorem [10] which we apply in order to get fixed points of a regularization of the integral operator associated to (1.1). The mentioned multivalued mapping is constructed by ‘convexifying’ the fixed point operator related to the fourth-order problem (1.1). These ideas can be found in [8] and we will detail them in Sect. 2. They recall the classical ideas of Filippov and Krasovskij envelopes which regularize the differential equation and transform it into a differential inclusion, see [9, 11] .
2 Fixed Point Theorem
In the sequel, we need the following definitions. A subset K of a Banach space \((X,\Vert \cdot \Vert )\) is a cone if it is closed, \(K+K\subset K\), \(\lambda K\subset K\) for all \(\lambda \ge 0\) and \(K\cap (-K)=\{0\}\). A cone K defines the partial order in X given by \(x\preceq y\) if and only if \(y-x\in K\). We will denote \(K_{c}=\left\{ x\in K:\left\| x\right\| < c\right\} \) and \(\overline{K}_{c}\) its closure, with \(0<c<\infty \).
Let U be a relatively open subset of K and let \(T:\overline{U}\subset K\rightarrow K\) be an operator, not necessarily continuous.
Definition 2.1
The closed-convex envelope of an operator \(T:\overline{U} \longrightarrow K\) is the multivalued mapping \(\mathbb {T}: \overline{U} \longrightarrow 2^K\) given by
where \(\overline{B}_{\varepsilon }(x)\) denotes the closed ball centered at x and radius \(\varepsilon \), and \(\overline{\mathrm{co}}\) means closed convex hull.
In other words, we say that \(y \in {\mathbb T}x\) if for every \(\varepsilon >0\) and every \(\rho >0\) there exist \(m \in \mathbb N\) and a finite family of vectors \(x_i \in \overline{B}_{\varepsilon }(x) \cap \overline{U}\) and coefficients \(\lambda _i \in [0,1]\) (\(i=1,2,\ldots ,m\)) such that \(\sum \lambda _i=1\) and
Now we present a discontinuous version of Krasnosel’skiĭ theorem which is a straightforward consequence of the multivalued version given by Fitzpatrick and Petryshyn [10].
Proposition 2.2
Let \(r_{i}\le R\) (\(i=1,2\)) with \(r_{1}\ne r_{2}\) positive numbers and \(T:\overline{K}_{\mathrm{R}}\rightarrow K\) a mapping such that \(T\,\overline{K}_{\mathrm{R}}\) is relatively compact and fulfills condition
where \({{\mathbb {T}}}\) is the closed--convex envelope of T as defined in (2.2).
Suppose that
-
(a)
\(\lambda x\not \in {{\mathbb {T}}}x\) for all \(x\in K\) with \(\left\| x\right\| =r_{1}\) and all \(\lambda \ge 1\),
-
(b)
there exists \(w\in K\) with \(\left\| w\right\| \ne 0\) such that \(x\not \in {{\mathbb {T}}}x+\lambda w\) for all \(\lambda \ge 0\) and all \(x\in K\) with \(\left\| x\right\| =r_{2}\).
Then T has a fixed point \(x \in K\) such that
Observe that condition (2.3) is equivalent to \(\mathrm{Fix}({{\mathbb {T}}})\subset \mathrm{Fix}(T)\), where \(\mathrm{Fix}(S)\) denotes the set of fixed points of the operator S. For more details about the previous fixed point theorem, see [8].
Remark 2.3
Condition (a) in Proposition 2.2 is satisfied if one of the following two conditions holds:
-
(i)
\(y\not \succeq x\) for all \(y\in {{\mathbb {T}}}\,x\) and all \(x\in K\) with \(\left\| x\right\| =r_{1}\),
-
(ii)
\(\left\| y\right\| <\left\| x\right\| \) for all \(y\in {{\mathbb {T}}}\,x\) and all \(x\in K\) with \(\left\| x\right\| =r_{1}\).
Analogously, assumption (b) in Proposition 2.2 holds if
-
(I)
\(y\not \preceq x\) for all \(y\in {{\mathbb {T}}}\,x\) and all \(x\in K\) with \(\left\| x\right\| =r_{2}\), or
-
(II)
\(\left\| y\right\| >\left\| x\right\| \) for all \(y\in {{\mathbb {T}}}\,x\) and all \(x\in K\) with \(\left\| x\right\| =r_{2}\).
