 Research
 Open access
 Published:
RofeBeketov formula for symplectic systems
Advances in Difference Equations volume 2012, Article number: 104 (2012)
Abstract
We establish the RofeBeketov formula for symplectic systems on time scales. This result generalizes the wellknown d’Alembert formula (or the Reduction of Order Theorem) and the RofeBeketov formula published for the second order SturmLiouville equations on time scales. Moreover, this result is new even in the discrete time case.
MSC:34N05, 26E70, 39A12.
1 Introduction
In this article, we solve the open problem presented in [1], Remark 1(iv)] concerning the RofeBeketov formula for symplectic systems on time scales (see Theorem 3), i.e., for the first order dynamic system
on a time scale \mathbb{T}. We unify the RofeBeketov formulas published recently in the literature for the second order SturmLiouville differential, difference, and dynamic equations and also for the linear Hamiltonian differential systems and we generalize them by establishing its dynamic counterpart for system (\mathbb{S}). We point out that this result is new even in the discrete time case (see Remark 4(v)) and, moreover, it can be viewed as an improvement of the corresponding Reduction of Order Theorem, see [2], Remark 6] and [3], Theorem 3.32], respectively.
Let us consider the second order SturmLiouville differential equation
where p>0 on J and {p}^{1}, q\in {\mathrm{L}}_{\mathrm{loc}}^{1}(J). Let x be a solution of (1) without zeros in \tilde{J}\subseteq J and {t}_{0}\in \tilde{J}. Then the second linearly independent solution y of (1) on \tilde{J} can be expressed with using the socalled d’Alembert formula (or the Reduction of Order Theorem) as
see, e.g.[4], Theorem 5.56], and these solutions are normalized, i.e.,
The RofeBeketov formula improves identity (2) and it gives a similar result without the assumption x(t)\ne 0 for t\in \tilde{J}. More precisely, if x is a nontrivial solution of (1) then the function
represents the second linearly independent solution of equation (1) on J and it holds w[x,y]\equiv 1. This statement was established in [5], Lemma 2] and it is a generalization of the original RofeBeketov formula presented for equation (1) with p(\cdot )\equiv 1 in [6], Lemma 2]. An application of identity (3) can be found in the study of the relative oscillation theory and spectral properties of differential operators associated with (1), see [5, 7].
In the year 2005, identity (3) was generalized for the linear Hamiltonian differential system
where A, B, C are n\times n matrixvalued locally integrable complex functions and B={B}^{\ast}, C={C}^{\ast}, see [8], Theorem 6.5]. This result is recalled in the following proposition, where we denote the Hermitian component of the matrix A by ReA, i.e., ReA:=(A+{A}^{\ast})/2, see e.g.[9], pp.268269] or [10], Facts 3.7.273.7.29].
Proposition 1 (RofeBeketov formula for (H))
If\left(\begin{array}{c}X\\ U\end{array}\right)is a2n\times nmatrix solution of (H) such that{X}^{\ast}U={U}^{\ast}Xanddet({X}^{\ast}X+{U}^{\ast}U)\ne 0, then the pair
where we put
forms the second linearly independent2n\times nmatrixvalued solution of (H) satisfying the condition{X}^{\ast}\tilde{U}{U}^{\ast}\tilde{X}\equiv I, i.e., the solutions\left(\begin{array}{c}X\\ U\end{array}\right)and\left(\begin{array}{c}\tilde{X}\\ \tilde{U}\end{array}\right)are normalized. Moreover, the conditions{\tilde{X}}^{\ast}\tilde{U}={\tilde{U}}^{\ast}\tilde{X}anddet({\tilde{X}}^{\ast}\tilde{X}+{\tilde{U}}^{\ast}\tilde{U})\ne 0hold also true.
