Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 4 minor 38 references

This paper claims that the radial part of the Brioschi–Halphen equation has three explicit solution families—quasi-exactly solvable polynomial, exact Jacobi, and Dirac-delta distributional—connected through an sl(2,R) algebraization.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 15:26 UTC pith:7K5RJLHV

load-bearing objection The radial reduction rests on a false chain rule — Eq. (10) is not the BHE, and every downstream result solves the wrong operator. the 5 major comments →

arxiv 2512.19751 v2 pith:7K5RJLHV submitted 2025-12-18 math.CA math-phmath.FAmath.MP

On Radial Distribution and Quasi-exact Solvability of Brioschi-Halphen Equation

U.S. Idiong , U.N. Bassey , O.S. Obabiyi This is my paper
classification math.CA math-phmath.FAmath.MP MSC 46F1016S30
keywords Brioschi-Halphen equationLamé equationquasi-exact solvabilityasymptotic separation of variablesradial wave functionJacobi polynomialsdistributional solutionsl(2,R) algebraization
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper aims to show that, after an asymptotic separation of variables in the complex plane, the radial part of the Brioschi–Halphen equation becomes a real second-order ODE that is quasi-exactly solvable and, in a special parameter case, exactly solvable, while also admitting a distributional solution made of derivatives of the Dirac delta. If correct, this gives explicit radial wave functions for an equation descended from Lamé's equation, which appears in the study of planetary motion. A sympathetic reader would care because these are rare explicit solution families for a fourth-order Fuchsian-type equation, and the paper presents them as a single Gelfand-triple picture: polynomial solutions in the smooth dense subspace, Jacobi-type solutions in L2, and delta distributions in the dual space. The three families are derived through Lie-algebraic algebraization, gauge transformations, and Fourier-transform methods.

Core claim

The central claim is that the Brioschi–Halphen equation, written with w=rζ and subjected to the joint limit r→∞, θ→2π, reduces to the real radial equation (4r^3-g2r-g3)R''-(n-1/2)(6r^2-g2/2)R'+n(2n-1)rR-BR=0. This radial operator is shown to be quasi-exactly solvable and to preserve the polynomial space P_{n+1}; its sl(2,R)-algebraic form has a tridiagonal Jacobi-matrix representation, and the paper derives three solution families. First, the quasi-exactly solvable eigenfunctions are R_n(r)=2^{-j}a_0(1+Σ μ_m r^m)∏_{s=1}^3(r-e_s)^{η_s-j/2}. Second, at j=1/2 the paper gives the exact asymptotic solution R(r)≈k_±^{-1/2}∏(r-e_s)^{-ν_s} w_±^{-γ±1/2}(w_±-1)^{ν-γ±1/2} P_m^{(ν-γ,γ-1)}(2w_±-1), with

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the radial operator H=(4r^3-g2r-g3)d^2/dr^2-(n-1/2)(6r^2-g2/2)d/dr+n(2n-1)r-B, obtained under the nonstandard derivative identities D=2ζ^{-1}∂_r=2r^{-1}∂_ζ. The paper algebraizes H using the sl(2,R) generators J_-=d/dr, J_0=rd/dr-j, J_+=r^2d/dr-2jr, which yields a tridiagonal Jacobi matrix with entries τ_{k,k+1}, τ_{k,k-1}, τ_{k,k-2} driving a three-term recurrence. Gauge transformations and point-canonical transformations then map the operator to Schrödinger or hypergeometric form, while the Fourier transform on the Gelfand triple converts the radial equation into a recurrence for delta-derivative coefficients.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the asymptotic separation Ψ(rζ)=R(r)Θ(ζ)+o(r^{-1}) as r→∞ and θ→2π, together with the identities D=2ζ^{-1}∂_r=2r^{-1}∂_ζ; if these nonstandard derivative identities or the limit interchange fail, equation (10) is not the radial part of the BHE and none of the three solution families applies to the original equation.

