Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Journal of Physics A Mathematical and General

Generalized Laguerre polynomials and quantum mechanics

Paul C Abbott

Published Oct 11, 2000• 9 citations
Publisher

Abstract

We comment on serious errors in a recently published paper (El-Sayed A M A 1999 J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 32 8647-54).
DOI
10.1088/0305-4470/33/42/401

Related papers

Reply to Comment on Semiclassical approximations in phase space with coherent states

Michel Baranger, Marcus A. M. de Aguiar, F Keck +2 more

The Herman–Kluk (HK) formula was shown in (Baranger et al J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 34 7227 ) not to be a correct semiclassical limit of an exact quantum mechanical formula. Two previous attempts to derive it using semiclassical arguments contain serious errors. These statements are left totally untouched by Herman and Grossmann's comment. They argue that the formula which we found to be at fault is not the one that should be called the HK formula. However, the formula we criticized is definitely one of the steps, in fact the main step, in these two published derivations of the HK formula. Very recently, a new derivation was published by Miller. It is interesting, but it is not semiclassical.

Journal of Physics A Mathematical and General•Oct 21, 2002•29 citations

Laguerre's Polynomials in Quantum Mechanics

F. B. Pidduck

Journal of the London Mathematical Society•Jul 1, 1929•9 citations

Comment on “On Quantum Mechanical Operators in Generalized Coordinates”

F. Landis Markley

American Journal of Physics•May 1, 1973•0 citations

Comment on "Temperature dependent fluctuations in the two-dimensional XY model"

Guillermo Palma

We comment the recent published article entitled "Temperature dependent fluctuations in the two-dimensional XY model", appeared in J. Phys. A: Math.Gen. 38 (2005) 5603.

arXiv:cond-mat/0507655•Jul 27, 2005•0 citations

Comment on Bohmian prediction about a two double-slit experiment and its disagreement with standard quantum mechanics

Ward Struyve, Willy De Baere, Jan De Neve +1 more

Recently Golshani and Akhavan 2001 J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 34 5259 proposed an experiment that should be able to distinguish between standard quantum mechanics and Bohmian mechanics. It is our aim to show that the claims made by Golshani and Akhavan are unwarranted.

Journal of Physics A Mathematical and General•Jan 22, 2003•11 citations

Comment on "Quantum Mechanics in the Formalism of London and Weyl"

Richard Gass, Carlos N. Kozameh

Physical Review Letters•Nov 5, 1984•1 citation
The Herman–Kluk (HK) formula was shown in (Baranger et al J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 34 7227 ) not to be a correct semiclassical limit of an exact quantum mechanical formula. Two previous attempts to derive it using semiclassical arguments contain serious errors. These statements are left totally untouched by Herman and Grossmann's comment. They argue that the formula which we found to be at fault is not the one that should be called the HK formula. However, the formula we criticized is definitely one of the steps, in fact the main step, in these two published derivations of the HK formula. Very recently, a new derivation was published by Miller. It is interesting, but it is not semiclassical.