Pith. sign in

REVIEW 6 minor 29 references

Polynomial potentials and nilpotent groups

T0 review · 0 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Polynomial potentials of degree $2N-2$ are partly solvable when the Hamiltonian is built from generators of a nilpotent group $\mathcal{G}_N$, with eigenfunctions given by a polynomial in $X_2$ times $\exp(-\int X_N\,dx)$ and with…

desk verdict A solid and honest unified algebraization of quasi-exactly solvable polynomial potentials; no load-bearing flaw, with new octic and E=0 results. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.11157 v2 pith:7ILK4VLQ submitted 2024-12-15 math-ph math.MP

W. Schweiger , W.H. Klink This is my paper · ORCID
classification math-phmath.MP
keywords quasi-exactlysolvablepolynomialpotentialsnilpotentgroupssexticoscillatorocticdecaticCasimirinvariantsSchrödingerequation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper claims that a broad class of one-dimensional polynomial Schrödinger operators of degree $2N-2$ is quasi-exactly solvable through a single algebraic scheme. The Hamiltonians are written as $H_N=X_0^2+X_N^2+\alpha X_{N-1}$, where the $X_i$ are generators of an irreducible representation of a nilpotent group $\mathcal{G}_N$ that generalizes the Heisenberg group. For eigenfunctions of the form $\psi(x)=p(x)\exp(-\int dx\,X_N)$ with $p$ a polynomial of degree $M$ in $X_2$, the paper derives an overdetermined coefficient system and shows that it has nontrivial solutions when $\alpha=-1-2M/(N-1)$ and $(N-3)$ Casimir invariants satisfy constraints. Explicit energies and eigenfunctions follow for sextic, octic, and decatic potentials, and the harmonic oscillator emerges as the $N=2$ case. The value is that quasi-exact solvability is thereby shown to be available beyond the usual $\mathrm{sl}(2,\mathbb{R})$ algebraization.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the $(N+1)$-parameter nilpotent group $\mathcal{G}_N$ with elements $(a,b_1,\dots,b_N)$ and the multiplication (4). Its irreducible representations on $L^2(\mathbb{R})$ give generators $X_0=i\partial_x$ and $X_k=\beta_k+\beta_{k-1}x+\cdots+\beta_1 x^{k-1}/(k-1)!$, with $[X_0,X_n]=iX_{n-1}$. The Casimir invariants $C_k$ are the polynomials of the $\beta$s in (9), and the key identity (10) expresses every $X_k$ with $k\ge 3$ as a polynomial in $X_2$ with coefficients built from the Casimirs. This identity is what closes the polynomial ansatz. A scaling argument then restricts the potential to $V_N=X_N^2+\alpha X_{N-1}$, the combinations that scale like the kinetic term $X_0^2$, and the resulting coefficient recursion (19) is the overdetermined system that fixes $\alpha$, the energy, and the allowed Casimir values.

What would settle it

For a fixed $N$ and $M$, for example $N=4$ and $M=4$ with $\beta_1=6$, $\beta_2=2$, $\beta_3=-0.2$, and $\beta_4=\beta_2\beta_3/\beta_1-\beta_3^2/(3\beta_1^2)$ so that $C_3=0$, solve the cubic (47) for the three energies and construct the three wave functions from (48); if any of these pairs fails to satisfy the original differential equation $H\psi=E\psi$ on a fine grid of $x$ values, the claimed solvability criterion is wrong.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the eigenvalue problem for $H_N=X_0^2+X_N^2+\alpha X_{N-1}$ is algebraized by the ansatz $\psi=p(X_2)\exp(-\int dx\,X_N)$. Inserting this ansatz into the Schrödinger equation and expressing $X_N$ and $X_{N-1}$ through the Casimir invariants converts the problem into the linear recursion (19) for the coefficients $a_m$. The highest-degree equation fixes $\alpha=-1-2M/(N-1)$; $M$ of the remaining equations determine $a_0,\dots,a_{M-1}$ recursively, while the extra equations determine the energy and impose $(N-3)$ constraints on the Casimirs. Consequently a three-parameter family of potential parameters is quasi-exactly solvable for even $N\ge 2$, and a two-parameter family after symmetrization for odd $N\ge 3$. The paper gives explicit closed-form energies and eigenfunctions for sextic, symmetrized octic, and decatic potentials, and a general set of $E=0$ solutions with $M=kN$ or $kN+1$.

