Page 636 - Handbook Of Integral Equations
P. 636

Formulas (47) show that in the class of solutions with admissible polar singularity for one of the
               functions, the number of solutions is greater than that in the class of functions bounded on the
               contour (for ν > 0) by the total order of all zeros and poles of the coefficient.
                   We now consider the nonhomogeneous problem. Let us write out the boundary condition in the
               form
                                              µ

                                                (t – α k ) m k
                                                              –
                                        +
                                      Φ (t)=  k=1       D 1 (t)Φ (t)+ H(t).                (48)
                                              κ

                                                (t – β j ) p j
                                              j=1
                                                                                   +
                                                                                           –
               We can readily see that the boundary condition cannot be satisfied by finite functions Φ (t) and Φ (t)
               if we assume that H(t) has poles at points that differ from β j or if at these points, the orders of the
               poles of H(t) exceed p j . Hence, we assume that H(t) can have poles at the points β j only and that
               their orders do not exceed p j . To perform the subsequent reasoning, we must also assume that the
               functions D 1 (t) and  κ   (t – β j ) H(t) at the exceptional points are differentiable sufficiently many
                                        p j
                                j=1
               times.
                   Just as in the homogeneous problem, we replace D 1 (t) by the ratio of the canonical functions
                       –
                 +
               X (t)/X (t) and rewrite the boundary condition (48) in the form
                              κ          +     µ            –     κ
                                       Φ (t)              Φ (t)             H(t)
                               (t – β j ) p j  =  (t – α k ) m k  +  (t – β j ) p j  .     (49)
                                         +
                                                                             +
                                                            –
                                       X (t)              X (t)            X (t)
                             j=1               k=1               j=1
               On replacing the function defined by the second summand on the right-hand side in (49) by the
               difference of the boundary values of analytic functions
                                         κ
                                                   H(t)     +     –
                                           (t – β j ) p j  = Ψ (t) – Ψ (t),
                                                     +
                                                   X (t)
                                        j=1
               where
                                                   κ
                                             1                H(τ)  dτ

                                      Ψ(z)=          (τ – β j ) p j     ,                  (50)
                                                               +
                                            2πi  L           X (τ) τ – z
                                                  j=1
               we reduce the boundary condition to the form
                                κ          +            µ           –
                                          Φ (t)   +                Φ (t)   –
                                  (t – β j ) p j  – Ψ (t)=  (t – α k ) m k  – Ψ (t).
                                                                     –
                                           +
                                          X (t)                    X (t)
                               j=1                     k=1
               On applying the theorem on analytic continuation and the generalized Liouville theorem (see
               Subsection 12.3-1), we obtain
                                                                  –
                              +
                            X (z)     +                –        X (z)      –
                    +
                  Φ (z)=            [Ψ (z)+ P ν+m (z)],  Φ (z)=          [Ψ (z)+ P ν+m (z)].  (51)
                          κ                                   µ

                            (z – β j ) p j                      (z – α k ) m k
                          j=1                                k=1
               In general, the last formulas give solutions that can tend to infinity at the points α k and β k . For a
                                                             +
               solution to be bounded it is necessary that the function Ψ (z)+ P ν+m (z) have zeros of orders p j at
                                          –
               the points β j and the function Ψ (z)+ P ν+m (z) have zeros of orders m k at the points α k . These
               requirements form m+p conditions for the coefficients of the polynomial P ν+m (z). If the coefficients
                 © 1998 by CRC Press LLC








               © 1998 by CRC Press LLC
                                                                                                             Page 619
   631   632   633   634   635   636   637   638   639   640   641