Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

A proof of the Khavinson conjecture

A proof of the Khavinson conjecture PETAR MELENTIJEVIC Abstract. This paper deals with an extremal problem for bounded harmonic n 3 functions in the unit ball B . We solve the Khavinson conjecture in R , an intriguing open question since 1992 posed by D. Khavinson, later considered in a general context by Kresin and Maz’ya. Precisely, we obtain the following inequality: 1 2 (1 + ρ ) |∇u(x)| ≤ − 1 sup |u(y)|, 2 2 ρ 1 − ρ |y|<1 with ρ = |x|, thus sharpening the previously known with |h∇u(x), n i| instead of |∇u(x)|, where n = . |x| 1. Introduction 1.1. Gradient estimates for harmonic and analytic functions. Sharp esti- mates of harmonic functions are important at many places in physics. According to [22] by Protter and Weinberger, these problems arose naturally in the theory of hydrodynamics of ideal or the viscous incompressible fluids, elasticity theory, electrostatics and others. Many of such sharp estimates are known. We recall here some of them. First, in the mentioned book of Protter and Weinberger there is the following estimate for the absolute value of the gradient of a harmonic function: nω n−1 (1) |∇u(x)| ≤ osc (u), (n − 1)ω d(x) n−1 n where u is harmonic function in Ω, ω is the area of the unit sphere S = ∂B , osc(u) is the oscillation of u in Ω, while d(x) denotes the distance of x ∈ Ω from ∂Ω. The inequality (1) is a consequence of the next best-constant inequality 2nω n−1 (2) |∇u(0)| ≤ sup |u(x)|, (n − 1)ω R |x|<R see Khavinson [10], Burgeth [3]. Some inequalities from analytic function theory can also be restated as inequal- ities for harmonic functions. Such are the so-called real-part theorems, with some characteristics of the real-parts of a function as the majorant. It is the case with Hadamard real-part theorem [5] and the whole collection of similar inequalities in [13]. Also, some pointwise sharp estimates for modulus of derivatives of analytic 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 35B30, Secondary 35J05. Key words and phrases. Khavinson problem, Bounded harmonic functions, Gradient of func- tion, Radial derivative, Sharp estimate, Unit ball. The author is partially supported by MPNTR grant 174017, Serbia. arXiv:1903.04564v2 [math.AP] 27 Mar 2019 ´ 2 PETAR MELENTIJEVIC functions can be found in [16]. We will mention that: 4 1 |f (z)| ≤ sup | Re f(w)|, π 1 − |z| |w|<1 for analytic functions can be also seen as 4 1 |∇u(z)| ≤ sup |u(w)| π 1 − |z| |w|<1 for a harmonic function in the unit disk D := {z ∈ C : |z| < 1}. The last classical result is improved by Kalaj and Vuorinen in [9]; their form of this inequality is 4 1 − |u(z)| (3) |∇u(z)| ≤ , π 1 − |z| for real-valued harmonic functions with |u(z)| < 1 for every z ∈ D. The inequality (3) is equivalent to the fact that harmonic functions with the assumed properties are Lipschitz with constant with respect to hyperbolic metric. Mateljevi in [19] showed that this result can be concluded from Ahlfors-Schwarz lemma. Let us mention that similar results for harmonic functions and hyperbolic metric are contained in papers [18],[4] and [20]. Also, some sharp inequalities for harmonic functions are given in [7] and [8]. 1.2. The Khavinson problem. In his paper [10] from 1992, Dmitriy Khavinson found the sharp pointwise constant in the estimate for the absolute value of the 3 3 radial derivative of a bounded harmonic function in the unit ball B := {x ∈ R : |x| < 1}. In a private communication with Vladimir Maz’ya and Gershon Kresin he said that he believed that the stronger inequality holds for the modulus of the gradient of a bounded harmonic function in place of the radial derivative. To give the precise statement of the problem, we introduce some notation. We consider bounded harmonic functions in B —it is common to denote this function ∞ n−1 space by h , see [2],[21]. For every l ∈ S by C(x, l) we denote the best constant ∞ n in the next inequality for the derivative of u ∈ h at x ∈ B in the direction v: (4) |h∇u(x), li| ≤ C(x, l) sup |u(y)|, |y|<1 while for the appropriate constant for the modulus of the gradient we use C(x) : (5) |∇u(x)| ≤ C(x) sup |u(y)|. |y|<1 Since |∇u(x)| = sup |h∇u(x), li|, |l|=1 we clearly have that (6) C(x) = sup C(x, l). |l|=1 We are especially interested for radial direction, which is, for x ∈ B , defined as 1 2 2 n = x, where |x| = x + x + · · · + x is the norm of x. 1 2 n |x| In their paper [11], Kresin and Maz’ya posed the generalized Khavinson problem for bounded harmonic functions in the unit ball B , as: KHAVINSON CONJECTURE 3 Conjecture 1 ([11], [10]). C(x) = C(x, n ). In the same paper, they obtain the sharp inequalities for the radial and tangen- tial derivatives of such functions and solved the analogous problem for harmonic functions with the L integrable boundary values for p = 1 and p = ∞. Also, the same authors in [12] solved the half-space analog of this problem for p = 1, p = 2 and p = ∞. In fact, they precisely proved: n−1 2 Γ( ) 4 (n − 1) 1 (7) |∇U(x)| ≤ √ sup |U(y)|, n−1 π 2 x n Γ( ) n y∈R 2 + for a real bounded harmonic function U in the n-dimensional upper-half space R . 1.3. Partial solutions of generalised Khavinson problem. Marijan Markovi considered the problem in special situation when x ∈ B is near the boundary. He confirmed Khavinson conjecture in this setting and also gave some conclusions and formulas in general. We will appeal to some of his conclusions later. As first, let us say that he showed that it is enough to prove the conjecture in special case x = ρe considering only directions of the form l = l = cos αe + sin αe . He obtained the α 1 2 following formula for the quantity C(z, ρ): n−1 4ω 2 1 P (zt) + P (−zt) n−2 ρ ρ √ p dt, (8) C(z, ρ) = n−1 2 2 4−n ω (1 − ρ)(1 + ρ) n 1 + z (1 − t ) where 2 2 z+ z +1−α 1−α n − β + nzw − β w ρ ρ n−2 P (z) = w dw n n +1 −1 2 2 2 2 2 (1 + w ) (1 + κ w ) n−(n−2)ρ 1−ρ n−2 with α = ρ, β = and κ = . Here, z = tg α and ω is the area ρ ρ ρ n n 2 1+ρ of ∂B . In this circumference, generalized Khavinson conjecture is equivalent with the fact that sup C(z, ρ) = C(0, ρ). z>0 Using the formula (8), David Kalaj in [6] prove the conjecture in the unit ball in R . But, as it can be seen from the definition of P , this formula for C(z, ρ) suitable for Markovi’s considerations, is not the appropriate one for treating the case when n is odd. This is the main reason why this problem is considered to be hard especially for n ∈ 2N + 1. 1.4. Organisation of the paper and results. We prove a representation formula which we will prove in the second section: Theorem 1. For every 0 ≤ ρ < 1 the following integral representation for C(ρe , l) holds: n Γ( ) (9) C(ρe , l) = 1 n−1 1 − ρ Γ( )Γ( ) 2 2 Z n−3 2 2 2 (1 − x ) 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n−2 n−2 n n−1 × | ρ cos α−x| F ( , ; ; )dx. 2 1 2 2 n −1 2 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 ´ 4 PETAR MELENTIJEVIC This formula enabled us to reduce Khavinson problem on finding the maximum of some function C(α). In fact, since it seems to be very hard to do that directly, ˜ ˜ ˜ we find the majorant C(α) which satisfies C(α) ≤ C(α) and C(0) = C(0). In order to do this more effectively, we prove some unexpected integral identities in the third section, thus obtaining the appropriate majorant in the fourth section. These identities include hypergeometric functions and seems to have independent interest. For general information on these functions, see [1]. The last section is devoted to the detailed analysis of C(α), and the final proof of our main theorem(Conjecture 1.1 in R ): Theorem 2. If u is a bounded harmonic function in the unit ball B , then we have the following sharp inequality: (1 + ρ ) (10) |∇u(x)| ≤ − 1 sup |u(y)|, 2 2 ρ 1 − ρ |y|<1 with ρ = |x|. 2. A general representation formula for the sharp constant In [17] Markovi gives some general observations about the problem in B . We start from his conclusion that it is enough to prove the conjecture for x ∈ B of the form x = ρe and directions given by l = l = e cos α + e sin α. 1 α 1 2 We start from the formula for the optimal constant in the inequality (11) |h∇u(ρe ), li| 6 C(ρe , l) sup |u(y)|, 1 1 |y|<1 for x = ρe and the direction l ∈ ∂B given by: (12) C(ρe , l) = |h∇P (x, ζ), li|dσ(ζ), ∂B 1−|x| where P (x, ζ) = is the Poisson kernel for the unit ball B . |x−ζ| Mobius transform 2 2 (1 − |x| )(η − x) − |η − x| x ζ = −T (η) = [η, x] where ∗ ∗ [x, y] = |y||y − x|, y = , |y| together with some calculations (see [17] for details) gives us: 2−n (13) C(ρe , l) = |hη − α e , li||η − ρe | dσ(η) 1 ρ 1 1 1 − ρ ∂B where n − 2 α = ρ, l = e cos α + e sin α, α ∈ [0, ]. ρ 1 2 So, the problem is, in fact, two-dimensional. We see this, since for fixed l ∈ ∂B there exists an orthogonal matrix A such that Al = e , Ae = cos αe + sin αe , α ∈ [0, ]. 