Abstract
In this paper, we investigate the non-existence of transcendental entire solutions for non-linear differential-difference equations of the forms
and
where n, s are positive integers, \(n\ge s+2,\) Q(z, f) is a differential-difference polynomial in f of degree d.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction and Main Results
In nonlinear science, the study of nonlinear mathematical physics equation is particularly meaningful. Nonlinear wave equation is an important mathematical model to describe natural phenomena. Examples include the Camassa–Holm equation [2] that describes the motion of water waves, the KdV–Burgers–Kuramoto equation [6] that describes unstable drift waves in plasma physics, the KdV equation [10] that describes the motion of shallow water waves, and etc. Similarly, the discrete nonlinear equation, especially the nonlinear differential-difference equation plays an important role in the study of nonlinear problems. Recently, many methods for studying the exact solutions of continuous nonlinear wave equations have been extended to nonlinear differential-difference equations. Tsuchida et al. [17] has extended the backscattering method to the study of differential-difference equations. Qian et al. [16] has extended the separation method of multilinear variables to solving differential-difference equations, so it is of great significance to study differential-difference equations in mathematical physics. In this paper, we will prove the existence of entire solutions of two kinds of differential-difference equations by using Nevanlinna’s value distribution theory.
Let f(z) be a meromorphic function in the complex plane \({\mathbb{C}}.\) We assume that the reader is familiar with standard notations in Nevanlinna’s value distribution theory, such as T(r, f), m(r, f), N(r, f), as well as the main conclusions, for references see [8, 20]. We use the symbols \(\sigma (f),\) \(\lambda (f)\) and \(\sigma _{2}(f)\) to denote the order of growth, the exponent of convergence of zeros and the hyper-order of f, respectively. In addition, we use \(N_{p)}(r,\frac{1}{f-a})\) to denote the counting function of the zeros of \(f-a,\) whose multiplicities are not greater than p. For \(a\in {\mathbb{C}},\) the deficiency \(\delta (a,f)\) and \(\delta _{p)}(a,f)\) are defined as
By S(r, f), we denote any quantity satisfying \(S(r,f)=o(T(r, f ))\) as \(r\rightarrow \infty\) outside of an exceptional set E with finite logarithmic measure. A meromorphic function \(\alpha (z)\) is said to be a small function of f if it satisfies \(T(r, a) = S(r, f ).\)
Nevanlinna’s value distribution theory of meromorphic functions has been widely applied to investigate the solvability and existence of entire or meromorphic solution of complex differential equations, difference equation and differential-difference equations. Proving the existence of entire or meromorphic solutions f of a given differential-difference equation and finding out the solutions, if any, are usually interesting and quite challenging problems.
Recently, many researchers focused on the non-existence of meromorphic solutions of nonlinear differential equations of the form
where \(Q_d(z,f)\) is a differential polynomial in f with degree d. In 2010, Yang and Laine [19] considered a special case of Eq. (1) regarding the existence of solutions, and proved the following result.
Theorem A
[19] Let p(z) be a non-vanishing polynomial, and let b, c be nonzero complex numbers. If p is nonconstant, then the differential equation
admits no transcendental entire solutions, while if p is constant, then Eq. (2) admits three distinct transcendental entire solutions, provided \((\frac{pb^2}{27})^3=\frac{1}{4}c^{2}.\)
Remark 1.1
Notice that \(c\sin {bz}=\frac{c}{2i}(e^{biz}-e^{-biz}),\) thus, \(c\sin {bz}\) is a linear combination of the \(e^{biz}\) and \(e^{-biz}.\) Therefore, it is meaningful to investigate the existence of solutions of the differential equation
Li and Yang [13] investigated meromorphic solutions of Eq. (3) and obtained the following result.
Theorem B
[13] Let \(n\ge 4\) be an integer and \(Q_d(z,f)\) denote an algebraic differential polynomial in f(z) of degree \(d\le n-3.\) If \(p_{1}(z),\) \(p_{2}(z)\) are two non-zero polynomials and \(\alpha _{1} , \alpha _{2}\) are two non-zero constant such that \(\frac{\alpha _{1}}{\alpha _{2}}\) is not rational, then Eq. (3) has no transcendental entire solutions.
In view of the progress on the difference analogues of classical Nevanlinna theory of meromorphic functions [5, 7], it is quite natural to investigate difference analogues of Eq. (2). In [19], Yang and Laine showed that similar conclusions follow if restricting the solutions to be of finite order.
Theorem C
[19] A nonlinear difference equation
where q(z) is a nonconstant polynomial and \(b,c\in {\mathbb{C}}\) are nonzero constants, does not admit entire solutions of finite order.
In 2011, Zhang and Liao discussed the case that \(Q_d(z,f)\) in Eq. (3) is a difference polynomials instead of differential polynomial.
