Lieb Thirring

With W.
Thirring in Studies in Mathematical Physics, Princeton University Press, 269-303 (1976)
INEQUALITIES FOR THE MOMENTS OF THE EIGENVALUES

OF THE SCHRODINGER HAMILTONIAN AND THEIR RELATION
TO SOBOLEV INEQUALITIES
Elliott H. L i e b *
Walter E. Thirring
1. Introduction
Estimates for the number of bound s t a t e s and their energies, e- < 0,
are of obvious importance for the investigation of quantum mechanical
Hamiltonians. If the latter are of the single particle form H = A + V(x)
in R^, we shall use available methods to derive the bounds
5^|ej|>^<L^^^ rd^xlV(x)|>:-^^/^ y>max(0,l-n/2). (LI)
Here, |V(x)|_ = - V(x) if V(x) < 0 and is zero otherwise.

Of course, in many-body theory, one is more interested in Hamiltonians
of the form S A- + S v(x- X:). It turns out, however, that the
i ^ i>j ^ ^
energy bounds for the single particle Hamiltonian yield a lower bound for
the kinetic energy, T, of N fermions in terms of integrals over the
single particle density defined by
p(x) ^ N M ^ ( x , X 2 , - - , x ^ ) | 2 d % . . . d % , (L2)
where i// is an antisymmetric, normalized function of the N variables

X. R^. Our main r e s u l t s , in addition to (1.1), will be of the form
Work supported by U. S. National Science Foundation Grant MPS 71-03375-A03.
269
205
With W. Thirring in Studies in Matliematical Physics, Princeton University Press, 269-303 (1976)
270 E. H. LIEB AND W. E. THIRRING
T-2 1 |Vi^(xi-Xj,)|2d% ..(!%

i=l ^
r /. -|2(p-l)/n
> Kp J J d"xp(x)P/(P-l) (1.3)
when max{n/2, l ! < p < 1 + n / 2 .

For N = 1, p = n / 2 , (1.3) reduces to the well-known Sobolev inequali-
t i e s . (1.3) is therefore a partial generalization of t h e s e inequalities, and
we shall expand on this in Section. 3.
Our c o n s t a n t s K are not always the best possible ones, but never-
t h e l e s s , they may be useful for many purposes. In particular, in ref. [1],
a s p e c i a l c a s e of (1.3) was used to give a simple proof of the stability of
matter, with a constant of the right order of magnitude. The result for q
s p e c i e s of fermions (2m = e = n = 1) moving in the field of M nuclei with
positive charges Z | is
H > -1.31q2/^N 1 + ( i zj/3/Ny / 2 (1.4)
In particular, if q = 2 (spin 1/2 electrons), we have a bound ^ N, and

if we set q = N, we get a bound -^ N ^^^ if no symmetry requirement is
imposed on the wave function; a fortiori this is a bound for bosons. Our
bound implies stability of matter in its intuitive meaning such that the
volume occupied by N particles will be '-^ N (Bohr radius) . To give a
formal demonstration of this fact, one might u s e a method which gives
lower bounds for the radii of complex atoms (compare Equation (3.6, 38)
of ref. [20]). As a first observation, one c a l c u l a t e s the ground s t a t e energy
of N electrons (with spin) in a harmonic potential. Filling the oscillator
levels, one finds
I 2 i-A. + 0)2 5?) > <o N4/3 3 ^ (1 + 0(N-l/3)) . (1.5)

1=1
206
Inequalities for Moments of Eigenvalues of the Schrodinger Hamiltonian
THE EIGENVALUES OF THE SCHRODINGER HAMILTON 271
Next, take the expectation value of this operator inequality with the ground
s t a t e of H, set

34/2 : - y A i > - J4 /-3 (1.6)
N'
and use the virial theorem

,-i2
1/2"
<-Â.> = - E Q < 2.08N iJ^ Z7/3/NJ (1.7)
Altogether we find
N
< m
i=l
> >
(3Ny,8/3
16<_ 2 î>
38/3j^5/3
16 2.08 \l + / 2 Zj/3/N1 / 2
n5
(1.8)
Thus we have proved that
<x?>l/2 > c N l / ^ .75 (1.9)

c = T7T-
IW^ZJ/VN
Therefore, if the system is not compressed by other forces, so that the

