Abstract
Two aspects of the coupled states (CS) and the recoupled states (RCS) formalism of K. McLenithan and D. Secrest [J. Chem. Phys. 80, 2480 (1984)] are discussed. First, there is an inconsistency, in that the Lippmann–Schwinger equation (51) implies, contrary to Eq. (21), that the CS wave function satisfies an inhomogeneous differential equation. This inconsistency is removed, and Eq. (54) is made exact, by the addition of a suitable term to the right-hand side of Eq. (51). Second, the CS-RCS formalism of McLenithan and Secrest defines zeroth- and first-order approximate transition operators; it is argued that the proper functioning of their formalism depends essentially on the use of a physically obscure l-labeling prescription for the determination of S matrices, and lacks uniqueness in that an alternative formalism exists that hews more closely to a strict perturbation theory approach for the zeroth- and first-order approximations to the exact transition operator.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
