Math. Nadir.

96, 115-117 (1980)

Some Instability Theorems for Third Order Ordinary Differential Equations

By W. A. SKRAPEK
(Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada)

(Eingegnngen am 1.8. 1979)

1. Introduction. Although a substantial amount of results have been published with

regard to stability of certain differential equations, comparatively few results have been
published which deal directly with instability. The prirpose of this paper is to provide
two theorems which deal with the instability of the trivial solution of the third order
differential equations of the form

(1.1) 5 + fl(2’)+ f Z ( 4 + f 3 ( 4 + f 4 ( 4 j., 2) = 0.

The functions f,, f 2 , f 3 , f 4 depend only on the variables displayed explicitly and the first
derivatives (full or partial) are assumed to exist and be continuous.
2. Theorem 1 and Theorem 2
We first rewrite equation (1.1) in the equivalent system form

(2.1) j. = y , Y = 2, 2 = - f 1 ( Z ) - f d Y ) - f a ( % ) - f a k , y , 2).
With respect to (2.1), we state the following theorems.

Theorem 1. For the system (2.1), let the following conditions be satisfied.
(i) f l ( 0 ) = f2(0)= f3(0)= 0 and f4(0,0, 0) = 0.
(ii) There exist positive constants a2 and a3 such that:

and
Y[fdY) + fdX9 Y9 41 5 --a2Y2,
IX[f3(X) f fs(X9 Y, 2 a3X2,
for all x , y , z.
(iii) There exist non-negative constants K , and K 2 und a constant a , sucht that:

and

for y + 0 crnd z =+ 0.
Z’hen the triviul solution is unstable.
8 Natli. Nadir. Bd. 98
114 Skrapek, some InHtability Theorems

Theorem 2. For the system (2.1), suppose thut fl(0) = f2(0) = f 3 ( 0 )= 0 ond f4(0,0, 0)
= 0. Also, let there exist non-negative constants K , and K , such thut:

Suppose further there exist p s i t i v e constants u, and a3 such that either:

(i) 4fl(Z) + Y l 4 l I--a1z2,

fAX9

x[f3(4 + 14(% Y,z)l 1 W 2 ,

f;(42 a39
for all x , y, z ;
or
(ii) 4fl(4 + fk,
y, 41 2 alza,
x[f3(x) + y? 2 -'3c21

f;(45 --a39

for all x, y, z .

Then the trivial solution of (2.1) is unstable.

3. Proofs of Theorem 1 and Theorom 2
The proofs will be based on instability criterion established by KRASOVSKIIin [ 11.
For each proof we define the continuous functions F,(z) and F , ( y ) by

(3.1)

Aha, we let
F,(z) =
1 flo
z
f;(o)
z+o

z =0
9 P2(Y) =
1
fio
f@)
y
y*o

Y =0

(3.2) G ( G Y, 2) = x.[13(5) + f4(2> Y, 41.

(a) Proof of Theorem 1. In this proof, noting condition (ii) of Theorem 1, we consider
two possible cases:

(1) G ( x , y, z ) 2 u3x2 for all .r, y, z ;

(2) G(s, y, z ) 5 -a3x2 for all x, y, z.
Case (1): G(z, y, z ) 2 a3x2.
Here we define the function V,(x, y, z ) by

22
where R is a positive constant to be fixed later in the proof. Since V , ( x , 0,O) = -, it is
2
clear that in every neighbourhood of (0, 0, 0 ) , there exists a point (xo, yo, zo) such that
V1(xo,yo, zo) 2 0. Next, an elementary differentiation of Vl with respect to t , along
 Skrupek, Some Instability Theorems 115

solution paths of (2.1),yields

= Rz' + Ry[-/z(y) - f 4 ( ~ y,, z ) ] t R [ ~ i z- f i ( z ) ]y + G(x,Y, 2)

+ [y + +
fz(y)l x / , ( z ) x 2 Rz2 t "ozYZ f13X2 +
+ "1 - Fl(41yz 11 F,(.Y)l"Y + + b"71(4x** +
hy using the functions defined in (3.1) and (3.2) and by applying condition ( i i ) of
Theorem 1. It follows then, that

v, 2--
2
+ H F
(22 92) + R[(1 - E ) 22 + (Ul - P,(z))yz f ((12 - t ) yz]

where E >0 chosen m a l l enough to ensure that (1 - E ) z2 (u,- F , ( z ) ) yz t ( a 2

IS +
z. This is always possible since [a,- P , ( Z ) ]5~K , c 4a, by (iii) of
- L ) y2 2 0 for all y,
Theorem 1. .Also, because of the boundedness of Fl(z) and P z ( y )by (iii) of Theorem 1,
it follows that the positive constant R can be chosen so that
P, 2 K ( r 2+ y2 + z 2 ) ,
for a constant K , where R is fixed to ensure that K > 0. Therefore, for such a value of R,
$', is positive definite and the instability of the trivial solution cf (2.1) follows by the
criterion established by KRASOVSKII in [ 11.
Case (2): G(z, y, z ) 5 -a3$.
, z ) by
Similar to case ( l ) , we define the function V 2 ( z y,