virial theorem is valid, it will not collapse, but will adjust its volume to
a s i z e proportional to the number of particles. Regarding the Z-dependence,
we s e e that with Z = Z'= N/M we have (for large Z)
^^2v.l/2 M1/3 y - 1 / 3
<x^>
That i s , the mean atomic radius is predicted to be > Z~^^^. A better

result can hardly be expected s i n c e for M = 1^ this is the correct
Z-dependence for large Z.
Although we have no results on the best possible constants, K ^,
except in a few special c a s e s , experience drawn from computer calcula-
tions suggests that there is a critical value y^^^ above which the c l a s s i -
cal value gives a bound:
207
With W. Thirring in Studies in Mathematical Physics, Princeton University Press, 269-303 (1976)
.LC r|v(x)i>:+"/2d"x,
Y > Yen ' (1-10)
and where L~^ ^, given by the above integral, is
Ly,n = 2 - " 7 7 - " / 2 r ( y + l ) / r ( y + l + n / 2 ) . (1.11)
We conjecture yî = 3 / 2 , y^ ^ -^^^ and Y^ ^= ^f all n > 8. If

this conjecture were to be true, the constants in (1.3, 1.4) could be further
improved.
In the next section we shall deduce bounds for 2 | e [ ^ and use them
j ^
in Section 3 to derive (1.3). In Section 4 we shall d i s c u s s our conjectures
and support them for n = 1 with results from the Korteweg-de Vries equa-
tion. Section 5 contains new results added in proof. In Appendix A,
generously contributed by J. F . Barnes, further evidence from computer
studies is presented. We are extremely grateful to Dr. Barnes for taking
an interest in this problem, for without his results we would have been
hesitant to put forth our conjectures.
2. Bounds for Moments of the Eigenvalues

In this section we shall deduce bounds of the form (1.1), and we shall
compare our L with the c l a s s i c a l values which one gets by replacing
;2|ej|y by (2,7)-" r d " x d " p | p 2 + V(x)|>l .
For n '^ 3 and y '^ 1, the latter are smaller by about an order of
magnitude.
208
Our inequalities are based on the Birman-Schwinger [2, 3] method for

estimating N ^ , the number of bound s t a t e s of H = A + V(x) having an
energy < E. Since
^N^=;â(E-ep
dE
we have
2|ej|y=y r daay-lN,^ . (2.1)

j ^0
Now, according to Birman-Schwinger [2, 3], for all a > 0, m > 1 and
t [0, 1],
N_^ < T r ( l V + ( l - t ) a l i / 2 ( - A + t a r ^ l V + ( l - t ) a | y 2 r (2.2)
REMARKS ABOUT (2.2):

1. We are only interested in potentials such that V_ L>'^"/^(R")
for y > min(0, 1 n/2). For such potentials (2.2) is justified, and a com-
plete discussion is given in Simon [4, 5]. Moreover, it is sufficient to
consider V C^(R^) in (2.2), and in the rest of this paper, and then to
u s e a limiting argument. Such potentials have the advantage that they
have only a finite number of bound s t a t e s [5].
2. Since we are interested in maximizing S | e | | ^ / / | V | ^ " ^ ^ ^ ^ , we may
as well assume that V(x) < 0, i.e. V = --|V|__. This follows from the
max-min principle [4] which a s s e r t s that e:(V) > e:(|V|_), all j , includ-
ing multiplicity.
To evaluate the trace in (2.2), we use the inequality
T r ( B l / 2 A B l / 2 ) m ^ T , B m / 2 j^m^m/2 (2.3)
when A, B are positive operators and m > 1. When m is integral and

A, B is of our special form, (2.3) is a consequence of Holder's inequality.
For completeness, we shall give a more general derivation of (2.3) in
Appendix B.
209
To calculate
Tr|V+(l-t)a|!^(-A + t a r " ' , (2.4)
we shall use an x-representation where (A + ta)"""^ is the kernel
G ( ^ ) ( x - y ) = (277)-" I d"p(p2 + t a ) " ^ e i p ( ^ - y ) (2.5)
if m > n / 2 . Using
d"P = k ^ dp P " - ' . (2.6)

ron/2) Jo
we easily compute
^" r(n/2) J^
( 4 ^ ) - n / 2 r ( m - n / 2 ) (^^)~m+n/2 (2.7)
r(m)
if m > n / 2 . Thus,
N_ < (4r7)-"/2 r ( n i i W 2 ) ( t ^ ) - m + n / 2 f d^x | V ( x ) + ( l - t ) a | ! ^ . (2.8)