Load-bearing premise

The whole construction is confined to potentials of the exact form $V_N=X_N^2+\alpha X_{N-1}$; the scaling argument shows that these are the combinations that scale like the kinetic term $X_0^2$, but it does not show that every quasi-exactly solvable polynomial potential must have this form.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The $N=2$ specialization reproduces the full harmonic-oscillator spectrum, with the polynomial $p(X_2)$ becoming the shifted Hermite polynomial.
  • For sextic potentials ($N=4$), the condition $C_3=0$ guarantees solvability for every polynomial degree $M$, with single closed-form eigenvalues for $M=0,\dots,3$ and cubic equations for the energies when $M=4,5$.
  • Symmetrized octic potentials ($N=5$) admit explicit parity-even and parity-odd eigenfunctions, which the paper presents as absent from the existing literature.
  • Decatic potentials ($N=6$) yield explicit energies and eigenfunctions for $M=0,\dots,5$; with $C_3=C_5=0$ the recursion reduces to a four-term relation solvable for arbitrary $M$.
  • For $E=0$, the potentials $V_{N,M}(x)=x^{2N-2}-(2M+N-1)|x|^{N-2}$ have normalizable zero-energy eigenfunctions whenever $M=kN$ or $kN+1$, with coefficients from the two-term recursion (96).

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A natural extension not pursued in the paper is to read the allowed $M$ values as a spectral-flow pattern: as $M$ runs through $kN$ and $kN+1$, successive excited levels cross $E=0$ in the deepening double well, so the exact solutions could be used to track level order and node counts for arbitrary $N$.
  • The reducible-representation construction implies that the same nilpotent-group algebraization solves charged-particle motion in crossed polynomial electric and magnetic fields; the paper sketches this one-way relation, and a testable next step is to check completeness of the direct-integral decomposition for $N>2$.
  • The $C_3\neq 0$ sextic examples indicate the method produces eigenfunctions that are not contained in finite-dimensional invariant subspaces, so the notion of quasi-exact solvability here is broader than $\mathrm{sl}(2,\mathbb{R})$ invariant-subspace solvability; this points to searching other conditionally solvable potentials for hidden nilpotent structure.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

0 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper studies one-dimensional Schrödinger operators of the form H_N = X_0^2 + X_N^2 + α X_{N-1}, where X_0, ..., X_N are generators of an irreducible representation of an (N+1)-parameter nilpotent group G_N that generalizes the Heisenberg group. The authors insert the ansatz ψ = p(X_2) exp(−∫ X_N dx) with p a polynomial of degree M and derive the overdetermined linear recursion (19) for the polynomial coefficients. They show that a nontrivial solution requires α = −1 − 2M/(N−1), and that the remaining consistency conditions determine the energy and impose (N−3) constraints on the Casimir invariants, leaving a three-parameter family of quasi-exactly solvable polynomial potentials of degree 2N−2. The formalism is applied to sextic (N=4), symmetrized octic (N=5), and decatic (N=6) potentials, with comparisons to known results, and an infinite family of E=0 solutions V_{N,M}(x) = x^{2N−2} − (2M+N−1)|x|^{N−2} is derived for M = kN, kN+1. A reducible representation is used to relate the problem to a charged particle in perpendicular polynomial electric and magnetic fields.

