On locally bounded above solutions of an equation of the Goła̧b–Schinzel type

We characterize solutions ${f, g : \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}}$ of the functional equation f(x + g(x)y) = f(x)f(y) under the assumption that f is locally bounded above at each point ${x \in \mathbb{R}}$ . Our result refers to Go?a?b and Schinzel (Publ Math Debr 6:113–125, 1959) and Wo?od?ko (Aequationes Math 2:12–29, 1968).     

On the order of magnitude of double fourier transforms. II

Denote by $\hat f$ the (complex) Fourier transform of a functionf which belongs toL ¹(R ²). We shall assume thatf is odd inx andy, orf is even inx and odd iny, orf is odd inx and even iny. Among others, we prove that iff ∈L ¹(R ²) and (x, y)=(0,0) is a strong Lebesgue point off, then $\left| t \right|\left| v \right|\hat f(t,v)$ tends to 0 as |t|, |v|→∞ in the sense (C;α,β) for allα,β>1.     

On restricting Cauchy–Pexider functional equations to submanifolds

Sufficient geometric conditions are given which determine when the Cauchy–Pexider functional equation f(x)g(y) = h(x + y) restricted to x, y lying on a hypersurface in ${\mathbb{R}^d}$ has only solutions which extend uniquely to exponential affine functions ${\mathbb{R}^d \to \mathbb{C}}$ (when f, g, h are assumed to be measurable and non-trivial). The Cauchy–Pexider-type functional equations ${\prod_{j=0}^df_j(x_j)=F(\sum_{j=0}^dx_j)}$ for ${x_0, \ldots,x_d}$ lying on a curve and ${f_1(x_1)f_2(x_2)f_3(x_3)=F(x_1+x_2+x_3)}$ for x ₁, x ₂, x ₃ lying on a hypersurface are also considered.     

Christensen measurability and some functional equation

Let X be a real separable F-space. We characterize solutions ${f:X\to\mathbb{R}}$ and ${M:\mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{R}}$ of the equation f(x?+?M(f(x))y)?=?f(x)f(y) such that f is bounded on a nonzero Christensen measurable set. Our result generalizes [Jab?o??ska in Acta Math Hung 125(1?C2):113?C119 2009, Theorem 1].     

A proof of a theorem by Fried and MacRae and applications to the composition of polynomial functions

Fried and MacRae (Math. Ann. 180, 220?C226 (1969)) proved that for univariate polynomials ${p,q, f, g \in \mathbb{K}[t]}$ ( ${\mathbb{K}}$ a field) with p, q nonconstant, p(x) ? q(y) divides f(x) ? g(y) in ${\mathbb{K}[x,y]}$ if and only if there is ${h \in \mathbb{K}[t]}$ such that f?=?h(p(t)) and g?=?h(q(t)). Schicho (Arch. Math. 65, 239?C243 (1995)) proved this theorem from the viewpoint of category theory, thereby providing several generalizations to multivariate polynomials. In the present note, we give a new proof of one of these generalizations. The theorem by Fried and MacRae yields a way to prove the following fact for nonconstant functions f, g from ${\mathbb{C}}$ to ${\mathbb{C}}$ : if both the composition ${f \circ g}$ and g are polynomial functions, then f has to be a polynomial function as well. We give an algebraic proof of this fact and present a generalization to multivariate polynomials over algebraically closed fields. This provides a way to prove a generalization of a result by Carlitz (Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged) 24, 196?C203 (1963)) that describes those univariate polynomials over finite fields that induce bijective functions on all of their finite extensions.     

On multiplicative (generalized)-derivations in prime and semiprime rings

Let R be a ring. A map ${F : R \rightarrow R}$ F : R → R is called a multiplicative (generalized)-derivation if F(xy) = F(x)y + xg(y) is fulfilled for all ${x, y \in R}$ x , y ∈ R where ${g : R \rightarrow R}$ g : R → R is any map (not necessarily derivation). The main objective of the present paper is to study the following situations: (i) ${F(xy) \pm xy \in Z}$ F ( xy ) ± xy ∈ Z , (ii) ${F(xy) \pm yx \in Z}$ F ( xy ) ± yx ∈ Z , (iii) ${F(x)F(y) \pm xy \in Z}$ F ( x ) F ( y ) ± xy ∈ Z and (iv) ${F(x)F(y) \pm yx \in Z}$ F ( x ) F ( y ) ± yx ∈ Z for all x, y in some appropriate subset of R. Moreover, some examples are also given.     