^ r(m) J
Next, we substitute (2.8) into (2.1). If we impose the condition that

t < 1, it is easy to prove that one can interchange the a and the x inte-
gration. Changing variables a ^ ( l - t ) ~ ^ lV(x)| j 3 , leads to
V le.iy < y(4;7)-"/2 t - m + n / 2 ( i ^ t ) m - y - n / 2 r ( y ~ m + n / 2 ) r ( m ~ n / 2 ) ^ T ^ n ^

^ ' j' - ^ ^ ^ r ( y + l + n/2) j
X |V(x)l):+"/2 (2.9)
provided n / 2 < m < n / 2 + y, m > l and 0 < t < 1. The optimal t is

t = (m-n/2)/y.
If we put our results together, we obtain the following (see note added
in proof. Section 5).
210
T H E O R E M 1. Let V_ e LX+"/2(Rn)^ y > max(0, 1 - n / 2 ) . Let H = -A

+ V(x), and let e- < 0 6e the negative energy bound states of H. Then
2lejl>'< Lyn r|V(x)|>:+n/2 (2.10)
where
Ly,n < ^y,n = "^^^

r(y+|+l) \ 2J \ 2 J
and where F(x) = r ( x ) x ~ ^ , m a x U , n / 2 ! < m < n / 2 + y.
REMARKS:
1. When y = 0, 2 | e J ^ means the number of bound s t a t e s , including

zero energy s t a t e s . For n > 2, our L Q n ^ ^* ^^ Section 4, we shall dis-
c u s s the y = 0 c a s e further. See also Section 5.
2. In (2.11), L is the bound we have obtained using the Birman-
Schwinger principle. We shall henceforth reserve the symbol L ^ for
the quantity n
L y , n " " ^ P S l j i ^ / J IVir-"/'- (2.12)
Optimization with respect to m in (2.11) can be done either numeri-

cally or analytically in the region where Stirling's formula
F(x) - e-^VW5 (2-13)
can be applied. In [1], for n = 3, y = 1, we used the value 2 for m. A

marginal improvement can be obtained with m = 1.9.
If (2.13) were exact, the best m would be
m = n(y + n / 2 ) / ( n + y) . (2.14)
Note that as y-^ oo, in is bounded by n. Using in, together with (2.13),
which is valid when y n ( y + n ) ~ is large,
211
With W. Thirring in Studies in Matliematical Physics, Princeton University Press, 269-303 (1976)
y-" ^ ^ r(y+n/2)LFrS72J " ^^ ^

Finally, we want to compare our bounds with their c l a s s i c a l values,
L ^. From the results of Martin [6] and Tamura [7], one has the following
THEOREM 2. // V(x) < 0 and V C^(R"), then
lim 2 | e j ( ^ V ) | y / flAViy-^^/^ = L^^^ . (2.16)

'- ,
COROLLARY.
Ly,n > L^,n (2.17)
Our L s a t i s f i e s (2.17), in particular in the asymptotic region

(2.15), we find
Ly,n/Ly,n ^ [47rn(y+n/2)]l/2y-l/2 . (2.18)
We conjecture in Section 4 that for y sufficiently large, the best

possible L should be L^^ , a result which does not follow from the
y,n y )^
Birman-Schwinger method employed here. For small y, we know that
L ^ ^ is not a bound.
We conclude this section with a theorem about L ^ which will be
useful in the discussion of the one-dimensional c a s e in Section 4.
T H E O R E M 3. Let y > 1 + max(0, l - n / 2 ) . Then
L y , n < Vl,nt>^/(>^-^"/2)] . (2.19)
PROOF. Choose e > 0. We can find a V e C ^ ( R " ) , with V < 0, such

that
212
Let g C^(R^) be such that 0 < g(x) < 1, Vx, and V(x) ^ 0 implies
g(x)=l. Let V;^(x) = V(x) - \ g ( x ) , A < 0 . The functions |ej(V;^)| are
continuous and monotone increasing in X. Furthermore, there are a finite
number of values -oo < A^ < A,2 < * < A|^ < 0 with Xj being the value of
X at which ^\(y\) first appears. \^ is finite because V^ is non-
negative for \ sufficiently negative. -(V^) is continuously differentiable
on A = }X|0>X > X p X ?^X., i=l,---,k| and
dej(V;^)/dX = - M(Aj(x;V;^)|2g(x)d^x
by the Feynman-Hellman theorem. It is easy to prove that if f, geL^CR^),

