Subject: Hartree-Fock limit

From: "Nathan A. Baker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 16:27:51 -0700 (PDT)

Isn't the proof of the Hartree-Fock limit simply the proof of the 
validity for a expansion of a function in terms of a complete set?  
Pinsky describes this in terms of Parseval's theorem in his book "Partial 
Differential Equations and Boundary-Value Problems with Applications, 2nd 
ed." on page 20.

In other words, we postulate that some trial function, a linear 
combination of n basis functions, is the solution to the Schrodinger 
equation.  If the n basis functions form a complete set (usually 
infinite), then some linear combination of these (as n goes to infinity) 
is the solution to the Schrodinger equation.

The difference between the true solution and the linear combination is 
called the mean squared convergence, which goes to zero in the limit of a 
complete set.

This probably could have been stated better, but I think I conveyed the 
general gist.

-----------------------------------------------
Nathan Baker * [email-masked]

HELP! MY TYPEWRITER IS BROKEN!
	-- E. E. CUMMINGS
-----------------------------------------------