What would settle it

Evaluate ∂/∂w and ∂/∂w̄ for w=rζ using the usual complex differential calculus and compare with D=2ζ^{-1}∂_r=2r^{-1}∂_ζ; if the identities do not hold except in the stated limiting sense, equation (10) is not equivalent to the original BHE. A second concrete check is to substitute a truncated delta-comb R_N(r)=Σ_{k=0}^N a_k δ^{(k)}(r) into the lemniscatic radial equation for g2=1, g3=0, n=-2 and test whether the residual tends to zero as N grows.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • If the quasi-exact solvability claim is correct, the first n+1 eigenvalues of the radial BHE, parametrized by the accessory parameter B, are obtained by diagonalizing a finite tridiagonal matrix, with closed-form determinant formulas for all n.
  • If Theorem 5 is correct, the j=1/2 radial wave functions are explicitly Jacobi polynomials with an exponential argument, giving normalization constants, orthogonality relations, and large-r asymptotics that can be used in physical computations.
  • If the distributional theorem is correct, the lemniscatic radial BHE has compactly supported distributional solutions, not only smooth ones, with coefficients expressible by two real constants K1, K2 satisfying K1+K2=1.
  • The non-self-adjointness of the radial operator implies that a complete spectral treatment requires both the operator and its adjoint, which the paper shows is closed thanks to the density of the polynomial space.
  • The determinant formulas for B provide a quantization condition on the accessory parameter, connecting the algebraic solvability of the radial equation to the original Lamé-type parameter.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The entire derivation rests on the asymptotic separation Ψ=R(r)Θ(ζ)+o(r^{-1}) and on the identities D=2ζ^{-1}∂_r=2r^{-1}∂_ζ; these are not the standard Wirtinger identities, so a skeptical reader should check whether equation (10) really is the radial part of the original complex BHE rather than a new auxiliary equation. If the reduction fails, the three solution families still solve the auxiliary
  • The three solution families suggest a general pattern for Fuchsian equations obtained from Lamé-type transformations: polynomial QES solutions, exact Jacobi-type solutions, and delta-comb distributional solutions all coexist, linked by the same tridiagonal recurrence. This pattern could be tested on other equations with four regular singularities.
  • In Theorem 8, the condition q=-iB with q real implies that a real nonzero accessory parameter B would make the recurrence denominator vanish or collapse, so nontrivial distributional solutions may exist only for purely imaginary B or special parameter values; this is a concrete testable restriction.
  • A direct numerical check would be to substitute a truncated sum R_N(r)=Σ_{k=0}^N a_k δ^{(k)}(r) into the lemniscatic radial equation with g2=1, g3=0, n=-2 and measure the residual as N grows; convergence of the residual to zero would support the distributional claim.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

5 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper claims to derive a radial reduction of the Brioschi–Halphen equation (BHE), algebraize it as a quasi-exactly solvable (QES) sl(2,R) operator, obtain exact Jacobi-polynomial solutions via a point canonical transformation, and construct a delta-distribution solution via Fourier transform. The central object is Eq. (10), obtained in §2 from an asymptotic separation of variables; all later results (Corollary 2, Theorems 4, 5, and 8) are consequences of that equation. The paper also contains a self-contained proof of the standard sl(2) QES algebraization theorem (Theorem 1).

Significance. If the results were correct, the paper would provide explicit QES, exact Jacobi, and distributional solutions for a radial form of the BHE, a second-order ODE of Lamé type. The proof of Theorem 1 is a useful recapitulation of the standard sl(2) algebraization, and the paper explicitly cites prior work on algebraization of the BHE [3,4]. However, the paper does not establish its central claims: the radial reduction is based on incorrect derivative identities, and the subsequent algebraization contains coefficient mismatches. The paper would need substantial rewriting around a correct radial equation before its conclusions could be considered.

