- Text
- Eigenvalues,
- Degenerate,
- Perturbation,
- Electronic,
- Eigenvalue,
- Eigenfunctions,
- Theorem,
- Pair,
- Follows,
- Equation,
- Expansion,
- Neighborhood,
- Renner,
- Www.ima.umn.edu

A Born-Oppenheimer Expansion in a Neighborhood of a Renner ...

Note that s**in**ce T(α) is an analytic family, we know the resolvent set is non-empty for all α ∈ C. Def**in**e the set We show that Υ = C. Υ = {α ∈ C : Rα(λ) is compact for all λ ∈ ρ(T(α)) }. Let Bs(z) denote an open disk **in** the complex plane **of** radius s > 0, centered at z ∈ C. Let λ0 ∈ ρ(T(0)). S**in**ce the set R is open, we know that there exists a disk Bδ(0), such that λ0 ∈ ρ(T(α)) for all α ∈ Bδ(0). Let l ∈ B(H) ∗ , such that l is vanish**in**g on C(H). Then the function f(α) = l(Rα(λ0)) def**in**es an analytic map from Bδ(0) **in**to C. S**in**ce the resolvent is compact for α ∈ IR, we know f(α) = 0 for all −δ < α < δ, which implies f(α) = 0 for all α ∈ Bδ(0). S**in**ce l was chosen arbitrarily **in** { l ∈ B(H) ∗ : l vanishes on C(H) }, it follows that Rα(λ0) is compact for all α ∈ Bδ(0) (if Rα ′(λ0) was not compact for some α ′ ∈ Bδ(0), we could choose l so that l(Rα ′(λ0)) �= 0, contradict**in**g f(α ′ ) = 0). Hence Bδ(0) ⊂ Υ. We now assume that Υ �= C and show this leads to a contradiction. Let r = sup{δ > 0 : Bδ(0) ⊂ Υ}. Note that 0 < r < ∞ s**in**ce we have assumed Υ �= C. Then, there exists α0 with |α0| = r, such that every neighborhood **of** α0 conta**in**s a po**in**t not **in** Υ. Let λ0 ∈ ρ(T(α0)) and choose δ ′ > 0 small enough so that λ0 ∈ ρ(T(α)) for all α ∈ Bδ ′(α0). Choos**in**g l as before, we know g(α) = l(Rα(λ0)) is analytic on Bδ ′(α0) and g(α) = 0 on Br(0) ∩ Bδ ′(α0). So, g(α) = 0 on all **of** Bδ ′(α0). Aga**in** s**in**ce l was chosen arbitrarily, there exists an entire neighborhood **of** α0 **in** Υ. This is a contradiction, so Υ = C. We now show that a closed operator with compact resolvent has purely discrete spectrum. Let A be a closed operator. Fix λ ∈ ρ(A) and let R(λ) = (A − λ) −1 be compact. Then the spectrum **of** R(λ) is made up **of** at most countably many eigenvalues **of** f**in**ite multiplicity that can only accumulate at 0 [17]. For E �= λ, we have A − E = A − λ − (E − λ) = (E − λ)(A − λ) � � 1 − R(λ) . E − λ 1 From this we see that if E−λ ∈ ρ(R(λ)), then E ∈ ρ(A). So, if E ∈ σ(A), then 1 E−λ 1 and thus E−λ is an isolated eigenvalue **of** R(λ) with f**in**ite multiplicity. S**in**ce, ∈ σ(R(λ)) 1 R(λ)Ψ = Ψ ⇔ (E − λ)Ψ = (A − λ)Ψ ⇔ AΨ = E Ψ, E − λ it follows that E is an isolated eigenvalue **of** A with f**in**ite multiplicity. Therefore, σ(A) is made up **of** at most countably many eigenvalues **of** f**in**ite multiplicity that can only accumulate at **in**f**in**ity. The conclusion **of** the Lemma follows. � Before we prove Proposition 4.4, we consider a different decomposition **of** H2. We def**in**e H0 and V to be H0 = − 1 2 ∆X, Y ⊗ I2 and V = ⎛ ⎜ ⎝ a + b 2 X2 + 22 bXY a − b 2 Y 2 bXY a − b 2 X2 + a + b 2 Y 2 ⎞ ⎟ ⎠ ,

