Abstract
In this paper, we consider central configurations of the planar 3n-body problem consisting of n masses at the vertices of a regular n-gon inscribed in a circle of radius r and 2n masses at the vertices of a second (not necessarily regular) concentric 2n-gon inscribed in a circle of radius ar which are symmetric in the sense that the set of positions of the 3n masses and the set of the corresponding masses are invariant under the action of a finite subgroup of O(2). There are two different types of such configurations. In the first type, called regular bicircular central configurations of the 3n-body problem, the second 2n-gon is regular, n of the vertices of the second n-gon are aligned with the vertices of the first regular n-gon and the masses at the vertices of this 2n-gon alternate values. In the second type, called semiregular bicircular central configurations of the 3n-body problem, the second 2n-gon is semiregular and the masses at its vertices are all of them equal. A semiregular 2n-gon has n pair of vertices symmetric by a reflection of an angle \(\beta \) with respect to the axis of symmetry of the first regular n-gon. Our aim is to analyze the set of values of the parameter a for the regular 2n-gon and of the parameters \((a,\beta )\) for the semiregular 2n-gon providing symmetric bicircular central configurations. In particular, for all \(n\ge 2 \) we prove analytically the existence of symmetric bicircular central configurations with a (respectively \((a,\beta )\)) satisfying some particular conditions. Using either computer-assisted results or numerical results, we also describe the complete set of values of a (respectively \((a,\beta )\)) providing symmetric bicircular central configurations for \(n=2,3,4,5\) and we give numerical evidences that the pattern for \(n>5\) is the same as the one for \(n=5\).
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bang, D., Elmabsout, B.: Representations of complex functions, means on the regular \(n\)-gon and applications to gravitational potential. J. Phys. A Math. Gen. 36, 11435–11450 (2003)
Barrabés, E., Cors, J.M.: On central configurations of the \(\kappa n\)-body problem. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 476, 720–736 (2019)
Llibre, J., Mello, L.F.: Triple and quadruple nested central configurations for the planar n-body problem. Phys. D 238, 563–571 (2009)
Corbera, M., Delgado, J., Llibre, J.: On the existence of central configurations of p nested n-gons. Qual. Theory Dyn. Syst. 8, 255–265 (2009)
Hagihara, Y.: Celestial Mechanics, vol. 1, chapter 3. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1970)
Hénot, O.H., Rousseau, C.: Spiderweb central configurations. Qual. Theory Dyn. Syst. 18, 1135–1160 (2019)
Hoppe, R.: Erweiterung der bekannten Speciallsung des Dreikperproblems. Archiv. Math. Phys. 64, 218–223 (1879)
Klemperer, W.B.: Some properties of rosette configurations of gravitating bodies in homographic equilibrium. Astron. J. 67, 162–167 (1962)
Longley, W.R.: Some particular solutions in the problem of \(n\)-bodies. Am. Math. Soc. 13, 324–335 (1907)
Marchesin, M.: A family of three nested regular polygon central configurations. Astr. Space Sci. 364, 160 (2019)
Moeckel, R., Simo, C.: Bifurcations of spatial central configurations from planar ones. SIAM J. Math. Anal. 26, 978–998 (1995)
Montaldi, J.: Existence of symmetric central configurations. Celest. Mech. Dyn. Astron. 122, 405–418 (2015)
Siluszyk, A.: A new central configuration in the planar \(N\)-body problem. Carpathian J. Math. 30, 401–408 (2014)
Siluszyk, A.: On a class of central configurations in the planar 3n-body problem. Math. Comput. Sci. 11, 457–467 (2017)
Tucker, W.: Validated Numerics: A Short Introduction to Rigorous Computations. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2011)
Wintner, A.: The Analytical Foundations of Celestial Mechanics. Princeton Math Series 5. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1941)
Yu, X., Zhang, S.: Twisted angles for central configurations formed by two twisted regular polygons. J. Differ. Eq. 253, 2106–2122 (2012)
Yu, X., Zhang, S.: Central configurations formed by two twisted regular polygons. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 425, 372–380 (2015)
Zhao, F., Chen, J.: Central configurations for \((pN+gN)\)-body problems. Celestial Mech. Dynam. Astronom. 121, 101–106 (2015)
Zhang, S., Zhou, Q.: Periodic solutions for the 2N-body problems. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 131, 2161–2170 (2003)
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions.