Theorem D
[21] Let \(n\ge 4\) be an integer and \(Q_d(z,f)\) denote an algebraic difference polynomial in f(z) of degree \(d\le n-3.\) If \(p_1(z), p_2(z)\) are two non-zero polynomials and \(\alpha _1, \alpha _2\) are two non-zero constants with \(\frac{\alpha _1}{\alpha _2}\ne (\frac{d}{n})^{\pm 1},1,\) then the Eq. (3) does not have any transcendental entire solution of finite order.
Remark 1.2
The proofs of the above theorems always need to use the logarithmic derivative lemma and its difference analogue. As we know, the logarithmic derivative lemma is valid for all meromorphic functions, while the difference analogue of the logarithmic derivative lemma is only valid for meromorphic functions with finite order or hyper-order less than one. Thus, for non-linear difference or differential-difference equations, only the entire (or meromorphic) solutions with finite order or hyper-order less than one were discussed.
Later on, some results were obtained when Q(z, f) is a differential-difference or difference polynomials, see [4]. In particular, Zhang and Huang [22] considered the case that the right-hand side of the Eq. (3) has \(s\ge 2\) terms and Q(z, f) is a difference polynomials in f, and they obtained the result as follow.
Theorem E
[22] Let \(n\ge 2+s\) be a integer, \(p(z)\not \equiv 0\) be a polynomial, \(\eta\) be a constant, \(\beta _{1}, \beta _{2},\ldots , \beta _{s}\) be nonzero constants and \(\alpha _{1}, \alpha _{2},\ldots , \alpha _{s}\) be distinct non-zero constants. Suppose that \(\frac{\alpha _{i}}{\alpha _{j}}\ne n\) for all \(i,j \in {1,2,\ldots ,s}.\) And when \(s\ge 5,\) suppose further that \(n\alpha _k\ne l_{k1}\alpha _1+ l_{k2}\alpha _2 +\cdots + l_{ks}\alpha _s\) for \(k = 5, 6,\ldots , s,\) where \(l_{k1}, l_{k2},\ldots , l_{ks}\in \{0, 1,\ldots , n-1\}\) and \(l_{k1}+ l_{k2}+ \cdots + l_{ks}= n.\) Then any meromorphic solution f(z) of the equation
must satisfy \(\sigma _{2} (f)\ge 1.\)
Remark 1.3
Clearly, we see that Eq. (5) has no meromorphic solutions with \(\sigma _2(f)<1\) under the assumption of Theorem E. In addition, observing the above theorems, we notice that the existence of entire or meromorphic solutions of Eq. (1) is related to the number of terms on the right-hand of the equation and the form of Q(z, f). In particular, when Q(z, f) is a differential-difference or difference polynomial and the right hand of Eq. (5) has \(s\ge 2\) terms, most of results discussed the simple case that Q(z, f) has only a monomial.
Let
where \(0\le m_{1}<\cdots <m_{p}\) and \(\tau _{j}(1\le j\le p)\) are complex constants, and \(a_{j}(0\le j\le p)\ne 0\) are small functions of f.
Inspired by the above results, our first result generalizes the result of Zhang and Huang and investigates the non-existence of entire solutions of the following differential-difference equations
and obtain the following result.
Theorem 1.1
Let \(n\ge 2+s\) be a integer, \(Q(z,f)\not \equiv 0,\) and n, s be the positive integers and let \(p_{1},\ldots ,p_{s},\) \(\alpha _{1},\ldots ,\alpha _{s}\) be constants with \(p_{1},\ldots ,p_{s}, \alpha _{1},\ldots \alpha _{s}\ne 0.\) If \(\alpha _{1},\ldots ,\alpha _{s}\) are distinct constants such that \(\frac{\alpha _{i}}{\alpha _{j}}\ne n\) for all \(i,j\in {1,2,\ldots ,s},\) then Eq. (6) admits no finite order transcendental entire function with a finite Borel exceptional value.
Example 1.1
Let \(n=4,\) \(s=2\) and \(Q(z,f)=-5(f')^2-f^2-2f'(z+2\pi i).\) Then, the following differential equation
has a transcendental entire solution \(f=e^z+1.\) Here f(z) has 1 as a Borel exceptional value.
Example 1.2
Let \(n=5,\) \(s=3\) and \(Q(z,f)=ff'+f^2f'(z+2\pi i).\) Then, the following differential equation
has a transcendental entire solution \(f=e^z.\) Here f(z) has zero as a Borel exceptional value.
Remark 1.4
The condition \(\deg (Q(z,f))=1\) is necessary. If \(\deg (Q(z,f))\ge 2,\) then Theorem 1.1 may not hold, as seen from Examples 1.1 and 1.2.
Observing the above results, one can find that every exponential part of two terms on the right side of the equations is the first order monomial. Naturally, a question arise: Can the solutions be obtained when every exponential part of two terms on right side of the equations is the k-th order monomial? Actually, the solutions of such equations can exist in this case. Below we provide a special example to illustrate this problem.