On mappings preserving orthogonality of non-singular vectors

Letq be a regular quadratic form on a vector space (V,F) and letf be the bilinear form associated withq. Then, \(\dot V: = \{ z \in V|q(z) \ne 0\} \) is the set of non-singular vectors ofV, and forx, y ∈ \(\dot V\) , ?(x, y) ?f(x, y) ²/(q(x) · q(y)) is theq-measure of (x, y), where ?(x,y)=0 means thatx, y are orthogonal. For an arbitrary mapping \(\sigma :\dot V \to \dot V\) we consider the functional equations $$\begin{gathered} (I)\sphericalangle (x,y) = 0 \Leftrightarrow \sphericalangle (x^\sigma ,y^\sigma ) = 0\forall x,y \in \dot V, \hfill \\ (II)\sphericalangle (x,y) = \sphericalangle (x^\sigma ,y^\sigma )\forall x,y \in \dot V, \hfill \\ (III)f(x,y)^2 = f(x^\sigma ,y^\sigma )^2 \forall x,y \in \dot V, \hfill \\ \end{gathered} $$ and we state conditions on (V,F,q) such thatσ is induced by a mapping of a well-known type. In case of dimV ∈N?{0, 1, 2} ∧ ∣F∣ > 3, each of the assumptions (I), (II), (III) implies that there exist aρ-linear injectionξ :V →V and a fixed λ ∈F?{0} such thatF x ^σ =F x ^ξ ?x ∈ \(\dot V\) andf(x ^ξ,y ^ξ)=λ · (f(x, y))^ρ ?x, y ∈V. Moreover, (II) implies ρ =id _F ∧q(x ^ξ) = λ ·q(x) ?x ∈ \(\dot V\) , and (III) implies ρ=id _F ∧ λ ∈ {1,?1} ∧x ^σ ∈ {x ^ξ, ?x ^ξ} ?x ∈ \(\dot V\) . Other results obtained in this paper include the cases dimV = 2 resp. dimV ?N resp. ∣F∣ = 3.     

On one sided ideals of a semiprime ring with generalized derivations

Let R be a ring with center Z(R). An additive mapping ${F : R \longrightarrow R}$ is said to be a generalized derivation on R if there exists a derivation ${d : R \longrightarrow R}$ such that F(xy) = F(x)y + xd(y), for all ${x, y \in R}$ (the map d is called the derivation associated with F). Let R be a semiprime ring and U be a nonzero left ideal of R. In the present note we prove that if R admits a generalized derivation F, d is the derivation associated with F such that d(U) ≠ (0) then R contains some nonzero central ideal, if one of the following conditions holds: (1) R is 2-torsion free and ${F(xy) \in Z(R)}$ , for all ${x, y \in U}$ , unless F(U)U = UF(U) = Ud(U) = (0); (2) ${F(xy) \mp yx \in Z(R)}$ , for all ${x,y \in U}$ ; (3) ${F(xy) \mp [x,y] \in Z(R)}$ , for all ${x,y \in U}$ ; (4) F ≠ 0 and F([x,y]) = 0, for all ${x, y \in U}$ , unless Ud(U) = (0); (5) F ≠ 0 and ${F([x, y]) \in Z(R)}$ , for all ${x, y \in U}$ , unless either d(Z(R))U = (0) or Ud(U) = (0)n.     

An Engel condition with skew derivations

Let R be a prime ring and set [x, y]₁ = [x, y] = xy ? yx for ${x,y\in R}$ and inductively [x, y] _k = [[x, y] _k-1, y] for k > 1. We apply the theory of generalized polynomial identities with automorphisms and skew derivations to obtain the following result: If δ is a nonzero σ-derivation of R and L is a noncommutative Lie ideal of R so that [δ(x), x] _k  = 0 for all ${x \in L}$ , where k is a fixed positive integer, then charR = 2 and ${R\subseteq M_{2}(F)}$ for some field F. This result generalizes the case of derivations by Lanski and also the case of automorphisms by Mayne.     

A method of constructing integrable linear equations and its application to Hill's equation

Starting with a given equation of the form $$\ddot x + [\lambda + \varepsilon f(t)] x = 0$$ , where λ > 0 and ? ? l is a small parameter [heref(t) may be periodic, and so Hill's equation is included], we construct an equation of the form y + [λ + ?f (t) + ?² _g (t)]y = 0, integrable by quadratures, close in a certain sense to the original equation. For x₀ = y₀ and x ₀ ^′ = y ₀ ^′ , an upper bound is obtained for ¦y—x¦ on an interval of length Δt.