Significance. If correct, the paper provides a unified algebraic treatment of a broad class of quasi-exactly solvable polynomial potentials, reproducing and extending known sextic and decatic results, and giving new symmetrized octic potentials and an infinite zero-energy family. The central derivation is explicit and checkable: Eq. (19) follows from the ansatz and the Casimir decomposition (10), and the specializations for N=4,5,6 are carried out with explicit energies and eigenfunctions. The paper is honest about its scope: the Hamiltonian form (13) is motivated by a scaling argument rather than derived from completeness, and the general-N statement is conditional on the existence of solutions to the stated Casimir constraints. These limitations are stated in the text rather than hidden, which is a strength of the presentation.

minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 2] In the paragraph after Eq. (5), the phrase "a whole chain of of nilpotent subgroups" contains a duplicated "of" and should be corrected.
  2. [Section 4.1] In the M=4 paragraph, the sentence "the eigenenergies E of the the ground state, the second and the fourth excited states" contains a duplicated "the" and should be corrected.
  3. [Section 5] The word "Hamitonian" appears in the sentence introducing Eq. (104); this should read "Hamiltonian".
  4. [Figures 1–8] Several figure captions contain the typo "For better visability"; this should be "visibility".
  5. [Section 3.2] The discussion after Eq. (19) states that the remaining (N−3) equations fix Casimirs and one equation fixes the energy; this assumes generic independence of those equations. Since no general proof of solvability of the resulting polynomial constraints is given, it would be helpful to state explicitly that the general result is conditional on the existence of solutions to these constraints, as is already implied by the examples.
  6. [Section 3.2, Eq. (18)] Division by C_1^{N−3} requires C_1 ≠ 0; this is consistent with the normalizability assumption β_1 > 0 stated near Eq. (15), but the condition could be repeated at the point of division for clarity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the derivation is self-contained, and the only self-citation is motivational rather than load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is self-contained. The Hamiltonian form H = X_0^2 + X_N^2 + alpha X_{N-1} is selected by a scaling argument (Sec. 3), and the paper's claims are explicitly conditional on that form; this is a scope restriction, not a fitted input. The eigenfunction ansatz p(X_2) exp(-integral X_N) is substituted into the Schroedinger equation to produce the coefficient system (19). The parameter alpha is then fixed by the highest-order equation, Eq. (22)-(24), and the Casimir constraints are derived from the same overdetermined system rather than being imposed from external data. The explicit N=4, N=5, and N=6 examples follow by solving the displayed recursion relations, and comparisons with literature results are genuinely independent checks. The only self-citation is to the authors' prior quartic-group paper [18], which serves as motivation and as a special case; the present group construction and equations (2)-(10) are derived here, so the quartic result is generalized rather than reused as a premise. The acknowledged lack of a proof that the Casimir constraints are solvable for all N and M is an incompleteness, not circularity. No prediction is renamed from a fit, and no load-bearing conclusion reduces to a self-citation.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The paper's central claim rests on a specific ansatz for eigenfunctions and a scaling-based restriction on the potential form. These are explicit assumptions, not derived results. The group-theoretic machinery is standard, and no external data are used.

assumptions (4)
  • ad hoc to paper Eigenfunctions are assumed to have the form p(x) exp(-∫ X_N dx) with p a degree-M polynomial in X_2.
    This ansatz is imposed to achieve algebraization; it is not derived from the Schrödinger equation.
  • domain assumption The Hamiltonian is restricted to the form X_0^2 + X_N^2 + α X_{N-1} based on scaling invariance.
    Section 3 argues that only these combinations scale like the kinetic term, limiting the class of potentials studied.
  • domain assumption For odd N, the potential is symmetrized via |x| and eigenfunctions are continued as even/odd functions with continuity at x=0.
    Necessary to obtain normalizable solutions for odd N; introduces additional constraints.
  • standard math Standard representation theory of nilpotent groups, including the existence of Casimir operators and the relation (10).
    Background used in Section 2 without proof.
invented entities (1)
  • Nilpotent group G_N
    purpose: Algebraic framework to generate quasi-exactly solvable potentials.
    A new mathematical construction generalizing the Heisenberg group; it is defined in the paper and has no independent physical evidence. It is a mathematical tool, not a physical entity.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Polynomial potentials and nilpotent groups." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7ILK4VLQ