Example 1.3
Let \(n=5,\) \(s=3\) and \(Q(z,f)=f'(z)+2zf(z+2).\) Then, the function \(f(z)=ze^{z^{2}}\) is a transcendental entire solution of
In 2013, Liao et al. [14] answered this question, and they obtained a result of the nonlinear differential equation of the following form
Theorem E
[14] Let \(n\ge 3\) and \(Q_d(f)\) be a differential polynomial in f of degree d with rational functions as its coefficients. Suppose that \(p_1(z), p_2(z)\) are rational functions and \(\alpha _1(z), \alpha _2(z)\) are polynomials. If \(d\le n-2,\) the differential equation (7) admits a meromorphic function f with finitely many poles, then \(\frac{\alpha '_1}{\alpha '_2}\) is a rational number. Furthermore, only one of the following four cases holds:
-
(1)
\(f(z) = q(z)e^{P (z)}\) and \(\frac{\alpha '_1}{\alpha ' _2} = 1,\) where q(z) is a rational function and P(z) is a polynomial with \(nP'(z) = \alpha '_1(z) = \alpha '_2(z);\)
-
(2)
\(f(z) = q(z)e^{P (z)}\) and either \(\frac{\alpha '_1}{\alpha ' _2} = \frac{k}{n}\) or \(\frac{\alpha '_1}{\alpha ' _2} = \frac{n}{k},\) where q(z) is a rational function, k is an integer with \(1\le k \le d\) and P(z) is a polynomial with \(nP'(z) = \alpha '_1(z)\) or \(nP'(z) = \alpha '_2(z);\)
-
(3)
f satisfies the first order linear differential equation \(f'=\left( \frac{1}{n}\frac{p'_2}{p_2}+\frac{1}{n}\alpha '_2\right) f+\psi\) and \(\frac{\alpha '_1}{\alpha ' _2}=\frac{n-1}{n}\) or f satisfies the first order linear differential equation \(f'=\left( \frac{1}{n}\frac{p'_1}{p_1}+\frac{1}{n}\alpha '_1\right) f+\psi\) and \(\frac{\alpha '_1}{\alpha ' _2}=\frac{n}{n-1},\) where \(\psi\) is a rational function;
-
(4)
\(f(z) = \gamma _1(z)e^{\beta _1(z)} + \gamma _2(z)e^{\beta _1(z)}\) and \(\frac{\alpha '_1}{\alpha ' _2} = -1,\) where \(\gamma _1,\gamma _2\) are rational functions and \(\beta _1(z)\) is a polynomial with \(n \beta _1'(z) = \alpha '_1\) or \(n \beta _1'(z) = \alpha '_2.\)
After that, Li and Yang [12] and Chen and Gui [3] continued to investigate this question, and got some results for certain types of non-linear differential equations.
Let
where \({\textbf{k}}=(0,1,\ldots ,k);\) \({\textbf{I}}=(I_0,I_1,\ldots ,I_{t}),\) \(I_{l}=(i_{l0},i_{l1},\ldots ,i_{lk})\) are multiindices of nonnegative integers \({\mathbb{Z}}_{+};\) \(d:=\deg (L_{d}(z,f))=\max \{\sum ^{t}_{i=l}I_{l}\}\) and \(c_{i}\) be constants; \({\mathbb{I}}\) is a finite set of \({\mathbb{Z}}_{+}^{(t+1)(k+1)}\) and \(a_{{\textbf{I}}}\ne 0\) are meromorphic functions. Our second result considers the following differential-difference equation
Theorem 1.2
Let \(n\ge 2+s,\) \(s\ge 3,\) \(L_d(z)\not \equiv 0,\) \(d\le n-s-1\) and n, s, d, k be positive integers. Suppose that \(p_{1}(z),\ldots , p_{s}(z)\) are non-vanishing rational functions and \(\alpha _{1}(z), \ldots ,\alpha _{s}(z)\) are nonconstant polynomials such that \(\deg \{\alpha _{i}(z)-\alpha _{j}(z)\}\ge 1\) \((i,j=1,2,\ldots ,s).\) If (8) has a meromorphic solution f with finitely many poles, then f must be of the form:
where q(z) is a non-vanishing rational function and P(z) is a non-constant polynomial. Furthermore, there must exist positive integers \(l_0, l_1,\ldots l_s\) with \(\{l_1, l_2,\ldots ls\} = \{1, 2, \ldots s\}\) and distinct integers \(j_{1},j_{2},\ldots ,j_{s-1}\) with \(0\le j_{1},j_{2}, \ldots , j_{s-1}\le d\) such that \(\alpha '_{l_1}:\alpha '_{l_2}:\alpha '_{l_3}:\ldots : \alpha '_{l_s}=n+1:j_{1}:j_{2}:\ldots :j_{s-1},\) \((n+1)P'=\alpha '_{l_{1}},\) \(L_d(z,f)=\sum ^{s}_{i=2}p_{l_i}(z)e^{\alpha _{l_i}{(z)}}.\)
Remark 1.5
Theorem 1.2 is also an extension of [18], in which Wang and Wang discuss the expressions of Eq. (8) when \(\alpha _1(z),\ldots ,\alpha _s(z)\) are polynomials with degree 1.
