Abstract
Purpose
Two problems are discussed in this paper. In the first problem, we consider one homogeneous and one non-homogeneous differential equations and study when the solutions of these differential equations can have (nearly) the same zeros. In the second problem, we consider two linear second-order differential equations and investigate when the solutions of these differential equations can take the value 0 and a non-zero value at (nearly) the same points.
Method
We apply the Nevanlinna theory and properties of entire solutions of linear differential equations.
Conclusion
In the first problem, the results determine all pairs of such equations having solutions with the same zeros or nearly the same zeros. Regarding the second problem, the results also show all pairs of such equations having solutions taking the value 0 and a non-zero value at (nearly) the same points.
Keywords:
Nevanlinna theory; differential equations1 Introduction
There has been much research [1-8] on zeros of solutions of linear differential equations with entire coefficients. The principal paper [9] that was published in 1982 by Bank and Laine has stimulated many studies on this kind of problems. The reader is referred to [10-12] for background on some applications of the Nevanlinna theory. We use the standard notation of the Nevanlinna theory from [13].
In 1955, Wittich [12] proved the following theorem.
Theorem 1.1Iffis a non-trivial solution of
, i.e.,
and
is entire, then we have:
(ii) Iffhas finite order, thenAis a polynomial.
(iii) Ifais a non-zero complex number, thenftakes the valueainfinitely often, and in fact, outside a set of finite measure,
The following facts follow from the asymptotic representation for solutions of the equation
LetPbe a polynomial of degreen, and letwbe a non-trivial solution of the equation (1). Then, whas order of growth equal to
. Moreover, ifwis a solution of (1) which has infinitely many zeros, then we have
Our previous paper [14] studied homogeneous linear differential equations having solutions with nearly the same zeros and proved several results, including the following.
Theorem 1.3[14]
Let
be a polynomial of degreen. Let
be a solution of (1). Assume thatwhas infinitely many zeros. Suppose that we have a solution
of the differential equation
such thatAis an entire function and
counts zeros ofvwhich are not zeros ofwand zeros ofwwhich are not zeros ofv. Assume that
The paper [14] includes further results for homogeneous linear differential equations, and the corresponding problem where P is a transcendental entire function of finite order is studied in [15].
Recently, the same problem, but with non-homogeneous first-order differential equations, has been studied in [16], including the following result.
Theorem 1.4[16]
Assume that
and
, whereA, B, CandDare entire functions of order less than 1 andv, ware transcendental functions. Assume that
, whereLhas finitely many zeros and poles, and
Then the following conclusions hold.
(I) IfLis a rational function, then
, Lis a constant and
.
(II) IfLis a transcendental function, then one of the following cases holds: If, in addition, Lhas finite order in case (ii), thenA, B, C, Dare polynomials and so is
.
(ii)
and
,
are non-zero constants, and
In this paper, our first result (Theorem 2.1) looks at the same problem but with one homogeneous and one non-homogeneous differential equations. In particular, we consider the first equation to be homogeneous of the second-order with a polynomial coefficient and the second equation to be non-homogeneous of the first-order with entire coefficients.
A further result (Theorem 2.2) studies the case where the solutions of two second-order homogeneous differential equations can take the value 0 and a non-zero value at (nearly) the same points.
2 Our results
Our first result is the following theorem.
Theorem 2.1Suppose that
is a polynomial of degreen, andwsolves (1), and
has infinitely many zeros. Suppose that
solves
Suppose that
has finitely many zeros and poles (i.e., wandvhave the same zeros with finitely many exceptions).
ThenAis a polynomial and there exists a polynomialQsuch that
and
Example 2.1 Take Q to be a polynomial. Let
Then
and
Now, let
be another polynomial, and let
Note that v has the same zeros as w. Now, we have
We now state our second result.
Theorem 2.2Suppose that
is a polynomial of degreen, andAis an entire function, and suppose thatwsolves (1) andvsolves (3), and
. Let
andwhave, with finitely many exceptions, the same zeros and the same multiplicities. Then one of the following holds.
(A) whas finitely many zeros andvis a polynomial and
.
(B) whas infinitely many zeros andP, Aare non-zero constants and
is non-constant and
whereσ,
,
,
are non-zero constants.
Hence,
has the same zeros as w. Here
and
.
Example 2.3 We give an example to show that the zeros of
and w must necessarily have the same multiplicities. To show this, let
Therefore, w and
have the same zeros but the zeros are simple for w, double for
. Here,
and
.