1 1 1 2 2 KHAVINSON CONJECTURE 5 Then we have: 1 − ρ 2−n C(ρe , l) = |hAη − α Ae , Ali||Aη − ρAe | dσ(η) 1 ρ 1 1 n n ∂B 2−n = |hξ − α Ae , Ali||ξ − ρAe | dσ(ξ) ρ 1 1 ∂B 2−n = |hξ − α Ae , e i||ξ − ρAe | dσ(ξ) ρ 1 1 1 ∂B n−2 2−n = |ξ − ρ cos α||ξ − ρ(cos αe + sin αe )| dσ(ξ). 1 1 1 ∂B Since 2−n |ξ − ρ(cos αe + sin αe )| 1 2 1− = hξ − ρ cos αe − ρ sin αe , ξ − ρ cos αe − ρ sin αe i 1 2 1 2 2 1− = (1 − 2ρξ cos α − 2ρξ sin α + ρ ) , 1 2 we have: 1 − ρ (14) C(ρe , l) n−2 2 1− = |ξ − ρ cos α||1 − 2ρξ cos α − 2ρξ sin α + ρ | dσ(ξ). 1 1 2 ∂B Now, the Khavinson conjecture is equivalent with the fact that, for fixed ρ ∈ [0, 1) the maximum of the last integral as a function on α is attained at α = 0. To expand the integral in (14), let us note that the integrand depends only on ξ and ξ . To do the expansion, we prove the following lemma which gives us the 1 2 formula for integrals over the sphere ∂B of functions which depends on k variables. It is a real counterpart of the Lemma from Rudin’s book [23]. Lemma 1. Let f be a continuous function on the closed ball B which depends on first k variables. If P is projection on R , we have: Z Z Γ( ) n−k−2 (15) (f ◦ P )dσ = (1 − |x| ) f(x)dv (x), k n−k n k Γ( + 1)Γ( ) ∂B B 2 2 where σ is normalized area measure and v normalised Lebesgue volume measure. k k Proof. Let us take f ∈ C(B ), supp f ⊂ r B , for some r < 1. Then, we define: 0 0 Z Z Z n−1 I(r) = (f ◦ P )dv = n t (f ◦ P )(tζ)dσ(ζ) dt, rB 0 S from which, after differentiating, we get: I (1) = n (f ◦ P )(ζ)dσ(ζ). On the other side, integrating over the n − k free variables gives us: n−k 2 2 I(r) = c (r − |x| ) f(x)dv (x), n,k k B ´ 6 PETAR MELENTIJEVIC so differentiation implies: n−k−2 (n − k)c n,k ′ 2 2 I (r) = · 2r (r − |x| ) f(x)dv (x) 2 k and hence: n−k−2 ′ 2 I (1) = ec (1 − |x| ) f(x)dv (x). n,k k To find the exact value of the constant that in the statement of our Lemma, let us set f(x) = 1: Z Z n−k−2 1 = (f ◦ P )dσ = C (1 − |x| ) dv (x) n,k k S B Z Z n−k−2 k−1 2 = kC t (1 − |tζ| ) dσ(ζ) dt n,k 0 S n−k −1 k−1 2 = kC t (1 − t ) dt n,k n−k kC k n,k 2 −1 2 −1 2 2 2 = (t ) (1 − t ) d(t ) k n−k Γ( )Γ( ) kC kC n,k n,k k n−k 2 2 = B( , ) = , 2 2 2 2 Γ( ) therefore: Γ( ) C = . n,k k n−k Γ( + 1)Γ( ) 2 2 Applying our Lemma 1, we get: 1 − ρ C(ρe , l) = 2 2 −2 Γ( ) 2 (1 − x − y ) 2 n−2 = | ρ cos α − x| dxdy n n −1 πΓ( − 1)Γ(2) 2 (1 − 2ρx cos α − 2ρy sin α + ρ ) Z Z 2 n 1 1−x 2 2 −2 n − 2 (1 − x − y ) n−2 = | ρ cos α − x| dy dx. n √ −1 2π 2 2 (1 − 2ρx cos α − 2ρy sin α + ρ ) −1 − 1−x Calculation of the inner integral will be done in the next lemma. We will invoke it at the appropriate places in the proof. Lemma 2. For ρ ∈ [0, 1] and α ∈ [0, ] there holds the following identity: 2 n 1−x 2 2 −2 (1 − x − y ) (16) dy 2 −1 2 (1 − 2ρx cos α − 2ρy sin α + ρ ) − 1−x n−3 2 2 2 2 1 n (1 − x ) 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n−2 n n−1 = B , − 1 F ( , ; ; ) n 2 1 2 2 −1 2 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) 2 2 (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) KHAVINSON CONJECTURE 7 1 − x t: Proof. We change variable by y = 2 n 1−x 2 2 −2 (1 − x − y ) dy 2 −1 2 (1 − 2ρx cos α − 2ρy sin α + ρ ) − 1−x n n 1 2 −2 2 −2 2 2 (1 − x ) (1 − t ) 1 − x = √ dt −1 2 2 (1 − 2ρx cos α − 2ρ 1 − x t sin α + ρ ) −1 2 −2 n−3 n (1 − t ) 2 2 1− 2 2 = (1 − x ) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) dt. −1 2 2 2ρt 1−x sin α −1 1 − 1+ρ −2ρx cos α Using power series expansion +∞ X 2 k + α − 1 n 2ρt 1 − x sin α −α k (1 − z) = z , for α = − 1 and z = , k 2 1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α k=0 we get: 1 2 −2 (1 − t ) dt −2 2 2 2ρt 1−x sin α −1 1 − 1+ρ −2ρx cos α n 1 X 2 k + − 1 − 1 2ρ 1 − x sin α n 2 2 −2 k = (1 − t ) t dt k 1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α −1 k=0 2k 1 n k 2k 2 k 2k + − 2 4 ρ (1 − x ) sin α n 2k 2 −2 = 2 t (1 − t ) dt. 2 2k 2k (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) k=0 We easily find that Z Z 1 1 n 1 n 2k 2 −2 k− −2 2 2 2 2 t (1 − t ) dt = u (1 − u) du 0 0 1 n Γ(k + )Γ( − 1) 1 n 2 2 = B k + , − 1 = . n−1 2 2 Γ(k + ) ( −1) 2k+ −2 2k Since = , by duplication formula for Gamma function, we have 2k (2k)! 1 n n 1 n Γ(k + )Γ( − 1) ( − 1) Γ(k + )Γ( − 1) 2k + − 2 2k 2 2 2 2 2 n−1 n−1 n−1 2k Γ(k + ) Γ(2k + 1)Γ( ) 2 2 2 n−2 n 4 4 1 n k k = B( , − 1) . 2 2 n−1 k! 2 k Using now Lemma 2 i.e. (16), we get: 1 − ρ n − 2 1 n C(ρe , l) = B , − 1 × n 2π 2 2 Z n−3 2 2 2 (1 − x ) 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n−2 n−2 n n−1 × | ρ cos α−x| F ( , ; ; )dx, 2 1 2 2 n −1 2 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 i.e. our Theorem 1. ´ 8 PETAR MELENTIJEVIC 3. Three important integral identities Before we can come to the main estimate, we need three integral identities. We derive the first two of them from Lemma 1 using it for some special choices of the function f. Identities are given by the next lemmata. Lemma 3. We have the following equality for all ρ ∈ [0, 1] and α ∈ [0, ] : Z n−3 2 2 2 2 (1 − x ) 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n−2 n n−1 (17) F , ; ; dx 2 1 2 2 −1 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 n−3 2 2 1− 2 2 = (1 − x ) (1 − 2ρx + ρ ) dx. −1 2 1− Proof. Using Lemma 1 for f(x, y) = (1 − 2ρx cos α − 2ρy sin α + ρ ) , where (x, y) ∈ B , we get 2 1− (1 − 2ρξ cos α − 2ρξ sin α + ρ ) dσ(ξ) 1 2 ∂B n − 2 n n 2 2 −2 2 1− 2 2 = (1 − x − y ) (1 − 2ρx cos α − 2ρy sin α + ρ ) dxdy 2π Z Z 1 1−x n − 2 n n 2 2 −2 2 1− 2 2 = (1 − x − y ) (1 − 2ρx cos α − 2ρy sin α + ρ ) dy dx 2π 2 −1 − 1−x Z n−3 1 2 2 2 2 2 n − 2 1 n (1 − x ) 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n−2 n n−1 = B , − 1 F , ; ; dx, n 2 1 2 2 −1 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) 2π 2 2 (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 by Lemma 2. On the other hand, introducing the change of variables, ζ = ξ cos α + ξ sin α, 1 1 2 ζ = ξ sin α − ξ cos α and ξ = ζ for 3 ≤ k ≤ n, we get: 2 1 2 k k Z Z n n 2 1− 2 1− 2 2 (1 − 2ρξ cos α − 2ρξ sin α + ρ ) dσ(ξ) = (1 − 2ρζ + ρ ) dσ(ζ) 1 2 1 n n ∂B ∂B n 1 Γ( ) n−3 2 2 1− 2 2 = (1 − x ) (1 − 2ρx + ρ ) dx. 3 n−1 2Γ( )Γ( ) −1 2 2 2 1− Comparing these two expressions for (1− 2ρξ cos α− 2ρξ sin α + ρ ) dσ(ξ) n 1 2 ∂B we conclude the proof of (17). One more necessary identity is given by the following lemma. Lemma 4. There holds the following identity for all ρ ∈ [0, 1] and α ∈ [0, ] : Z n−3 2 2 2 2 2 2 x (1 − x ) 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n−2 n n−1 (18) F , ; ; dx n 2 1 2 2 −1 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 2 1 sin α n−1 n 2 2 1− 2 2 = (1 − x ) (1 − 2ρx + ρ ) dx n − 1 −1 n−3 2 2 2 2 1− 2 2 + cos α x (1 − x ) (1 − 2ρx + ρ ) dx. −1 KHAVINSON CONJECTURE 9 Proof. Similarly as in Lemma 3, using Lemma 1 and Lemma 2 for function f(x, y) = 2 2 1− , we get x (1 − 2ρx cos α − 2ρy sin α + ρ ) 2 2 1− ξ (1 − 2ρξ cos α − 2ρξ sin α + ρ ) dσ(ξ) 1 2 ∂B Z n−3 2 2 2 2 2 2 n − 2 1 n x (1 − x ) 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n−2 n n−1 = B , −1 F , ; ; dx. n 2 1 2 2 −1 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) 2π 2 2 2 (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 On the other hand, introducing the change of variables, ζ = ξ cos α + ξ sin α, 1 1 2 ζ = ξ sin α − ξ cos α and ζ = ξ for 3 ≤ k ≤ n, we get: 2 1 2 k k 2 2 1− ξ (1 − 2ρξ cos α − 2ρξ sin α + ρ ) dσ(ξ) 1 2 ∂B 2 2 1− = (ζ cos α + ζ sin α) (1 − 2ρζ + ρ ) dσ(ζ) 1 2 1 ∂B Z Z n n 2 2 2 1− 2 2 2 1− 2 2 = cos α ζ (1−2ρζ +ρ ) dσ(ζ)+sin α ζ (1−2ρζ +ρ ) dσ(ζ). 1 1 1 2 n n ∂B ∂B 2 1− The integral ζ ζ (1 − 2ρζ + ρ ) dσ(ζ) is equal to zero, since the function n 1 2 1 ∂B under the integral sign is odd on ζ . These integrals we expand using Lemma 1 thus obtaining: 2 2 1− ζ (1 − 2ρζ + ρ ) dσ(ζ) ∂B Γ( ) n−3 2 2 2 1− 2 2 = (1 − x ) x (1 − 2ρx + ρ ) dx, 3 n−1 2Γ( )Γ( ) −1 2 2 2 2 1− ζ (1 − 2ρζ + ρ ) dσ(ζ) ∂B Γ( ) n−4 n 2 2 2 2 2 1− 2 2 = y (1 − x − y ) (1 − 2ρx + ρ ) dxdy πΓ( − 1) 2 Second integral we calculate integrating first over y-variable: n−4 n 2 2 2 2 1− 2 2 y (1−x − y ) (1 − 2ρx + ρ ) dxdy Z Z 2 1 1−x n−4 2 1− 2 2 2 2 2 = (1 − 2ρx + ρ ) y (1 − x − y ) dy dx −1 − 1−x 3 n n−1 n 2 2 1− 2 2 = B , − 1 (1 − x ) (1 − 2ρx + ρ ) dx. 2 2 −1 The procedure is the same as in the some of previous calculations. Finally, equal- izing two expressions for the same integral we get the identity (18). The last lemma, we mention here has already been proved by Markovi and its half-space counterpart by Maz’ya and Kresin, but we will also give an easy and quick proof. Lemma 5. For all ρ ∈ [0, 1) and α ∈ [0, ], we have the next identity: n−3 1 n−2 2 ρ cos α − x 1 − x 2 2 2 n 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n−2 n n−1 (19) F , ; ; dx = 0. 