2112 -- XB fR [ jf3(0 +
2
0
2yz + - yz + 2.cz,
X2
where R again is a positive constant to be fixed later. We note that V 2 ( x ,0.0) =; -,
and differentiating V , with respect to t to obtain 2

vz = R?A-/z(Y) - + R [ w- Y -
f 4 h Y9 41 fI(Z)l G(X7 !4, .)
+ I!/- ry - /i(z) z h Rz2 + R(hzy2 +
/2(~)3 ~ 3 5 '

t R[a, - F,(z)l yz + [ 1 - FZ(9)l xy - F,(z) X7.'2,

we futher note that the positive definiteness of v,

follows in case (2) a8 I t (lid in case (1).
'Therefore, applying KF~ASOVSKII'S criterion [ 11, the trivial solution 1s unstable.
Combining case (1) and case (a), the proof of Theorem 1 is complete.
(b) Proof of Theorem 2. Here again we employ (3.1) und (3.2) along with
(8.3) H(x9 Y9 ). = z[f,(z) + f&, y, z)I.
By noting conditions ( i ) and (ii) of Theoreni 2, we consider two possible cases. That is,
there exist positive constants (I,and a3 such that either:
Case ( 1 ) G ( x , y, z ) 2 u3x2,H ( x , y, z ) 4 -u1z2 and f j ( r )2 a, for all x, y, z ;
or
Case ( 2 ) G ( x , y, z ) 5 -a3x2, H ( x , y, z ) 2 u1z2, and /j(z) 5 -u3 for all x,y, z.

8*
116 Skrapek, Some Instability Theorems

Case (1).To prove instability in case (1) we employ the function Wl(z, y, z ) defined by

X2
where R is a positive constant to be fixed later in the proof. Since W,(z, 0,O) = -, it is
2
clear that in every neighborhood of (0, 0, 0) we can find a point (zo,yo, zo) such that
Wl(xo,yo, zo) 2 0. Also, differectiating W , with respect to t , along solution paths of
(TI), we obtain
Wl = R f W Y2 - RH(z, y, 2) + y, z ) + [y + f2fy)l .r + 5 9

where G(z, y, z ) and H ( r , y, z ) are as defined in (3.2) and (3.3). It follows then, by using
condition (i) of Theorem 2 and (3.1),that
@, 2 Ru3y2+ Rulz2 + u3z2+ [ l + P z ( y ) xy
] + Pl(z)zz

where a,, and a3 are pcsitive constants. Therefore, since PI(%)

and Fz(y) are bounded by
Theorem 2. it follows that the positive constant .R can be chosen large enough to ensure
t,hat

That, is, for R sufficiently large, W , is positive definite and tho instability of the trivial
solution follows.
Case (2). The proof of this case follows identical lines to that of Case (l),after defining
the function W2(x,y, z ) by

I
U
2W2(z,y, z ) = z2 - R 2yf3(z) + z2 + 3 J f 2 ( 6 )dE
0
- y2 + xz,
Xa
so that , = -, and
W 2 ( z 0,O)
2
@Z = -R&(z) y2 + RH(G 1 ~ 2
9 ) - Q(z, Y, 2 ) + [Y - f z ( y ) I s - 2

2 Ru& + R u , +~ + [ l - F , ( y ) ]XY - F,(z)

1 ~ 3 ~ ’ ITZ.

Tho positive definite property of m,

follows as in case (1).Therefore by KRASOVSKIIS’
criterion [l], the trivial solution is unstable.
Remarks. (1) For the equation
(4.1) 2 +fl(4 +fz(Y)+ f 3 ( 4 = 0,
the conditions of Theorem 1 reduce to the following.
(i) f l ( 0 )= f 2 ( 0 )== f 3 ( 0 )= 0 .
 Skrapek, Some Instability Theorems 117

(ii) There exist positive constants u, and a3 such that:

y/,(y) 5 -u2y2 and Ixfa(x)l 2 u3z2 for all x and y

r!r
(iii) There exists u constant a, and non-negative constant,s K , and K , such that:

[a, - $'1 5 K , < 4a, and 5 K,, for y + O and z $. 0.

(2) For equation (4. l), the conditions of Theorem 2 reduce to the following.
(i) f , ( O ) = /,(0) = j 3 ( 0 )= 0 and there exist non-negative constants K , and K , such
that:

5 Ii, and IK z for y + O and z + O .

Then the trivial solution is unstable provided that there exist positive constants a, and
u3 siich that either:
(ii) Z / ~ ( Z )5 -a,z2 and f j ( z ) 2 u3 for all x and z ; or
(iii) z/,(z) 2 u,z2 and f ; ( z ) 2 -a3 for all x and z .
(3) It should be noted that the conditions of Theorem 1 rind Theorem 2 allow for
"non-linear" ternis in the equations (1.1) and (2.1). For example, it, is not difficwlt to
check that the function
C22z3e-(z' ' 2')
f ( r ,Y, 2) = -(al + MI)z + + M 2 )y + (a3+ M 3 )xe"' +
(a2
1 +- Y2 '
where u,,u,, us,M I , M , , M , are positive constants and c is any constant such that

satisfies the condition of both Theorem 1 and Theoreni 2.

(4) For the equat,ion
x + u,P + u,x + a3x = 0 ,
the conditions of Theorem 1 reduce to a, < 0. The conditions of Theorern 2 reduce to
ulu3 < 0. These results are consist,ent with regard to the ROIJTH-HURWITZ
criterion for
stability of the above equation.

References
[l] N. N. KRASOVSEII,
Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 101, 17-20 (1955).

IJniversity of Saskatchewan
Department of Mathematics
Saekattoon, Saskatchewan
Canada