p > 1, then
h(X) ^ I |f(x)-Xg(x)|Pd^x
is differentiable, VX and
dh/dX|;^^0 = p r | f ( x ) | P - l g ( x ) d ^ X .
Thus L ^{V^) is piecewise C^ on A and its derivative, L^ j^, is

given by
Ly,=r|'lV;,|y+/2l |y2lej(VA)l^''Jg'Aj('';V^)|2dx-(y+n/2)Ly(V;,)
By the stated properties of L y ^ , there e x i s t s a X e ( X j , 0 ] such that
(i) S,n(VA)>0;
(") S.n(V>Ly,n-2e.
Thus, using the properties of g,
0< ySl^J^^x)!"-' - Ly^(V;,)(y+n/2) JlV;,|n/2-^ . (2.20)

J
Since was arbitrary, (2.20) implies the theorem.
213
If we use (2.17) together with the fact that L ^ ^ = ^ y - i n^y/(y+^/'2.)],

we have
C O R O L L A R Y . // for some y > max(0, l - n / 2 ) , L = L^ then
^y+j,n = ^y+hn' j = 0, 1, 2, 3,--- .
R E M A R K . By the same proof
Ly.n < L 1 _ , [ y / ( y + n/2)] (2.21)
(see (3.1) for the definition of L3, ^).
3. Bounds for the Kinetic Energy

In this section, we shall use Theorem 1 to derive inequalities of the
type (1.3). We recall the definition (2.14) and we further define
Lj^^.suplejy/JlVir"/^ (3.1)
Clearly,
L ; , n < Ly.n " ^''^^
li if/ }{^ n = t^^ N-fold antisymmetric tensor product of L^(R^;C^),

we can write ifj pointwise as y(f(Xj,---, Xj^; a j , - - * , CTJ^) with X: R^,
C7j U , 2 , - " , q ! and ijj-^-{fj if ( x . , a | ) is permuted with (Xj,c7j). q=2
for spin 1/2 fermions. We can extend the definition (1.2) to
p^(x) = N ^ ^ I |^(x,X2,,x^;a,CT2,,c7^)|^dS2^%
^2=l ^N = l (3.3)
We also define
214
'T^-S i - i /lVj'A(x;)Pd-^x , (3.4)

j = l (7^ = 1 a^ = i
qq qq, ^
2 _
^-
A-AJV
X - y ...
l'A(x;)l^d"^x .
^1 = 1
V
(7^=1
I !./,/. ^M2jnN
(3.5)
Our result is
T H E O R E M 4. Let p satisfy max i n / 2 , l! < p < 1 + n / 2 and suppose

that L p _ n / 2 n "^ "* ^^ H^lâ " ^' then, except for the case n = 2, p = 1,
there exists a positive constant K sue A that
y ,ii
_,2(p-l)/n
_ ,)P/(P-l)dx| (3.6)
^^ ^ S,
ancf
T^ ^ 1 nr^-2p/n/^ n/9^-l+2p/n/T 1 /T N-l+2p/nLl -2/n

Kpn>2'^P (p-n/^) ^ ^^p-n/2,n/^p-n/2,n^ ^p-n/2,n
(3.7)
Before giving the proof of Theorem 4, we d i s c u s s its relation to the

well-known Sobolev inequalities [9, 10]:
T H E O R E M 5 (Sobolev-Talenti-Aubin). Let Vi/r ^ L^(R") with 1 < r < n.

Let t = nr/(n-r). Then
for some C^. ^^ > 0.
Talenti [11] and Aubin [21] have given the best possible C^. ^^ (for
n = 3, r = 2, t = 6, C2 ^ is also given in [8] and [12]):
215
C^ ^ = n.^/2 ( l ^ y - 7 r ( U n ^ n / r ) r ( n / r ) y / " (39^