@misc{pith2026241211157,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Polynomial potentials and nilpotent groups},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7ILK4VLQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.11157}
}
abstract

This paper deals with the partial solution of the energy-eigenvalue problem for one-dimensional Schr\"odinger operators of the form $H_N=X_0^2+V_N$, where $V_N=X_N^2+\alpha X_{N-1}$ is a polynomial potential of degree $(2N-2)$ and $X_i$ are the generators of an irreducible representation of a particular nilpotent group $\mathcal{G}_N$. Algebraization of the eigenvalue problem is achieved for eigenfunctions of the form $\sum_{k=0}^M a_k X_2^k \exp(-\int dx\, X_N)$. It is shown that the overdetermined linear system of equations for the coefficients $a_k$ has a nontrivial solution, if the parameter $\alpha$ and $(N-3)$ Casimir invariants satisfy certain constraints. This general setting works for even $N\geq 2$ and can also be applied to odd $N\geq 3$, if the potential is symmetrized by considering it as function of $|x|$ rather than $x$. It provides a unified approach to quasi-exactly solvable polynomial interactions, including the harmonic oscillator, and extends corresponding results known from the literature. Explicit expressions for energy eigenvalues and eigenfunctions are given for the quasi-exactly solvable sextic, octic and decatic potentials. The case of $E=0$ solutions for general $N$ and $M$ is also discussed. As physical application, the movement of a charged particle in an electromagnetic field of pertinent polynomial form is shortly sketched.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.11157 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The sextic potential (X2 4 + αX3) for α = −1 (left) and α = − 5 3 (right), β1 = 6., β2 = 2., β3 = −0.2 and β4 = β2β3 β1 − β 3 2 3β 2 1 (i.e. C3 = 0) along with the corresponding analytically calculable energy eigenvalues and eigenfunctions. Potential and wave functions are plotted as functions of y = arctan x. The normalization of the wave function has been chosen such that R π/2 −π/2 dy Ψsext M 2 (x(y)) = 1. M=2 gr… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Same as in Fig. 1, but for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Same as in Fig. 1, but for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The symmetrized sextic potential for α = − 7 3 , β4 = 0.5 (left) and β4 = −0.5 (right), β1 = 16β 4 4 , β2 = 8β 3 4 and β3 = 10 3 β 2 4 along with the cor￾responding analytically calculable energy eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of the parity even ground state and the pa…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The symmetrized octic potential for α = −2, β2 = 2., β5 = 0.5 and β1, β2, β4 chosen according to Eq. (77), upper sign (left), and Eq. (76) (right), respectively. Drawn are also the corresponding analytically calculable energy eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of even (lef…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The decatic potential for α = − 13 5 , β1 = 0.5, β3 = −0.1, β5 = 0.949938, β2 = β4 = β6 = 0, (left) and α = −3, β1 = 0.5, β3 = −0.1, β5 = 1.26, β2 = β4 = β6 = 0 (right), along with the corresponding an￾alytically calculable energy eigenvalues and eigenfunctions. Potent…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The potential (100) for M = 0, 1, N = 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10 (left) along with the corresponding E = 0 eigenfunctions (right). Potentials and wave functions are plotted as functions of y = arctan x. The normalization of the wave functions has been chosen such that R π/2 −π/…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The potential (100) for N=4 (sextic potential), M=0,1,4,5,8,9 (left) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p034_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

29 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Turbiner, A

    A. Turbiner, A. Ushveridze, Spectral singularities and quasi-exactly solv- able quantal problem, Phys. Lett. A 126 (3) (1987) 181–183. doi: 10.1016/0375-9601(87)90456-7

    work page doi:10.1016/0375-9601(87)90456-7 1987

  2. [2]