major comments (5)
  1. [§2, Eqs. (7)–(8)] The derivation of the radial ODE rests on the identities D=2ζ^{-1}∂_r=2r^{-1}∂_ζ and D^2=4ζ^{-2}∂_r^2. These are not the Wirtinger derivatives for w=rζ. For f(w)=w^2 with ζ=1, the correct derivative d/dw is 2r, whereas 2ζ^{-1}∂_r f gives 4r. The exact chain rule on a ray is d/dw=ζ^{-1}d/dr, with no factor 2, and the assertion that d wbar/dw 'has two values' is not a legitimate derivation. Consequently Eq. (10) is not a reduction of Eq. (1): substituting w=r into (1) and dividing by 4 gives a first-derivative coefficient (1-2n)/4, whereas Eq. (10) divided by 4 gives (1-2n)/8. All downstream results solve a different equation.
  2. [§4, Corollary 2 and Eq. (41)] The stated Lie-algebraic form does not match the operator it claims to algebraize. The radial operator H in Corollary 2 has d/dr coefficient -(2j-1/2)(6r^2 - g2/2), while Eq. (41) gives (9/2)(2j-1)r^2 + g2/4. Even ignoring signs, the r^2 coefficients have opposite signs for j>1/2 and the constant terms differ. The coefficient comparison in the proof cannot simultaneously produce the H displayed in the corollary and the -H1 displayed in Eq. (41). This invalidates the QES and gauge-transformation results that are built on Eq. (41).
  3. [§4, Eqs. (43)–(45)] The recurrence entries are computed incorrectly. From the explicit action of -H1 on r^k in the proof, the r^{k-1} coefficient is -g2 k(k-1) + (g2/4)k = -g2 k(k-5/4) = -(g2/4)k(4k-5), not -(g2/4)k(4k-3). This error propagates into τ_{k,k-1}, the Jacobi-matrix recursion, and the coefficients μ_j^{(m)} in Theorem 4.
  4. [§6, Theorem 8 and Eq. (84)] The distributional solution is not well defined as written. The exponents N_i = s - 3/4 are fractional for n=-2s, so the binomial expansion (r^3 - r/4)^{N1} = Σ_{p=0}^{N1} ... in Eq. (84) is illegitimate. The derivation later shifts to floor values, but the Fourier transforms of r^a δ^{(k)} with fractional a are not defined in the way used. Moreover, the assertion 'if B is real then q=0' with q=-iB is false for nonzero real B. The claimed solution therefore does not solve Eq. (10).
  5. [§6, proof of Theorem 8] The proof asserts H is self-adjoint on L^2(Ω,dμω) merely because C_c^∞(Ω) is invariant and dense; invariance of C_c^∞ is not shown, and density plus symmetry does not imply self-adjointness. The subsequent extension to D'(Ω) and the claim Ran(H)=D'(Ω) are unsupported. These gaps matter because the distributional solution is claimed to lie in Dom(H)=C_c^∞(Ω), which is incompatible with a derivative-of-delta series.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§3, Eq. (11) vs (20)] There is a sign/normalization inconsistency: Eq. (11) defines H = -1/2 P4 d^2/dr^2 + P3 d/dr + P2, while Theorem 1 writes -H = P4 d^2/dr^2 + ... . The reader cannot tell which normalization is being used in later sections.
  2. [§3, Theorem 1 statement vs proof] The statement of Theorem 1 gives P0 = j(j+1)/3 (c00 - 4c+-) + c*, while the proof (Eq. (37)) gives P0 = j(j+1)/3 c00 + 2j(2j-1)/3 c+- + c*. These are not equivalent except in special cases.
  3. [§5, Theorem 5 and Remark 6] Theorem 5 is stated with an approximate sign, and Remark 6 says the result is a 'good approximation' for large r, but the abstract describes it as exact. The wording should be made consistent.
  4. [Throughout] The typesetting is very rough: Eq. (50) writes -d/dw instead of -d^2/dw^2; Eq. (57) has algebra that does not follow from Eq. (56); and §6 mixes the fractional upper limit N1 with ⌊N1⌋ in summations. These issues make verification unnecessarily difficult.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; the paper's main flaw is mathematical soundness, not circularity.