3 Proof of Theorem 2.1
Proof We have
So,
but
We also have, using (1), (5), (8), (9) and (10),
Let
Then
We divide (11) by L, and by using (12) and (13), we get
The next step is to estimate the growth of M.
We know that
from [9]. Therefore,
To show this, we know that
since M has finitely many poles.
Write (5) as
Then, there exists a constant c such that
Also, using (6), we can write
Also,
So,
Therefore, we get
We use Lemma 2.3 in [[13], p.38] with
to get
Hence,
This completes the proof of Claim 3.1.
Using Claim 3.1 and (14), we get
and
Also, by Theorem 1.2, we get
Therefore, we must have
and
because otherwise we can write
to get a contradiction.
We now divide (17) by B to get
So,
has finitely many poles, and so B has finitely many zeros. Then we can write B in the form
But then, we can write
Then we also can write
Substitute (18) in (16), we obtain
Now, let
Also, let
So, we get
Substituting (21) in (19), we obtain
Thus,
, H is entire, and B has no zeros.
Then,
Therefore, A is a polynomial.
Since B has no zeros, from (20) we can write
where Q is a polynomial.
Since w and H solve the same equation and are linearly independent (because w has zeros but H does not), we can write
Therefore,
where
is a constant and Q is a polynomial.
Now, we have
So, we can write
Therefore, we have
Hence, using (22), we obtain
Now, from (23) and (24), we notice that w and v have the same zeros.
Also, differentiating (24), using (22), we have
Comparing this with (5), we get
This completes the proof of Theorem 2.1. □
4 A lemma needed to prove Theorem 2.2
In order to prove Theorem 2.2, we must state and prove the following lemma. We include a proof for completeness.
Lemma 4.1Let
be distinct, and let
be rational functions such that
Then there exists
such that
and
, and
for
.
Proof The proof is by induction. It is obvious that the lemma is true when
.
Assume that the lemma is true for
. Differentiating (25), we get
Now, we have two cases to consider.
Case (1): Suppose there exists k such that
. Without loss of generality, let
, then we can write
Since we assumed the lemma is true for
, there exists
such that
. But this contradicts our assumption that
are distinct.
Case (2): Suppose that
for each j, i.e.,
If
, then
because otherwise we have
But this contradicts the fact that
.
So, we have
for
. Thus, (25) becomes (for some k)
5 Proof of Theorem 2.2
We first note that, outside a set of finite measure, by Theorem 1.1,
In particular, if w has finitely many zeros, then v is a polynomial, which gives
. This completes the proof of part (A) in the conclusion.
Assume henceforth that w has infinitely many zeros. Then (26) implies that
, and so A is a polynomial of degree at most n by the Wiman-Valiron theory [17]. Also,
since
has infinitely many zeros.
Now, two cases have to be considered.
Case (I). Assume that P is a non-zero constant; then
and A is constant. Therefore, we can write
Since w and
have the same zeros with finitely many exceptions, we can write
where
is a rational function and
is a polynomial. We know that
because
. We can now write
Now, by using Lemma 4.1,
is constant and so we can write (28) as
where δ is constant.
Therefore,
Now, by using Lemma 4.1, we get
and
,
, β, −β, 0 cannot all be different.
We must now try six cases:
I(a): If
and
, then
and
. But this contradicts (30). Thus, this case cannot happen.
I(b): If
and
, then
and
. Substituting these in (30) gives
where
,
are constants, which yields
. Putting this in (27) gives (7) with
.
There are four more cases:
It is easy to check that case I(c) is impossible and cases I(d), I(e), I(f) all lead
to (7) with
.
From these cases, we find that
, and so
is non-constant. Also, we have (7) and case (B) of the conclusion.
Case (II). Suppose that P is non-constant. We will show that this leads to a contradiction. Let
where L is a rational function and Q is an entire function.
From (26), we have
, and so Q is a polynomial.
Also, from (31), we have

So,
Now, we have two cases to consider.
Case (i): If M is constant, then either
and
, so that
, which is a contradiction, or
is a rational function, which is a contradiction since w has infinitely many zeros.
Case (ii): If M is non-constant, then
. Therefore,
where
is rational because
is rational and
is rational, and so
is rational.
Also,
Then we can write (33) as
where
are rational functions and Q is a polynomial.
Let
, then we can write (34) as
Now, we have two cases to consider:
Case ii(a): If
in (35), then (34) gives
which is a contradiction since w has infinitely many zeros.