''" Vn-ry I r(n)r(Un/2) j ^ ^
Our inequality (3.6) relates only to the x = 2 c a s e in (3.8), in which

case t = 2 n / ( n - 2 ) . Consider (3.8) with r = 2 and \\ifj\\^=l. Using
Holder's inequality on the right side of (3.8), one gets
-2(p-n/2)/n
JlV^l' > C2,nrj!^l'P'^P-^^l'''"'''"[Jl^l^ (3.10)
whenever n > 2 and p > n / 2 . However, C2 j , is not necessarily the

best constant in (3.10) when p ^ n / 2 (p = n / 2 corresponds to r = 2 in
(3.8)). Indeed, Theorem 4 s a y s something about this question.
In the c a s e that N = 1 and q = 1, Theorem 4 is of the same form as
(3.10) (since p = |iAl^ ^^^ \\^\\2 = ^)- ^ ^ ^^^^ ^^^ things:
1. For n > 2 and p = n / 2 , (3.6) agrees with (3.8) except, possibly,
for a different constant. We have, therefore, an alternative proof of the
usual Sobolev inequality (for the r = 2 c a s e ) . As we shall also show
K n //o = Co2 , n,' so we also have the best ^possible constant for this c a s e .
2,n
2. If max {n/2, l! < p < 1 + n / 2 . Theorem 4 gives an improved version
of (3.10), even i7 n = 1 or 2 (in which c a s e s ^2,n = ^' ^^^ ^p,n-^ ^^
For p > 1 + n / 2 , one can always u s e Holder's inequality on the p = l + n / 2
result to get a nontrivial bound of the form (3.10). However, in Theorem 4,
the restriction p < 1 + n / 2 is really necessary. This has to do with the
dependence of T / on N rather than on n, as we shall explain shortly.
Next we turn to the c a s e N > 1. To illustrate the nature of (3.6), we
may as well suppose q = 1. To fix i d e a s , we take a special, but important
form for ij/, namely
(A(x,,...,x^) = ( N ! ) - l / 2 D e t l < ^ k x j ) ! f . ^ l (3.11)
and where the cf>^ are orthonormal functions in L'^(R"). Then, suppressing
the subscript o because q = 1,
216
p(x) = 2 p'Kx) ,
i=l
p\x) = l0Hx)|2 ^
V = S''.
i=l
t^= f w ' (3.12)
Theorem 4 s a y s that
p/(p_l) .2(p-l)/n
s^'^s.n|/rs^^ d"x' (3.13)
If we did not use the orthogonality of the 0^, all we would be able to
conclude, using (3.6) with N = 1, N times, would be
2(p-l)/n
2ti>Kp2rp(x)P/<P-l>d"x] (3.14)
i ' i L*^ J
If p = n / 2 , then (3.14) is better than (3.13), by convexity. In the opposite

c a s e , p = 1 + n / 2 , (3.13) is superior. For in between c a s e s , (3.13) is
decidedly better if N is large and if the p^ are c l o s e to each other (in
the L P / ^ P - ^ > ( R ^ ) s e n s e ) . Suppose p\x) = p(x)/^, i=l,--.,N. Then
the right s i d e of (3.13) is proportional to N^P^^ while the right side of
(3.14) grows only as N. This difference is caused by the orthogonality of
the 0^, or the Pauli principle.
In fact, the last remark shows why p < 1 + n / 2 is important in Theorem
4. If p^ = p / N , all i, then the best bound, insofar as the N dependence
is concerned, occurs when p is as large as possible. It is easy to s e e
217
by example, however, that the largest growth for T^ due to the orthogo-
nality condition can only be N^""^^^/".
PROOF OF T H E O R E M 4. Let V(x) < 0 be a potential in R^ with at

least one bound s t a t e . If e^ = min {e-i, then, for y e [ 0 , 1 ] ,
Si^f ^ I - I I ' " ' 2 N

J j
Using the definition (2.14) and (3.2), we have that
2ljl<\,njJ|V|>'^"/'| (3.15)
\,n = S.n^Ly.n)-'^'/^ (3.16)
when 1 > y > m a x ( 0 , 1 n/2). (3.15) holds even if V has no bound s t a t e .

Let 77 , c r = l , * - - , q , be the projection onto the s t a t e o, i.e. for
i/f L^(R"; C^), (77 i//)(x,a) = if/(x,v) if a = 1/ and zero otherwise. Choose
y = p - n / 2 . Let i p ^ i ^ ^ i be given by (3.3) and, for a^ > 0, a=l,---,q,
define
h = - A - ^ a^p,(x)l/(y+"/2-l).^ (3.17)
cr=l
to be an operator on L'^(R";C^) in the usual way. Define
i=i
where h- means h acting on the i-th component of Kj^^n,q* î^^^^V^

let E = inf spec H^^.
Now, by the Rayleigh-Ritz variational principle
218
E < (^,H^) = T^ - 2 a fpl^^^~'^- (3-19)