Funding
The first author was partially supported by FEDER/MINECO grant numbers MTM2016-77278-P and PID2019-104658GB-I00. The second author was partially supported by FCT/Portugal through UID/MAT/04459/2019.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflicts of interests
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix 1: Proof of Proposition 1
We state and prove some auxiliary results that will be used in the proof of Proposition 1. We need the following two propositions taken from Bang and Elmabsout (2003).
Proposition 6
(Bang and Elmabsout 2003, Proposition 7) For \(0\leqslant a<1\), \(\alpha \in (0,1)\) and \(u\in [0,2\pi )\), we have
Proposition 7
(Bang and Elmabsout 2003, Proposition 8) For \(a>1\), \(\alpha \in (0,1)\) and \(u\in [0,2\pi )\), we have
We need the following auxiliary result.
Lemma 1
Let \(u\in {\mathbb {R}}\) and let \(\gamma =2\pi \,j/n+u\).
-
(a)
The following identities hold for all \(\ell \in {\mathbb {N}}\)
$$\begin{aligned} \sum _{j=1}^n \cos \left( \frac{2\ell \pi \,j}{n}+u\right) =0, \qquad \sum _{j=1}^n \sin \left( \frac{2\ell \pi \,j}{n}+u\right) =0, \end{aligned}$$(18)when \(n\ge 2\) and \(n\ne \ell \).
-
(b)
For \(n\ge 3\), we have
$$\begin{aligned} \sum _{j=1}^n \cos ^2 \gamma =\frac{n}{2}, \end{aligned}$$(19)and for \(n=2\) we have
$$\begin{aligned} \sum _{j=1}^2 \cos ^2\big (\pi \,j+u\big ) =2\cos ^2 u. \end{aligned}$$(20) -
(c)
For all \(n\ge 1\), we get
$$\begin{aligned}\sum _{j=1}^n\frac{a-\cos \gamma }{\Big (1+a^2-2a\cos \gamma \Big )^{3/2}}=-\frac{d}{da}\sum _{j=1}^n\frac{1}{\Big (1+a^2-2a\cos \gamma \Big )^{1/2}}. \end{aligned}$$ -
(d)
Let
$$\begin{aligned} L(a,u)=\sum _{j=1}^n\frac{1-1/a\cos \gamma }{\Big (1+a^2-2a\cos \gamma \Big )^{3/2}}. \end{aligned}$$We have \(L(a,u)=-n/2+O(a)\) when \(n\ge 3\) and \(L(a,u)=2-6\cos ^2u+O(a)\) when \(n=2\).
Proof
Using the sum of the first n terms of a geometric series, we get
for all \(\ell \in {\mathbb {Z}}\) with \(\ell \ne n\) (here \(i=\sqrt{-1}\)). This proves statement (a). From the formula of the cosinus of twice an angle an applying statement (a) with \(\ell =2\) and 2u instead of u, we get
This proves statement (b) for \(n>2\). Statement (b) for \(n=2\) and statement (c) follows from direct computations.
Expanding the function L in Laurent series around \(a=0\), we have
Then, when \(n\ge 3\) in view of (18) with \(\ell =1\) together with (19) we obtain
and when \(n=2\) in view of (18) with \(\ell =1\) and (20) we obtain
This completes the proof of statement (d).
\(\square \)
We need the following technical lemma.
Lemma 2
We have \(f(v)=(1+v)(1-v^{2n})-4 n v^n (1-v) > 0\) for \(n \ge 2\) and \(v \in (0,1)\).
Proof
Note that
where
We see that
Indeed,
and since
then
Therefore,
for some coefficients \(c_j\).
We will show by induction that
In view of (21), we have that the coefficients \(c_j\) satisfy \(c_0=1\), \(c_1=2 + 2 c_0=4\),
\(c_{2n-3} -2 c_{2n-2}=2\) and \(c_{2n-2}=1\) (and so \(c_{2n-3}= 4).\)
We prove by induction the cases for \(j=0,\ldots ,n-1\). It is clear for \(j=0,1\) and we will prove it for some \(2 \le j < n-1\). Note that by the induction hypotheses
and so the induction is satisfied for \(j=0,\ldots ,n-1\). For \(j=n\), we have
and for \(j=n+1\) we have
For \(j=n, \ldots , 2n-2\), the induction hypotheses yield \(c_j=(2n-j-1)^2\). Note that it is clear for \(j=n\) and \(j=n+1\) and we will show it for \(n+1<j \le 2n-2\). In particular, the cases \(j=2n-3\) and \(j=2n-2\) are also trivially satisfied. So, we only need to show it for \(n+1< j < 2n-3\). By the induction hypotheses for any \(n+1< j < 2n-3\), we have
and the induction hypotheses holds. In short, the lemma is proved. \(\square \)
The next result concerns properties of the functions \(K_i(a)\) introduced in Sect. 3.
