The Stability of Matter: From Atoms to Stars pp 401-404 | Cite as
Bound for the Kinetic Energy of Fermions Which Proves the Stability of Matter
Chapter
Received:
Abstract
We first prove that Σ|e(V)|, the sum of the negative energies of a single particle in a potential V, is bounded above by (4/15π)∫|V|5/2. This, in turn, implies a lower bound for the kinetic energy of N fermions of the form 3/5(3π)/4)2/3∫ρ5/3, where ρ(x) is the one-particle density. From this, using the no-binding theorem of Thomas-Fermi theory, we present a short proof of the stability of matter with a reasonable constant for the bound.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 2.F. J. Dyson and A. Lenard, J. Math. Phys. (N.Y.) 8, 423 (1967); A. Lenard and F. J. Dyson, J. Math. Phys. (N.Y.) 9, 698 (1968).MATHCrossRefMathSciNetADSGoogle Scholar
- 3.A. Lenard, in Statistical Mechanics and Mathematical Problems, edited by A. Lenard (Springer, Berlin, 1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.P. Federbush, J. Math. Phys. (N.Y.) 16, 347, 706 (1975).ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.J. P. Eckmann, “Sur la Stabilité de Matière” (to be published).Google Scholar
- 6.E. Teller, Rev. Mod. Phys. 34, 627 (1962). A rigorous proof of this theorem is given by E. Lieb and B. Simon, “Thomas-Fermi Theory of Atoms, Molecules, and Solids” (to be published). See also E. Lieb and B. Simon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 31, 681 (197CrossRefADSMATHGoogle Scholar
- 7.J. Schwinger, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 47, 122 (1961).ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.J. L. Lebowitz and E. H. Lieb, Phys. Rev. Lett. 22, 631 (1969); E. H. Lieb and J. Lebowitz, Adv. Math. 9, 316 (1972).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
References
- 1.A. M. Boyarski et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 35, 196 (1975).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
- 2.S. L. Glashow, J. Hiopoulos, and L. Maiani, Phys. Rov. D 2, 1285 (1970).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.G. Altarelli, N. Cabibbo, and L. Maiani, Nuel, Phys. B88, 285 (1975). The same result was given independently by P. L. Kingsley, S. B. Treiman, F. Wilczek, and A. Zee, Phys. Rev. D 11, 1919 (1975)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.Kingsley, Treiman, Wilczek, and Zee, Ref. 3. The same result was given independently by P. L. Kingsley, S. B. Treiman, F. Wilczek, and A. Zee, Phys. Rev. D 11, 1919 (1975)Google Scholar
- 5.M. B. Einhorn and C. Quigg, Phys. Rev. D (to be published).Google Scholar
- 6.M. K. Gaillard, B. W. Lec, and J. L. Rosner, Rev. Mod. Phys. 47, 277 (1975).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
- 7.J.-E. Augustin et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 34, 764 (1975).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.V. Chaloupka et al., Phys. Lett. 50B, 1 (1974)Google Scholar
- 9.Y. Dothan and H. Harari, Nuovo Cimento, Suppl. No. 3, 48 (1965). The statement in Ref. 1 that the modes K−π+π+, K̄0̄0K+, ̄0π+ η, and ̄0π+π0 should occur in the ratios 4:4:3:1 is correct only if they are in the totally symmetric 10. It is not true iIn general.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- 10.M. K. Gaillard and B. W. Lee, Phys. Rev. Lett. 33, 108 (1974).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
- 11.G. Altarelli and L. Maiani, Phys. Lett. 52B, 351 (1974).ADSGoogle Scholar
Copyright information
© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg New York 2005