Let $\mathcal{J}_{n+1/2}$ be the Bessel function of order $n+1/2$. Let $j'_{n+1/2,1}$ denote the first zero of its derivative, which is also the location of the first maximum of $\mathcal{J}_{n+1/2}$.

My question: Given a non-negative integer $n$, is it true that $|\mathcal{J}_{m+1/2}(j'_{n+1/2,1})|<|\mathcal{J}_{n+1/2}(j'_{n+1/2,1})|$ holds for all non-negative integers $m\neq n$?

EDIT: The answer is yes and the proof can be found in the appendix of the paper http://arxiv.org/abs/1504.07306 Thanks for the helpful comment @Jung Wen Chen!

  • $\begingroup$ Have you written up the proof somewhere? I would like to read it. $\endgroup$ – username Oct 23 '14 at 8:53
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, see the edit $\endgroup$ – M Lemm Apr 29 '15 at 18:12
  • $\begingroup$ Jung Wen Chen isn't my name. I think MO is nicer if answers are answers judged for what they are worth without wondering whether the author is a graduate student or a tenured faculty or a field medalist, as it leads to automatically favouring answers from annointed mathematicians. If you really want to say something in your paper, a general acknowledgement to fruitful discussions on mathoverflow for example would be more fair to the process which lead to the tip. $\endgroup$ – username May 5 '15 at 16:48

We suppose $0<m<n$. It is known, from Landau's paper quoted above that $ n\to n^{1/3}J_n(x_n) $ increases (to some universal constant $b$). Thus $$ J_n(x_n)>\left(\frac{m}{n}\right)^{1/3}J_m(x_m)>\left(\frac{m}{x_n}\right)^{1/3}J_m(x_m). $$ It is also known that for $x>n$, $ x\to \sqrt{x^2-n^2}((J_n(x))^2+(Y_n(x))^2) $ increases to $2/\pi$. Therefore, as $x_n>n>m$ $$ |J_m(x_n)|^2\leq \frac{2}{\pi}\frac{1}{\sqrt{x_n^2 -m^2}}. $$ Therefore, the inequality holds at least for all $n,m$ such that $$ \frac{2}{\pi m^{2/3}(J_m(x_m))^2}<\sqrt{x_n^{2} -m^{2}} \frac{1}{x_n^{2/3}}, $$ and the left hand-side is between $1.39$ and $1.89$. If we write $$m=\frac{x_n}{1+\lambda x_n^{-2/3}}$$ we find that this inequality holds for all $x_n\geq40$, and $\lambda>11/10$ for example. The asymptotic of $x_n$ is quite well known, and it is precisely of that sort of magnitude, $x_n=n+\beta n^{1/3}+O(1)$. So, refining the argument and using $n$ instead of $x_n$, you would be very close. For $m=n-1$, you get $$ \frac{2}{\pi m^{2/3}(J_m(x_m))^2}<\sqrt{\beta^2 n^{2/3} +2\beta n^{4/3}+2n-1} \frac{1}{n^{2/3}}, $$ Asymptotically, this is not enough, because $\beta\approx 0.8$ and $\sqrt{1.6}=1.26<1.39$, but that does limit the range of $m$ to investigate, to $m\geq n- n^{1/3}/5$, so you are only have to consider the case when $J_m(x_n)>0$, $J_m^\prime(x_n)<0$, as the first root is further away ($m+ 1.8m^{1/3}$).

  • $\begingroup$ thank you for this answer. However, I am interested in an argument that circumvents the (well-studied) asymptotics of Bessel functions, because I want to prove the claim for all m. $\endgroup$ – M Lemm Jun 9 '14 at 17:15
  • $\begingroup$ Also, I don't see how you arrive at the second line. I suspect it should have J_n(x_n)^2 on the right-hand side. $\endgroup$ – M Lemm Jun 9 '14 at 17:17
  • $\begingroup$ Finally, I want to remind you that the question asks about Bessel functions of half-integer order. While Landau's result holds for arbitrary orders, I don't know if this is also true for the limiting result for the modulus that you use. $\endgroup$ – M Lemm Jun 9 '14 at 17:52
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @MLemm I am note sure what you mean by second line. If you mean second inequality, it is true for all $\nu\geq\frac{1}{2}$: $|H^{(1)}_{\nu}(x)|^2\sqrt{x^2-\nu^2}$ is increasing to its limit (for $x>\nu$), $2/\pi$. Page 447, 13.74 Watson's book. I used no asymptotic result which is not true for all $m$. The bound $x_{\nu}>\nu+0.8\nu^{1/3}$ is true for all $n>1$.Everything is for all $m$, of the form integer plus a half or not. $\endgroup$ – username Jun 9 '14 at 18:37
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the clarification. Do you have a reference for $x_\nu>\nu +0.8 \nu^{1/3}$? I can only find an old paper by Gatteschi & Laforgia, which adresses uniform lower bounds on $x_\nu$, but does not quite yield this for all $\nu > 1$. $\endgroup$ – M Lemm Jun 12 '14 at 1:06

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.