ON A VAN DER POL EQUATION WITH ODD COEFFICIENTS

65

ON A VAN DER POL EQUATION WITH ODD COEFFICIENTS

J. G. WENDEL*.

E. McHarg [l]f has proved the

THEOREM. Let f(x) and g{x) be odd continuous functions such that f(x) > 0 and g(x)>0 for x > 0 Let there exist 'positive constants k and x such that f{x) <ky(x) for 0<x<x'. Then the differential equation

has a periodic solution satisfying the initial conditions x = Q, x = v0 for every positive vQ <min [kr1, \/{2G(x')}], where G(x)=
Jo

g(u)du.

As was pointed out in [1], in order that a solution x(t) with init al conditions x(0) = 0, x(0) > 0 be periodic it is necessary and sufficient that there exist a tx > 0 such that xty^ = 0, x(tx) < 0; for (1) is left unchanged by the transformation x-^x, t->t, and is free of explicit dependence on t. we have x(t) = x(2tLt), x(t) = x(2tlti,, and Then, for t1^t^.2tl, 0 = x(0) = x(2t1), x(0) = x(2t1). The necessity of the condition :'s clearBy studying (1) in the phase plane, which is to say that (1) is replaced by the equivalent system dx
( 2 )

dv dt Miss McHarg shows that solutians of (2) with the prescribed initial conditions do indeed cut the negative axis of v, which proves the theorem. In the present note we use the Lienard plane

a--*.
(3)

where Fix) \ f(u)du,

Jo

and prove that a somewhat wider olass of

solutions fulfils the necessary and sufficient condition for periodicity.

* Received 12 November, li)48; read 18 November, 1948. t [1] E. McHarg, Journal London Math. Soc., 22 (1947), 83-85.
JOT7B. 9 3 . B"

66

J. G. WENDEL

The requirement x positive implies f(x) positive is replaced by two sets of alternative hypotheses: I. II. and O(co)< oo, F{x)^0; 0(co)= oo, and xx^0 or exists such that F(x)^0 for x^-xx\ or

A. &>0, a;'>0 exist such that 0<f(x)<kg(x) for 0<x<x'; B. x" > 0 exists such that F(x) < 0 for 0 < x < x".
We prove the following

Letf(x), g(x) be odd continuous functions such that g(x) > 0 for x>0. Then, if IA, IIA, or I I B holds, all solutions of (I) having initial conditions x = Q, 0<x = v0^. -\/{2G(oo)}, are periodic.
THEOREM.

As will be seen in the lemmas to follow, conditions I and II govern the behaviour of solutions at infinity, A and B the behaviour near the origin; the origin is the only singular point of the system (3). The result of [1] is a special case of our theorem under hypotheses IA and IIA. LetP(t) = Q{x{t)}+%{y{t)Y; and note thatp(t) = F{x(t)}g{x(t)} follows from (3). The curves p = G{x)+\y2 = p0 < 0( oo) are simple closed curves about the origin in the x, y plane; the function p (t) will be used as a measure of the distance of the trajectory T: {x(t), y{t)} from the origin. 1. / / I holds, and if x{0) = 0, 0 < z(0) = y0 < y/{20{oo)}, then the trajectory T: {x(t), y{t)} cuts the curve y = F(x) at some time T > 0.
LEMMA

Proof. As long as T lies above y Q(x) we have x(t)>0; hence x(0 > 0 and y(t) = g{x{t)} < 0. Therefore 0 = min F(x) < y{t) < y0. Since the origin is the only singular point of the system (3), we conclude that, if the lemma is false, then there exists tx (finite or infinite) such'that T lies above y=F(x) for 0 ^ t < tx and x{tx0) = + oo. Hence lim But p(t)= F(x)g[x) < 0 , under our assumption on T. Hence < #()i which contradicts the above and proves the lemma.
LEMMA 2. / / II holds and if x(0) = 0, 0 < x{0), then T cuts y = F(x) at some time T > 0.

Proof. Suppose the lemma false; then, as in the proof of Lemma 1, T lies above y = F(x) for 0 < t < tlt and #(^0) = -f- oo. Hence
/>(!-<>) = + 0 0 .

ON A VAN DER POL EQUATION WITH ODD COEFFICIENTS.

67

But there exists t2 < <x such that, for t > t2, x(t) > xv F(x) ^ 0, p(t) Hence p(t)^p(t2) for t2^.t<tl', thus we have a contradiction, which proves Lemma 2. 3. If A or B holds and if tx such that x(ix) = 0, x{tx) < 0.
LEMMA X(T)

> 0,

X(T)

= 0, then there exists

Proof. If X(T) > 0, Z(T) = 0, then x(r) = g{x{r)} < 0. Hence, for some8,x(t)<0 withr<t<T-f-8. Indeed, as4ongafterTasz(0remains positive we must have x (t) negative; otherwise TX exists such that i(Tx) = 0, x{rx)^0, in contradiction to x'^) = g{x(r1)} < 0. We recall that ?/(<) = g{x{t)} and that the origin is the only singular point of (3). Then, if the lemma is false, one of two alternatives must hold: (i) for some finite or infinite tvx(t) > Oforr << < ^andy^0) = oo, or (ii) x(t) > 0 for
T

< t and x( oo) = y( oo) 0.

The first of these can be excluded at once. For if y -> oo while x remains bounded and x(t) < 0, then -=?-> + oo. But - / = - ~ ^ y - \ is bounded. yJf(x) V dx ax If A holds, (ii) is impossible; for, if (ii) holds, there exists a sequence and *n->oo such that z(tn)-*>0, y(tn)-+O, 0 > x{tn) = y(tn)-F{x(tn)}->0 (U > 0; we may then assume 0 < x(tn) < 8, so that 0 <f{x{tn)} < kg{x(tH)}. Combining this inequality with the inequality x(tn) > 0 and using (1), we have x(tn) < ~gf\
J\xV'n)j

fAl <k<0,

which contradicts x(tn)-+Q.

If B holds, (ii) is impossible. For, if (x, y) -> (0, 0), then

But, for some t2, we have 0 < x(t).<xr if t> t2, so that
P(t)

= -F{x(t)}g{x(t)} > 0, P(t) ^P(t2) > 0.

This completes the proof of Lemma 3. The stated theorem is proved by combining Lemmas 1 and 3 for IA, Lemmas 2 and 3 for IIA, IIB, together with the necessary and sufficient condition for periodicity. California Institute of Technology and Yale University.
F2