2 1 2 2 −1 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 ´ 10 PETAR MELENTIJEVIC Proof. Denote that the integrand is similar to the representation of C(ρe , v) with the one, but crucial difference—we do not have absolute brackets around the n−2 ρ cos α − x. So, since all transformations that we apply to obtain our integral expression for C(ρe , v) save equality without these brackets, we have that n−3 n−2 1 2 2 ρ cos α − x 1 − x 2 2 2 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n n−2 n n−1 F , ; ; dx n 2 1 2 2 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) 2 −1 (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 is, in fact, by (12), equal to h∇P (z, ζ)f(ζ), (1, 1, . . . , 1)i, on ∂B for function f(ζ) = n n 1 on ∂B and z ∈ B . But this is equal to is, in fact, equal to h∇f(z), (1, 1, . . . , 1)i, on B and since f(z) = 1, by the uniqueness of harmonic extension, the proof follows. 4. Construction of the majorant As we have said in the introduction, the crux of the proof is construction of the majorant with the maximum in α = 0 and the same value in α = 0 as C(ρe , l). Starting from the general representation formula, we split the hypergeometric function into two parts: n−3 1 n−2 2 2 2 2 2 | ρ cos α − x|(1 − x ) 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n n−2 n n−1 F , ; ; dx 2 1 2 2 −1 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 n−3 1 n−2 2 | ρ cos α − x|(1 − x ) = dx −1 (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 Z n−3 n−2 1 2 | ρ cos α − x|(1 − x ) 2 2 2 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n n−2 n n−1 + F , ; ; − 1 dx. n 2 1 2 2 −1 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 Now, lemmas from the previous section suggest that we can evaluate the last n−2 n−2 integral with 1 or ρ cos α − x in place of | ρ cos α − x|, so we estimate it n n by Cauchy-Schwarz inequality: Z n−3 1 n−2 | ρ cos α − x|(1 − x ) 2 2 2 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n n−2 n n−1 F , ; ; − 1 dx n 2 1 2 2 −1 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 Z n−3 2 2 2 2 (1 − x ) 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n−2 n n−1 ≤ F , ; ; − 1 dx × 2 1 2 2 −1 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 n−3 Z 2 1 n−2 2 2 2 2 ρ cos α − x (1 − x ) 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n n−2 n n−1 × F , ; ; −1 dx . n 2 1 2 2 2 −1 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 Let us denote: Z n−3 n−2 1 2 | ρ cos α − x|(1 − x ) (20) S(α) = dx, −1 (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 (21) Z n−3 2 2 2 (1 − x ) 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n−2 n n−1 S (α) = F , ; ; − 1 dx 1 2 1 2 2 −1 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 KHAVINSON CONJECTURE 11 and (22) Z 2 n−3 1 n−2 2 ρ cos α − x (1 − x ) 2 2 2 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n n−2 n n−1 S (α) = F , ; ; −1 dx. 2 n 2 1 2 2 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) 2 −1 (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 n n−2 1 n Majorant for C(ρe , l ) which we have searched for is C = B , −1 S+ 1 α 2 1−ρ 2π 2 2 S S . Denote that C(0) = C(0), as it is needed. 1 2 5. Proof of the Theorem 2 In this section we will find the explicit formulas for the functions S(α), S (α) and S (α) when n = 3. We see that: 2 2 − x (1 − 2ρx + ρ ) dx −1 4 3 2 2 = − 1 + ρ − 2ρx(2ρ + 2ρ x + ρ (3x + 4) + 2 + 2ρx) 3 −1 15ρ 4 3 2 = 1 + ρ + 2ρ(2ρ − 2ρ + 7ρ + 2 − 2ρ) 15ρ 4 3 2 − 1 + ρ − 2ρ(2ρ + 2ρ + 7ρ + 2 + 2ρ) 5 3 4ρ + 10ρ 4 2 = = ρ + . 15ρ 15 3 and 1 − x p dx −1 1 + ρ − 2ρx 4 3 2 2 = 1 + ρ − 2ρx(2ρ + 2ρ x + ρ (3x − 11) + 2ρx + 2) 3 −1 15ρ 4 4 2 = − ρ 3 15 thus, by Lemma 4 obtaining that 1 2 2 2 2 4ρ sin α(1−x ) 1 3 p F , , 1; dx 2 1 2 2 4 4 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) 1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α −1 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ( ρ + ) cos α + ( − ρ ) sin α 15 3 3 15 Also, from Lemma 3, we get: 2 2 2 4ρ (1−x ) sin α Z 1 3 Z 1 1 F ( , , 1; ) 2 1 2 2 1 4 4 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) 2 − p dx = (1 − 2ρx + ρ ) dx −1 1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α −1 1 (1 + ρ) − (1 − ρ) = − 1 + ρ − 2ρx = = 2 ρ ρ −1 ´ 12 PETAR MELENTIJEVIC We need also the following two integrals: 1 2 ( ρ cos α − x) dx 1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α −1 1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α 4 2 2 2 = −5ρ cos(4α) − 72ρ x cos α 3 3 360ρ cos α 2 2 2 2 4 2 + 8ρx cos α(5ρ cos(2α) − ρ − 6) + 20ρ (2 + ρ ) cos(2α) − 23ρ − 56ρ − 48 −1 4 4 2 2 2 2 2 = (−40ρ cos α + 8ρ (10ρ + 1) cos α − 48(1 + ρ ) 3 3 360ρ cos α p p 2 2 × 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α − 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α 3 3 3 + 80ρ cos α − 48ρ cos α − 48ρ cos α 3 3 360ρ cos α p p 2 2 × 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α + 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α and dx 1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α p = − ρ cos α −1 1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α −1 p p 2 2 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α − 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α = . ρ cos α Now, appealing to Lemmas 3,4 and 5, we find S (α) and S (α) : 1 2 p p 2 2 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α − 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α S (α) = 2 − , ρ cos α 2 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 S (α) = ( + ρ ) cos α + ( − ρ ) sin α − ρ cos α · 2 3 15 3 15 9 2 2 2 ρ cos α 10ρ + 1 2(1 + ρ ) + − + 3 3 9 45ρ cos α 15ρ cos α p p 2 2 1 + ρ 1 + ρ × − 2ρ cos α − + 2ρ cos α p p 2(1 + ρ ) 2 2 2 + − 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α + 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α 2 2 15ρ cos α 9 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ( + ρ ) cos α + ( − ρ ) sin α 3 45 3 15 2 2 2 ρ cos α 10ρ + 1 2(1 + ρ ) + − + 3 3 9 45ρ cos α 15ρ cos α p p 2 2 × 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α − 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α p p 2(1 + ρ ) 2 2 2 + − 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α + 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α 2 2 15ρ cos α 9 KHAVINSON CONJECTURE 13 Also, using ρ cos α − x p dx 1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α 1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α 2 2 2 = (1 + ρ − ρ cos α + ρx cos α) 2 2 3ρ cos α we find 1 1 | ρ cos α − x| S(α) = p dx 1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α −1 1 2 3 2 2 2 = 2(1 + ρ − ρ cos α) 2 2 3ρ cos α 3 2 2 2 − (1 + ρ − ρ cos α + ρ cos α) 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α 2 2 2 − (1 + ρ − ρ cos α − ρ cos α) 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α To find a majorant, with which we can handle more effectively, we proceed in the √ √ following manner. We estimate S S from the above with S S ≤ tS + S , 1 2 1 2 1 2 4t by the arithmetic-geometric mean inequality with t = and therefore get the 1 3 majorant S + S + S . Denote that this majorant has the same value for α = 0 1 2 3 4 as C(ρe , l), with l = l . 2 1 α 2(1−ρ ) We easily calculate 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2(1 + ρ − ρ cos α) 1 3 7 ρ 2ρ cos α (23) S + S + S = + − + 1 2 2 2 3 4 3ρ cos α 6 10 15 p p 1 7(1 + ρ ) 2 2 + − 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α + 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α 2 2 6 30ρ cos α 2 2 2 p p ρ cos α 10ρ + 1 (1 + ρ ) 2 2 + − + 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α− 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α . 3 3 12 60ρ cosα 10ρ cos α π π (This formula we use for α < , while for α = we can calculate this majorant 2 2 from the integral expressions. Also, we expect certain cancellations to achieve the function bounded for α = .) We can expand square roots using binomial series as: p p 2 2 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α + 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α +∞ +∞ k k 1 1 p X X 2ρ 2ρ k k k 2 2 = 1 + ρ (−1) cos α + cos α 2 2 k 1 + ρ k 1 + ρ k=0 k=0 +∞ 2k p X 2ρ 2k 2 2 = 2 1 + ρ cos α. 2k 1 + ρ k=0 Similarly: p p 2 2 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α − 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α +∞ 2k+1 p X 2ρ 2k+1 2 2 = −2 1 + ρ cos α 2k + 1 1 + ρ k=0 ´ 14 PETAR MELENTIJEVIC and 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2(1 + ρ − ρ cos α) 2(1 + ρ ) 2ρ cos α = 1 − 2 2 2 2 2 3ρ cos α 3ρ cos α 3(1 + ρ ) +∞ k 2 3 2 2(1 + ρ ) 2ρ k 2k = (−1) cos α 2 2 2 3ρ cos α k 3(1 + ρ ) k=0 3 +∞ 2 2 2 X 2 2(1 + ρ ) 2 1 + ρ 8ρ 2ρ k 2k+2 = − + p (−1) cos α. 2 2 2 3ρ cos α 3 k + 2 3(1 + ρ ) 27 1 + ρ k=0 These expansions give us: +∞ 1 3 7 ρ 1 2k (24) S + S + S = − − p + a (ρ) cos α, 1 2 k 3 4 6 10 6 1 + ρ k=1 where p p k 2k 3 2 1 2 2 4 1 + ρ 2ρ 1 + ρ 2ρ 2 k+1 2 a (ρ) = (−1) + 2 2 9 k + 1 3(1 + ρ ) 3 2k 1 + ρ 2k 2k 1 1 28 2ρ 10ρ + 1 2ρ 2 2 − p + p 2 2 2 2 2k + 2 1 + ρ 2k + 1 1 + ρ 15 1 + ρ 15 1 + ρ 2k−1 2k 1 1 ρ 1 + ρ 2ρ 8 2ρ 2 2 − − p , 2 2 6 2k − 1 1 + ρ 2k + 3 1 + ρ 5 1 + ρ for k ≥ 1. Specially, we have 2 1 1 a (ρ) = ρ − p − . 