Growth of Meromorphic Solutions of Some q-Difference Equations
Abstract
We estimate the growth of the meromorphic solutions of some complex q-difference equations and investigate the convergence exponents of fixed points and zeros of the transcendental solutions of the second order q-difference equation. We also obtain a theorem about the q-difference equation mixing with difference.
1. Introduction and Main Results
In this paper, we mainly use the basic notation of Nevanlinna Theory, such as T(r, f), N(r, f), and m(r, f), and the notation S(r, f) is defined to be any quantity satisfying S(r, f) = o(T(r, f)) as r → ∞ possibly outside a set of r of finite linear measure (see [1–3]). In addition, we use the notation ρ(f) to denote the order of growth of the meromorphic function f(z) and λ(f) to denote the exponent of convergence of the zeros. We also use the notation τ(f) to denote the exponent of convergence of fixed points of f. We give the definition of τ(f) as following.
Definition 1. Let f be a nonconstant meromorphic function. The exponent of convergence of fixed points of f is defined by
Recently, a number of papers focused on complex difference equations, such as [4–6] and on difference analogues of Nevanlinna’s theory, such as [7, 8]. Correspondingly, there are many papers focused on the q-difference (or c-difference) equations, such as [9–14].
Theorem A. All meromorphic solutions of (2) satisfy T(r, f) = O((log r)2).
Theorem B. All transcendental meromorphic solutions of (2) satisfy (log r)2 = O(T(r, f)).
Theorem 2. Suppose that f is a nonconstant meromorphic solution of equation of (3) and the coefficients are small functions of f. Then, d = max {s, t} ≤ n and ρ(f) ≤ log (n/d)/(−log | q|).
First of all, we give some remarks.
Remark 3. If α2(z) and β2(z) are not zero at the same time, by Theorem 2, we derive that the solution of (4) is of order zero.
Remark 4. If α2(z) = β2(z) = β1(z) ≡ 0, by Theorem A, the solutions of (4) is also of order zero.
Remark 5. If α2(z) = β2(z) = 0, β1(z) ≠ 0, by Theorem 2, the order of the solutions is less than log (2)/(−log | q|). Thus, a question arises: does the equation have a solution which is of order nonzero under this situation? This question is still open.
In [6], Chen and Shon proved some theorems about the properties of solutions of the difference Painlevé I and II equations, such as the exponents of convergence of fixed points and the zeros of transcendental solutions. A natural question arises: how about the exponents of convergence of the fixed points and the zeros of transcendental solutions of the q-difference equation (4)? Do the transcendental solutions have infinitely many fixed points and zeros? The following theorem, in which the coefficients are constants, answers the above questions partly.
Theorem 6. Suppose that f is a transcendental solution of the equation
In the rest of the paper, we consider (3) when |q | > 1. In [15], Heittokangas et al. considered the essential growth problem for transcendental meromorphic solutions of complex difference equations, which is to find lower bounds for their characteristic functions. Following this idea, Zheng and Chen [14] obtained the following theorem for q-difference equations.
Theorem C. Suppose that f is a transcendental solution of equation
Regarding Theorem C, they obtained the lower bound of the order of solutions. Then, how about the upper bound of the order of the solutions? Can the conditions of Theorem C become a little more simple? In fact, we have the following theorem.
Theorem 7. Suppose that f is a transcendental solution of (3), where |q | > 1, n < d = max {s, t} and the coefficients are rational functions. Then, log (d/n)/(nlog | q|) ≤ ρ(f) ≤ log (d + n − 1)/(log | q|).
We know that the difference analogues and q-difference analogues of Nevanlinna’s theory have been investigated. Consequently, many results on the complex difference equations and q-difference equations have been obtained respectively. Thus, mixing the difference and q-difference equations together is a natural idea. The following Theorem 8 is just a simple application of the above idea, and further investigation is required.
Theorem 8. Suppose that f is a nonconstant meromorphic solution of the equation
2. Some Lemmas
The following important result by Valiron and Mohon’ko will be used frequently, one can find the proof in Laine’s book [16, page 29].
Lemma 9. Let f be a meromorphic function. Then, for all irreducible rational function in f,
The next lemma on the relationship between T(r, f(qz)) and T(|q | r, f(z)) is due to Bergweiler et al. [10, page 2].
Lemma 10. One case see that
Lemma 11 (see [12].)Let Φ : (1, ∞)→(0, ∞) be a monotone increasing function, and let f be a nonconstant meromorphic function. If for some real constant α ∈ (0,1), there exist real constants K1 > 0 and K2 ≥ 1 such that
Lemma 12 (see [9], Theorem 2.2.)Let f(z) be a nonconstant zero-order meromorphic solution of
Lemma 13 (see [7].)Let f be a meromorphic function of finite order, and let c be a nonzero complex constant. Then one has
Lemma 14 (see [7].)Let f be a meromorphic function of finite order ρ, and let c is a nonzero complex constant. Then, for each ε > 0, one has
It is evident that S(r, f(z + c)) = S(r, f) from Lemma 14.
By (7), (8), and Lemmas 13 and 14, Laine and Yang obtained the following lemma in [13].
Lemma 15. The characteristic function of a difference polynomial P(z, f) in (8) satisfies
3. Proof of Theorems
Proof of Theorem 2. Set Φ(r) = max i,j,k{T(r, αi(z)), T(r, βj(z)), T(r, γk(z))} = S(r, f). From (3) and Lemmas 9 and 10 and noting 0<|q | < 1, we immediately obtain
Proof of Theorem 6. Assume that f(z) is a transcendental solution of (5). Since at least one of α2, β2 is non-zero, by Remark 3, we obtain that ρ(f) = 0.
(I) Set g(z) = f(z) − z. Substituting f(z) = g(z) + z into (5), we obtain that
(II) By (5), we derive that
Proof of Theorem 7. From (3), we have
Proof of Theorem 8. Suppose that the order of f is ρ < ∞. We rewrite (9) as
Acknowledgments
The author wishes to express his thanks to the referee for his/her valuable suggestions and comments. The present investigation was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation under Grant no. 11226088 and the Key Project of Natural Science Foundation of Educational Committee of Henan Province under Grant no. 12A110002 of the People’s Republic of China.