3 Positive Solutions
In this section, we establish sufficient conditions for the existence of positive solutions for the simply supported beam Eq. (1.1).
Technical reasons make that we need to work in the Banach space \((\mathcal {C}^{2}([0,1]),\left\| \cdot \right\| )\), where \(\left\| u\right\| =\max \{\left\| u\right\| _{\infty },\left\| u'\right\| _{\infty },\left\| u''\right\| _{\infty }\}\) and \(\left\| \cdot \right\| _{\infty }\) is the usual supremum norm.
We shall look for fixed points of the operator \(T:\mathcal {C}^{2}([0,1])\rightarrow \mathcal {C}^{2}([0,1])\) given by
where G is the Green’s function. It is given by
which is nonnegative and satisfies (see [4, 13])
where
and \(c=45\sqrt{3}/128\approx 0.608924\).
We shall look for fixed points of T in the cone
Proposition 3.1
The operator \(T:K\rightarrow K\) is well-defined and maps bounded sets into relatively compact sets.
Proof
The fact that \(T\,K\subset K\) can be verified by using the properties of the Green’s function G together with the mapping \(\Phi \). In addition, from the hypotheses about f and g and the regularity of the Green’s function it is routine to conclude that T maps bounded sets into relatively compact ones by means of the Áscoli-Arzela’s theorem. \(\square \)
Now we define the points where we allow the function f to be discontinuous. The following definition is an adjustment to the admissible discontinuity curves of [7, 12] in the case of a fourth-order problem and a function f only dependent on the space variable u.
Definition 3.2
An admissible discontinuity point is a nonnegative real number x satisfying one of the following conditions:
-
(a)
\(f(x)=0\) (x is said a viable point),
-
(b)
There exist \(\varepsilon >0\) and \(\psi \in L^{1}(0,1)\), \(\psi (t)>0\) for a.a. \(t\in [0,1]\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} \psi (t)<g(t)f(y) \quad \text {for a.a. } t\in [0,1] \text { and all } y\in [x-\varepsilon ,x+\varepsilon ] \quad \text {({ x} is inviable)}. \end{aligned}$$(3.4)
Remark 3.3
Notice that the hypotheses about the admissible discontinuity points defined here are similar to the condition
given in [11] for first-order discontinuous autonomous systems. Indeed, they are equivalent whenever \(g\equiv 1\).
Moreover, observe that if \(g(t)>0\) for a.a. \(t\in [0,1]\), then the fact that there exists \(\varepsilon >0\) such that
implies condition (3.4) in Definition 3.2. Similar assumptions were required in [1, 2] in the study of second-order problems, but the approach there relies on critical point theory for non-smooth operators.
Now we enunciate three technical results whose proofs can be looked up in [12].
Lemma 3.4
([12], Lemma 4.1]) Let \(a,b \in {\mathbb {R}}\), \(a<b\), and let \(g, h \in L^1(a,b)\), \(g \ge 0\) a.e., and \(h>0\) a.e. in (a, b). For every measurable set \(J \subset (a,b)\) with \(m(J)>0\), there is a measurable set \(J_0 \subset J\) with \(m(J \setminus J_0)=0\) such that for every \(\tau _0 \in J_0\) we have
Corollary 3.5
([12], Corollary 4.2]) Let \(a,b \in {\mathbb {R}}\), \(a<b\), and let \(h \in L^1(a,b)\) be such that \(h>0\) a.e. in (a, b). For every measurable set \(J \subset (a,b)\) with \(m(J)>0\), there is a measurable set \(J_0 \subset J\) with \(m(J \setminus J_0)=0\) such that for all \(\tau _0 \in J_0\) we have
Corollary 3.6
([12], Corollary 4.3]) Let \(a,b \in \mathbb R\), \(a<b\), and let \(f, \, f_\mathrm{n}:[a,b] \longrightarrow \mathbb R\) be absolutely continuous functions on [a, b] (\(n \in \mathbb N\)), such that \(f_\mathrm{n} \rightarrow f\) uniformly on [a, b] and for a measurable set \(A \subset [a,b]\) with \(m(A)>0\) we have
If there exists \(M \in L^1(a,b)\) such that \(|f'(t)| \le M(t)\) a.e. in [a, b] and also \(|f_\mathrm{n}'(t)| \le M(t)\) a.e. in [a, b] (\(n \in \mathbb N\)), then \(f'(t)=g(t)\) for a.a. \(t \in A\).