2 Preliminary Lemmas
In order to prove our results, we fist give some lemmas as follows.
Lemma 2.1
[19] Let f(z) be a transcendental meromorphic function with finite order \(\rho ,\) and P(z, f), Q(z, f) be two differential-difference polynomials of f(z). If
holds and if the total degree of Q(z, f) in f(z) and its derivatives and their shifts is at most n, then for any \(\varepsilon >0,\)
possible outside of an exception set of finite logarithmic measure.
Lemma 2.2
[1] Let \(f_{k}(z)(1 \le k \le n)\) be meromorphic functions and \(g_{k}(z)(1 \le k \le n)\) be entire functions satisfying
-
(i)
\(\sum ^{n}_{k=1}f_{k}e^{g_{k}}\equiv 0;\)
-
(ii)
\(g_{k}-g_{l}\) are not constants for \(1 \le k<l\le n;\)
-
(iii)
\(T(r, f_{j}) = o(T(r, e^{g_{k}-g_{l}} ))\) when \(r\rightarrow \infty ,\) \(r \notin E\) for \(1 \le j \le n\) and \(1 \le k<l \le n,\)
where \(E\subset [1,\infty )\) is a set of finite logarithmic measure.
Then \(f_{j} (z) \equiv 0\) for \(1 \le j \le n.\)
Lemma 2.3
[11] Let f(z) be an entire function, and \(a_{1}, a_{2}, \ldots\) denote all nonzero zeros of f(z) repeated according to multiplicity, suppose also that f(z) has a zero at \(z = 0\) of multiplicity \(m \ge 0.\) Then there exists an entire function g(z) and a sequence of nonnegative integers \(p_{1}, p_{2}\) such that
where \(E(z) = z^{m}\prod ^{\infty }_{n=1}E_{pn}\frac{z}{a_{n}}\) is the canonical product formed by the zeros of f(z), and \(E_{n}(z)\) is given by \(E_{0}(z)=1-z;\) \(E_{n}(z) = (1-z) exp(z + z^{2}/2 +\cdots + z^{n}/n), n\ge 1.\) A well known fact about Lemma 2.3asserts that \(\sigma (E) = \lambda (f)\le \sigma (f),\) and \(\sigma (f) = \sigma (e^{g})\) when \(\lambda (f) < \sigma (f).\)
Lemma 2.4
[8] Let f be a non-constant meromorphic function on \({\mathbb{C}}\) and \(k\ge 1.\) Then
holds outside of a set of finite logarithmic measure.
Lemma 2.5
[9] The elementary symmetric function \(E_{i}\equiv \sum \alpha _{1}\alpha _{2}\ldots \alpha _{i}\) of the n variables \(\alpha _{1}, \alpha _{2},\ldots ,\alpha _{n}\) is equal to the quotient of the secondary Vandermondian \(V_{n_i}\) by the principal Vandermondian \(V_{n_0}.\)
Lemma 2.6
[15] Consider the system of linear equation \(AX=B,\) where
and
If \(\det (A)\ne 0,\) then the system has unique solution
where
Lemma 2.7
[20] Let f(z) be a nonconstant meromorphic function in the complex plane and k be a positive integer. Set
where \(a_{k}(z)(k=0,1,\ldots ,n)\) are all small functions of f(z). Then
Lemma 2.8
[5] Let f(z) be a nonconstant meromorphic function of finite order and \(c\in {\mathbb{C}}.\) Then
and
3 Proof of Theorem 1.1
Suppose that Eq. (6) has an entire solution f(z) with a finite Borel exceptional value. We assert that f(z) is transcendental. If f(z) is a polynomial, it’s obvious that the order of growth of the left side is 0, while the order of growth of the right side of Eq. (6) is 1. This is impossible. Thus it follows that f is transcendental, as asserted. We will distinguish two cases to deduce contradictions.
Case 1. \(s=1.\)
Then Eq. (6) becomes
Differentiating both sides of (9), we get
Eliminating \(e^{\alpha _1z}\) from (9) and (10), we can get
If \(nf'-\alpha _{1} f\not \equiv 0,\) note that \(n\ge 2+s=3,\) then from (11) and Lemma 2.1, we obtain
Combining (12) and (13), we get
It is a contradiction.
If \(nf'-\alpha _{1} f\equiv 0,\) then \(f(z)=c_{1}e^{\frac{\alpha _{1}}{n}z},\) where \(c_{1}\) is a constant.
From (11) we can deduce that \(\alpha _{1}Q(z,f)-Q'(z,f)=0.\) Then
where \(c_{2}\) is a constant.