<7=1 *^
On the other hand, E > the sum of all the negative eigenvalues of h
-VS^'^rj/r'"^! (3.20)
by (3.15). Combining (3.19) and (3.20) with
2(y-l)/n
y 1 \2y/n
the theorem is proved.
Note that when p = 1 + n/2 (corresponding to y = 1 in the proof),

L^ does not appear in (3.7). In this case, the right side of (3.7) is the
I,n
best possible value of K^ ^2 n' ^^ ^^ ^^^ show.
LEMMA 6. From (3.7), define
Then L*n=Li.
PROOF. By (3.7), we only have to prove that L* j^ > Lj ^. Let V < 0,

V ( CQ (R") and let H = - A + V. Let {4>^, e^\^_ ^ be the bound state
eigenfunctions and eigenvalues of H. Let ij/ and p be as defined in
(3.11), (3.12). Then
2;iei| = - J v p - T ^ < l|V||p||Hlp/(p_i)-T^
with p = 1 + n/2. Using Theorem 4 for T / , one has that
219
2 l e i l < m a x t | l V | | p y - V / 2 , n y ' P ' " ! = ^t,nMp^

i y>o
We conclude with an evaluation of ^^/2 n ^^^ n > 2 a s promised. By

a simple limiting argument
^n/2,n ^ ^^^ ("Sht s i d e of (3.7)) . (3.21)

Pin/2
Our bound (2.11) on ^^_r^/2 n shows that
""> (L /2,nr'^'P^" = 1 (3.22)

Pin/2
Hence
K/2,n > ( L j , ) - 2 / " . (3.23)
On the other hand, by the method of Lemma 6 applied to the N = 1 c a s e ,
^ n / 2 n ^ (^0 n)'"^'^"- ^^^ ^^^^^ ^^ ^ 0 n ^^ ^^^^^ ^" ('^2'*)- '^^ ^^

honest, its evaluation requires the solution of the same variational problem
as given in [8, 11, 12]. Substitution of (4.24) into (3.23) yields the required
result
Kn/2,n = C2,n = ^ n ( n - 2 ) [ r ( n / 2 ) / r ( n ) ] 2 / ^ . (3.24)
If we examine (3.23) when n = 2, one gets K^ ^ > ^ since L Q 2 = "^*

This reflects the known fact [5] that an arbitrarily small V < 0 always
has a bound s t a t e in two dimensions. This observation can be used to
show that
K^ 2 = 0 (3-25)
When n = 1, the smallest allowed p is p = 1. In this c a s e , (3.6)

reads
Using (3.7) and (4.20),
220
If one accepts the conjecture of Section 4 that L j / 2 i = ^ 1 / 2 i "^ ^ / ^ '

then
Kj J = 1 . (3.28)
The reason for the equality in (3.28) is that K^ ^ = 1 is well known to

be the best possible constant in (3.26) when q = 1 and N = 1.
4. Conjecture About L.,^ , 11

We have shown that for the bound s t a t e energies {e-! of a potential
V in n dimensions and with
then
^y,n - ^^P Ly,n(V) (4-2)

VeLy+"/2
is finite whenever y + n / 2 > 1 and y > 0. The ''boundary p o i n t s ' ' are
y = 1/2 n= 1
(4.3)
y= 0 n> 2 .
We showed that for n = 1, ^ 1 / 2 1 < ^ - ^^^ Y "^ 1/2, n = 1, there

cannot be a bound of this kind, for consider Vj^(x) = 1/L for |x| < L
and zero otherwise. For L -^ 0, this converges towards 2S(x) and
thus has a bound s t a t e of finite energy (which is - 1 for - 2S(x)). On
the other hand,
lim (dx |VLI^^^^>'=0 for y < 1/2 .

LÔ J
For n = 2, y = 0 is a ''double boundary p o i n t " and L^ 2 = "^^ ^^- there

is no upper bound on the number of bound s t a t e s in two dimensions. (Cf. [5].)
221
For n > 3, LQ ^^ is conjectured to be finite (see note added in proof,