We shall also need the following result whose proof is similar to that of Lemma 3.11 in [8].
Lemma 3.7
If \(M \in L^1(0,1)\), \(M \ge 0\) almost everywhere, then the set
is closed in \(\mathcal {C}^{2}([0,1])\).
Moreover, if \(u_\mathrm{n} \in Q\) for all \(n \in \mathbb N\) and \(u_n\rightarrow u\) in the \(\mathcal {C}^{2}\) norm, then there exists a subsequence \(\{u_{\mathrm{n}_\mathrm{k}}\}\) which tends to u in the \({\mathcal {C}}^3\) norm.
Following the notation of [3], we define
and we suppose \(\gamma _{*}>0\).
Now we prove the main result of this section.
Theorem 3.8
Assume that the functions f and g satisfy the following hypotheses:
- \((H_1)\):
-
\(g\ge 0\) a.e. on \(I=[0,1]\) and \(g\in L^{1}(0,1)\);
- \((H_2)\):
-
\(f:[0,\infty )\rightarrow [0,\infty )\) is such that
-
\(u\mapsto f(u)\) is measurable for every \(u\in \mathcal {C}^{2}([0,1])\), and
-
f is locally bounded;
- \((H_3)\):
-
There exist admissible discontinuity points \(x_{n}\ge 0\) such that the function \(u\mapsto f(u)\) is continuous in \([0,\infty )\setminus \bigcup _{n\in {\mathbb {N}}}{\left\{ x_{\mathrm{n}}\right\} }\).
Moreover, assume that either
-
(i)
\(f_0:=\lim _{u\rightarrow 0^{+}}{\displaystyle \frac{f(u)}{u}}=+\infty \quad \) and \(\quad f_{\infty }:=\lim _{u\rightarrow \infty }{\displaystyle \frac{f(u)}{u}}=0\) (sublinear case); or
-
(ii)
\(f_0=0\quad \) and \(\quad f_\infty =\infty \) (superlinear case).
Then BVP (1.1) has one positive solution.
Proof
We are going to prove that the conditions of Proposition 2.2 are satisfied. We suppose that f satisfies (i) (it is similar if the nonlinearity f is in the superlinear case). Claims 1 and 2 are standard (see, e.g., [4], Theorem 3.1]), but here some changes are necessary due to the use of the set-valued operator \({{\mathbb {T}}}\), and the last one is a technical result which follows the ideas of [12], Theorem 4.4].
Claim 1: There exists \(r_1>0\) such that \(\left\| y\right\| <\left\| u\right\| \) for all \(y\in {{\mathbb {T}}}\,u\) and all \(u\in K\) with \(\left\| u\right\| =r_{1}\).
Since \(f_\infty =0\), for each \(L>0\) there exists \(M>0\) such that
We can choose \(L>0\) small enough such that \(5\max \{\gamma ^{*},\gamma _{1}^{*},\gamma _{2}^{*}\}L<2\) and \(r_1>0\) large enough such that \(2\max \{\gamma ^{*},\gamma _{1}^{*},\gamma _{2}^{*}\}M<r_1\). Suppose that \(u\in K\) with \(\left\| u\right\| =r_1\), then for every finite family \(u_i \in \overline{B}_{r}(u) \cap K\) and \(\lambda _i \in [0,1]\) (\(i=1,2,\ldots ,m\)), with \(\sum \lambda _i=1\) and \(r=\left\| u\right\| _{\infty }/4\), we have
In addition,
and
Hence, if \(y\in {{\mathbb {T}}}\,u\), then it is the limit of a sequence of functions v as above, so \(\left\| y\right\| <\left\| u\right\| \) for all \(y\in {{\mathbb {T}}}\,u\) and all \(u\in K\) with \(\left\| u\right\| =r_{1}\).
Claim 2: There exists \(r_2>0\) such that \(y\not \preceq u\) for all \(y\in {{\mathbb {T}}}\,u\) and all \(u\in K\) with \(\left\| u\right\| =r_{2}\).