Substituting \(f(z)=c_{1}e^{\frac{\alpha _{1}}{n}z}\) and \(Q(z,f)=c_{2}e^{\alpha _{1}z}\) into (9), we can get
By Lemma 2.2, we can deduce that
In another way, substituting \(f(z)=c_{1}e^{\frac{\alpha _{1}}{n}z}\) into Eq. (9), we get
By Lemma 2.2, we can get \(c_{1}^{n}-p_{1}=0.\) Combining (14) we have \(c_{2} =0,\) that is \(Q(z,f)\equiv 0,\) a contradiction.
Therefore, Eq. (6) does not have transcendental entire solution when \(s=1.\)
Case 2. \(s>1.\) For convenience, let
Differentiating Eq. (15) \(s-1\) times yield the system of equations
By Lemma 2.6, we obtain
where
is a principal Vandermondian with order s,
Noting that \(\alpha _{1},\alpha _{2},\ldots \alpha _{s}\) are distinct constants, hence,
By (17), (18)and (19), we obtain
where
Differentiating both sides of (20), we get
By eliminating \(e^{\alpha _{1}z}\) from (20) and (23), we get
Let H(w) be a linear differential operator defined by
We deduce from (21), (22), (25) and Lemma 2.5 that
and
Denote
Here, \(\tau _{j}\) \((j=1, 2,\ldots ,s-1)\) are the elementary symmetric function of s variables \(\alpha _{1}, \alpha _{2},\ldots , \alpha _{s}.\) So H(w) can be rewritten as
Since \(h=f^{n}(z)+Q(z,f),\) it follows from (24) that
In addition, for \(m=1,2,\ldots ,s,\)
where \(\gamma _{j\lambda }\) are the positive integers, \(\lambda _{j1},\lambda _{j2},\ldots \lambda _{jm-1}\) are the non-negative integers and the sum \(\sum _{\lambda }\) is carried out such that \(\lambda _{j1}+\lambda _{j2}+\cdots +\lambda _{j,m-1}=j\) and \(\lambda _{j1}+2\lambda _{j2}+\cdots +(m-1)\lambda _{j,m-1}=m.\)
By (25), (30), (31) and (32), we get
where \(\Phi\) is a differential polynomial in f(z) of degree s with constant coefficients and H(Q(z, f)) is a differential-difference polynomial in f(z) of degree 1 with small function coefficients of f.
If \(\Phi =0,\) which yields \(H(f^{n}(z))\equiv 0\) and \(H(Q(z,f))\equiv 0.\)
By \(H(Q(z,f))\equiv 0,\) we get
The characteristic equation for this equation is as follows:
Due to the fact that \(\alpha _{1},\alpha _{2},\ldots ,\alpha _{s}\) are s distinct roots of (34), we can obtain that
where \(\tilde{c_{j}}(j=1,2\cdots ,s)\) are constants. Accordingly, we deduce from \(H(f^{n}(z))\equiv 0\) that
where \(d_{j}(j=1,2\ldots ,s)\) are constants.
Since f(z) is a finite order transcendental entire function with a finite Borel exceptional value a, using Weierstrass factorisation theorem, we can factorize f(z) as
where d(z) is the canonical product of \(f-a\) formed with it’s zeros and d(z) is an entire function such that \(\sigma (d(z))<\sigma (f(z)).\) We can get that g(z) is a polynomial of degree \(\ge 1.\) By (36), we see that
where \(G_{1}(z),G_{2}(z),\ldots ,G_{p}(z)\) are polynomials in d(z), g(z) and their derivatives. Clearly, \(T(r,G_{j})=o(T(r,f))\) and \(G_{j}\ne 0\) for \(j=1,2,3\ldots ,p.\) Then we can get
where \(A_{j}=a_{j}(z)G_{j}(z+\tau _{j}).\) Since \(T(r,a_{j}(z))=o(T(r,f))\) \((1\le j\le p),\) we obtain \(T(r,A_{j})=o(T(r,f)), j=1,2\ldots p.\)
Now we claim that g(z) is a polynomial of degree 1.
Otherwise, we suppose that g(z) is a polynomial of degree \(\ge 2.\) Denote \(g(z)=a_{n}z^{n}+a_{n-1}z^{n-1}+\cdots +a_{0}\) with \(a_{n}\ne 0,\) then we can rewrite (38) as
where \(\tilde{A_{j}}(z)=A_{j}(z)e^{g(z+\tau _{j})-a_{n}z^{n}},\) \(\sigma (\tilde{A_{j}}(z))\le n-1\) and \(T(r,\tilde{A_{j}}(z))= o(T(e^{a_{n}z^{n}-\alpha _{k}z})).\) Applying Lemma 2.2 to (39), it follows that \(a_0(z)\equiv 0,\) which is a contradiction .