Lemma 3
The following statements hold for all \(n\ge 2\):
-
(a)
\(K_6(a)>K_4(a)\) for \(a\in (0,1)\);
-
(b)
\(K_6(a)<K_4(a)\) for \(a>1\);
-
(c)
\(K_5>K_1>0\).
-
(d)
\(a^3K_4(a)=K_2(1/a)\) and \(a^3K_6(a)=K_3(1/a)\).
Proof
Note that
When \(a \in (0,1)\), using Lemma 1(c) and Proposition 6 with \(\alpha =1/2\) and \(u=0\), we get
and using Lemma 1(c) and Proposition 6 with \(\alpha =1/2\) and \(u=\pi /n\), we get
Hence, for \(a \in (0,1)\),
because the integrand is negative for \(a \in (0,1)\). Therefore, \(K_6(a) > K_4(a)\) for \(0< a < 1\) and so statement (a) is proved.
For \( a > 1\) using Lemma 1(c) and Proposition 7 with \(\alpha =1/2\) and \(u=0\), we get
and using Lemma 1(c) and Proposition 7 with \(\alpha =1/2\) and \(u=\pi /n\) and taking derivatives with respect to a, we get
Hence, for \(a > 1\),
because the integrand is positive for \(a >1\). Therefore, \(K_6(a) < K_4(a)\) for \(a > 1\) and statement (b) is proved.
To prove statement (c), we proceed as follows. Note that
Thus,
where \(A_0\), \(A_1\), \(A_2\) are the summations defined above. Applying Proposition 6, we have that \(A_0-A_1+A_2\) when \(a\in (0,1)\) is given by
On the other hand, applying Proposition 7 we have that \(A_0-A_1+A_2\) when \(a>1\) is given by
After doing the substitution \(a\rightarrow 1/a\), the expression \(\overline{A}\) can be written as \(a\, A\). Thus,
Now we show that \(A>0\). Note that taking \(v=ta\), we get
Using Lemma 2, we get that
for \(v < 1\). So \(A>0\) and taking the limit when \(a\rightarrow 1^-\) together with (23) and (22) we get \(\lim _{a\rightarrow 1^-}A=\lim _{a\rightarrow 1^+}\overline{A}=2(K_5-K_1)>0\) for all \(n\ge 2\). Moreover, \(K_1\) is positive by definition. So, we have proved statement (c).
Statement (d) follows from direct computations. \(\square \)
In the following lemma, we provide properties of the function \(\varDelta (a)=-K_1-K_5+a^3(K_2(a)+K_3(a))\) that appears in the denominator \(m_D\) in (4).
Lemma 4
For all \(n\ge 2\), the following statements hold.
-
(a)
\(\varDelta (a)\) is increasing for all \(a \in (0,1)\);
-
(b)
\(\varDelta (0)<0\), \(\varDelta (a)\rightarrow \infty \) when \(a\rightarrow 1^-\) and \(\varDelta (a)\rightarrow -\infty \) when \(a\rightarrow 1^+\);
-
(c)
\(\varDelta (a)<0\) for all \(a>1\);
-
(d)
\(\varDelta (a)\) has a unique zero and it belongs to the interval (0, 1).
Proof
We first note that setting \(b=1/a\) we have
Let \({\overline{\varDelta }}(b) =(1/b {{\bar{K}}}_2(b) +1/b {{\bar{K}}}_3(b))\). We want to show that for \(a\in (0,1)\)
So, it is sufficient to show that \(\varDelta (b)'<0\) for \(b>1\).
Let
Using Lemma 1(c), we get that
and so \(({\bar{\varDelta }}(b))' =\frac{1}{b^2} T_1 -\frac{1}{b} T_2\) where
Since from Proposition 7, we have
taking another derivative with respect to b we get
Since \(T_1 < 0\) (the integrand is negative) and \(T_2 >0\) (the integrand is positive), we readily obtain that \( ({{\bar{\varDelta }}}(b))' <0\) and so \(\varDelta '(a) >0\) for \(a \in (0,1)\). In short, statement (a) is proved.
It is clear that \(\varDelta (0)=-K_1-K_5<0\), see Lemma 3(c). Moreover,
so
Furthermore, \(\lim _{a\rightarrow 1} K_3(a)=K_5\) which is different from zero and from infinity. Hence, using (26) we get
This completes the proof of statement (b).