2 2 15 2 18 1 + ρ 30(1 + ρ ) Formulas 1 1 3 (4k − 3)!! (4k − 1)!! 3(2k − 3)!! k+1 2 2 2 = − , = , (−1) = , 2k 2k+1 k+1 2k 2 (2k)! 2k + 1 2 (2k + 1)! k + 1 2 (k + 1)! for k ≥ 2, gives us 2k 2 2 2 1 + ρ (2k − 3)!! ρ (4k − 5)!! 2ρ a (ρ) = + p × 2 2 2k 2 3(k + 1)! 3(1 + ρ ) 1 + ρ 2 (2k + 3)! 1 + ρ 1 + ρ 7 × − (4k − 3)(2k + 1)(2k + 2)(2k + 3) + (2k + 3)(4k − 3)(4k − 1)(4k + 1) 3 15 1 + ρ 3 + (2k + 2)(2k + 3)(4k − 3)(4k − 1) − (4k − 3)(4k − 1)(2k + 2)(2k + 3) 3 10 2 2 (1 + ρ ) 1 − (2k)(2k + 1)(2k + 2)(2k + 3) − (4k − 3)(4k − 1)(4k + 1)(4k + 3) , 6 5 KHAVINSON CONJECTURE 15 or, after some routine calculations: 2 1 + ρ (2k − 3)!! ρ a (ρ) = 3(k + 1)! 3(1 + ρ ) 2k (4k − 5)!! ρ 8 22 2 2 4 3 2 + − (1 + ρ ) k + 8k + k + 2k 1 + ρ 3 3 (2k + 3)! 1 + ρ 32 68 32 70 2 4 3 2 4 3 2 + 1 + ρ k + 8k − k − 8k + 12 − k + 16k − k + 17k − 3 . 3 3 3 3 To complete the proof of our main theorem, we need the following two lemmas. Lemma 6. Coefficients a (ρ) are negative for all k ≥ 2 and 0 < ρ < 1. Proof. We easily see that 1 (4k − 5)!! 3 −2k k 2 k− 2 2 2 a ρ 3 (1+ρ ) = −P (k)(1+ρ ) +Q(k)(1+ρ )+R(k) 2 k+1 (2k + 3)! (1 + ρ ) 2 (2k − 3)!! + , 3 (k + 1)! 8 4 3 22 2 32 4 3 68 2 where P (k) = k + 8k + k + 2k, Q(k) = k + 8k − k − 8k + 12 and 3 3 3 3 32 4 3 70 2 R(k) = − k + 16k − k + 17k − 3. 3 3 Therefore, the sign of the a is determined by the sign of the expression on the right hand side of the previous equation. Let us consider the function: 3 (4k − 5)!! 2 (2k − 3)!! −k+1 −k −k−1 Φ(y) = − P (k)y + Q(k)y + R(k)y + . (2k + 3)! 3 (k + 1)! First, we will prove that it is monotone increasing on y. Namely, its first derivative is equal to: 3 (4k − 5)!! ′ −k−2 2 Φ (y) = y (k − 1)P (k)y − kQ(k)y − (k + 1)R(k) , (2k + 3)! and the quadratic polynomial (k − 1)P (k)y − kQ(k)y − (k + 1)R(k) is positive for 2 2 2 all k ≥ 2 and 1 ≤ y ≤ 2, since its discriminant D = k Q (k)+ 4(k − 1)P (k)R(k) = 3200 5824 3488 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 − k − 544k + k + 952k − k − 432k + 96k + 24k is negative for 9 9 9 k ≥ 2. Hence, Φ(y) ≤ Φ(2), which gives us: (4k − 5)!! 3 2 (2k − 3)!! 2 2 2 [−P (k)(1 + ρ ) + Q(k)(1 + ρ ) + R(k)] + 2 k+1 (2k + 3)! (1 + ρ ) 3 (k + 1)! (4k − 5)!! 3 2 (2k − 3)!! ≤ [−4P (k) + 2Q(k) + R(k)] + , 2(2k + 3)! 2 3 (k + 1)! and, taking into account that −4P (k) + 2Q(k) + R(k) = −98k − 7k + 21, to finish the proof of the lemma, we must prove k+1 (4k − 5)!!(k + 1)! 3 2 l = > = d . k k (2k − 3)!!(2k + 3)! 2 98k + 7k − 21 ´ 16 PETAR MELENTIJEVIC 3(4k−1)(4k−3)(k+2) 3(4k−1)(4k−3)(k+2) But, since l = l and > 1 for all k ≥ 2, k+1 k 2(2k+5)(2k+4)(2k−1) 2(2k+5)(2k+4)(2k−1) we see that l is increasing, while d is decreasing. It is easy to check that l > d k k 2 2 and therefore the proof of this lemma is complete. Let us consider, like in (24), the function +∞ 7 ρ 1 (25) T (t) = − − p + a (ρ)t . 6 10 6 1 + ρ k=1 The next lemma considers behavior od this function near the point t = 1. Lemma 7. T (1) ≥ 0. 1 3 2 Proof. Let us first denote that, in fact, (S + S + S )(α) = T (t), for t = cos α. 1 2 3 4 Hence, we have: 1 3 ′ (S + S + S ) (α) 1 2 ′ 3 4 T (1) = lim . α→0+ −2 sin α cos α Differentiating (23), we get: 2 2 2 4 sin α 1 + ρ − ρ cos α 1 3 3 1 ′ 2 2 2 (S + S + S ) (α) = 1 + ρ + ρ cos α 1 2 2 3 3 4 3ρ cos α 3 1 7(1 + ρ ) −ρ sin α ρ sin α − ρ cos α sin α+ − p + p 2 2 2 2 15 6 30ρ cos α 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α p p 7(1 + ρ ) sin α 2 2 − 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α + 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α 2 3 15ρ cos α 2 2 2 ρ cos α 10ρ + 1 (1 + ρ ) ρ sin α ρ sin α p p + − + + 3 3 2 2 12 60ρ cos α 10ρ cos α 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α 2 2 2 ρ sin α (10ρ + 1) sin α 3(1 + ρ ) sin α + − − + × 2 3 4 12 60ρ cos α 10ρ cos α p p 2 2 × 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α − 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α Therefore: 1 3 (S + S + S ) (α) 1 4 1 1 2 3 4 2 4 2 lim = −40(1+ ρ ) 1 + ρ +11ρ +60ρ +40 ≥ 0, α→0+ −2 sin α cos α 30ρ 3 3 since this is equivalent with: 4 1 10040 640 4 2 2 2 2 2 8 6 4 (11ρ + 60ρ + 40) − 1600(1 + ρ ) (1 + ρ ) = 121ρ + ρ + ρ ≥ 0. 3 3 27 3 Now the lemma follows. KHAVINSON CONJECTURE 17 We can now finish the proof of our main theorem. In fact, we have to conclude 1 3 S + S ) has its maximum in α = 0, or, what is the same, T (t), defined that (S + 1 2 3 4 by (25), attains its maximum in t = 1. Differentiating T (t) two times, we get +∞ ′′ k−2 ′′ ′ T (t) = k(k − 1)a t , and Lemma 6 implies that T (t) ≤ 0. Hence, T (t) k=2 ′ ′ ′ is decreasing and T (t) ≥ T (1), while Lemma 7 gives us T (1) ≥ 0. Therefore, − − T (t) ≥ 0, T increases and has the maximum in t = 1; consequently C(ρe , l ) ≤ 1 α C(ρe , e ). 1 1 Acknowledgements. The author wishes to express his gratitude to Miroslav Pavlovi´c, Milan Lazarevi´c and Nikola Milinkovi´c for their valuable suggestions and comments that have improved the quality of the paper. The author is partially supported by MPNTR grant, no. 174017, Serbia. References [1] G. Andrews, R. Askey and R. Roy Special Functions Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, 71, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999. [2] S. Axler, P. Bourdon and W. Ramey Harmonic Function Theory Springer, New York, 2001. [3] B. Burgeth A Schwarz Lemma for harmonic and hyperbolic-harmonic functions in higher dimensions Manuscripta Math. 77(1992), 283-296. [4] F. Colonna The Bloch constant of bounded harmonic mappings Indiana University Math. J., 38(1989), 829-840. G(X) [5] J. Hadamard Sur les fonctions entieres de la forme e C. R. Acad. Sci. 114(1892), 1053- [6] D. Kalaj A proof of Khavinson conjecture in R Bull. London Math. Soc., 49(4)(2017), 561- [7] D. Kalaj and M. Markovi Optimal estimates for harmonic functions in the unit ball Positivity 16(2012), 771-782. [8] D. Kalaj and M. Markovi. Optimal Estimates for the Gradient of Harmonic Functions in the Unit Disk Complex Analysis and Operator Theory, 7(2013), 1167-1183. [9] D. Kalaj and M. Vuorinen On harmonic functions and the Schwarz lemma Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 140(2012), 161-165. [10] D. Khavinson An extremal problem for harmonic functions in the ball Canadian Math. Bul- letin, 35(1992), 218-220. [11] G. Kresin and V. Maz’ya Sharp pointwise estimates for directional derivatives of harmonic function in a multidimensional ball J. Math. Sci., 169(2010), 167-187. [12] G. Kresin and V. Maz’ya Optimal estimates for the gradient of harmonic functions in the multidimensional half-space Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. 28(2010), 425-440. [13] G. Kresin and V. Maz’ya Sharp Real-Part Theorems. A Unified Approach. Lect. Notes in Math., 1903, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 2007. [14] G. Kresin and V. Maz’ya Sharp real part theorems in the upper-half plane ans similar esti- mates for harmonic functions J. Math. Sci., 179(2011), 144-163. [15] G. Kresin and V. Maz’ya Maximum Principles and Sharp Constants for Solutions of Elliptic and Parabolic Systems Mathematical Surveys and Monographs 183, American Mathematical Society, 2012. [16] A. J. Macintyre and W. W. Rogosinski Extremum problems in the theory of analytic functions Acta Mathematica, 82 (1950), 275-325. [17] M. Markovi. Solution to the Khavinson problem near the boundary of the unit ball Construc- tive Approximation, 45(2)(2017), 243-271. [18] M. Markovi On harmonic functions and the hyperbolic metric Indag. Math. 26(2015), 19-23. [19] M. Mateljevi Schwarz lemma and Kobayashi Metrics for harmonic and holomorphic functions J. Math. Anal. Appl. 464(1)(2018), 78-100. [20] P. Melentijevi Invariant gradient in refinements of Schwarz and Harnack inequalities Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Math. 43(2018), 391-399. [21] M. Pavlovi Function Classes on the Unit Disc: An Introduction De Gruyter Studies in Math- ematics 2013. ´ 18 PETAR MELENTIJEVIC [22] M. H. Protter and H. F. Weinberger Maximum Principles in Differential Equations Prentice Hall, Inc, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey (1967); Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York (1984). [23] W. Rudin Function Theory in the Unit Ball of C Classics in Mathematics Springer, 1980. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Mathematics arXiv (Cornell University)

A proof of the Khavinson conjecture

Melentijević, Petar