Then we can get
where \(\beta\) is a nonzero constant, and hence
Therefore, we can rewrite (38) as
If \(\beta \ne \alpha _{k}(k=1,2,\ldots ,s),\) then by Lemma 2.2, we can get
where
It is a contradiction.
On the other hand, if \(\beta =\alpha _{r}\) for some \(r\in \{1,2,\ldots ,s\},\) then by (40) we can get
From (35) it finally concludes that
We note that \(\frac{\alpha _{i}}{\alpha _{j}}\ne n,\) so \(n\alpha _{r}\ne \alpha _{k}(k=1,\ldots ,s).\) By Lemma 2.2, it yields that \(d^{n}(z)=0.\)
Then \(f(z)\equiv a,\) a contradiction.
If \(\Phi \ne 0,\) note that \(n\ge s+2,\) then by (33) and Lemma 2.2 we get
Then, we have
a contradiction.
4 Proof of Theorem 1.2
Let
Suppose that f is a rational solution of Eq. (6). Obviously, h(z) is a small function of \(p_{i}(z)e^{\alpha _{i}(z)} (i=1,2,\ldots ,s).\) Since deg\(\{\alpha _{i}(z)-\alpha _{j}(z)\}\geqslant 1,\) by Lemma 2.2 we deduce that \(p_{i}(z)=0 (i=1,2,\ldots ,s),\) which contradicts \(p_{i}(z)(i=1,2,\ldots ,s)\) are non-vanishing rational functions. Hence f must be transcendental.
Suppose that f is a meromorphic solution with finitely poles of Eq. (6). Now we prove that f has finite order. Clearly,
where
and
Hence \((n-d)T(r,f)\le A r^{\eta }+S(r,f)\) and f is of finite order.
Differentiating Eq. (44) \(s-1\) \((s\ge 3)\) times yields the system of differential equations
where \(H_{j}(\alpha _i',\alpha _i'',\ldots ,\alpha _i^{(j)})\) are differential polynomials of \(\alpha _i^{(j)}\) with degree j \((j=1,2,\ldots ,s-1; i=1,2,\ldots ,s).\) By Lemma 2.6, we obtain
where
We will distinguish the following two cases:
Case 1. If \(D\equiv 0,\) then by (47) we have \(D_1\equiv 0.\) So,
where
and
are rational functions.
Substituting the expression (44) of h(z) and \(h'(z)\) \(h''(z)\cdots\) \(h^{(s-1)}\) into (50), we get
where
is a differential polynomial in f with rational functions as its coefficients and degree of \(H_1\le d.\) In addition,
where \(\gamma _{j\lambda }\) are the positive integers, \(\lambda _{j1},\lambda _{j2},\ldots \lambda _{jm-1}\) are the non-negative integers and the sum \(\sum _{\lambda }\) is carried out such that \(\lambda _{j1}+\lambda _{j2}+\cdots +\lambda _{j,m-1}=j\) and \(\lambda _{j1}+2\lambda _{j2}+\cdots +(m-1)\lambda _{j,m-1}=m.\)
Since
and
We deduce inductively that,
for \(t=0, 1,\ldots ,s ,\) where \(\gamma _{j\lambda }\) are positive integers, \(\lambda _{j1},\lambda _{j2},\ldots \lambda _{j,i-1}\) are nonnegative integers, and \(\lambda _{j1}+\lambda _{j2}+\cdots +\lambda _{j,i-1}=j\) and \(\lambda _{j1}+2\lambda _{j2}+\cdots +(i-1)\lambda _{j,i-1}=i.\)
Now we define
for \(t=1,2,\ldots ,s-1.\)
It follows from (54) and (51), we can rewrite (51) as
where
Note that \(d\le n-s-1\) and f is finite order, so combining (55) with Lemma 2.1 we get
On the other hand, since f has finitely many poles, we have
which means that \(R_1\) is a rational function.
Next we discuss the following two subcases:
Case 1.1. If \(R_1(z)\equiv 0,\) then from (55) and (51), we have
We will show that f has at most finitely many zeros. Suppose that f has infinitely many zeros. Then there exists a point \(z_1\) such that \(f(z_1) = 0\) and \(z_1\) is not the zero and pole of \(M_{j1} (j = 1, 2,\ldots , s).\)
Take \(z=z_1.\) First, assume that \(M_{s1}\not \equiv 0.\) Then by (54) and (53), we know \(\psi _1(z_1)=\psi _2(z_1)\cdots =\psi _{s-2}(z_1)=0.\) Then by (57), we have \(\psi _{s-1}(z_1)=0.\) Noting that
we can deduce that \((f'(z_1))^{s-1}f^{(k)}(z_1) = 0.\) Now we will deduce a contradiction by comparing the zero multiplicity of (57) with respect to \(z_1.\) We need to treat three cases:
Subcase 1. \(f'(z_{1})=0\) and\(f^{(k)}(z_{1})=0.\) Suppose that \(z_1\) is a zero of \(f^{(k)}(z)\) with multiplicity h \((h\ge 1)\) and \(z_1\) is a zero of f with multiplicity m \((m\ge 2).\) Then we can deduce form (58), (52) and (57) that \(z_1\) is a zero of the right hand side of (57) with multiplicity \((m-1)(s-1)+h ,\) while the multiplicity of the left hand side of (57) is \((s-1)m+h.\) It is a contradiction.
