1. Introduction
Suppose that
denote the class of all analytic
in the open unit disk
With
A typical problem in geometric function theory is to study a functional made up of com-binations of the coefficients of the original function. Usually, there is a parameter over which the extremal value of the functional is needed. The paper deals with one important functional of this type: the Fekete-Szegö functional. The classical Fekete-Szegö functional is defined by
and it is derived from the Fekete-Szegö inequality. The problem of maximizing the abso-lute value of the functional μ in subclasses of normalized functions is called the Fekete-Szegö problem. In 1933, Fekete and Szegö [1] found the maximum value of
. as a function of the real parameters μ, for functions belonging to the class S. Since then, several researchers solved the Fekete-Szegö problem for various sublasses of the class of S and related subclasses of functions in A. The mathematicians who introduced the functional. M. Fekete and G. Szegö [1], were able to bound the classical functional in the class S by
.
Later Pfluger [2] used Jenkin’s method to show that this result holds for complex μ such that
. Keogh and Merkes [3] obtained the solution of
the Fekete-Szegö problem for the class of close-to-convex functions. Ma and Minda [4] [5] gave a complete answer to the Fekete-Szegö problem for the classes of strongly close-to-convex functions and strongly starlike functions. In the literature, there exists a large number of results about inequalities for
corresponding to various subclasses of A (see, for instance, [1]-[26]).
Suppose
is a subfamily of
consisting of functions that are univalent in Ω. For functions
, i.e.
is represented as:
(1)
and
(2)
I now define the Hadamard product of
and
as follows:
(3)
Next I consider the linear operator L defined as follows
(4)
In there
.
is the Pochhammer symbols defined,
and in terms of the Euler Γ-function, by
(5)
The aim of this paper is to present Lemma 4 to construct an analytic D-function inequality for the Fekete-Szego problem using a different approach.
The paper is organized as follows:
In section preliminaries I remind some basic notations in [6]-[26] such as The generalized linear operator, the linear multiplier differential operator
, subclass
.
Section: 3 Stability
-functional inequalities for complex parameter
.
Section: 4 Stability
-functional inequalities for real parameter
.
2. Preliminaries
Definition 1. The linear multiplier differential operator
was defined as follows:
In there
and
From the definition I lead to consequence
Corollary 1. If
then the linear multiplier differential operator
identified as
Definition 2. The generalized linear operator
In there
,
,
and
.
Definition 3. Suppose that
be a nonzero complex numbers with
,
and
,
and
. Let
. A function
is given by the following form
is said to belong to subclass
if:
(6)
Note: This class includes a variety of well-known subclasses of
.
For example,
3. Stability
-Functional Inequalities for Complex
Parameter μ
Let
be the class of all analytic functions
3.1. Condition for Existence of
-Functional Inequalities
Lemma 1. If
and
.(7)
Then
1)
,
2)
.
Lemma 2. Suppose that b, d be a nonzero complex numbers with
,
and
,
and
. If
of the form:
(8)
Then
(9)
Proof. we put
. Since
(10)
on the other hand
(11)
which implies the equality
Equating the coefficients of both sides we get
(12)
Therefore, according to (12) we have
(13)
Thus we have
(14)
(15)
From Lemma 1, We have
(16)
From (12) and (13), we get
(17)
So, We obtain
(18)
(19)
(20)
3.2. Construct the of
-Function Inequality
Theorem 1. Suppose that a, c be a complex parameters such that
,
and
,
and
. If
,
and
is a complex parameter, then
(21)
In there
(22)
Proof. We have
(23)
Thus, we get
(24)
By Lemma 3.1 we have
(25)
So, I get
(26)
So
(27)
Next by (22), I get
(28)
Case 1: If
Then from (28) I got the result
(29)
Case 2: If
(30)
4. Construct the of
-Function Inequality for Real
Parmerte μ
Theorem 2. Suppose that
,
,
and
. If
, and
then for
we have.
Proof. To prove Theorem 3.4 I consider the following cases:
Case 1:
Suppose that
From (27) I have
(31)
By lemma 1 with
I get
(32)
Now I prove the case 2
Case 2:
(31) I have
(33)
Next I prove the case 3
Case 3:
in this case I put
(34)
Next from (27) I have
(35)
Next continue to apply Lemma 1, I get
(36)
Case 4: Continue to apply the above inequality, I have
Form (35), I have
(37)
So the complete theorem 4.1 proves.
Corollary 2. Suppose that
,
,
and
,
and
(38)
If
,
(39)
then
(40)
5. Conclusion
In this article, I have presented Lemma 1 to prove the existence of functional inequalities involving complex and real parameters (of the
-functional inequalities for complex parameter
and
-functional inequalities for real parameter
).
Conflicts of Interest
The author declares no conflicts of interest.