full rationale

I walked the derivation chain from the BHE (Eq. 1) through the asymptotic radial reduction (Eq. 10), the sl(2,R) algebraization (Corollary 2), the QES/PCT results (Theorems 3-5), and the distributional solution (Theorem 8). The radial reduction is indeed based on nonstandard and apparently incorrect derivative substitutions (Eqs. 7-8), but that is a correctness defect: Eq. (10) is not obtained by assuming its own target solution, nor by fitting a parameter to a subset of data, nor by renaming a known result. Corollary 2 is an explicit coefficient-matching calculation against the general QES operator form, and Theorem 5 and Theorem 8 are standard ansatz constructions from Eq. (10). The self-citations [3,4] appear in the introduction as background for earlier algebraization/polynomial work, but the present paper re-derives the algebraization itself in Corollary 2, so the citations are not load-bearing. No step reduces by construction to its input or to a self-citation chain. The main concerns here are mathematical correctness, not circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The framework pulls standard QES, gauge, and distribution-theory machinery from the literature, and adds the specific radial ansatz and a distributional ansatz. The main free constants are the arbitrary K1/K2 in the distributional solution; the other quantities are either inputs (g2,g3,B) or determined by recurrences. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • K_1 (and K_2=1−K_1) = unspecified in (0,1)
    Arbitrary constants in the distributional solution (Section 6, Theorem 8); they are not fixed by the equation and parameterize the claimed solution family.
axioms (5)
  • ad hoc to paper Radial separation ansatz and limits (r→∞, θ→2π) reduce BHE to Eq. (10).
    Section 2, Eqs. (5)-(10); the derivative identities D=2ζ^{-1}∂_r=2r^{-1}∂_ζ are nonstandard and the limit discards angular dependence without a rigorous argument.
  • domain assumption QES algebraization theorem (Theorem 1 from Gonzalo-Lopez et al. [12]) expresses the operator in U(sl(2,R)).
    Section 3, Theorem 1; standard in the QES literature but invoked as a black box.
  • domain assumption Gauge/PCT transform (Theorem 3 from [12]) maps the operator to Schrödinger form; requires P3(r)=4r³-g2r-g3>0 on the interval of interest.
    Section 4, proof of Theorem 4; positivity is stated as a possibility, not ensured for arbitrary g2,g3.
  • ad hoc to paper Distributional solution ansatz R(r)=Σ a_k δ^{(k)}(r) with weight ω(r)=∏(r-e_i)^{N_i}, N_i=s-3/4 fractional.
    Section 6, Eqs. (82)-(84); the finite binomial expansion of a fractional power is invalid, so this ansatz does not yield a well-defined distribution.
  • ad hoc to paper Self-adjointness of H on L²(Ω,dµ_ω) and invariance of C_c^∞(Ω).
    Section 6, proof of Theorem 8; claimed but not proven, and the fractional weight has singularities at the roots.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 23853 in / 21707 out tokens · 191964 ms · 2026-08-03T15:26:31.540609+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

The Brioschi-Halphen equation (BHE) is a second order complex differential equation obtained by a two step transformation of the Lam\'e equation. The Lam\'e equation is an equation in Astronomical physics used in the study of motion of planetary bodies. In this paper, the radial part of the BHE for sufficiently large $r$ and the argument limit $2\pi$ is obtained. The asymptotic radial wave function associated with BHE is obtained in terms of canonical polynomials $\mathscr{P}_{n+1},$ and spherical function in $L^{2}(G,{\rm d}\mu), G=SL(2,\mathbb{R})$ using point canonical transformation and distributional solution in $\mathscr{C}_{c}^{\infty}(\Omega)$ using Fourier transform method are obtained.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    and Stegun, I

    Abramowitz, M. and Stegun, I. A. (eds.),Handbook of Mathematical Functions with Formulas, Graphs, and Mathematical Tables, New York: Dover(1965), ISBN 978-0486612720, MR 0167642

    1965

  2. [2]

    Akhiezer, N. I. and Glazman, I. M.Theory of linear operators in Hilbert space, Frederick Ungar Publishing Company, New-York (1961)

    1961

  3. [3]

    and Idiong U.S

    Bassey U.N. and Idiong U.S. Algebraization of Brioschi-Halphen Equation.In- ternational Journal of Differential Equations and Applications. V olume 15 No. 2 (2016) 69-76