Mathematics , Volume 2020 (1903) – Mar 11, 2019
Download PDF
18 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/arxiv-cornell-university/a-proof-of-the-khavinson-conjecture-i0Ik2kPlf6

References (25)

ISSN
0001-8708
eISSN
ARCH-3343
DOI
10.1016/j.aim.2019.06.025
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

PETAR MELENTIJEVIC Abstract. This paper deals with an extremal problem for bounded harmonic n 3 functions in the unit ball B . We solve the Khavinson conjecture in R , an intriguing open question since 1992 posed by D. Khavinson, later considered in a general context by Kresin and Maz’ya. Precisely, we obtain the following inequality: 1 2 (1 + ρ ) |∇u(x)| ≤ − 1 sup |u(y)|, 2 2 ρ 1 − ρ |y|<1 with ρ = |x|, thus sharpening the previously known with |h∇u(x), n i| instead of |∇u(x)|, where n = . |x| 1. Introduction 1.1. Gradient estimates for harmonic and analytic functions. Sharp esti- mates of harmonic functions are important at many places in physics. According to [22] by Protter and Weinberger, these problems arose naturally in the theory of hydrodynamics of ideal or the viscous incompressible fluids, elasticity theory, electrostatics and others. Many of such sharp estimates are known. We recall here some of them. First, in the mentioned book of Protter and Weinberger there is the following estimate for the absolute value of the gradient of a harmonic function: nω n−1 (1) |∇u(x)| ≤ osc (u), (n − 1)ω d(x) n−1 n where u is harmonic function in Ω, ω is the area of the unit sphere S = ∂B , osc(u) is the oscillation of u in Ω, while d(x) denotes the distance of x ∈ Ω from ∂Ω. The inequality (1) is a consequence of the next best-constant inequality 2nω n−1 (2) |∇u(0)| ≤ sup |u(x)|, (n − 1)ω R |x|<R see Khavinson [10], Burgeth [3]. Some inequalities from analytic function theory can also be restated as inequal- ities for harmonic functions. Such are the so-called real-part theorems, with some characteristics of the real-parts of a function as the majorant. It is the case with Hadamard real-part theorem [5] and the whole collection of similar inequalities in [13]. Also, some pointwise sharp estimates for modulus of derivatives of analytic 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 35B30, Secondary 35J05. Key words and phrases. Khavinson problem, Bounded harmonic functions, Gradient of func- tion, Radial derivative, Sharp estimate, Unit ball. The author is partially supported by MPNTR grant 174017, Serbia. arXiv:1903.04564v2 [math.AP] 27 Mar 2019 ´ 2 PETAR MELENTIJEVIC functions can be found in [16]. We will mention that: 4 1 |f (z)| ≤ sup | Re f(w)|, π 1 − |z| |w|<1 for analytic functions can be also seen as 4 1 |∇u(z)| ≤ sup |u(w)| π 1 − |z| |w|<1 for a harmonic function in the unit disk D := {z ∈ C : |z| < 1}. The last classical result is improved by Kalaj and Vuorinen in [9]; their form of this inequality is 4 1 − |u(z)| (3) |∇u(z)| ≤ , π 1 − |z| for real-valued harmonic functions with |u(z)| < 1 for every z ∈ D. The inequality (3) is equivalent to the fact that harmonic functions with the assumed properties are Lipschitz with constant with respect to hyperbolic metric. Mateljevi in [19] showed that this result can be concluded from Ahlfors-Schwarz lemma. Let us mention that similar results for harmonic functions and hyperbolic metric are contained in papers [18],[4] and [20]. Also, some sharp inequalities for harmonic functions are given in [7] and [8]. 1.2. The Khavinson problem. In his paper [10] from 1992, Dmitriy Khavinson found the sharp pointwise constant in the estimate for the absolute value of the 3 3 radial derivative of a bounded harmonic function in the unit ball B := {x ∈ R : |x| < 1}. In a private communication with Vladimir Maz’ya and Gershon Kresin he said that he believed that the stronger inequality holds for the modulus of the gradient of a bounded harmonic function in place of the radial derivative. To give the precise statement of the problem, we introduce some notation. We consider bounded harmonic functions in B —it is common to denote this function ∞ n−1 space by h , see [2],[21]. For every l ∈ S by C(x, l) we denote the best constant ∞ n in the next inequality for the derivative of u ∈ h at x ∈ B in the direction v: (4) |h∇u(x), li| ≤ C(x, l) sup |u(y)|, |y|<1 while for the appropriate constant for the modulus of the gradient we use C(x) : (5) |∇u(x)| ≤ C(x) sup |u(y)|. |y|<1 Since |∇u(x)| = sup |h∇u(x), li|, |l|=1 we clearly have that (6) C(x) = sup C(x, l). |l|=1 We are especially interested for radial direction, which is, for x ∈ B , defined as 1 2 2 n = x, where |x| = x + x + · · · + x is the norm of x. 1 2 n |x| In their paper [11], Kresin and Maz’ya posed the generalized Khavinson problem for bounded harmonic functions in the unit ball B , as: KHAVINSON CONJECTURE 3 Conjecture 1 ([11], [10]). C(x) = C(x, n ). In the same paper, they obtain the sharp inequalities for the radial and tangen- tial derivatives of such functions and solved the analogous problem for harmonic functions with the L integrable boundary values for p = 1 and p = ∞. Also, the same authors in [12] solved the half-space analog of this problem for p = 1, p = 2 and p = ∞. In fact, they precisely proved: n−1 2 Γ( ) 4 (n − 1) 1 (7) |∇U(x)| ≤ √ sup |U(y)|, n−1 π 2 x n Γ( ) n y∈R 2 + for a real bounded harmonic function U in the n-dimensional upper-half space R . 1.3. Partial solutions of generalised Khavinson problem. Marijan Markovi considered the problem in special situation when x ∈ B is near the boundary. He confirmed Khavinson conjecture in this setting and also gave some conclusions and formulas in general. We will appeal to some of his conclusions later. As first, let us say that he showed that it is enough to prove the conjecture in special case x = ρe considering only directions of the form l = l = cos αe + sin αe . He obtained the α 1 2 following formula for the quantity C(z, ρ): n−1 4ω 2 1 P (zt) + P (−zt) n−2 ρ ρ √ p dt, (8) C(z, ρ) = n−1 2 2 4−n ω (1 − ρ)(1 + ρ) n 1 + z (1 − t ) where 2 2 z+ z +1−α 1−α n − β + nzw − β w ρ ρ n−2 P (z) = w dw n n +1 −1 2 2 2 2 2 (1 + w ) (1 + κ w ) n−(n−2)ρ 1−ρ n−2 with α = ρ, β = and κ = . Here, z = tg α and ω is the area ρ ρ ρ n n 2 1+ρ of ∂B . In this circumference, generalized Khavinson conjecture is equivalent with the fact that sup C(z, ρ) = C(0, ρ). z>0 Using the formula (8), David Kalaj in [6] prove the conjecture in the unit ball in R . But, as it can be seen from the definition of P , this formula for C(z, ρ) suitable for Markovi’s considerations, is not the appropriate one for treating the case when n is odd. This is the main reason why this problem is considered to be hard especially for n ∈ 2N + 1. 1.4. Organisation of the paper and results. We prove a representation formula which we will prove in the second section: Theorem 1. For every 0 ≤ ρ < 1 the following integral representation for C(ρe , l) holds: n Γ( ) (9) C(ρe , l) = 1 n−1 1 − ρ Γ( )Γ( ) 2 2 Z n−3 2 2 2 (1 − x ) 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n−2 n−2 n n−1 × | ρ cos α−x| F ( , ; ; )dx. 2 1 2 2 n −1 2 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 ´ 4 PETAR MELENTIJEVIC This formula enabled us to reduce Khavinson problem on finding the maximum of some function C(α). In fact, since it seems to be very hard to do that directly, ˜ ˜ ˜ we find the majorant C(α) which satisfies C(α) ≤ C(α) and C(0) = C(0). In order to do this more effectively, we prove some unexpected integral identities in the third section, thus obtaining the appropriate majorant in the fourth section. These identities include hypergeometric functions and seems to have independent interest. For general information on these functions, see [1]. The last section is devoted to the detailed analysis of C(α), and the final proof of our main theorem(Conjecture 1.1 in R ): Theorem 2. If u is a bounded harmonic function in the unit ball B , then we have the following sharp inequality: (1 + ρ ) (10) |∇u(x)| ≤ − 1 sup |u(y)|, 2 2 ρ 1 − ρ |y|<1 with ρ = |x|. 2. A general representation formula for the sharp constant In [17] Markovi gives some general observations about the problem in B . We start from his conclusion that it is enough to prove the conjecture for x ∈ B of the form x = ρe and directions given by l = l = e cos α + e sin α. 1 α 1 2 We start from the formula for the optimal constant in the inequality (11) |h∇u(ρe ), li| 6 C(ρe , l) sup |u(y)|, 1 1 |y|<1 for x = ρe and the direction l ∈ ∂B given by: (12) C(ρe , l) = |h∇P (x, ζ), li|dσ(ζ), ∂B 1−|x| where P (x, ζ) = is the Poisson kernel for the unit ball B . |x−ζ| Mobius transform 2 2 (1 − |x| )(η − x) − |η − x| x ζ = −T (η) = [η, x] where ∗ ∗ [x, y] = |y||y − x|, y = , |y| together with some calculations (see [17] for details) gives us: 2−n (13) C(ρe , l) = |hη − α e , li||η − ρe | dσ(η) 1 ρ 1 1 1 − ρ ∂B where n − 2 α = ρ, l = e cos α + e sin α, α ∈ [0, ]. ρ 1 2 So, the problem is, in fact, two-dimensional. We see this, since for fixed l ∈ ∂B there exists an orthogonal matrix A such that Al = e , Ae = cos αe + sin αe , α ∈ [0, ]. 