Hypothesis (i) \(f_0=\infty \) guarantees that we can choose \(L>0\) large enough such that \(\gamma _{*}Lc>2\) and \(C>0\) satisfying \(f(s)\ge Ls\) provided that \(0\le s\le C\). Suppose that \(u\in K\) with \(\left\| u\right\| =C/2=:r_2\), then for every finite family \(u_i \in \overline{B}_{r}(u) \cap K\) and \(\lambda _i \in [0,1]\) (\(i=1,2,\dots ,m\)), with \(\sum \lambda _i=1\) and \(r=\left\| u\right\| _{\infty }/2\), we have \(\left\| u_i\right\| _{\infty }\le 3r_2/2<C\), so \(0\le u_i(t)\le C\) for all \(t\in [1/4,3/4]\) and
which implies that \(y\not \preceq u\) for all \(y\in {{\mathbb {T}}}u\) with \(u\in K\) and \(\left\| u\right\| =r_2\).
Claim 3: The operator T satisfies the condition \(\left\{ u\right\} \cap {{\mathbb {T}}}u\subset \left\{ Tu\right\} \) for all \(u\in \overline{K}_{\mathrm{R}}\) with \(R\ge r_1\).
First, notice that there exists \(\tilde{R}>0\) such that \(f(u)\le \tilde{R}\) for all \(u\in \overline{K}_{\mathrm{R}}\). Therefore, there exists \(M\in L^{1}(0,1)\) such that
Now we consider the set
which is a closed and convex subset of \(\mathcal {C}^{2}([0,1])\) by Lemma 3.7. It is immediate to see that \(T\,K\subset Q\), by the definition of the operator T, and since Q is a closed and convex subset of \(X{ =\mathcal {C}^{2}([0,1])}\) we have that \({{\mathbb {T}}}\,K\subset Q\). In particular, \({{\mathbb {T}}}\,\overline{K}_{\mathrm{R}}\subset Q\). We note that condition \(\left\{ u\right\} \cap {{\mathbb {T}}}u\subset \left\{ \mathrm{Tu}\right\} \) needs only to be verified for every \(u\in \overline{K}_{\mathrm{R}}\cap {{\mathbb {T}}}\,\overline{K}_{\mathrm{R}}\subset \overline{K}_{\mathrm{R}}\cap Q\).
Therefore, we fix \(u\in \overline{K}_{\mathrm{R}}\cap Q\) and we consider the following three cases.
Case 1: \(m\left( \left\{ t\in [0,1]:u(t)=x_{n}\right\} \right) =0 \textit{ for all } n\in {\mathbb {N}}\). Let us prove that then T is continuous at u.
The assumption implies that for a.a. \(t\in [0,1]\) the function \(f(\cdot )\) is continuous at u(t). Hence, if \(u_{\mathrm{k}}\rightarrow u\) in Q, then
which, along with (3.5), yield \(\mathrm{Tu}_{\mathrm{k}}\rightarrow \mathrm{Tu}\) in \(\mathcal {C}^{2}([0,1])\).
Case 2: \(m\left( \left\{ t\in [0,1]:u(t)=x_{\mathrm{n}}\right\} \right) >0\) for some \(n\in {\mathbb {N}}\) such that \(x_\mathrm{n}\) is inviable. In this case, we can prove that \(u\not \in {{\mathbb {T}}}u\).
Let us assume that for some \(n\in {\mathbb {N}}\) we have \(m\left( \left\{ t\in [0,1]:u(t)=x_{\mathrm{n}}\right\} \right) >0\) and we will simply denote x instead of \(x_{\mathrm{n}}\). There exist \(\varepsilon >0\) and \(\psi \in L^{1}(0,1)\), \(\psi (t)>0\) for a.a. \(t\in [0,1]\) such that (3.4) holds.
We denote \(J=\left\{ t\in [0,1]:u(t)=x\right\} \), and we deduce from Lemma 3.4 that there exists a measurable set \(J_{0}\subset J\) with \(m(J_{0})=m(J)>0\) such that for all \(\tau _{0}\in J_{0}\) we have
By Corollary 3.5, there exists \(J_1 \subset J_0\) with \(m(J_0 \setminus J_1)=0\) such that for all \(\tau _0 \in J_1\) we have
Let us now fix a point \(\tau _0 \in J_1\). From (3.7) and (3.8), we deduce that there exist \(t_-<\tilde{t}_{-}<\tau _0\) and \(t_+>\tilde{t}_{+}>\tau _0\), \(t_{\pm }\) sufficiently close to \(\tau _0\) so that the following inequalities are satisfied for all \(t\in [\tilde{t}_{+},t_{+}]\):
and for all \(t\in [t_{-},\tilde{t}_{-}]\):
Finally, we define a positive number
and we are now in a position to prove that \(u \not \in {\mathbb T}u\). It suffices to prove the following claim:
Claim -- Let \(\varepsilon >0\)be given by our assumptions over x and let \(\rho =\displaystyle \frac{\tilde{\rho }}{2}\min \left\{ \tilde{t}_{-}-t_{-},t_{+}-\tilde{t}_{+}\right\} \) be where \(\tilde{\rho }\) is as in(3.13).For every finite family \(u_i \in \overline{B}_{\varepsilon }(u) \cap K\) and\(\lambda _i \in [0,1]\) (\(i=1,2,\ldots ,m\)), with \(\sum \lambda _i=1\), we have \(\Vert u-\sum \lambda _i Tu_i\Vert \ge \rho \).