so that H2 = H0 + V . Note that for any X, Y , the eigenvalues **of** V are a+b 2 (X2 + Y 2 ) and a−b 2 (X2 + Y 2 ). So for f, g ∈ L2 (IR 2 ), � � f g � , V � f and V is a positive operator. g � � ≥ a − b 2 � (X 2 + Y 2 ) � |f| 2 + |g| 2� dX dY, � � Proposition 4.4. Let Ψ = f g ∈ H be a solution **of** H2Ψ = EΨ, with E > 0. Then, f, g ∈ C∞ (IR 2 ), ∇f, ∇g ∈ L2 (R2 ), and for any γ > 0, f, g ∈ D(e γ〈x〉 ), ∇f, ∇g ∈ D(e γ〈x〉 ), ∆f, ∆g ∈ D(e γ〈x〉 ), where 〈x〉 = � 1 + X 2 + Y 2 . Pro**of**: Let V11 = a+b 2 X2 + a−b 2 Y 2 , V12 = V21 = bXY, and V22 = a−b 2 X2 + a+b 2 Y 2 . Then, f, g satisfy the follow**in**g pair **of** equations: (− ∆ + V11) f + V12 g = E f (4.6) (− ∆ + V22) g + V21 f = E g (4.7) To show that f, g ∈ C ∞ (IR 2 ), we follow the pro**of** **of** Theorem IX.26 **of** [18]. Let Ω be a bounded open set **in** IR 2 . S**in**ce f, g ∈ L 2 (IR 2 ) = W0 and the Vij ∈ C ∞ , we have V11f, V21f, V12g, V22g ∈ W0(Ω). It follows from (4.6) and (4.7) that ∆f, ∆g ∈ W0(Ω). Then by the Lemma on pg. 52 **of** [18], f, g ∈ W2(Ω). Repeat**in**g the argument we get f, g ∈ Wm(Ω) ∀ m ∈ Z. It follows from Sobolev’s Lemma that f, g ∈ C ∞ on Ω. S**in**ce Ω was arbitrary f, g ∈ C ∞ (IR 2 ). We now show ∇f, ∇g ∈ L 2 . We know Ψ ∈ D(H2). Let D(−∆) and Q(−∆) be the doma**in** **of** self-adjo**in**tness and quadratic form doma**in** **of** −∆ respectively. Then � � � D(H2) ⊂ D(−∆) ⊕ D(−∆) ⊂ Q(−∆) ⊕ Q(−∆) = Ψ = f g : ∇f, ∇g ∈ L 2 (IR 2 ) We now use the Combes-Thomas argument (see theorem XIII.39 **of** [19]) to prove that f, g ∈ D(e γ|X| ). The argument can be repeated for D(e γ|Y | ), and s**in**ce e γ〈x〉 ≤ e γ e γ(|X|+|Y |) ≤ e γ e 2γ max{|X|, |Y |} � γ ≤ e e 2γ|X| 2γ|Y + e |� , we then have f, g ∈ D(e γ〈x〉 ). For α ∈ R, consider the unitary group W(α) = e iαX ⊗ I2 and the operator H2(α) = W(α)H2W(α) −1 . We have H2(α) = H2 + α2 2 ⊗ I2 + iα ∂ ∂X ⊗ I2 . 23 � .

- Page 1 and 2: A Born-Oppenheimer Expansion in a N
- Page 3 and 4: there exist quasimode energies of t
- Page 5 and 6: to both electronic states of the R-
- Page 7 and 8: 3 The Construction of the Quasimode
- Page 9 and 10: with eigenvalues ˜ E±(x, y) = ±
- Page 11 and 12: f ↔ g, Ψ1 ↔ Ψ2, h11 ↔ h22,
- Page 13 and 14: So we get E (1) = 0 and ψ (1) ⊥
- Page 15 and 16: and ⎛ Using what we know through
- Page 17 and 18: and ⎛ ⎝ f(k−2) g (k−2) ⎞
- Page 19 and 20: This easily follows from � �
- Page 21: H ± 1 = W −1 H ± 0 W = ⎛ ⎜
- Page 25 and 26: Let β > 0. Then, � e 2γ〈x〉
- Page 27 and 28: � Proposition 4.7. Let Ψ = ≥ |
- Page 29 and 30: � = IR n \BS(t) � ≥ IR n \BS(
- Page 31 and 32: form (see Theorem XII.5 in [19])
- Page 33 and 34: Let r = a1/4 ρ, ˜b = b , and a HU
- Page 35 and 36: Denote the eigenfunctions of H [±|
- Page 37 and 38: for the larger values of |l|. The s
- Page 39 and 40: 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 0.1 0.2
- Page 41 and 42: 1. For l �= 0, each +|l| state ge
- Page 43 and 44: Φ A ǫ is also asymptotic to an ei
- Page 45 and 46: We have (H(ǫ) − Eǫ,K)Φǫ,K = F
- Page 47 and 48: Acknowledgement It is a pleasure to