1 1 1 2 2 KHAVINSON CONJECTURE 5 Then we have: 1 − ρ 2−n C(ρe , l) = |hAη − α Ae , Ali||Aη − ρAe | dσ(η) 1 ρ 1 1 n n ∂B 2−n = |hξ − α Ae , Ali||ξ − ρAe | dσ(ξ) ρ 1 1 ∂B 2−n = |hξ − α Ae , e i||ξ − ρAe | dσ(ξ) ρ 1 1 1 ∂B n−2 2−n = |ξ − ρ cos α||ξ − ρ(cos αe + sin αe )| dσ(ξ). 1 1 1 ∂B Since 2−n |ξ − ρ(cos αe + sin αe )| 1 2 1− = hξ − ρ cos αe − ρ sin αe , ξ − ρ cos αe − ρ sin αe i 1 2 1 2 2 1− = (1 − 2ρξ cos α − 2ρξ sin α + ρ ) , 1 2 we have: 1 − ρ (14) C(ρe , l) n−2 2 1− = |ξ − ρ cos α||1 − 2ρξ cos α − 2ρξ sin α + ρ | dσ(ξ). 1 1 2 ∂B Now, the Khavinson conjecture is equivalent with the fact that, for fixed ρ ∈ [0, 1) the maximum of the last integral as a function on α is attained at α = 0. To expand the integral in (14), let us note that the integrand depends only on ξ and ξ . To do the expansion, we prove the following lemma which gives us the 1 2 formula for integrals over the sphere ∂B of functions which depends on k variables. It is a real counterpart of the Lemma from Rudin’s book [23]. Lemma 1. Let f be a continuous function on the closed ball B which depends on first k variables. If P is projection on R , we have: Z Z Γ( ) n−k−2 (15) (f ◦ P )dσ = (1 − |x| ) f(x)dv (x), k n−k n k Γ( + 1)Γ( ) ∂B B 2 2 where σ is normalized area measure and v normalised Lebesgue volume measure. k k Proof. Let us take f ∈ C(B ), supp f ⊂ r B , for some r < 1. Then, we define: 0 0 Z Z Z n−1 I(r) = (f ◦ P )dv = n t (f ◦ P )(tζ)dσ(ζ) dt, rB 0 S from which, after differentiating, we get: I (1) = n (f ◦ P )(ζ)dσ(ζ). On the other side, integrating over the n − k free variables gives us: n−k 2 2 I(r) = c (r − |x| ) f(x)dv (x), n,k k B ´ 6 PETAR MELENTIJEVIC so differentiation implies: n−k−2 (n − k)c n,k ′ 2 2 I (r) = · 2r (r − |x| ) f(x)dv (x) 2 k and hence: n−k−2 ′ 2 I (1) = ec (1 − |x| ) f(x)dv (x). n,k k To find the exact value of the constant that in the statement of our Lemma, let us set f(x) = 1: Z Z n−k−2 1 = (f ◦ P )dσ = C (1 − |x| ) dv (x) n,k k S B Z Z n−k−2 k−1 2 = kC t (1 − |tζ| ) dσ(ζ) dt n,k 0 S n−k −1 k−1 2 = kC t (1 − t ) dt n,k n−k kC k n,k 2 −1 2 −1 2 2 2 = (t ) (1 − t ) d(t ) k n−k Γ( )Γ( ) kC kC n,k n,k k n−k 2 2 = B( , ) = , 2 2 2 2 Γ( ) therefore: Γ( ) C = . n,k k n−k Γ( + 1)Γ( ) 2 2 Applying our Lemma 1, we get: 1 − ρ C(ρe , l) = 2 2 −2 Γ( ) 2 (1 − x − y ) 2 n−2 = | ρ cos α − x| dxdy n n −1 πΓ( − 1)Γ(2) 2 (1 − 2ρx cos α − 2ρy sin α + ρ ) Z Z 2 n 1 1−x 2 2 −2 n − 2 (1 − x − y ) n−2 = | ρ cos α − x| dy dx. n √ −1 2π 2 2 (1 − 2ρx cos α − 2ρy sin α + ρ ) −1 − 1−x Calculation of the inner integral will be done in the next lemma. We will invoke it at the appropriate places in the proof. Lemma 2. For ρ ∈ [0, 1] and α ∈ [0, ] there holds the following identity: 2 n 1−x 2 2 −2 (1 − x − y ) (16) dy 2 −1 2 (1 − 2ρx cos α − 2ρy sin α + ρ ) − 1−x n−3 2 2 2 2 1 n (1 − x ) 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n−2 n n−1 = B , − 1 F ( , ; ; ) n 2 1 2 2 −1 2 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) 2 2 (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) KHAVINSON CONJECTURE 7 1 − x t: Proof. We change variable by y = 2 n 1−x 2 2 −2 (1 − x − y ) dy 2 −1 2 (1 − 2ρx cos α − 2ρy sin α + ρ ) − 1−x n n 1 2 −2 2 −2 2 2 (1 − x ) (1 − t ) 1 − x = √ dt −1 2 2 (1 − 2ρx cos α − 2ρ 1 − x t sin α + ρ ) −1 2 −2 n−3 n (1 − t ) 2 2 1− 2 2 = (1 − x ) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) dt. −1 2 2 2ρt 1−x sin α −1 1 − 1+ρ −2ρx cos α Using power series expansion +∞ X 2 k + α − 1 n 2ρt 1 − x sin α −α k (1 − z) = z , for α = − 1 and z = , k 2 1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α k=0 we get: 1 2 −2 (1 − t ) dt −2 2 2 2ρt 1−x sin α −1 1 − 1+ρ −2ρx cos α n 1 X 2 k + − 1 − 1 2ρ 1 − x sin α n 2 2 −2 k = (1 − t ) t dt k 1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α −1 k=0 2k 1 n k 2k 2 k 2k + − 2 4 ρ (1 − x ) sin α n 2k 2 −2 = 2 t (1 − t ) dt. 2 2k 2k (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) k=0 We easily find that Z Z 1 1 n 1 n 2k 2 −2 k− −2 2 2 2 2 t (1 − t ) dt = u (1 − u) du 0 0 1 n Γ(k + )Γ( − 1) 1 n 2 2 = B k + , − 1 = . n−1 2 2 Γ(k + ) ( −1) 2k+ −2 2k Since = , by duplication formula for Gamma function, we have 2k (2k)! 1 n n 1 n Γ(k + )Γ( − 1) ( − 1) Γ(k + )Γ( − 1) 2k + − 2 2k 2 2 2 2 2 n−1 n−1 n−1 2k Γ(k + ) Γ(2k + 1)Γ( ) 2 2 2 n−2 n 4 4 1 n k k = B( , − 1) . 2 2 n−1 k! 2 k Using now Lemma 2 i.e. (16), we get: 1 − ρ n − 2 1 n C(ρe , l) = B , − 1 × n 2π 2 2 Z n−3 2 2 2 (1 − x ) 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n−2 n−2 n n−1 × | ρ cos α−x| F ( , ; ; )dx, 2 1 2 2 n −1 2 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 i.e. our Theorem 1. ´ 8 PETAR MELENTIJEVIC 3. Three important integral identities Before we can come to the main estimate, we need three integral identities. We derive the first two of them from Lemma 1 using it for some special choices of the function f. Identities are given by the next lemmata. Lemma 3. We have the following equality for all ρ ∈ [0, 1] and α ∈ [0, ] : Z n−3 2 2 2 2 (1 − x ) 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n−2 n n−1 (17) F , ; ; dx 2 1 2 2 −1 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 n−3 2 2 1− 2 2 = (1 − x ) (1 − 2ρx + ρ ) dx. −1 2 1− Proof. Using Lemma 1 for f(x, y) = (1 − 2ρx cos α − 2ρy sin α + ρ ) , where (x, y) ∈ B , we get 2 1− (1 − 2ρξ cos α − 2ρξ sin α + ρ ) dσ(ξ) 1 2 ∂B n − 2 n n 2 2 −2 2 1− 2 2 = (1 − x − y ) (1 − 2ρx cos α − 2ρy sin α + ρ ) dxdy 2π Z Z 1 1−x n − 2 n n 2 2 −2 2 1− 2 2 = (1 − x − y ) (1 − 2ρx cos α − 2ρy sin α + ρ ) dy dx 2π 2 −1 − 1−x Z n−3 1 2 2 2 2 2 n − 2 1 n (1 − x ) 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n−2 n n−1 = B , − 1 F , ; ; dx, n 2 1 2 2 −1 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) 2π 2 2 (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 by Lemma 2. On the other hand, introducing the change of variables, ζ = ξ cos α + ξ sin α, 1 1 2 ζ = ξ sin α − ξ cos α and ξ = ζ for 3 ≤ k ≤ n, we get: 2 1 2 k k Z Z n n 2 1− 2 1− 2 2 (1 − 2ρξ cos α − 2ρξ sin α + ρ ) dσ(ξ) = (1 − 2ρζ + ρ ) dσ(ζ) 1 2 1 n n ∂B ∂B n 1 Γ( ) n−3 2 2 1− 2 2 = (1 − x ) (1 − 2ρx + ρ ) dx. 3 n−1 2Γ( )Γ( ) −1 2 2 2 1− Comparing these two expressions for (1− 2ρξ cos α− 2ρξ sin α + ρ ) dσ(ξ) n 1 2 ∂B we conclude the proof of (17). One more necessary identity is given by the following lemma. Lemma 4. There holds the following identity for all ρ ∈ [0, 1] and α ∈ [0, ] : Z n−3 2 2 2 2 2 2 x (1 − x ) 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n−2 n n−1 (18) F , ; ; dx n 2 1 2 2 −1 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 2 1 sin α n−1 n 2 2 1− 2 2 = (1 − x ) (1 − 2ρx + ρ ) dx n − 1 −1 n−3 2 2 2 2 1− 2 2 + cos α x (1 − x ) (1 − 2ρx + ρ ) dx. −1 KHAVINSON CONJECTURE 9 Proof. Similarly as in Lemma 3, using Lemma 1 and Lemma 2 for function f(x, y) = 2 2 1− , we get x (1 − 2ρx cos α − 2ρy sin α + ρ ) 2 2 1− ξ (1 − 2ρξ cos α − 2ρξ sin α + ρ ) dσ(ξ) 1 2 ∂B Z n−3 2 2 2 2 2 2 n − 2 1 n x (1 − x ) 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n−2 n n−1 = B , −1 F , ; ; dx. n 2 1 2 2 −1 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) 2π 2 2 2 (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 On the other hand, introducing the change of variables, ζ = ξ cos α + ξ sin α, 1 1 2 ζ = ξ sin α − ξ cos α and ζ = ξ for 3 ≤ k ≤ n, we get: 2 1 2 k k 2 2 1− ξ (1 − 2ρξ cos α − 2ρξ sin α + ρ ) dσ(ξ) 1 2 ∂B 2 2 1− = (ζ cos α + ζ sin α) (1 − 2ρζ + ρ ) dσ(ζ) 1 2 1 ∂B Z Z n n 2 2 2 1− 2 2 2 1− 2 2 = cos α ζ (1−2ρζ +ρ ) dσ(ζ)+sin α ζ (1−2ρζ +ρ ) dσ(ζ). 1 1 1 2 n n ∂B ∂B 2 1− The integral ζ ζ (1 − 2ρζ + ρ ) dσ(ζ) is equal to zero, since the function n 1 2 1 ∂B under the integral sign is odd on ζ . These integrals we expand using Lemma 1 thus obtaining: 2 2 1− ζ (1 − 2ρζ + ρ ) dσ(ζ) ∂B Γ( ) n−3 2 2 2 1− 2 2 = (1 − x ) x (1 − 2ρx + ρ ) dx, 3 n−1 2Γ( )Γ( ) −1 2 2 2 2 1− ζ (1 − 2ρζ + ρ ) dσ(ζ) ∂B Γ( ) n−4 n 2 2 2 2 2 1− 2 2 = y (1 − x − y ) (1 − 2ρx + ρ ) dxdy πΓ( − 1) 2 Second integral we calculate integrating first over y-variable: n−4 n 2 2 2 2 1− 2 2 y (1−x − y ) (1 − 2ρx + ρ ) dxdy Z Z 2 1 1−x n−4 2 1− 2 2 2 2 2 = (1 − 2ρx + ρ ) y (1 − x − y ) dy dx −1 − 1−x 3 n n−1 n 2 2 1− 2 2 = B , − 1 (1 − x ) (1 − 2ρx + ρ ) dx. 2 2 −1 The procedure is the same as in the some of previous calculations. Finally, equal- izing two expressions for the same integral we get the identity (18). The last lemma, we mention here has already been proved by Markovi and its half-space counterpart by Maz’ya and Kresin, but we will also give an easy and quick proof. Lemma 5. For all ρ ∈ [0, 1) and α ∈ [0, ], we have the next identity: n−3 1 n−2 2 ρ cos α − x 1 − x 2 2 2 n 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n−2 n n−1 (19) F , ; ; dx = 0. 