Section 5); for n = 3, this is the well-known f\V\l/^ conjecture on the
number, NQ(V), of bound states (cf. [5]). The best that is known at
present is that
-.4/3
No(v)<crj |V| 3/2
(4.4)
but for spherically symmetric V, a stronger result is known [8]:
NQCV) < I ^1 + i In I^ ,
I = 4(3772 3 1 / 2 ) - ! r | v l i / 2 . (4.5)
In (1.4) and (3.1), we introduced L^ and L and showed that
Ly,>'"ax(L^^,LC). (4.6)
A parallel result is Simon's [22] for n > 3:
No(V) < D,,(||V_||,^/2 + llV_||_,^/2)/2
with D , -* oo as e -^ 0.
n,6
In our previous paper [4], we conjectured that L^ ^ = ^ f 3^ ^^ we
also pointed out that L][ ^ > L^ ^. A remark of Peter Lax (private com-
munication), which will be explained presently, led us to the following:
CONJECTURE. For each n, there is a critical value of y,y^ ^, such

that
S n = ^?,n y>yc
Ly,n = ^ , n y<yc
111
y^ is defined to be that y for which L^' = W, ', the uniqueness of

this y^ is part of the conjecture. Furthermore, y^ i = 3 / 2 , Yn 2 ^ ^'^'
y^ 2 '^ -^^ ^^^ ^^^ smallest n such that YQ ^= 0 is n = 8.
(A) Remarks on Lr,

y fii
We want to maximize
r[i.Ai^v+ivî2]d"x /rivi)'+"/2 (47)

with respect to V, and where j \i/f\ = 1 and (A + V)i/f = e.i/r. By the
variational principle, we can first maximize (4.7) with respect to V, hold-
ing i// fixed. Holder's inequality immediately yields
V(x) = - a | t / r ( x ) | 2 / ( n ^ / 2 - l )
with (7 > 0. The kinetic energy, /lVi/r|^, is not increased if i/f(x) is

replaced by \il/(x)\ and, by the rearrangement inequality [13], this is not
increased if \i//\ is replaced by its symmetric decreasing rearrangement.
Thus, we may assume that |V| and \if/\ are spherically symmetric, non-
increasing functions.
By the methods of [8] or [11], (4.7) can be shown to have a maximum
when y -1- n / 2 > 1. The variational equation is
-A./r(x) - a.A(x)(>'+"/2+i)/(y+n/2-l) ^ e^^(^) (43)
with
^ Nl/(y+n/2-l)
l(y+n/2)L;j
(4.9)
Equation (4.8) determines i// up to a constant and up to a change of
s c a l e in x. The former can be used to make fi//=l and the latter
leaves (4.7) invariant.
223
Equation (4.8) can be solved analytically in two c a s e s , to which we

shall return later:
(i) n = 1, all y > 1/2
(ii) n > 3, y = 0.
(B) The One-Dimensional C a s e

L a x ' s remark was about a result of Gardner, Greene, Kruskal and
Miura [14] to the effect that
^ 3 / 2 , 1 = L ? / 2 , i = 3/16 . (4.10)
To s e e this, we may assume V e. C^(R), and use the theory of the

Korteweg-de Vries (KdV) equation [14]:
Wt = 6WW^-Wxxx (4.11)
There are two remarkable properties of (4.11):

(i) As W evolves in time, t, the eigenvalues of d'^/dx^ + W
remain invariant.
(ii) JW-^ dx is constant in time.
Let W(x,t) be given by (4.11) with the initial data
W(x,0) = V(x) .
Then L , / ^ i(W(* , t ) ) is independent of t, and may therefore be evaluated

by studying its behavior as t -> o.
There exist traveling wave solutions to (4.11), called solitons, of the
form
W(x,t) = f ( x - c t ) .
Equation (4.11) becomes
- - f x = - W + 6ff^. (4.12)
The solutions to (4.12) which vanish at oo are
fa(x) = - 2 a 2 c o s h - 2 ( a x )
c = 4a2 . (4.13)
224
Any solution (4.13), regarded a s a potential in the Schrodinger equation

h a s , a s we shall s e e shortly, exactly one negative energy bound s t a t e with
energy and wave function
e= -a2
(/r(x) = c o s h - 1 (ax) . (4.14)
Now the theory of the KdV equation s a y s that a s t ^ oo, W evolves

into a sum of solitons (4.13) plus a part that goes to zero in L~(R) norm
(but not necessarily in L'^(R) norm). T h e solitons are well separated
s i n c e they have different velocities. Because the number of bound s t a t e s
is finite, the non-soliton part of W can be ignored a s t ^ oo. Hence, for
the initial V,
2lejl'/'= 2 a^ (4.15)
solitons
while
J V(x)2 dx > ^ I f^(x)2 dx . (4.16)