Subcase 2. \(f'(z_{1})=0\) and\(f^{(k)}(z_{1})\ne 0.\) Suppose that \(z_1\) is a multiple zero of f which multiplicity is m \((k\ge m\ge 2).\) Then we can deduce form (58), (52) and (57) that \(z_1\) is a zero of the right hand side of (57) with multiplicity \((m-1)(s-1) ,\) while the multiplicity of the left hand side of (57) is \((s-1)m,\) a contradiction.
Subcase 3.\(f'(z_{1})\ne 0\) and\(f^{(k)}(z_{1})=0.\) Suppose that \(z_1\) is a multiple zero of \(f^{(k)}\) which multiplicity is h \((h\ge 1)\) and \(z_1\) is a multiple zero of \(f'\) which multiplicity is \(m=1\) . Then we can deduce form (58), (52) and (57) that \(z_1\) is a zero of the right hand side of (57) with multiplicity h, while the multiplicity of the left hand side of (57) is \(s-1+h,\) a contradiction.
If not, assume that \(M_{s1} \equiv 0.\) If \(z_1\) is a simple zero of f(z), then \(f'(z_1)\ne 0.\) Suppose that \(z_1\) is a zero of \(f^{(k)}(z)\) whose multiplicity is h \((h\ge 0).\) So we get that \(z_1\) is a zero with multiplicity \(s-1+h\) of left hand side of (57) and a zero with multiplicity \(1+h\) of right hand side of (57). Since \(s\ge 3,\) it is a contradiction.
If \(z_1\) is a multiple zero of f(z) with multiplicity \(m\ge 2,\) then \(z_1\) is a zero with multiplicity \((s-1)m+h\) of left hand side of (57) and a zero with multiplicity \((s-2)(m-1)+m+h\) of right hand side of (57), where \(h\ge 0\) is the multiplicity of \(f^{(k)}(z).\) A contradiction. Thus, f has at most finitely many zeros.
Case 1.2. If \(R_1(z)\not \equiv 0,\) then (55) leads to
By Lemma 2.1, we get
Since \(fR_1\) has finitely many poles, then we have
Therefore, \(fR_1\) is a rational function, which contradicts that f is transcendental.
Case 2. If \(D\not \equiv 0,\) then differentiating (47), we have
Eliminating \(e^{\alpha _1}\) from (47) and (60), we get
Substituting \(D_1=M_{11}h-M_{21}h'+\cdots +(-1)^{s-1}M_{s1}h^{(s-1)}\) and \(D'_1=M_{11}'h+(M_{11}-M_{21}')h'+\cdots +(-1)^{s-2}(M_{s-1 1}-M_{s1}')h^{(s-1)}+(-1)^{(s-1)}M_{s1}h^{(s)}\) into (61), we obtain that
where
are rational functions. Substituting the expression (44) of h(z) and \(h'(z)\) \(h''(z)\cdots h^{(s)}\) into (62), we get
where
Clearly, \(H_2\) is a differential-difference polynomial in f with degree \(\le d\) and rational functions as its coefficients. By (53), we set
for \(t=1,2,\ldots ,s.\) Combining (65) and (64), we have
where
Since \(d\le n-s-1\) and f is finite order, by Lemma 2.1 we get
On the other hand, we know that f has finitely many poles, and hence
Then, \(R_2\) is a rational function. Next we consider the following two cases:
Case 2.1. If \(R_2(z)\equiv 0,\) then from (67), we have
Now counting zero multiplicity of the left hand side of (68) and right hand side of (68) in the same way as done in Case 1.1, we can find that the multiplicity of zeros is different between the left sides and the right sides of (68). It is a contradiction. So we can obtain that f has finitely many zeros.