Case ii(b): Assume that
in (35); then (35) gives
Now, (1) and (35) give
and so
Therefore,
because if not, w has finitely many zeros, a contradiction. Also,
Put
Then,
From (36), we get
So, G solves (1), and since
and is a polynomial of degree n, we see that G is a transcendental entire function with finitely many zeros and has order
.
Since w and G solve the same equation but w has infinitely many zeros and G has finitely many zeros, w and G are linearly independent, and we can write
where c is a non-zero constant. So,
By integrating, we get
Also, using (31), (38) and (39),
Now, we can assume that
because if
, we can multiply w by
.
We differentiate (40) to get
where
is a rational function.
So, from (3) and (41), we get
and so
Since v is transcendental and
,
are rational functions, we must have
and
From (44), we have
From (42), we get
We integrate to get
where a is a constant. But this contradicts the fact that H and K are rational functions and G is a transcendental function. This completes the proof of Claim 5.1.
Once we have Claim 5.1, (41) gives
and so
By (45), v has finitely many zeros, so we can write
where
,
are polynomials,
, and
is non-constant because v is transcendental.
Therefore,
Now, we can write this as
where
,
are rational functions and
,
are polynomials.
Here,
and
are linearly independent because
is non-constant. Now, we get
where
,
are rational and satisfy
Therefore,
because otherwise
or
. Thus,
,
both solve
and have finitely many zeros, and they are linearly independent.
Hence, P is constant by [9], which contradicts our assumption in Case (II) that P is non-constant. □
Competing interests
The author declares that he has no competing interests.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank his supervisor Prof. Jim Langley for his support and guidance. Also, he would like to thank King Abdulaziz University for financial support for his PhD study.
References
-
Alotaibi, A: On complex oscillation theory . Results Math.. 47, 165–175 (2005)
-
Bank, SB, Laine, I: Representations of solutions of periodic second order linear differential equations . J. Reine Angew. Math.. 344, 1–21 (1983)
-
Bank, SB, Laine, I, Langley, JK: On the frequency of zeros of solutions of second order linear differential equations . Results Math.. 10, 8–24 (1986)
-
Bank, SB, Laine, I, Langley, JK: Oscillation results for solutions of linear differential equations in the complex plane . Results Math.. 16, 3–15 (1989)
-
Bank, SB, Langley, JK: Oscillation theory for higher order linear differential equations with entire coefficients . Complex Var. Theory Appl.. 16(2-3), 163–175 (1991)
-
Langley, JK: Some oscillation theorems for higher order linear differential equations with entire coefficients of small growth . Results Math.. 20(1-2), 517–529 (1991)
-
Langley, JK: On entire solutions of linear differential equations with one dominant coefficient . Analysis. 15(2), 187–204 Corrections in Analysis 15, 433 (1995) (1995)
-
Rossi, J: Second order differential equations with transcendental coefficients . Proc. Am. Math. Soc.. 97, 61–66 (1986). Publisher Full Text
-
Bank, SB, Laine, I: On the Oscillation theory of
where A is entire
. Trans. Am. Math. Soc.. 273, 351–363 (1982)
-
Hille, E: Ordinary Differential Equations in the Complex Domain, Wiley, New York (1976)
-
Laine, I: Nevanlinna theory and complex differential equations, de Gruyter, Berlin (1993)
-
Wittich, H: Neuere Untersuchungen über eindeutige analytische Funktionen, Springer, Berlin (1955)
-
Hayman, WK: Meromorphic Functions, Clarendon Press, Oxford (1964)
-
Asiri, A: Common zeros of the solutions of two differential equations . Comput. Methods Funct. Theory. 12, 67–85 (2012)
-
Asiri, A: Common zeros of the solutions of two differential equations with transcendental coefficients . J. Inequal. Appl.. 2011, 134 doi:10.1186/1029-242X-2011-134 (2011)
doi:10.1186/1029-242X-2011-134
BioMed Central Full Text -
Asiri, A: Common zeros of the solutions of two non-homogeneous first order differential equations . Results Math. doi:10.1007/s00025-011-0213-y. Published online: 17 November 2011, 1–10 (2011)
-
Hayman, WK: The local growth of power series: a survey of the Wiman-Valiron method . Can. Math. Bull.. 17(3), 317–358 (1974). Publisher Full Text




























































































































