The RofeBeketov formula was also established for the second order SturmLiouville dynamic equation
where \mathbb{T} denotes a time scale, see [1], Theorem 1]. In addition, since this result was new in the discrete time case, i.e., \mathbb{T}=\mathbb{Z}, the RofeBeketov formula for the second order SturmLiouville difference equation
was presented in [1], Remark 1(ii)]. In this article we complete this treatment by proving the RofeBeketov formula for symplectic dynamic (and consequently for difference) systems.
2 Preliminaries on time scales and symplectic systems
The time scale calculus was originally published by Hilger in his dissertation [11], see also [12]. It is well known that this theory provides suitable tools for a study of differential and difference (among others) equations under the unified framework. The time scale theory has been developed in the last 20 years intensively and we refer to [13, 14] for the fundamental results achieved in this field.
A time scale\mathbb{T} is any nonempty closed subset of real numbers \mathbb{R}. With respect to the standard terminology, the forward jump operator\sigma :\mathbb{T}\to \mathbb{T} and the backward jump operator\rho :\mathbb{T}\to \mathbb{T} are introduced as
respectively, and simultaneously we put inf\mathrm{\varnothing}:=sup\mathbb{T} and sup\mathrm{\varnothing}:=inf\mathbb{T}. The graininess function\mu :\mathbb{T}\to [0,\mathrm{\infty}) is defined as \mu (t):=\sigma (t)t.
Let t\in \mathbb{T} be a point such that t>inf\mathbb{T}. It is said to be leftdense and leftscattered if \rho (t)=t and \rho (t)<t, respectively. On the other hand, a point t\in \mathbb{T} satisfying t<sup\mathbb{T} is called rightdense and rightscattered if \sigma (t)=t and \sigma (t)>t, respectively. In addition, for a=min\mathbb{T} we put \rho (a)=a and for b=max\mathbb{T} we have \sigma (b)=b. We also use the following notation
For a complexvalued function f and t\in {\mathbb{T}}^{\kappa} we define {f}^{\mathrm{\Delta}}(t), i.e., the Δderivative of f at t, as the number (provided it exists) with the property that for any given \epsilon >0 there is a neighborhood \mathcal{U} of t (i.e., \mathcal{U}=(t\delta ,t+\delta ) for some \delta >0) such that
where we used the notation {f}^{\sigma}(t):=f(\sigma (t)). We note that {f}^{\mathrm{\Delta}}(b) is not well defined if b=max\mathbb{T} exists and is leftscattered.
The rule for the differentiation of a product fg has the wellknown form
and it also holds
whenever {f}^{\mathrm{\Delta}}(t) exists.
A complex function f is called regressive on J\subseteq {\mathbb{T}}^{\kappa} if
where I denotes an appropriate identity matrix. A function f is called regulated if its righthand limit f({t}^{+}) exists (finite) at all rightdense points t\in \mathbb{T} and the lefthand limit f({t}^{}) exists (finite) at all leftdense points t\in \mathbb{T}. Provided a function f is regulated and it is continuous at each rightdense point t\in \mathbb{T}, it is called rdcontinuous (we write f\in {\mathrm{C}}_{\mathrm{rd}}) on \mathbb{T}. A function f is said to be piecewise rdcontinuous (f\in {\mathrm{C}}_{\mathrm{prd}}) on \mathbb{T} if it is regulated and if f is rdcontinuous at all but possibly finitely many rightdense points t\in \mathbb{T}. A function f is said to be rdcontinuously Δdifferentiable (f\in {\mathrm{C}}_{\mathrm{rd}}^{\mathrm{1}}) on \mathbb{T} if {f}^{\mathrm{\Delta}} exists for all t\in {\mathbb{T}}^{\kappa} and {f}^{\mathrm{\Delta}}\in {\mathrm{C}}_{\mathrm{rd}} on {\mathbb{T}}^{\kappa}. Finally, a function f is said to be piecewise rdcontinuously Δdifferentiable (f\in {\mathrm{C}}_{\mathrm{prd}}^{\mathrm{1}}) on {[a,b]}_{\mathbb{T}} if f is continuous on \mathbb{T} and {f}^{\mathrm{\Delta}}(t) exists at all except of possibly finitely many points t\in {\mathbb{T}}^{\kappa}, and {f}^{\mathrm{\Delta}}\in {\mathrm{C}}_{\mathrm{prd}} on {\mathbb{T}}^{\kappa}.
