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

Comment on 'Penetrability of a one-dimensional Coulomb potential' by M. Moshinsky

Roger G. Newton

Published Jul 7, 1994• 32 citations
Publisher

Abstract

See ibid., vol.26, p.2445 (1993). The analysis of the one-dimensional Schrodinger equation with the potential - lambda /x given is found to be incorrect. Contrary to the author's claim, the origin is indeed 'impenetrable'.
DOI
10.1088/0305-4470/27/13/044

Related papers

Comment on the deformation of quantum mechanics

Ki-Soo Chung, Won-Sang Chung

For original paper see Li et al., ibid, vol.25, p.6779 (1992) In this comment we point out a serious mistake in a recent paper by Li and Sheng and present the correct version for q-deformed quantum mechanics.

Journal of Physics A Mathematical and General•Jul 21, 1994•4 citations

Comment on 'The effect of radiation trapping of high-intensity scattered radiation on multiphoton ionisation rates and resonance fluorescence'

Thomas J. Mcilrath, Thomas B. Lucatorto

Recent claims (Salter, ibid., vol.12, p.L763) have been made that the trapping of resonance radiation explains both the efficient ionisation of dense metal vapours irradiated by intense resonant laser radiation and previous experiments concerning anomalous behaviour of resonance fluorescence. The authors examine these claims and show that they are incorrectly developed and that basic physical arguments show that resonance trapping cannot explain the phenomena mentioned above.

Journal of Physics B Atomic and Molecular Physics•Nov 14, 1980•9 citations

Comments on the one-dimensional hydrogen atom [Am. J. Phys. 2 7, 649 (1959); Am. J. Phys. 3 7, 1145 (1969); Am. J. Phys. 4 4, 1064 (1976)

C. L. Hammer, T. A. Weber

Extraneous solutions to the Schroedinger equation are discussed. (AIP)

American Journal of Physics•Mar 1, 1988•18 citations

Comments on “Agreement between Classical and Quantum Mechanical Solutions for a Linear Potential inside a One-Dimensional Infinite Potential Well”

Noble M. Johnson, John N. Churchill

American Journal of Physics•Dec 1, 1969•1 citation

A comment on disordered systems

Theodore Kaplan, L. J. Gray

For original papers see ibid., vol.10, p.L597 (1977) and vol.11, p.L949 (1978). The authors respond to two recent letters which comment on the augmented space formalism.

Journal of Physics C Solid State Physics•Sep 28, 1979•3 citations

Comments on the paper by Coveney and Penrose 'On the validity of the Brussels formalism in statistical mechanics'

Claude D. George, Ilya Prigogine

For original paper see Coveney et. al. ibid., vol.25, p.4947 (1992). The previous authors state, in the introductory section of their paper that they are looking only at a 'small part' of the Brussels formalism. The title of their paper does not reflect this restriction and refers to the general validity of the Brussels formalism. The criticisms are focused on a few papers published about twenty years ago. However, even restricted to these papers, their claims do not apply. The present authors point out two major misrepresentations.

Journal of Physics A Mathematical and General•Aug 7, 1993•3 citations
For original paper see Coveney et. al. ibid., vol.25, p.4947 (1992). The previous authors state, in the introductory section of their paper that they are looking only at a 'small part' of the Brussels formalism. The title of their paper does not reflect this restriction and refers to the general validity of the Brussels formalism. The criticisms are focused on a few papers published about twenty years ago. However, even restricted to these papers, their claims do not apply. The present authors point out two major misrepresentations.