    2016

  4. [4]

    and Idiong U.S

    Bassey U.N. and Idiong U.S. Polynomial Solutions of Polynomial Solutions of Brioschi-Halphen Equation.MAYFEB Journal of Mathematics, V ol. 2 (2018) 1-15. 31

    2018

  5. [5]

    and Godart, M., Quasi-exactly Solvable Extensions of the Lamé Equation.Journal of Mathematical Physics34, 5283(1993):doi:10.1063/1.530304

    Brihaye, Y . and Godart, M., Quasi-exactly Solvable Extensions of the Lamé Equation.Journal of Mathematical Physics34, 5283(1993):doi:10.1063/1.530304

    work page doi:10.1063/1.530304 1993

  6. [6]

    Some Integrals and orthogonal properties for a class of Hypergeo- metric Functions.Periodica Mathematica Hungarica,V ol

    Bajpai S.D. Some Integrals and orthogonal properties for a class of Hypergeo- metric Functions.Periodica Mathematica Hungarica,V ol. 29, Issue 2, 169-175 (1994) (Publisher: Springer-Verlag)

    1994

  7. [7]

    A note on a three-term recurrence for a tridiagonal matrix,Appl

    El-Mikkawy M. A note on a three-term recurrence for a tridiagonal matrix,Appl. Math. Comp.139 (2003) 503–511

    2003

  8. [8]

    New York: Dover (1987)

    Erdélyi, A.Asymptotic Expansions. New York: Dover (1987)

    1987

  9. [9]

    and Kanwal R.P., Asymptotic Separation of Variables,Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications178, 130-142 (193)

    Estrada R. and Kanwal R.P., Asymptotic Separation of Variables,Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications178, 130-142 (193)

  10. [10]

    Ganguli, A., Associated Lamé and various other new classes of elliptic poten- tials fromsl(2,R) and related orthogonal polynomialsJ. Math. Phys.43, 1980 (2002); 10.1063/1.1455687

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1455687 1980

  11. [11]

    and Shilov, G.E.Generalized Functions

    Gel’fand, I.M. and Shilov, G.E.Generalized Functions. Properties and Opera- tions, V ol.1, Academic Press (1964)

    1964

  12. [12]

    Gonzalo-Lopez A., M. N. Kamram and P.J. Olver,Quasi-Exact Solvability. Con- temp. Math. V ol. 160 (1994) pp. 113-140

    1994

  13. [13]

    Hoeij M.V ., Finite Singularities and Hypergeometric Solutions of Linear Recur- rence Equations,Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra, volume 139, issue 1-3 (1999)

    1999

  14. [14]

    Hunger R., An Introduction to Complex Differentials and Complex Differen- tiability,Technical Report, Technische Universität München. 2007. Associate Institute for Signal Processing

    2007

  15. [15]

    Kananthai A. 2001. The Distribution Solutions of Ordinary Differential Equa- tion with Polynomial Coefficients.Southeast Asian Bulletin of Mathematics25: 129-134

    2001

  16. [16]

    and Müller G

    Karabach M. and Müller G. Introduction to The Bethe Ansatz I,Computers in Physics11, 36 (1997), doi:10.1063/1.4822511

    work page doi:10.1063/1.4822511 1997

  17. [17]

    Kammler D.W.First Course in Fourier Analysis, Cambridge University Press, New York. 2007

    2007

  18. [18]

    Kanwal R.P.,Generalised Functions, Theory an d Applications3 edition 2009, ©2004 Springer Science+Business Media New York, Originally published by Birkhäuser Boston in 2004. 32

    2009

  19. [19]

    On Semigroups Generated by Differential Operators on Lie Groups Journal of Functional Analysis31, 234-244 (1979)

    Kynsinski J. On Semigroups Generated by Differential Operators on Lie Groups Journal of Functional Analysis31, 234-244 (1979)

    1979

  20. [20]

    A class of exactly solvable potentials related to the Jacobi polynomials, J

    Levai, G. A class of exactly solvable potentials related to the Jacobi polynomials, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.24 (1991) 131-146