It is also well known that for any rdcontinuous function on \mathbb{T} there exists an antiderivative F, i.e., a function satisfying {F}^{\mathrm{\Delta}}(t)=f(t) for all t\in {\mathbb{T}}^{\kappa}. A time scale integral of a function f over a time scale interval [c,d]\cap \mathbb{T}, where c,d\in \mathbb{T}, is defined as
for any antiderivative F of f.
In this article, we are interested in the symplectic system on time scales
where the 2n\times 2n matrixvalued complex function \mathbb{S}(\cdot ) satisfies
With using the block notation Z=\left(\begin{array}{c}X\\ U\end{array}\right) and \mathbb{S}(t):=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathbb{A}(t)& \mathbb{B}(t)\\ \mathbb{C}(t)& \mathbb{D}(t)\end{array}\right), system (\mathbb{S}) can be written in the form
where X,U\in {\mathrm{C}}_{\mathrm{prd}}^{\mathrm{1}} are n\times m, 1\le m\le n, matrixvalued complex functions and the coefficients are n\times n matrixvalued complex functions such that \mathbb{A},\mathbb{B},\mathbb{C},\mathbb{D}\in {\mathrm{C}}_{\mathrm{prd}} on \mathbb{T}. Identity (8) can be also written in this block notation as (we omit the argument t)
Moreover, we note that identity (8) implies the symplecticity of the matrix (I+\mu \mathbb{S}) on {\mathbb{T}}^{\kappa}, i.e., {(I+\mu \mathbb{S})}^{\ast}\mathcal{J}(I+\mu \mathbb{S})=\mathcal{J}. Since every symplectic matrix is invertible, it follows that the matrixvalued function \mathbb{S}(\cdot ) is regressive on {\mathbb{T}}^{\kappa}. Hence the existence of a unique solution for any (vector or matrix) initial value problem is a consequence of [12], Theorem 5.7] or [13], Theorem 5.8], see also [2], Remark 1].
The theory of symplectic difference systems was initiated in [15] as the discrete counterpart of system (H), while the study of system (\mathbb{S}) originates in [2]. It is a wellknown fact that system (\mathbb{S}) includes many special cases, e.g., equations (1), (4) and (5), system (H), discrete symplectic systems, and any even order SturmLiouville equation, see [16].
We associate with system (\mathbb{S}) the Wronskian matrix given by
where Z=\left(\begin{array}{c}X\\ U\end{array}\right) and \tilde{Z}=\left(\begin{array}{c}\tilde{X}\\ \tilde{U}\end{array}\right) are any 2n\times m, 1\le m\le n, solutions of (\mathbb{S}). It is a direct consequence of {W}^{\mathrm{\Delta}}[Z,\tilde{Z}]\equiv 0 that the Wronskian matrix takes a constant value on \mathbb{T}.
A solution Z=\left(\begin{array}{c}X\\ U\end{array}\right) of (\mathbb{S}) is said to be a conjoined solution if W[Z,Z]\equiv 0, i.e., {X}^{\ast}(t)U(t) is a Hermitian matrix at one (and hence at any) t\in \mathbb{T}. Two solutions Z,\tilde{Z} are called normalized if W[Z,\tilde{Z}]\equiv I. A solution Z=\left(\begin{array}{c}X\\ U\end{array}\right) is said to be a basis if rankZ=n on \mathbb{T}. It was shown in [17], Proposition 2.2] that the value of rankZ(t) is also constant on \mathbb{T}.