Case 2.2. If \(R_2(z)\not \equiv 0,\) then from (67) we have
It follows from Lemma 2.1 that
Since \(fR_2\) has finitely many poles,
Therefore, \(fR_2\) is a rational function, which contradicts that f is transcendental. So from the above discussion we conclude that f is a transcendental meromorphic function with finite many zeros and poles. Now by Lemma 2.3, we can say that
and
where q(z) is a non-vanishing rational function, P(z) is a non-constant polynomial, R(z) is a differential polynomial in q(z) and P(z). Substituting (70) and (71) into (8) yields
where \(\beta _{j}\) are rational functions and \(P_{c_{j}}\) are polynomials with \(\deg (P_{c_{j}})<\deg (P(z)).\) Since \(\deg \{\alpha _{i}(z)-\alpha _{j}(z)\}\ge 1\) and \(p_i(z)\) are non-vanishing rational functions, by Lemma 2.2 we can deduce that there must exist positive integers \(l_0, l_1,\ldots l_s\) with \(\{l_1, l_2,\ldots ls\} = \{1, 2, \ldots s\}\) and distinct integers \(j_{1},\) \(j_{2},\ldots , j_{s-1}\) with \(0\le j_{1},j_{2}, \ldots , j_{s-1}\le d\) such that
where \(\gamma _1,\) \(\gamma _2,\ldots ,\gamma _s\) are constants, and
Hence, \(\beta _{j}\equiv 0\) hold for all \(j\ne j_{i}(i=1,2,3,\ldots ,s-1),\) \(\alpha '_{l_1}:\alpha '_{l_2}:\alpha '_{l_3}:\ldots :\alpha '_{l_s}=n+1: j_{1}:j_{2}:\ldots :j_{s-1},\) \((n+1)P'=\alpha '_{l_{1}},\) \(L_d(z,f)=\sum ^{s}_{i=2}p_{l_i}(z)e^{\alpha _{l_i}{(z)}}.\)
Data Availability
All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article.
References
Berenstein, C.A., Gay, R.: Complex Variables. Springer, New York (1991)
Camassa, R., Holm, D.: An integrable shallow water equation with peaked solitons. Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 1661–1664 (1993)
Chen, J.F., Gui, L.: Expressions of meromorphic solutions of certain type of nonlinear complex difference equations. Taiwan. J. Math. 15, 2145–2157 (2011)
Chen, M.F., Gao, Z.S.: Entire solutions of certain type of nonlinear differential equations and differential-difference equations. J. Comput. Anal. Appl. 24, 137–147 (2018)
Chiang, Y.M., Feng, S.J.: On the Nevanlinna characteristic of \(f(z+\eta )\) and difference equations in the complex plane. Ramanujan J. 16, 105–129 (2008)
Cohen, B., Krommes, J., Tang, W., Rosenbluth, M.: Non-linear saturation of the dissipative trapped-ion mode by mode coupling. Nucl. Fusion 16, 971–992 (1976)
Halburd, R.G., Korhonen, R.J.: Difference analogue of the lemma on the logarithmic derivative with applications to difference equations. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 314, 477–487 (2006)
Hayman, W.K.: Meromorphic Functions. Oxford Mathematical Monographs, Clarendon Press, Oxford (1964)
Heineman, E.R.: Generalized Vandermonde determinants. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 31, 406–479 (1929)
Korteweg, D.J., De, V.G.: On the change of form of long waves advancing in a rectangular channel, and a new type of long stationary waves. Philos. Mag. 39, 422–443 (1895)
Krantz, S.G.: Handbook of Complex Variables. Birkhäuser, Boston (1999)
Li, N., Yang, L.Z.: Some results on meromorphic solutions of certain nonlinear differential equations. Bull. Korean Math. Soc. 57, 1095–1113 (2020)
Li, P., Yang, C.C.: On the nonexistence of entire solutions of certain type of nonlinear differential equations. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 320, 827–835 (2006)
Liao, L.W., Yang, C.C., Zhang, J.J.: On meromorphic solutions of certain type of nonlinear differential equations. Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Math. 38, 581–593 (2013)
Mirsky, L.: An Introduction to Linear Algebra. Clarendon Press, Oxford (1995)
Qian, X.M., Lou, S., Hu, X.B.: Variable separation approach for a differential-difference system: special Toda equation. J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 37, 2401–2411 (2004)
Tsuchida, T., Ujino, H., Wadati, M.: Integrable semi-discretization of the coupled nonlinear Schrödinger equations. J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 32, 2239–2262 (1999)
Wang, Q., Wang, Q.Y.: Study on the existence of the solutions to specific types of differential-difference equations. Turk. J. Math. 43, 941–954 (2019)
Yang, C.C., Laine, I.: On analogies between nonlinear difference and differential equations. Proc. Jpn. Acad. Ser. A Math. Sci. 86, 10–14 (2010)
Yang, C.C., Yi, H.X.: Uniqueness theory of meromorphic functions. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht (2003)
Zhang, J., Liao, L.W.: Entire solutions of a certain type of nonlinear differential and difference equations. Taiwan. J. Math. 15, 2145–2157 (2011)
Zhang, R.R., Huang, Z.B.: On meromorphic solutions of non-linear difference equations. Comput. Methods Funct. Theory 18, 389–408 (2018)
Funding
The work was supported by NNSF of China (no. 11971344).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
ZH made the substantial contributions to the conception of the work, and MZ was a major contributor in writing the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Ethics Approval
Not applicable.
Consent to Participate
Not applicable.
Consent for Publication
Not applicable.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Zhao, M., Huang, Z. On Meromorphic Solutions of Non-linear Differential-Difference Equations. J Nonlinear Math Phys 30, 1444–1466 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44198-023-00136-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44198-023-00136-2