A Fixed Point Theorem Based on Miranda

(1)

Volume 2007, Article ID 78706,6pages doi:10.1155/2007/78706

Research Article

A Fixed Point Theorem Based on Miranda

Uwe Sch¨afer

Received 5 June 2007; Revised 17 August 2007; Accepted 1 October 2007

Recommended by Robert F. Brown

A new fixed point theorem is proved by using the theorem of Miranda.

Copyright © 2007 Uwe Sch¨afer. This is an open access article distributed under the Cre-ative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

1. Introduction

In 1940, Miranda published the following theorem ([1]).

Theorem1.1. LetΩ=x∈Rn_:_x

i≤L, i=1,. . .,nand let f :Ω→Rnbe continuous

satisfying

fi

x1,x2,. . .,xi−1,−L,xi+1,. . .,xn

≥0, fix1,x2,. . .,xi−1, +L,xi+1,. . .,xn≤0,

∀i{1,. . .,n}. (1.1)

Then,f(x)=0has a solution inΩ.

Forn=1,Theorem 1.1reduces to the well-known intermediate-value theorem. Mi-randa proved his theorem using the Brouwer fixed point theorem. Using the Brouwer degree of a mapping, Vrahatis gave another short proof ofTheorem 1.1(see [2]). Follow-ing this proof it is easy to see thatTheorem 1.1is also true, ifLis dependent ofi; that is, Ωcan also be a rectangle and need not to be a cube. Even someLican be zero. Very often, the theorem of Miranda is stated as in the following corollary (see also [3,4]), which is not the theorem of Miranda in its original form, but a consequence of it.

Corollary1.2. Let x∈Rn_,_L₌_(l

i)∈Rn,li≥0, for i=1,. . .,n, let Ωbe the rectangle Ω:= {x∈Rn_:_|_x

(2)

Also let

F+

i := {x∈Ω:xi=xi+li}, Fi−:= {x∈Ω:xi=xi−li}, i=1,. . .,n, (1.2)

be the pairs of parallel opposite faces of the rectangleΩ. If for alli=1,. . .,n

fi(x)·fi(y)≤0, ∀x∈Fi+,∀y∈Fi−, (1.3)

then there exists somex∗∈Ωsatisfying f(x∗)=0.

In principle,Corollary 1.2says thatTheorem 1.1is also true if the≤-sign and the≥ -sign are exchanged with each other in (1.1).Corollary 1.2also says thatTheorem 1.1is not restricted to a rectangle with 0 as its center.

Many generalizations have been given (see, e.g., [2,4–6] for the finite-dimensional case and see [7,8] for the infinite-dimensional case). In the presented paper we give a generalization ofCorollary 1.2 in the infinite-dimensional Hilbert spacel2_{. Finally, we}

prove a fixed point version ofTheorem 1.1inl2_.

2. The infinite-dimensional case

Letl2_{be the infinite-dimensional Hilbert space of all square summable sequences of real}

numbers equipped with the natural order

x≤y:⇐⇒xi≤yi, ∀i∈N, (2.1)

and equipped with the normx:= ∞_i=1x2i.

Theorem 2.1. Let x= {xi}∞i=1∈l2,L= {li}∞i=1∈l2,li≥0, for alli∈N, Ω:= {x∈l2: |xi−xi| ≤li,f or all i∈N}and let f :Ω→l2be a continuous function onΩ. Also let

Fi+:= {x∈Ω:xi=xi+li}, Fi−:= {x∈Ω:xi=xi−li}, ∀i∈N. (2.2)

If for alli∈Nit holds that

fi(x)·fi(y)≤0, ∀x∈Fi+,∀y∈Fi−, (2.3)

then there exists somex∗∈Ωsatisfying f(x∗)=0.

Proof. For fixedn∈N, we consider the functionh(n)_:_Ω_→_l2_{defined by}

h(n)_{(x) :}₌

⎛ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎝ f1

x1,x2,. . .,xn−1,xn,xn+1,. . .

.. . fn

x1,x2,. . .,xn−1,xn,xn+1,. . .

0 .. .

⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠

. (2.4)

(3)

then there is av∈ {v(1)_{,. . .,v}(p)_}_{such that}

f(x)−v ≤ε (2.5)

and there existsn1=n1(ε)∈Nsuch that for alln > n1it holds that

∞

j=n+1

vj

2

≤ε, ∀v∈v(1)_{,. . .}_,v(p)_. _(2.6)

So, ifn > n1is valid, then for all f(x)∈ f(Ω) we have somev∈ {v(1),. . .,v(p)}such that

_f_(x)₋_h(n)_(x)₌

⎛ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎝ 0 .. . 0 fn+1(x)

fn+2(x)

.. . ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠

≤ f(x)−v+ ⎛ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎝ 0 .. . 0 vn+1

vn+2

.. . ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠

≤2ε (2.7)

for allx∈Ω. Now, for fixedn∈ Nwe define

Ωn:= ⎛ ⎜ ⎜ ⎝

x1−l1,x1+l1

.. .

xn−ln,xn+ln ⎞ ⎟ ⎟

⎠ (2.8)

andh(n)_:_Ω_n→_Rn_by

h(n)_{(x) :}₌

⎛ ⎜ ⎜ ⎝ f1

x1,x2,. . .,xn−1,xn,xn+1,xn+2,. . .

.. .

fnx1,x2,. . .,xn−1,xn,xn+1,xn+2,. . .