3 Main result
The Reduction of Order Theorem for system (\mathbb{S}) was published in [2], Remark 6] and it is recalled in the following proposition.
Proposition 2 (Reduction of Order Theorem for (\mathbb{S}))
LetZ=\left(\begin{array}{c}X\\ U\end{array}\right)be a conjoined basis of (\mathbb{S}) such that X is invertible on the time scale intervalI:=[a,b]\cap \mathbb{T}, a,b\in \mathbb{T}. Then\tilde{Z}=\left(\begin{array}{c}\tilde{X}\\ \tilde{U}\end{array}\right), where
is also a conjoined basis of (\mathbb{S}). Moreover, Z and\tilde{Z}are linearly independent (even normalized), i.e., they form a basis of the solution space for (\mathbb{S}).
Now, we improve this proposition in the main result by dropping the invertibility of X, i.e., we state and prove the RofeBeketov formula for system (\mathbb{S}).
Theorem 3 (RofeBeketov formula for (\mathbb{S}))
LetZ=\left(\begin{array}{c}X\\ U\end{array}\right)be a conjoined basis of (\mathbb{S}). Then the pair\tilde{Z}=\left(\begin{array}{c}\tilde{X}\\ \tilde{U}\end{array}\right)given by
where
for a fixed{t}_{0}\in \mathbb{T}chosen without any restriction, solves also system (\mathbb{S}). Moreover, \tilde{Z}is a basis of (\mathbb{S}) and it holdsW[Z,\tilde{Z}]\equiv I (i.e., they are linearly independent and normalized). In addition, \tilde{Z}constitutes also a conjoined basis if{F}^{\ast}=F.
Proof The proof is based on the variation of parameters method. By differentiating identity (10)(i), and from (6), we get
Since Z=\left(\begin{array}{c}X\\ U\end{array}\right) solves system (\mathbb{S}) and \tilde{Z}=\left(\begin{array}{c}\tilde{X}\\ \tilde{U}\end{array}\right) has to solve the same system, it follows from (13) that
Similarly, we obtain
Since Z is a conjoined basis, the multiplication of identity (14) by {X}^{\sigma} from the left and identity (15) by {U}^{\sigma} from the left yields in the sum
Analogously, multiplying identity (14) by {U}^{\sigma} from the left and identity (15) by {X}^{\sigma} from the left, we get the dynamic equation
Nevertheless, we can get the form of G explicitly. If we multiply identity (10)(i) from the left by {U}^{\ast} and identity (10)(ii) from the left by {X}^{\ast}, we obtain by adding these equations
Since Z is a conjoined basis and it has to be satisfied W[Z,\tilde{Z}]\equiv I, it follows
i.e., G is determined by (11). Consequently, identity (16) yields that the matrixvalued function F is given by (12) for a fixed {t}_{0}\in \mathbb{T} chosen without any restriction at the outset of the proof.
Now, from the facts that the value of rank\tilde{Z} is constant and the matrix G has a full rank, and since it holds
it follows that the solution \tilde{Z} forms a basis of (\mathbb{S}), i.e., rank\tilde{Z}=n (see also Remark (4)(i)). Moreover, from (10), (11), identity {X}^{\ast}U={U}^{\ast}X, and by the direct calculation, we obtain
i.e., \tilde{Z} is also a conjoined solution if {F}^{\ast}=F on \mathbb{T}, and the proof is complete. □
Remark 4

(i)
The fact that \tilde{Z} represents a basis of (\mathbb{S}), follows also from the calculation
{\tilde{X}}^{\ast}\tilde{X}+{\tilde{U}}^{\ast}\tilde{U}={F}^{\ast}{G}^{1}F+{G}^{\ast}
since the condition rank\tilde{Z}=n is equivalent with det({\tilde{X}}^{\ast}\tilde{X}+{\tilde{U}}^{\ast}\tilde{U})\ne 0. This condition is obviously satisfied at t={t}_{0} and hence it holds true for any t\in \mathbb{T}.