Let \(u_i\) and \(\lambda _i\) be as in the Claim and, for simplicity, denote \(y=\sum \lambda _i \mathrm{Tu}_i\). For a.a. \(t \in J=\{t \in [0,1] \, : \, u(t)=x\}\) we have
On the other hand, for every \(i \in \{1,2,\ldots ,m\}\) and every \(t \in J\) we have
and then the assumptions on x ensure that for a.a. \(t \in J\) we have
Now for \(t\in [t_{-},\tilde{t}_{-}]\) we compute
hence \(u'''(t)-y'''(t) \ge \tilde{\rho }\) provided that \(u'''(\tau _0) \ge y'''(\tau _0)\). Therefore, by integration we obtain
If \(u''(t_{-})-y''(t_{-})\le -\rho \), then \(\left\| y''-u''\right\| _{\infty }\ge \rho \) and thus \(\left\| y-u\right\| \ge \rho \) too. Otherwise, that is, if \(u''(t_{-})-y''(t_{-})>-\rho \), then we have \(u''(\tilde{t}_{-})-y''(\tilde{t}_{-})>\rho \) and hence \(\left\| y-u\right\| \ge \rho \) too.
Similar computations in the interval \([\tilde{t}_{+},t_+]\) instead of \([t_-,\tilde{t}_{-}]\) show that if \(u'''(\tau _0) \le y'''(\tau _0)\) then we have \(y'''(t)-u'''(t) \ge \tilde{\rho }\) for all \(t\in [\tilde{t}_{+},t_+]\) and this also implies \(\left\| y-u\right\| \ge \rho \). The claim is proven.
Case 3: \(m(\{t \in [0,1] \, : \, u(t)=x_n\})>0\) only for some of those \(n \in \mathbb N\) such that \(x_n\) is viable. Let us prove that in this case the relation \(u \in {\mathbb T}u\) implies \(u=Tu\).
Let us consider the subsequence of all viable admissible discontinuity points in the conditions of Case 3, which we denote again by \(\{x_n\}_{n \in {\mathbb N}}\) to avoid overloading notation. We have \(m(J_n)>0\) for all \(n \in \mathbb N\), where
For each \(n \in \mathbb N\) and for a.a. \(t \in J_n\), we have
and therefore \(u^{(4)}(t)=g(t)f(u(t))\) a.e. in \(J=\cup _{n \in {\mathbb N}}J_n\).
Now we assume that \(u \in {\mathbb T}u\) and we prove that it implies that \(u^{(4)}(t)=g(t)f(u(t))\) a.e. in \([0,1]\setminus J\), thus showing that \(u=Tu\).
Since \(u \in {\mathbb T}u\) then for each \(k \in \mathbb N\), we can guarantee that we can find functions \(u_{k,i} \in \overline{B}_{1/k}(u)\cap K\) and coefficients \(\lambda _{k,i} \in [0,1]\) (\(i=1,2,\ldots ,m(k)\)) such that \(\sum \lambda _{k,i}=1\) and
Let us denote \(y_\mathrm{k}=\sum _{i=1}^{m(k)}\lambda _{k,i}\mathrm{Tu}_{k,i}\), and notice that \(y_\mathrm{k} \rightarrow u\) in the \(\mathcal {C}^{2}\) norm and \(\Vert u_{k,i}-u\Vert \le 1/k\) for all \(k \in \mathbb N\) and all \(i \in \{1,2,\ldots ,m(k)\}\).
For every \(k\in \mathbb {N}\), we have \(y_k\in Q\) as defined in (3.6), and therefore Lemma 3.7 guarantees that \(u \in Q\) and, up to a subsequence, \(y_k \rightarrow u\) in the \({\mathcal {C}}^3\) topology.