Now we show that \(\varDelta (a) < 0\) for \(a > 1\). To do so, we will show that \(a^3 K_2(a) +a^3 K_3(a)< 0\). Note that this is sufficient because \(-K_1 -K_5 < 0\). Clearly in view of (24) and (25), we have \(a^3 K_2(a) + a^3 K_3(a) = \frac{1}{b} ({{\bar{K}}}_2(b) + {{\bar{K}}}_3(b))=-\frac{1}{b}\frac{dT}{db}\) with \(b < 1\). So, applying Proposition 6 we get
and since the integrand is positive we readily have that \(a^3 K_2(a) + a^3 K_3(a)< 0\) for \(a > 1\) and so \(\varDelta (a) < 0\) for \(a > 1\). In short, statement (c) is proved.
The proof of statement (d) is a direct consequence of the statements (a)–(c) together with the Bolzano–Cauchy theorem. \(\square \)
Proof of Proposition 1
We expand \(m_2=a^3 m_{N,2}/{m_{D}}\) in Laurent series around \(a=0\), see (4). The expansion of \(m_D\) around \(a=0\) is given by
Using Lemma 1(d) with \(u=0\) (respectively \(u=\pi /n\)) to expand \(K_4\) (respectively \(K_6\)) in Laurent series around \(a=0\), we get
when \(n\ge 3\) and
when \(n=2\). Therefore, when \(n\ge 3\) we have
and since \(K_1,K_5 > 0\), we obtain \( \lim _{a \rightarrow 0^+} m_2 = 0^+\).
When \(n=2\), we compute directly the quantities \(K_1\) and \(K_5\) and we have \(K_1=1/4\), \(K_5=1/\sqrt{2}\). So expanding \(m_3\) in Laurent series around \(a=0\), we get
Hence, \( \lim _{a \rightarrow 0^+} m_2 = 0^-\). This completes the proof of statement (a).
For statement (b), we note that by (5)
Using the Laurent series of \(K_4\) and \(K_6\) around \(a=0\) given in (27), we get
when \(n\ge 3\) and so
which yields \(\lim _{a \rightarrow 0^+} m_3 = 0^+\) when \(n\ge 3\).
On the other hand, for \(n=2\), using the Laurent series of \(K_4\) and \(K_6\) around \(a=0\) given in (28) and the values of \(K_1\) and \(K_5\) for \(n=2\) computed above, we get
which yields
and so \( \lim _{a \rightarrow 0^+} m_3 = 0^+. \) This completes the proof of statement (b).
We expand \(m_3=a^3 m_{N,3}/m_{D}\) in Laurent series around \(a=1\) (with \(a > 1\)), see (4). Note that
and \(a^3=1+O(a-1)\). Hence,
Therefore,
Since in view of Lemma 3(c) we have \(K_5>K_1>0\), then \( \lim _{a \rightarrow 1^+} m_3 = -\infty \), which completes the proof of statement (c).
For statement (d), note that taking \(b=1/a\) and using Lemma 3(d) we have \(K_2(a)=K_2(1/b)=b^3K_4(b)\), \(K_3(a)=K_3(1/b)=b^3K_6(b)\), \(K_4(a)=K_2(1/a)/a^3=b^3K_2(b)\) and \(K_6(a)=K_3(1/a)/a^3=b^3K_3(b)\). Thus, using Lemma 1(d) for \(n\ge 3\) we have
Moreover, expanding in power series around \(b=0\), we get
Hence for \(n\ge 3\)
Proceeding in the same way for \(n=2\), we get
Using (29) and (30), the numerators of \(m_2\) and \(m_3\) (see (4)) can be written as
and the denominators of \(m_2\) and \(m_3\) (see again (4)) can be written as
for all \(n\ge 2\). Thus, the Laurent expansion of \(m_2\) and \(m_3\) around \(b=0\) becomes (after simplifying \(K_5-K_1\))
Then taking into account that in view of Lemma 3(c) we have \(K_5>K_1>0\), we conclude that
This proves statement (d).
From Lemma 3(a), we get \(K_6-K_4(a)>0\) for \(a\in (0,1)\). From Lemma 3(b), we get \(K_6-K_4(a)<0\) for \(a>1\), and from Lemma 3(c), we get \(K_5-K_1>0\). Thus from (5) we get \(m_2<m_3\) when \(a\in (0,1)\) and \(m_2>m_3\) when \(a>1\), which proves statement (e). \(\square \)
Appendix 2: Proof of Proposition 3
We need the following auxiliary lemma.