(ii)
With using the block identities in (9) and identity (7), the function F can be also given in the form
\begin{array}{rcl}F& =& {\int}_{{t}_{0}}^{t}\left\{{G}^{\sigma}\right[{X}^{\ast}({\mathbb{C}}^{\ast}+\mathbb{B}+\mu ({\mathbb{A}}^{\ast}\mathbb{B}+{\mathbb{C}}^{\ast}\mathbb{D}))X\\ {X}^{\ast}({\mathbb{A}}^{\ast}+\mathbb{A}+\mu ({\mathbb{A}}^{\ast}\mathbb{A}+{\mathbb{C}}^{\ast}\mathbb{C}))U\\ +{U}^{\ast}({\mathbb{D}}^{\ast}+\mathbb{D}+\mu ({\mathbb{B}}^{\ast}\mathbb{B}+{\mathbb{D}}^{\ast}\mathbb{D}))X\\ {U}^{\ast}({\mathbb{B}}^{\ast}+\mathbb{C}+\mu ({\mathbb{B}}^{\ast}\mathbb{A}+{\mathbb{D}}^{\ast}\mathbb{C}))U\left]G\right\}(s)\mathrm{\Delta}s.\end{array}
On the other hand, with using identity (7) for system (\mathbb{S}), i.e., {Z}^{\sigma}=(I+\mu \mathbb{S})Z, and without the block notation (i.e., only with Z, \tilde{Z}, and \mathbb{S}) the coefficient matrices in (11)(12) can be written as G={({Z}^{\ast}Z)}^{1} and

(iii)
It follows from identities (17) and (8) that it is satisfied {F}^{\ast}(t)=F(t) for a point t\in \mathbb{T} and, consequently, the pair \tilde{Z} forms a conjoined basis if it holds \mu (t)=0. Especially if \mathbb{T}=\mathbb{R}, we have \sigma (t)=t, \mu (t)=0, and {f}^{\mathrm{\Delta}}(t)={f}^{\prime}(t). In this setting, system (\mathbb{S}) has the form of (H) and the statement of Theorem 3 corresponds to Proposition 1, i.e., [8], Theorem 6.5].

(iv)
Equation (4), where 1/p,q\in {\mathrm{C}}_{\mathrm{prd}}, can be written as the symplectic dynamic system
(\begin{array}{c}x\\ p{x}^{\mathrm{\Delta}}\end{array}{)}^{\mathrm{\Delta}}=(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1/p\\ q& \mu q/p\end{array}\left)\right(\begin{array}{c}x\\ p{x}^{\mathrm{\Delta}}\end{array}).
Theorem 3 yields for a nontrivial solution x of (4) that the second linearly independent solution y such that p(x{y}^{\mathrm{\Delta}}{x}^{\mathrm{\Delta}}y)\equiv 1, can be expressed as
where we put
This result corresponds to [1], Theorem 1] by a direct calculation using identity (7) and reduces to [5], Lemma 2] in the special case \mathbb{T}=\mathbb{R}.

(v)
As mentioned in the introduction, Theorem 3 is new even in the discrete time case, i.e., for \mathbb{T}=\mathbb{Z}. In this case, system (\mathbb{S}) can be written as the discrete symplectic system
where we put {\mathbb{A}}_{k}:=\mathbb{A}(k)+I, {\mathbb{B}}_{k}:=\mathbb{B}(k), {\mathbb{C}}_{k}:=\mathbb{C}(k), and {\mathbb{D}}_{k}:=\mathbb{D}(k)+I. Hence, if Z=\left(\begin{array}{c}X\\ U\end{array}\right) is a conjoined basis of ({\mathbb{S}}_{\mathbb{Z}}), then the pair \tilde{Z}=\left(\begin{array}{c}\tilde{X}\\ \tilde{U}\end{array}\right) given by (10), where
and
with {\mathbb{S}}_{k}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}{\mathbb{A}}_{k}& {\mathbb{B}}_{k}\\ {\mathbb{C}}_{k}& {\mathbb{D}}_{k}\end{array}\right), represents a solution of ({\mathbb{S}}_{\mathbb{Z}}) such that W[Z,\tilde{Z}]=I, compare with [3], Theorem 3.32].