For a.a. \(t \in [0,1]\setminus J\), we have that \(f(\cdot )\) is continuous at u(t), so for any \(\varepsilon >0\) there is some \(k_0=k_0(t) \in \mathbb N\) such that for all \(k \in \mathbb N\), \(k \ge k_0\), we have
and therefore
Hence, \(y_k^{(4)}(t) \rightarrow g(t)f(u(t))\) for a.a. \(t \in [0,1] \setminus J\), and then Corollary 3.6 guarantees that \(u^{(4)}(t)=g(t)f(u(t))\) for a.a. \(t \in [0,1] \setminus J\).
Therefore, the conditions of Proposition 2.2 are satisfied and we can ensure that BVP (1.1) has a positive solution. \(\square \)
Remark 3.9
Observe that the boundary conditions (BCs) do not play an important role together to the discontinuities of the nonlinearity f in order to guarantee the existence of positive solutions, so our result may be generalized to other BCs whenever the Green’s function satisfies suitable sign conditions.
We illustrate our theory with an example inspired by [4], Example 2].
Example 3.10
Consider the BVP
where \(\lfloor x\rfloor \) denotes the integer part of x.
The mapping \(f(u)=\lfloor 7u^3-18u^2+12u \rfloor e^{-u}+\sqrt{u}\) is discontinuous at infinitely many points and these points are admissible inviable discontinuity points (it suffices to take \(\psi \equiv 0.1\) and \(\varepsilon =0.05\) in Definition 3.2). In addition, it is not monotone and, clearly, \(f_0=+\infty \) and \(f_\infty =0\).
Therefore, Theorem 3.8 guarantees the existence of a positive solution for this problem.
4 A Multiplicity Result
We establish the existence of two positive solutions for problem (1.1). Our multiplicity result is based on the following Lemma and a suitable asymptotic behavior of the function f at zero and at infinity.
Lemma 4.1
Assume that the functions f and g satisfy conditions \((H_1)\) and \((H_2)\).
If there exist \(r_1>0\) and \(\varepsilon >0\) such that
then \(\left\| y\right\| <\left\| u\right\| \) for all \(y\in {{\mathbb {T}}}\,u\) and all \(u\in K\) with \(\left\| u\right\| =r_{1}\).
Proof
Suppose that \(u\in K\) with \(\left\| u\right\| =r_1\). Then for every finite family \(u_i \in \overline{B}_{\varepsilon }(u) \cap K\) and \(\lambda _i \in [0,1]\) (\(i=1,2,\ldots ,m\)), with \(\sum \lambda _i=1\), we have (by condition (4.16))
In addition,
and
Hence, if \(y\in {{\mathbb {T}}}\,u\), then it is the limit of a sequence of functions v as above, so \(\left\| y\right\| <r_1\). \(\square \)
Remark 4.2
Notice that if f is a nondecreasing function, then condition (4.16) can be simply written as
Now we present our multiplicity result concerning the existence of a “small” and a “big” positive solutions for problem (1.1).
Theorem 4.3
Assume that the functions f and g satisfy conditions \((H_1)\)--\((H_3)\). Moreover,
-
(1)
\(f_0=\infty \) and \(f_{\infty }=\infty \);
-
(2)
there exist \(r_1>0\) and \(\varepsilon >0\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} \max \{\gamma ^{*},\gamma _{1}^{*},\gamma _{2}^{*}\} \sup _{x\in [0,r_1+\varepsilon ]} f(x)<r_1. \end{aligned}$$
Then problem (1.1) has two positive solutions \(u_1\) and \(u_2\) such that \(\left\| u_1\right\| <r_1\) and \(\left\| u_2\right\| >r_1\).
Proof
First, as in Claim 3, Theorem 3.8, condition \((H_3)\) guarantees that \(\mathrm{Fix}({{\mathbb {T}}})\subset \mathrm{Fix}(T)\).
On the other hand, \(f_0=\infty \) implies that there exists \(0<r_2<r_1\) such that \(y\not \preceq u\) for all \(y\in {{\mathbb {T}}}\,u\) and all \(u\in K\) with \(\left\| u\right\| =r_{2}\) (see Claim 2 in Theorem 3.8). Analogously, since \(f_{\infty }=\infty \), there exists \(R_2>r_1\) such that \(y\not \preceq u\) for all \(y\in {{\mathbb {T}}}\,u\) and all \(u\in K\) with \(\left\| u\right\| =R_{2}\).