⎞ ⎟ ⎟

⎠. (2.9)

Due to (2.3) andCorollary 1.2there existsx(n)_∈_Ω

nwith

h(n)x(n)=0. (2.10)

Setting

x(n)_:₌

⎛ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎝

x(n)

xn+1

xn+2

.. . ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟

⎠, (2.11)

it holds that

(4)

Now, letn > n1. Then,

_f

x(n)₌_f_x(n)₋_h(n)_x(n)_≤_2ε. _(2.13)

Hence, limn→∞f(x(n))=0. SinceΩis compact, the sequencex(n)has an accumulation point inΩ, sayx∗. Without loss of generality, we assume that limn→∞x(n)=x∗holds. On

the one hand, it follows that limn→∞f(x(n))=f(x∗), since f is continuous. On the other hand, it follows that f(x∗)=0, since the limit is unique.

Next, we prove the fixed point version ofTheorem 1.1inl2_.

Theorem2.2. LetL= {li}∞

i=1∈l2,li≥0, for alli∈N. LetΩ= {x∈l2:|xi| ≤li,∀i∈N}

and suppose that the mappingg:Ω→l2_{is continuous satisfying}

gi(x1,x2,. . .,xi−1,−li,xi+1,. . .)≥0,

gi(x1,x2,. . .,xi−1, +li,xi+1,. . .)≤0,

∀i∈N. (2.14)

Then,g(x)=xhas a solution inΩ.

Proof. We consider the continuous function

f(x) :=g(x)−x, x∈Ω. (2.15)

Since for alli∈N

fi

x1,. . .,xi−1,−li,xi+1,. . .

=gi

x1,. . .,xi−1,−li,xi+1,. . .

+li≥0,

fix1,. . .,xi−1, +li,xi+1,. . .

=gix1,. . .,xi−1, +li,xi+1,. . .

−li≤0,

(2.16)

due toTheorem 2.1there existsx∈Ωsatisfying f(x)=0; that is,g(x)=x.

Example 2.3. Letb∈l2_and_A₌_(a

ik) satisfying ∞i,k=1|aik|2<∞. Then, the mapping

g(x) :=

b1−

∞

k=1

a1kxk,b2−

∞

k=1

a2kxk,. . .

(2.17)

is (even) a compact mapping froml2_to_l2_{. Now, if}_A_{is some kind of diagonally dominant}

in the sense that there exists someL= {li}∞_i=1∈l2such that for alli∈N

aii·li≥bi+ ∞

k=1,k=i

_a_ik_·_l_k_, _(2.18)

then byTheorem 2.1there exists someξ∈Ω= {x∈l2_:_|_x_{i| ≤}_l

i,∀i∈N}withAξ=b. ByTheorem 2.2it follows that there existsη∈Ωsatisfyingη=b−Aη.

Remark 2.4. Note that inTheorem 2.2it is not necessary thatgis a self-mapping as it is assumed in many other fixed point theorems.

(5)

y

L L x

(a)

y

x−L x x+L x

(b)

Figure2.1. In both pictures the thick line is the graph of a functiony=g(x),x∈Ω. In the left pic-ture,Ω=[−L,L] andg(−L)<0,g(L)>0. According toCorollary 1.2g(x) has a zero inΩ. However, g(x) has no fixed point inΩ, which is no contradiction to Theorem (2.2), sinceg(−L)≥0,g(L)≤0 is not valid, here. In the right picture,Ω=[x−L,x+L] andg(x−L)>0,g(x+L)<0. According to

Corollary 1.2,g(x) has a zero inΩ. However,g(x) has no fixed point inΩ.

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank the anonymous referee(s) for many suggestions and com-ments that helped to improve the paper. Furthermore, he would like to thank Professor Mitsuhiro Nakao for his invitation to the Kyushu University in Fukuoka, where this work was started.

References

[1] C. Miranda, “Un’osservazione su un teorema di Brouwer,”Bollettino dell’Unione Matematica Italiana, vol. 3, pp. 5–7, 1940.

[2] M. N. Vrahatis, “A short proof and a generalization of Miranda’s existence theorem,”Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 107, no. 3, pp. 701–703, 1989.

[3] J. B. Kioustelidis, “Algorithmic error estimation for approximate solutions of nonlinear systems of equations,”Computing, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 313–320, 1978.

[4] J. Mayer, “A generalized theorem of Miranda and the theorem of Newton-Kantorovich,” Numer-ical Functional Analysis and Optimization, vol. 23, no. 3-4, pp. 333–357, 2002.

[5] G. Alefeld, A. Frommer, G. Heindl, and J. Mayer, “On the existence theorems of Kantorovich, Miranda and Borsuk,”Electronic Transactions on Numerical Analysis, vol. 17, pp. 102–111, 2004. [6] N. H. Pavel, “Theorems of Brouwer and Miranda in terms of Bouligand-Nagumo fields,”Analele

Stiintifice ale Universitatii Al. I. Cuza din Iasi. Serie Noua. Matematica, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 161–164, 1991.

[7] C. Avramescu, “A generalization of Miranda’s theorem,”Seminar on Fixed Point Theory Cluj-Napoca, vol. 3, pp. 121–127, 2002.

[8] C. Avramescu, “Some remarks about Miranda’s theorem,”Analele Universitatii din Craiova. Seria Matematica Informatica, vol. 27, pp. 6–13, 2000.

Uwe Schäfer: Institut für Angewandte und Numerische Mathematik, Fakultät für Mathematik, Universität Karlsruhe (TH), D-76128 Karlsruhe, Germany