2 1 2 2 −1 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 ´ 10 PETAR MELENTIJEVIC Proof. Denote that the integrand is similar to the representation of C(ρe , v) with the one, but crucial difference—we do not have absolute brackets around the n−2 ρ cos α − x. So, since all transformations that we apply to obtain our integral expression for C(ρe , v) save equality without these brackets, we have that n−3 n−2 1 2 2 ρ cos α − x 1 − x 2 2 2 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n n−2 n n−1 F , ; ; dx n 2 1 2 2 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) 2 −1 (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 is, in fact, by (12), equal to h∇P (z, ζ)f(ζ), (1, 1, . . . , 1)i, on ∂B for function f(ζ) = n n 1 on ∂B and z ∈ B . But this is equal to is, in fact, equal to h∇f(z), (1, 1, . . . , 1)i, on B and since f(z) = 1, by the uniqueness of harmonic extension, the proof follows. 4. Construction of the majorant As we have said in the introduction, the crux of the proof is construction of the majorant with the maximum in α = 0 and the same value in α = 0 as C(ρe , l). Starting from the general representation formula, we split the hypergeometric function into two parts: n−3 1 n−2 2 2 2 2 2 | ρ cos α − x|(1 − x ) 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n n−2 n n−1 F , ; ; dx 2 1 2 2 −1 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 n−3 1 n−2 2 | ρ cos α − x|(1 − x ) = dx −1 (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 Z n−3 n−2 1 2 | ρ cos α − x|(1 − x ) 2 2 2 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n n−2 n n−1 + F , ; ; − 1 dx. n 2 1 2 2 −1 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 Now, lemmas from the previous section suggest that we can evaluate the last n−2 n−2 integral with 1 or ρ cos α − x in place of | ρ cos α − x|, so we estimate it n n by Cauchy-Schwarz inequality: Z n−3 1 n−2 | ρ cos α − x|(1 − x ) 2 2 2 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n n−2 n n−1 F , ; ; − 1 dx n 2 1 2 2 −1 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 Z n−3 2 2 2 2 (1 − x ) 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n−2 n n−1 ≤ F , ; ; − 1 dx × 2 1 2 2 −1 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 n−3 Z 2 1 n−2 2 2 2 2 ρ cos α − x (1 − x ) 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n n−2 n n−1 × F , ; ; −1 dx . n 2 1 2 2 2 −1 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 Let us denote: Z n−3 n−2 1 2 | ρ cos α − x|(1 − x ) (20) S(α) = dx, −1 (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 (21) Z n−3 2 2 2 (1 − x ) 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n−2 n n−1 S (α) = F , ; ; − 1 dx 1 2 1 2 2 −1 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 KHAVINSON CONJECTURE 11 and (22) Z 2 n−3 1 n−2 2 ρ cos α − x (1 − x ) 2 2 2 4ρ sin α(1−x ) n n−2 n n−1 S (α) = F , ; ; −1 dx. 2 n 2 1 2 2 4 4 2 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) 2 −1 (1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α) −1 n n−2 1 n Majorant for C(ρe , l ) which we have searched for is C = B , −1 S+ 1 α 2 1−ρ 2π 2 2 S S . Denote that C(0) = C(0), as it is needed. 1 2 5. Proof of the Theorem 2 In this section we will find the explicit formulas for the functions S(α), S (α) and S (α) when n = 3. We see that: 2 2 − x (1 − 2ρx + ρ ) dx −1 4 3 2 2 = − 1 + ρ − 2ρx(2ρ + 2ρ x + ρ (3x + 4) + 2 + 2ρx) 3 −1 15ρ 4 3 2 = 1 + ρ + 2ρ(2ρ − 2ρ + 7ρ + 2 − 2ρ) 15ρ 4 3 2 − 1 + ρ − 2ρ(2ρ + 2ρ + 7ρ + 2 + 2ρ) 5 3 4ρ + 10ρ 4 2 = = ρ + . 15ρ 15 3 and 1 − x p dx −1 1 + ρ − 2ρx 4 3 2 2 = 1 + ρ − 2ρx(2ρ + 2ρ x + ρ (3x − 11) + 2ρx + 2) 3 −1 15ρ 4 4 2 = − ρ 3 15 thus, by Lemma 4 obtaining that 1 2 2 2 2 4ρ sin α(1−x ) 1 3 p F , , 1; dx 2 1 2 2 4 4 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) 1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α −1 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ( ρ + ) cos α + ( − ρ ) sin α 15 3 3 15 Also, from Lemma 3, we get: 2 2 2 4ρ (1−x ) sin α Z 1 3 Z 1 1 F ( , , 1; ) 2 1 2 2 1 4 4 (1+ρ −2ρx cos α) 2 − p dx = (1 − 2ρx + ρ ) dx −1 1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α −1 1 (1 + ρ) − (1 − ρ) = − 1 + ρ − 2ρx = = 2 ρ ρ −1 ´ 12 PETAR MELENTIJEVIC We need also the following two integrals: 1 2 ( ρ cos α − x) dx 1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α −1 1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α 4 2 2 2 = −5ρ cos(4α) − 72ρ x cos α 3 3 360ρ cos α 2 2 2 2 4 2 + 8ρx cos α(5ρ cos(2α) − ρ − 6) + 20ρ (2 + ρ ) cos(2α) − 23ρ − 56ρ − 48 −1 4 4 2 2 2 2 2 = (−40ρ cos α + 8ρ (10ρ + 1) cos α − 48(1 + ρ ) 3 3 360ρ cos α p p 2 2 × 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α − 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α 3 3 3 + 80ρ cos α − 48ρ cos α − 48ρ cos α 3 3 360ρ cos α p p 2 2 × 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α + 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α and dx 1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α p = − ρ cos α −1 1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α −1 p p 2 2 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α − 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α = . ρ cos α Now, appealing to Lemmas 3,4 and 5, we find S (α) and S (α) : 1 2 p p 2 2 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α − 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α S (α) = 2 − , ρ cos α 2 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 S (α) = ( + ρ ) cos α + ( − ρ ) sin α − ρ cos α · 2 3 15 3 15 9 2 2 2 ρ cos α 10ρ + 1 2(1 + ρ ) + − + 3 3 9 45ρ cos α 15ρ cos α p p 2 2 1 + ρ 1 + ρ × − 2ρ cos α − + 2ρ cos α p p 2(1 + ρ ) 2 2 2 + − 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α + 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α 2 2 15ρ cos α 9 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 = ( + ρ ) cos α + ( − ρ ) sin α 3 45 3 15 2 2 2 ρ cos α 10ρ + 1 2(1 + ρ ) + − + 3 3 9 45ρ cos α 15ρ cos α p p 2 2 × 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α − 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α p p 2(1 + ρ ) 2 2 2 + − 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α + 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α 2 2 15ρ cos α 9 KHAVINSON CONJECTURE 13 Also, using ρ cos α − x p dx 1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α 1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α 2 2 2 = (1 + ρ − ρ cos α + ρx cos α) 2 2 3ρ cos α we find 1 1 | ρ cos α − x| S(α) = p dx 1 + ρ − 2ρx cos α −1 1 2 3 2 2 2 = 2(1 + ρ − ρ cos α) 2 2 3ρ cos α 3 2 2 2 − (1 + ρ − ρ cos α + ρ cos α) 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α 2 2 2 − (1 + ρ − ρ cos α − ρ cos α) 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α To find a majorant, with which we can handle more effectively, we proceed in the √ √ following manner. We estimate S S from the above with S S ≤ tS + S , 1 2 1 2 1 2 4t by the arithmetic-geometric mean inequality with t = and therefore get the 1 3 majorant S + S + S . Denote that this majorant has the same value for α = 0 1 2 3 4 as C(ρe , l), with l = l . 2 1 α 2(1−ρ ) We easily calculate 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2(1 + ρ − ρ cos α) 1 3 7 ρ 2ρ cos α (23) S + S + S = + − + 1 2 2 2 3 4 3ρ cos α 6 10 15 p p 1 7(1 + ρ ) 2 2 + − 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α + 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α 2 2 6 30ρ cos α 2 2 2 p p ρ cos α 10ρ + 1 (1 + ρ ) 2 2 + − + 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α− 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α . 3 3 12 60ρ cosα 10ρ cos α π π (This formula we use for α < , while for α = we can calculate this majorant 2 2 from the integral expressions. Also, we expect certain cancellations to achieve the function bounded for α = .) We can expand square roots using binomial series as: p p 2 2 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α + 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α +∞ +∞ k k 1 1 p X X 2ρ 2ρ k k k 2 2 = 1 + ρ (−1) cos α + cos α 2 2 k 1 + ρ k 1 + ρ k=0 k=0 +∞ 2k p X 2ρ 2k 2 2 = 2 1 + ρ cos α. 2k 1 + ρ k=0 Similarly: p p 2 2 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α − 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α +∞ 2k+1 p X 2ρ 2k+1 2 2 = −2 1 + ρ cos α 2k + 1 1 + ρ k=0 ´ 14 PETAR MELENTIJEVIC and 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2(1 + ρ − ρ cos α) 2(1 + ρ ) 2ρ cos α = 1 − 2 2 2 2 2 3ρ cos α 3ρ cos α 3(1 + ρ ) +∞ k 2 3 2 2(1 + ρ ) 2ρ k 2k = (−1) cos α 2 2 2 3ρ cos α k 3(1 + ρ ) k=0 3 +∞ 2 2 2 X 2 2(1 + ρ ) 2 1 + ρ 8ρ 2ρ k 2k+2 = − + p (−1) cos α. 2 2 2 3ρ cos α 3 k + 2 3(1 + ρ ) 27 1 + ρ k=0 These expansions give us: +∞ 1 3 7 ρ 1 2k (24) S + S + S = − − p + a (ρ) cos α, 1 2 k 3 4 6 10 6 1 + ρ k=1 where p p k 2k 3 2 1 2 2 4 1 + ρ 2ρ 1 + ρ 2ρ 2 k+1 2 a (ρ) = (−1) + 2 2 9 k + 1 3(1 + ρ ) 3 2k 1 + ρ 2k 2k 1 1 28 2ρ 10ρ + 1 2ρ 2 2 − p + p 2 2 2 2 2k + 2 1 + ρ 2k + 1 1 + ρ 15 1 + ρ 15 1 + ρ 2k−1 2k 1 1 ρ 1 + ρ 2ρ 8 2ρ 2 2 − − p , 2 2 6 2k − 1 1 + ρ 2k + 3 1 + ρ 5 1 + ρ for k ≥ 1. Specially, we have 2 1 1 a (ρ) = ρ − p − . 