References
Došlý O: RofeBeketov’s formula on time scales. Comput. Math. Appl. 2010, 60(8):2382–2386. doi:10.1016/j.camwa.2010.08.033 10.1016/j.camwa.2010.08.033
Došlý O, Hilscher R: Disconjugacy, transformations and quadratic functionals for symplectic dynamic systems on time scales. J. Differ. Equ. Appl. 2001, 7(2):265–295. doi:10.1080/10236190108808273 10.1080/10236190108808273
Ahlbrandt CD, Peterson AC: Discrete Hamiltonian Systems: Difference Equations, Continued Fractions, and Riccati Equations. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht; 1996.
Kelley WG, Peterson AC: The Theory of Differential Equations. Classical and Qualitative. 2nd edition. Springer, New York; 2010.
Schmidt KM: Critical coupling constants and eigenvalue asymptotics of perturbed periodic SturmLiouville operators. Commun. Math. Phys. 2000, 211(2):465–485. doi:10.1007/s002200050822 10.1007/s002200050822
RofeBeketov FS: Constants of Kneser type and effective masses for zone potentials. Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 1984, 276(2):356–359.
Krüger H, Teschl G: Effective Prüfer angles and relative oscillation criteria. J. Differ. Equ. 2008, 245(12):3823–3848. doi:10.1016/j.jde.2008.06.004 10.1016/j.jde.2008.06.004
RofeBeketov FS, Kholkin AM: Spectral Analysis of Differential Operators. Interplay between Spectral and Oscillatory Properties. World Scientific, Hackensack; 2005.
Gantmacher FR: The Theory of Matrices. AMS Chelsea Publishing, Providence; 1998. vols. I and II
Bernstein DS: Matrix Mathematics. Theory, Facts, and Formulas. 2nd edition. Princeton University Press, Princeton; 2009.
Hilger, S: Ein Maßkettenkalkül mit Anwendung auf Zentrumsmannigfaltigkeiten. PhD thesis, University of Würzburg (1988)
Hilger S: Analysis on measure chains  a unified approach to continuous and discrete calculus. Results Math. 1990, 18: 18–56.
Bohner M, Peterson AC: Dynamic Equations on Time Scales. An Introduction with Applications. Birkhäuser, Boston; 2001.
Bohner M, Peterson AC (Eds): Advances in Dynamic Equations on Time Scales. Birkhäuser, Boston; 2003.
Ahlbrandt CD: Equivalence of discrete Euler equations and discrete Hamiltonian systems. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1993, 180(2):498–517. doi:10.1006/jmaa.1993.1413 10.1006/jmaa.1993.1413
Zemánek P: A note on the equivalence between evenorder SturmLiouville equations and symplectic systems on time scales. Appl. Math. Lett. 2012. doi:10.1016/j.aml.2012.04.009
Hilscher R, Zemánek P: Trigonometric and hyperbolic systems on time scales. Dyn. Syst. Appl. 2009, 18(3–4):483–506.
Acknowledgements
The research was supported by the Czech Science Foundation under grant P201/10/1032 and also by the Operational Programme “Education for Competitiveness” under the project CZ.1.07/2.3.00/30.0009. The author wishes to thank the anonymous referees for the detailed reading of the manuscript and for their comments which helped to improve the presentation of the results.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Competing interests
The author declares that he has no competing interests.
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.
About this article
Cite this article
Zemánek, P. RofeBeketov formula for symplectic systems. Adv Differ Equ 2012, 104 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1186/168718472012104
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/168718472012104