    1991

  21. [21]

    and Lipson M.Schaum Outline of Discrete Mathematics,McGraw Hill, New York,(1965) pp

    Lipschutz S. and Lipson M.Schaum Outline of Discrete Mathematics,McGraw Hill, New York,(1965) pp. 113-115

    1965

  22. [22]

    and Kanwal R.P

    Littlejohn L.L. and Kanwal R.P. Distributional Solutions of Hypergeometric Equation.Journal Of Mathematical Analysis and Applications122 (1987) 325- 345

    1987

  23. [23]

    and Miroshnichenko A.E

    Moroz A. and Miroshnichenko A.E. Constraint polynomial approach-an alter- native to the functional Bethe Ansatz method? arXiv:1807.11871v3 [quant-ph] 21 Apr 2019

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  24. [24]

    Poole E.G.C.Linear Differential Equations, Oxford University Press, Oxford (1936)

    1936

  25. [25]

    Marcel Dekker, Inc

    Neto J.B.An introduction to the theroy of distributions.Pure and Applied Math- ematics Series of Monographs and Textbooks. Marcel Dekker, Inc. New York 1973

    1973

  26. [26]

    Quantum Mathematics.Graduate Lecture note series.2016

    Olver, P. Quantum Mathematics.Graduate Lecture note series.2016

    2016

  27. [27]

    Panahi H., Zarrinkamar S., and Baradaran M., Solutions of the D-dimensional Schrödinger equation with Killingbeck potential: Lie algebraic approach,Chin. Phys. BV ol. 24, No. 6 (2015) 060301

    2015

  28. [28]

    2010.Transforms and Applications Handbook,CRC Press, Tay- lor & Francis Group, USA

    Poularikas A.D. 2010.Transforms and Applications Handbook,CRC Press, Tay- lor & Francis Group, USA

    2010

  29. [29]

    Sofia (2005)

    Rusev P.Classical Orthogonal Polynomials and their Associated Functions in Complex Domain. Sofia (2005)

    2005

  30. [30]

    Shifman, M.A., New findings in Quantum Mechanics (Partial Algebraization of Spectral Problems.International Journal of Modern PhysicsA, V ol. 4, No. 12 (1989) 2897-2952

    1989

  31. [31]

    ,Generalized functions and partial differential equations-Gordon and Breach, Science Publishers, New York (1968)

    Shilov G.E. ,Generalized functions and partial differential equations-Gordon and Breach, Science Publishers, New York (1968)

    1968

  32. [32]

    Lecture note

    Teschl G.Functional Analysis. Lecture note. (2007). Retrieved 2016. URL: http://www.mat.univie.ac.at/~gerald/ 33

    2007

  33. [33]

    Lie-algebraic approach to the theory of polynomial solutions

    Turbiner A. Lie-algebraic approach to the theory of polynomial solutions. II. Differential equations in one real and one Grassmann variables and 2×2 matrix differential equations.ETH-TH/92-21 CPT-92/P.2708.arXiv:hep-th/9209080v1 22 Sep 1992

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1992

  34. [34]

    One-Dimensional Quasi-Exactly Solvable Schrödinger Equations

    Turbiner A. One-Dimensional Quasi-Exactly Solvable Schrödinger Equations. arXiv:1603.02992v2 [quant-ph] 8 Apr 2016

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  35. [35]

    Quasi-Exactly-Solvable Differential Equations

    Turbiner A. Quasi-Exactly-Solvable Differential Equations. Preprint IFUNAM FT 94-57. 1994.arXiv:hep-th/9409068v2 12 Oct 1994

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  36. [36]

    Cambridge University Press (2001)

    Varadarajan V .S.Introduction to Harmonic Analysis on Semisimple Lie Group. Cambridge University Press (2001)

    2001

  37. [37]

    Thesis, Universiteit Utrecht (2004)

    van der Waall H.A.Lamé Equations with Finite Monodromy,Published, Ph.D. Thesis, Universiteit Utrecht (2004)

    2004

  38. [38]

    Weyl H.The Theory of Groups and Quantum Mechanics, Dover, New York (1931). 34

    1931