Therefore, by applying Proposition 2.2 twice, we obtain that the operator T has two fixed points \(u_1\) and \(u_2\) such that \(r_2<\left\| u_1\right\| <r_1\) and \(r_1<\left\| u_2\right\| <R_2\). \(\square \)
To finish, we present a simple example which, as far as we are aware, is not covered by the previous literature.
Example 4.4
Consider the problem
where \(0<p<1\) and \(q>1\). Here \(g\equiv 1\) and \(f(u)=u^p+\lfloor u \rfloor ^q\).
Observe that f is discontinuous at \(x_n=n\), \(n\in {\mathbb {N}}\), and for each \(n\in {\mathbb {N}}\),
so the points \(x_n\) are inviable, see Definition 3.2 and Remark 3.3.
Since \(0<p<1\) and \(q>1\), we have that
Moreover, \(\gamma ^{*}=1/384\), \(\gamma _{1}^{*}\le 1/6\) and \(\gamma _{2}^{*}=1/8\), so \(\max \{\gamma ^{*},\gamma _{1}^{*},\gamma _{2}^{*} \}\le 1/6\). By taking \(r_1=1/2\) and \(\varepsilon =1/2\), condition (2) in Theorem 4.3 holds since \(\sup \{f(x)\,:\,x\in [0,1] \}=2\) and thus
Therefore,Theorem 4.3 ensures that problem (4.17) has two positive solutions \(u_1\) and \(u_2\) such that \(\left\| u_1\right\| <1/2\) and \(\left\| u_2\right\| >1/2\) for any \(0<p<1\) and \(q>1\).
References
Bonanno, G., Bisci, G.M.: Infinitely many solutions for a boundary value problem with discontinuous nonlinearities. Bound. Value Probl. 2009, 670675 (2009)
Bonanno, G., Buccellato, S.M.: Two point boundary value problems for the Sturm-Liouville equation with highly discontinuous nonlinearities. Taiwan. J. Math. 14(5), 2059–2072 (2010)
Cabada, A., Cid, J.A., Infante, G.: New criteria for the existence of non-trivial fixed points in cones. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013, 125 (2013)
Cid, J.A., Franco, D., Minhós, F.: Positive fixed points and fourth-order equations. Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. 41, 72–78 (2009)
Drábek, P., Holubová, G., Matas, A., Nećesal, P.: Nonlinear models of suspension bridges: discussion of the results. Appl. Math. 48, 497–514 (2003)
Drábek, P., Holubová, G.: Positive and negative solutions of one-dimensional beam equation. Appl. Math. Lett. 51, 1–7 (2016)
Figueroa, R., Infante, G.: A Schauder-type theorem for discontinuous operators with applications to second-order BVPs. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2016, 53 (2016)
Figueroa, R., López Pouso, R., Rodríguez-López, J.: A version of Krasnosel’skiĭ’s compression-expansion fixed point theorem in cones for discontinuous operators with applications. Topol. Methods Nonlinear Anal. 51, 493–510 (2018)
Filippov, A.F.: Differential equations with discontinuous righthand sides. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht (1988)
Fitzpatrick, P.M., Petryshyn, W.V.: Fixed point theorems and the fixed point index for multivalued mappings in cones. J. London Math. Soc. 2(11), 75–85 (1975)
Hu, S.: Differential equations with discontinuous right-hand sides. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 154, 377–390 (1991)
López Pouso, R.: Schauder’s fixed-point theorem: new applications and a new version for discontinuous operators. Bound. Value Probl. 2012, 92 (2012)
Webb, J.R.L., Infante, G., Franco, D.: Positive solutions of nonlinear fourth order boundary value problems with local and nonlocal boundary conditions. Proc. R. Soc. Edinb. A 148, 427–446 (2008)
Acknowledgements
Partially supported by Xunta de Galicia under grants ED481A-2017/178 and ED431C-2019/2, Spain.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by Syakila Ahmad.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rodríguez-López, J. Positive Solutions of a Discontinuous One-Dimensional Beam Equation. Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. 44, 2357–2370 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40840-020-01072-w
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40840-020-01072-w
Keywords
- Fourth-order problem
- Positive solution
- Krasnosel’skiĭ theorem
- Discontinuous differential equations
- Multiplicity result