    Ushveridze, Quasi-Exactly Solvable Models in Quantum Mechanics, Taylor & Francis, New York, 1994

    A. Ushveridze, Quasi-Exactly Solvable Models in Quantum Mechanics, Taylor & Francis, New York, 1994. doi:10.1201/9780203741450

    work page doi:10.1201/9780203741450 1994

  3. [3]

    Turbiner, Quasiexactly solvable problems and SL(2) group, Commun

    A. Turbiner, Quasiexactly solvable problems and SL(2) group, Commun. Math. Phys. 118 (1988) 467. doi:10.1007/BF01466727

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01466727 1988

  4. [4]

    Gonz´ alez-L´ opez, N

    A. Gonz´ alez-L´ opez, N. Kamran, P. J. Olver, Normalizability of one- dimensional quasi-exactly solvable Schr¨ odinger operators, Commun. Math. Phys. 153 (1993) 117. doi:10.1007/BF02099042

    work page doi:10.1007/bf02099042 1993

  5. [5]

    Turbiner, One-dimensional quasi-exactly solvable Schr¨ odinger equa- tions, Phys

    A. Turbiner, One-dimensional quasi-exactly solvable Schr¨ odinger equa- tions, Phys. Rept. 642 (2016) 1–71. arXiv:1603.02992, doi:10.1016/ j.physrep.2016.06.002

    arXiv 2016

  6. [6]

    Gomez-Ullate, N

    D. Gomez-Ullate, N. Kamran, R. Milson, Quasi-exact solvability in a general polynomial setting, Inverse Problems 23 (5) (2007) 1915. doi: 10.1088/0266-5611/23/5/008

    work page doi:10.1088/0266-5611/23/5/008 2007

  7. [7]

    Magyari, Exact quantum mechanical solutions for anharmonic oscil- lators, Phys

    E. Magyari, Exact quantum mechanical solutions for anharmonic oscil- lators, Phys. Lett. A 81 (1981) 116–118. doi:10.1016/0375-9601(81) 90037-2

    doi:10.1016/0375-9601(81 1981

  8. [8]

    G. P. Flessas, Exact solutions for anharmonic oscillators J. Phys. A: Mathematical and General 14 (6) (1981) L209. doi:10.1088/ 0305-4470/14/6/001

    work page 1981

Show all 29 references
  1. [9]

    N. Saad, R. L. Hall, H. Ciftci, Sextic anharmonic oscillators and orthog- onal polynomials, J. Phys. A: Mathematical and General 39 (26) (2006) 8477-8486. doi:10.1088/0305-4470/39/26/014

    2006 doi

  2. [10]

    F. Maiz, M. M. Alqahtani, N. Al Sdran, I. Ghnaim, Sextic and de- catic anharmonic oscillator potentials: Polynomial solutions, Physica B: Condensed Matter 530 (2018) 101–105. doi:10.1016/j.physb.2017. 11.010. 40

    2018 doi

  3. [11]

    Amore, F

    P. Amore, F. M. Fern´ andez, On some conditionally solvable quantum- mechanical problems, Phys. Scripta 95 (10) (2020) 105201.arXiv:2007. 03448, doi:10.1088/1402-4896/abb252

    2020 doi

  4. [12]

    Manimegalai, S

    K. Manimegalai, S. Paul, M. M. Panja, T. Sil, Study of the sextic and decatic anharmonic oscillators using an interpolating scale func- tion, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 135 (2) (2020) 133. doi:10.1140/epjp/ s13360-020-00130-3

    2020 doi

  5. [13]

    S. Li, I. Marquette, Y.-Z. Zhang, Bethe ansatz solutions and hidden sl(2) algebraic structure for a class of quasi-exactly solvable systems, Ann. Phys. 462 (2024) 169595. arXiv:2309.11731, doi:10.1016/j. aop.2024.169595