Lemma 5
Let
Then
if n is even and
if n is odd.
Proof
First note that
because
and
is finite for all \(a>0\). On the other hand,
Clearly \( \lim _{\beta \rightarrow \pi /n} N_4(a,\beta ) L_{5,1}(\beta )=0 \). Therefore, we need to study \( \lim _{\beta \rightarrow \pi /n} N_4(a,\beta ) L_{5,2}(\beta ) \). Note that expanding \(L_{5,2}\) around \(\beta =\pi /n\) we have
On the other hand, we can rewrite \(N_4(a,\beta )\) as
if n is even and as \({\bar{N}}_4(a,\beta )+{\bar{N}}_4^*(a,\beta )\) with
if n is odd. Expanding \({\bar{N}}_4\) around \(\beta =\pi /n\), we get
and expanding \({\bar{N}}_4^*\) also around \(\beta =\pi /n\) we get
Thus, expanding \(N_4(a,\beta ) L_{5,2}(\beta )\) around \(\beta =\pi /n\) we obtain
if n is even and
if n is odd. Taking the limit as \(\beta \rightarrow \pi /n\) we obtain the result that we wanted to prove. \(\square \)
Proof of Proposition 3
Note that
In view of Lemma 5, it is clear that the sign of \(F(a,\beta )\) as \(\beta \rightarrow \pi /n\) is determined by the sign of the difference G given by
where
When \(a \rightarrow \infty \), we have
This proves statement (a) of the proposition.
Furthermore, when \( a \rightarrow 1\), using Lemma 3(c), we obtain
So, statement (b) is proved.
Using Lemma 1(d) with \(u =\pi /n\), the expansion of \({\bar{L}}_4\) around \(a=0\) is given by \( {\bar{L}}_4(a)= -n/2+ O(a), \) when \(n\ge 3\) and \( {\bar{L}}_4(a)= 2 + O(a), \) when \(n=2\). Hence, when \(n\ge 3\) the expansion of G around \(a=0\) is \( G=K_1 +n/2 + O(a)\) and so \( \lim _{a \rightarrow 0} G >0. \) For \(n=2\), computing the value of \(K_1\), the expansion of G around \(a=0\) is \( G=1/4 -2 + O(a) \) and so \( \lim _{a \rightarrow 0} G =-7/4<0. \) This yields statement (c) of the proposition. \(\square \)
Appendix 3: Proof of Propositions 4 and 5
We need the following auxiliary lemma.
Lemma 6
We have
Proof
First note that
which is finite for all \(a>0\). Moreover, it is easy to see that
and so \( \lim _{\beta \rightarrow \pi /2n} N_5(\beta )(K_1-L_4(a,\beta ))=0, \) as we wanted to prove. \(\square \)
Proof of Proposition 4
In view of Lemma 6 the sign of \(F(a,\beta )\) around \(\beta =\pi /2n\) is determined by the sign of \(N_4(a,\beta )(K_1 -2 a^3 L_2(a,\beta ) + L_5(\beta ))\) unless \(\lim _{\beta \rightarrow \pi /2n} N_4(a,\beta )(K_1-2a^3L_2(a,\beta )+L_5(\beta ))= 0\). From the analysis of the sign of \(N_4(a,\beta )(K_1 -2 a^3 L_2(a,\beta ) + L_5(\beta ))\) around \(\beta \rightarrow \pi /2n\) we will see that \(\lim _{\beta \rightarrow \pi /2n} N_4(a,\beta )(K_1-2a^3L_2(a,\beta )+L_5(\beta ))\ne 0\).
In view of Proposition 2, we have that \(N_4(a,\beta ) < 0\) for \(\alpha \in (0,\pi /n)\) and so \(N_4(a,\beta ) < 0\). So, we need to study the sign of \(K_1 -2 a^3 L_2(a,\beta ) + L_5(\beta )\) as \(\beta \rightarrow \pi /2n\).
Hence,
where
When \(a\rightarrow 0\), we have that \({\bar{L}}_2(a) \rightarrow n\). So \( \lim _{a \rightarrow 0}H = K_1 +K_5 > 0 \) in view of Lemma 3(c). This proves statement (a) of the proposition.
To study the behavior when \(a \rightarrow \infty \), we first observe that making the change \(b=1/a\) we get \(a^3{\bar{L}}_2(a)=L(b,\pi /2n)\) where L is the function defined in Lemma 1(d). Thus, applying Lemma 1(d) with \(u=\pi /2n\) and using Lemma 3(c) we have
when \(n\ge 3\) and
when \(n=2\). This proves statement (b).