2 2 15 2 18 1 + ρ 30(1 + ρ ) Formulas 1 1 3 (4k − 3)!! (4k − 1)!! 3(2k − 3)!! k+1 2 2 2 = − , = , (−1) = , 2k 2k+1 k+1 2k 2 (2k)! 2k + 1 2 (2k + 1)! k + 1 2 (k + 1)! for k ≥ 2, gives us 2k 2 2 2 1 + ρ (2k − 3)!! ρ (4k − 5)!! 2ρ a (ρ) = + p × 2 2 2k 2 3(k + 1)! 3(1 + ρ ) 1 + ρ 2 (2k + 3)! 1 + ρ 1 + ρ 7 × − (4k − 3)(2k + 1)(2k + 2)(2k + 3) + (2k + 3)(4k − 3)(4k − 1)(4k + 1) 3 15 1 + ρ 3 + (2k + 2)(2k + 3)(4k − 3)(4k − 1) − (4k − 3)(4k − 1)(2k + 2)(2k + 3) 3 10 2 2 (1 + ρ ) 1 − (2k)(2k + 1)(2k + 2)(2k + 3) − (4k − 3)(4k − 1)(4k + 1)(4k + 3) , 6 5 KHAVINSON CONJECTURE 15 or, after some routine calculations: 2 1 + ρ (2k − 3)!! ρ a (ρ) = 3(k + 1)! 3(1 + ρ ) 2k (4k − 5)!! ρ 8 22 2 2 4 3 2 + − (1 + ρ ) k + 8k + k + 2k 1 + ρ 3 3 (2k + 3)! 1 + ρ 32 68 32 70 2 4 3 2 4 3 2 + 1 + ρ k + 8k − k − 8k + 12 − k + 16k − k + 17k − 3 . 3 3 3 3 To complete the proof of our main theorem, we need the following two lemmas. Lemma 6. Coefficients a (ρ) are negative for all k ≥ 2 and 0 < ρ < 1. Proof. We easily see that 1 (4k − 5)!! 3 −2k k 2 k− 2 2 2 a ρ 3 (1+ρ ) = −P (k)(1+ρ ) +Q(k)(1+ρ )+R(k) 2 k+1 (2k + 3)! (1 + ρ ) 2 (2k − 3)!! + , 3 (k + 1)! 8 4 3 22 2 32 4 3 68 2 where P (k) = k + 8k + k + 2k, Q(k) = k + 8k − k − 8k + 12 and 3 3 3 3 32 4 3 70 2 R(k) = − k + 16k − k + 17k − 3. 3 3 Therefore, the sign of the a is determined by the sign of the expression on the right hand side of the previous equation. Let us consider the function: 3 (4k − 5)!! 2 (2k − 3)!! −k+1 −k −k−1 Φ(y) = − P (k)y + Q(k)y + R(k)y + . (2k + 3)! 3 (k + 1)! First, we will prove that it is monotone increasing on y. Namely, its first derivative is equal to: 3 (4k − 5)!! ′ −k−2 2 Φ (y) = y (k − 1)P (k)y − kQ(k)y − (k + 1)R(k) , (2k + 3)! and the quadratic polynomial (k − 1)P (k)y − kQ(k)y − (k + 1)R(k) is positive for 2 2 2 all k ≥ 2 and 1 ≤ y ≤ 2, since its discriminant D = k Q (k)+ 4(k − 1)P (k)R(k) = 3200 5824 3488 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 − k − 544k + k + 952k − k − 432k + 96k + 24k is negative for 9 9 9 k ≥ 2. Hence, Φ(y) ≤ Φ(2), which gives us: (4k − 5)!! 3 2 (2k − 3)!! 2 2 2 [−P (k)(1 + ρ ) + Q(k)(1 + ρ ) + R(k)] + 2 k+1 (2k + 3)! (1 + ρ ) 3 (k + 1)! (4k − 5)!! 3 2 (2k − 3)!! ≤ [−4P (k) + 2Q(k) + R(k)] + , 2(2k + 3)! 2 3 (k + 1)! and, taking into account that −4P (k) + 2Q(k) + R(k) = −98k − 7k + 21, to finish the proof of the lemma, we must prove k+1 (4k − 5)!!(k + 1)! 3 2 l = > = d . k k (2k − 3)!!(2k + 3)! 2 98k + 7k − 21 ´ 16 PETAR MELENTIJEVIC 3(4k−1)(4k−3)(k+2) 3(4k−1)(4k−3)(k+2) But, since l = l and > 1 for all k ≥ 2, k+1 k 2(2k+5)(2k+4)(2k−1) 2(2k+5)(2k+4)(2k−1) we see that l is increasing, while d is decreasing. It is easy to check that l > d k k 2 2 and therefore the proof of this lemma is complete. Let us consider, like in (24), the function +∞ 7 ρ 1 (25) T (t) = − − p + a (ρ)t . 6 10 6 1 + ρ k=1 The next lemma considers behavior od this function near the point t = 1. Lemma 7. T (1) ≥ 0. 1 3 2 Proof. Let us first denote that, in fact, (S + S + S )(α) = T (t), for t = cos α. 1 2 3 4 Hence, we have: 1 3 ′ (S + S + S ) (α) 1 2 ′ 3 4 T (1) = lim . α→0+ −2 sin α cos α Differentiating (23), we get: 2 2 2 4 sin α 1 + ρ − ρ cos α 1 3 3 1 ′ 2 2 2 (S + S + S ) (α) = 1 + ρ + ρ cos α 1 2 2 3 3 4 3ρ cos α 3 1 7(1 + ρ ) −ρ sin α ρ sin α − ρ cos α sin α+ − p + p 2 2 2 2 15 6 30ρ cos α 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α p p 7(1 + ρ ) sin α 2 2 − 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α + 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α 2 3 15ρ cos α 2 2 2 ρ cos α 10ρ + 1 (1 + ρ ) ρ sin α ρ sin α p p + − + + 3 3 2 2 12 60ρ cos α 10ρ cos α 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α 2 2 2 ρ sin α (10ρ + 1) sin α 3(1 + ρ ) sin α + − − + × 2 3 4 12 60ρ cos α 10ρ cos α p p 2 2 × 1 + ρ − 2ρ cos α − 1 + ρ + 2ρ cos α Therefore: 1 3 (S + S + S ) (α) 1 4 1 1 2 3 4 2 4 2 lim = −40(1+ ρ ) 1 + ρ +11ρ +60ρ +40 ≥ 0, α→0+ −2 sin α cos α 30ρ 3 3 since this is equivalent with: 4 1 10040 640 4 2 2 2 2 2 8 6 4 (11ρ + 60ρ + 40) − 1600(1 + ρ ) (1 + ρ ) = 121ρ + ρ + ρ ≥ 0. 3 3 27 3 Now the lemma follows. KHAVINSON CONJECTURE 17 We can now finish the proof of our main theorem. In fact, we have to conclude 1 3 S + S ) has its maximum in α = 0, or, what is the same, T (t), defined that (S + 1 2 3 4 by (25), attains its maximum in t = 1. Differentiating T (t) two times, we get +∞ ′′ k−2 ′′ ′ T (t) = k(k − 1)a t , and Lemma 6 implies that T (t) ≤ 0. Hence, T (t) k=2 ′ ′ ′ is decreasing and T (t) ≥ T (1), while Lemma 7 gives us T (1) ≥ 0. Therefore, − − T (t) ≥ 0, T increases and has the maximum in t = 1; consequently C(ρe , l ) ≤ 1 α C(ρe , e ). 1 1 Acknowledgements. The author wishes to express his gratitude to Miroslav Pavlovi´c, Milan Lazarevi´c and Nikola Milinkovi´c for their valuable suggestions and comments that have improved the quality of the paper. The author is partially supported by MPNTR grant, no. 174017, Serbia. References [1] G. Andrews, R. Askey and R. Roy Special Functions Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, 71, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999. [2] S. Axler, P. Bourdon and W. Ramey Harmonic Function Theory Springer, New York, 2001. [3] B. Burgeth A Schwarz Lemma for harmonic and hyperbolic-harmonic functions in higher dimensions Manuscripta Math. 77(1992), 283-296. [4] F. Colonna The Bloch constant of bounded harmonic mappings Indiana University Math. J., 38(1989), 829-840. G(X) [5] J. Hadamard Sur les fonctions entieres de la forme e C. R. Acad. Sci. 114(1892), 1053- [6] D. Kalaj A proof of Khavinson conjecture in R Bull. London Math. Soc., 49(4)(2017), 561- [7] D. Kalaj and M. Markovi Optimal estimates for harmonic functions in the unit ball Positivity 16(2012), 771-782. [8] D. Kalaj and M. Markovi. Optimal Estimates for the Gradient of Harmonic Functions in the Unit Disk Complex Analysis and Operator Theory, 7(2013), 1167-1183. [9] D. Kalaj and M. Vuorinen On harmonic functions and the Schwarz lemma Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 140(2012), 161-165. [10] D. Khavinson An extremal problem for harmonic functions in the ball Canadian Math. Bul- letin, 35(1992), 218-220. [11] G. Kresin and V. Maz’ya Sharp pointwise estimates for directional derivatives of harmonic function in a multidimensional ball J. Math. Sci., 169(2010), 167-187. [12] G. Kresin and V. Maz’ya Optimal estimates for the gradient of harmonic functions in the multidimensional half-space Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. 28(2010), 425-440. [13] G. Kresin and V. Maz’ya Sharp Real-Part Theorems. A Unified Approach. Lect. Notes in Math., 1903, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 2007. [14] G. Kresin and V. Maz’ya Sharp real part theorems in the upper-half plane ans similar esti- mates for harmonic functions J. Math. Sci., 179(2011), 144-163. [15] G. Kresin and V. Maz’ya Maximum Principles and Sharp Constants for Solutions of Elliptic and Parabolic Systems Mathematical Surveys and Monographs 183, American Mathematical Society, 2012. [16] A. J. Macintyre and W. W. Rogosinski Extremum problems in the theory of analytic functions Acta Mathematica, 82 (1950), 275-325. [17] M. Markovi. Solution to the Khavinson problem near the boundary of the unit ball Construc- tive Approximation, 45(2)(2017), 243-271. [18] M. Markovi On harmonic functions and the hyperbolic metric Indag. Math. 26(2015), 19-23. [19] M. Mateljevi Schwarz lemma and Kobayashi Metrics for harmonic and holomorphic functions J. Math. Anal. Appl. 464(1)(2018), 78-100. [20] P. Melentijevi Invariant gradient in refinements of Schwarz and Harnack inequalities Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Math. 43(2018), 391-399. [21] M. Pavlovi Function Classes on the Unit Disc: An Introduction De Gruyter Studies in Math- ematics 2013. ´ 18 PETAR MELENTIJEVIC [22] M. H. Protter and H. F. Weinberger Maximum Principles in Differential Equations Prentice Hall, Inc, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey (1967); Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York (1984). [23] W. Rudin Function Theory in the Unit Ball of C Classics in Mathematics Springer, 1980.

Journal

Mathematics – arXiv (Cornell University)

Published: Mar 11, 2019

There are no references for this article.