    2024 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Brandon, N

    D. Brandon, N. Saad, Exact and approximate solutions to Schr¨ odinger’s equation with decatic potentials, Central European Journal of Physics 11 (3) (2013) 279–290. doi:10.2478/s11534-013-0179-3

    2013 doi

  7. [15]

    Sk´ ala, J

    L. Sk´ ala, J. Dvoˇ r´ ak, V. Kapsa, Analytic solutions of the Schr¨ odinger equation for the modified quartic oscillator, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 36 (12) (1997) 2953–2961. doi:10.1007/BF02435720

    1997 doi

  8. [16]

    Znojil, Symmetrized quartic polynomial oscillators and their partial exact solvability, Phys

    M. Znojil, Symmetrized quartic polynomial oscillators and their partial exact solvability, Phys. Lett. A 380 (16) (2016) 1414 – 1418. doi: 10.1016/j.physleta.2016.02.035

    2016 doi

  9. [17]

    Quesne, Quasi-exactly solvable symmetrized quartic and sextic poly- nomial oscillators, Eur

    C. Quesne, Quasi-exactly solvable symmetrized quartic and sextic poly- nomial oscillators, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 132 (11) (2017) 450. doi: 10.1140/epjp/i2017-11718-y

    2017 doi

  10. [18]

    W. H. Klink, W. Schweiger, Polynomial solutions of generalized quartic anharmonic oscillators, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 138 (7) (2023) 656. arXiv: 2007.11326, doi:10.1140/epjp/s13360-023-04282-w

    2023 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Jørgensen, W

    P. Jørgensen, W. Klink, Quantum mechanics and nilpotent groups. I. The curved magnetic field, Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 21 (1985) 969–

    1985

  12. [20]

    Klink, Nilpotent groups and anharmonic oscillators, in: E

    W. Klink, Nilpotent groups and anharmonic oscillators, in: E. Tanner, R. Wilson (Eds.), Noncompact Groups and Some of their Applications, Vol. 429 of NATO ASI series C, 1994, pp. 301–313. 41

    1994

  13. [21]

    W. K. Tung, Group Theory in Physics, World Scientific, Singapore,

  14. [22]

    A. O. Barut, R. Raczka, Theory of Group Representations and Appli- cations, World Scientific, Singapore, 1986

    1986

  15. [23]

    Gesztesy, R

    F. Gesztesy, R. Nichols, and M. Zinchenko, Sturm–Liouville Operators, Their Spectral Theory, and Some Applications, Colloquium Publica- tions, Vol. 67, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2024

    2024

  16. [25]

    Jafarpour, D

    M. Jafarpour, D. Afshar, Calculation of energy eigenvalues for the quan- tum anharmonic oscillator with a polynomial potential, J. Phys. A: Mathematical and General 35 (1) (2001) 87. doi:10.1088/0305-4470/ 35/1/307

    2001 doi

  17. [26]

    Pathak, S

    A. Pathak, S. Mandal, Classical and quantum oscillators of sextic and octic anharmonicities, Phys. Lett. A 298 (4) (2002) 259-270. doi:10. 1016/s0375-9601(02)00500-5

    2002

  18. [27]

    B. P. Mahapatra, N. Santi, N. B. Pradhan, A new general approximation scheme (NGAS) in quantum theory: Application to the anharmonic and double well oscillators, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 20 (2005) 2687–2714. arXiv:quant-ph/0406036, doi:10.1142/S0217751X05022408

    2005 arXiv

  19. [28]

    A. V. Turbiner, A new approach to the eigenvalue problem in quantum mechanics: convergent perturbation theory for rising potentials, J. Phys. A 14 (1981), 1641-1649. doi:10.1088/0305-4470/14/7/020

    1981 doi

  20. [29]

    Landau, E

    L. Landau, E. Lifshitz, Quantum Mechanics: Non-Relativistic Theory, Vol. 3 of Course of Theoretical Physics, Butterworth-Heinemann, 1981. 42

    1981

  21. [999]

    doi:10.2977/prims/1195178792

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.