Finally, to prove statement (c) we need to study the sing of H when \(a \rightarrow 1\). Note that
In order to study the sign of \(\lim _{a \rightarrow 1} H\), we rewrite \(\lim _{a \rightarrow 1} H\) as \(\lim _{a\rightarrow 1} H_1\) where
Now applying Proposition 6 with \(\alpha =1/2\) and \(u=0\); \(n=1\), \(\alpha =1/2\) and \(u=0\); \(\alpha =1/2\) and \(u=-\pi /2n\); and \(\alpha =1/2\) and \(u=\pi /n\), respectively, we get
Setting \(v=at\) and \(N=2n\) and using Lemma 2, we get
Therefore \(\lim _{a\rightarrow 1^-} H_1<0\).
Applying Proposition 7 to \(H_1\) with \(\alpha =1/2\) and \(u=0\); \(n=1\), \(\alpha =1/2\) and \(u=0\); \(\alpha =1/2\) and \(u=-\pi /2n\); and \(\alpha =1/2\) and \(u=\pi /n\), respectively, we get
After doing the substitution \(a\rightarrow 1/a\), we get that \({\bar{H}}_1\) can be written as \(a\, H_1\). Thus, \(\lim _{a\rightarrow 1^+} H_1<0\). In short, we have that \(H < 0\) when \(a\rightarrow 1\) and statement (c) is proved. \(\square \)
Proof of Proposition 5
We start proving statement (a) for \(n=2\). Computing directly the quantities \(K_1\), \(L_2(a,\beta )\), \(L_4(a,\beta )\), \(N_4(a,\beta )\), \(L_5(\beta )\), and \(N_5(\beta )\) for a fixed \(\beta \) and expanding F around \(a=0\) we get
So \({\bar{F}}(\beta )<0\) for all \(\beta \in (\pi /2n,\pi /n)\) and \(n=2\).
Now we will show that for any \(\beta \in (\pi /2n,\pi /n)\) and \(n\ge 3\) we have \( {\bar{F}}(\beta ) >0 \). We fix \(\beta \) and we expand F around \(a=0\). First, expanding \(N_4\) around \(a=0\), we get
and in view of (18) we have \(N_4(a,\beta )=O(a)\). So expanding \(N_4(a,\beta )(K_1 -2 a^3 L_2(a,\beta ) + L_5(\beta )) \) around \(a=0\) we obtain
On the other hand, using Lemma 1(d) with \(u=\beta \) and \(n\ge 3\), the expansion of \(L_4\) around \(a=0\) is given by \(L_4(a,\beta )=-n/2+O(a)\). Therefore, around \(a=0\) we get
The sign of \(N_5(\beta )\) for any \(\beta \in (0,\pi /n)\) was studied in Proposition 2, and we obtained that \(N_5(\beta )\) is negative if \(\beta \in (0,\pi /2n)\) and positive if \(\beta \in (\pi /2n,\pi /n)\). Therefore, from (31) we have that for any \(\beta \in (\pi /2n,\pi /n)\) and \(n\ge 3\), \({\bar{F}}(\beta )>0\) which completes the proof of statement (a).
Now we consider the case in which \(a \rightarrow \infty \). Fixed \(\beta \in (\pi /2n,\pi /n)\) we have that \(N_5(\beta )\) is positive. Moreover,
Making the change \(b=1/a\) we get \(a^3L_2(a,\beta )=L(b,\beta )\), where L is the function defined in Lemma 1(d). Thus, applying Lemma 1(d) with \(u=\beta \), we get that \(\lim _{a\rightarrow \infty } a^3 L_2(a,\beta )=\lim _{b\rightarrow 0}-n/2+O(b)\) when \(n\ge 3\) and \(\lim _{a\rightarrow \infty } a^3 L_2(a,\beta )=\lim _{b\rightarrow 0}2-6\cos ^2(\beta )+O(b)\) when \(n=2\). So,
for all \(n\ge 2\). In short, for any \(\beta \in (\pi /2n,\pi )\) and \(n\ge 2\), \({\tilde{F}}(\beta )>0\). This concludes the proof of the proposition. \(\square \)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Corbera, M., Valls, C. On the Existence of Symmetric Bicircular Central Configurations of the 3n-Body Problem. J Nonlinear Sci 31, 88 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00332-021-09743-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00332-021-09743-z