solitons
Since 4 f cosh-'^(x)dx = 1 6 / 3 , we conclude that
^ 3 / 2 , 1 = L C / 2 _ ^ = 3/16 (4.17)
with equality if and only if W(x, t) i s composed purely of solitons a s

t ^ oo. For the same reason,
^3/2,1 = ^3/2,1 (4.18)
(cf. (4.21)).
Not only do we have an evaluation of L^^2 i^ (4.17), but we learn
something more. When y = 3 / 2 , there is an infinite family of potentials
for which L^^2 i(V) ^ ^ 3 / 2 1^ ^"^ these may have any number of bound
s t a t e s = number of solitons.
What we believe to be the c a s e is that when y < 3 / 2 , the optimizing
potential for L ^ h a s only one bound s t a t e , and satisfies (4.8). When
225
y > 3 / 2 , the optimizing potential i s , loosely speaking, infinitely deep and

has infinitely many bound states; thus L = L!r ^,
An additional indication that the conjecture is correct is furnished by
the solution to (4.8). When y = 3 / 2 , this agrees with (4.14). In general,
one finds that, apart from scaling, the nodeless solution to (4.8) is
'A/x) = r ( y ) l / 2 ; , - l / 4 r ( y - l / 2 r l / 2 ^ 0 s h - n l / 2 ( ^ )
V^(x) = - ( y 2 - l / 4 ) c o s h - 2 ( x )
ej = - ( y - 1 / 2 ) ^ . (4.19)
Thus,
Tl ,-1/2 1 r(y^l) /y^l/2\>-+^/^ 20)
V,l=^ y-l/2r(y+l/2)Vy+l/2; ^"
When L}^ ^ is compared with L9: J , one finds that
L;,I > L^^ y < 3/2

L j . i < Ly,i y > 3/2 . (4.21)
This confirms at least part of the conjecture.

However, more is true. For y = 3 / 2 , V has a zero energy single
node bound state ,, . ^ ...
0 ( x ) = tanh(x) .
Since V is monotone in y, it follows that V has only one bound

state for y < 3 / 2 and at least two bound states for y > 3 / 2 . The (un-
normalized) second bound state can be computed to be
0 ( x ) = sinh(x)cosh""y+^/2(x)
e^ = - ( y - 3 / 2 ) 2 , (4.22)
In like manner, one can find more bound states as y increases even further.
226
Thus we s e e that the potential that optimizes the ratio lejI^^/JIVl^"^^/-^

automatically has a second bound state when y > y .
Finally, we remark that Theorem 3, together with (4.10), shows that
THEOREM 7.
L^ 1 = L^ 1 for y = 3 / 2 , 5 / 2 , 7 / 2 , e^c.
An application of Theorem 7 to scattering theory will be made in

Section 4(D).
(C) Higher Dimensions

We have exhibited the solution to the variational equation (4.8) for L^ -.
When n > 2 and y = 0, we clearly want to take e. = 0 in order to
maximize L^ j^(V). (4.8) has the zero energy solution
<^(x) = ( l + | x | 2 ) l - " / 2
V(x) = a<^(x)2/(y+n/2-l) ^ n(n_2)(l+ | x | 2 ) ( 2 - n ) / ( n / 2 - l ) (4 33)
(note: </> e L2(Rn) if and only if n > 4, but V e L^^^(J{^) always). This
leads to
^0,n = k n ( n - 2 ) ] - " / 2 p ( j , y p ( j , / 2 ) . (4.24)
The smallest dimension for which L i < L 9 is n = 8.

0,n - o,n
If we suppose that the ratio L J^/LT^ ^ is monotone decreasing in y
(as it is when n = 1 and as it is when n = 3 on the basis of the numeri-
cal solution of (4.10) by J. F. Barnes, given in Appendix A), and if our
conjecture is correct, then Ly ^ = Ly ^ ôr n > 8. The value of y^
obtained numerically is
y ^ = 1.165 n=2
y_ = .863 n= 3 . (4.26)
227
The other bit of evidence, apart from the monotonicity of L3, ^ / ^ V n'
for the correctness of our conjecture is a numerical study of the energy
levels of the potential
V;^(x) = X e - | ^ l , \ > 0 ,
in three dimensions. This is given in Appendix A. The energy levels of

the square well potential are given in [15, 16]. In both c a s e s , one finds
that
li"^ L , 3(V;,) = L f 3
A ôo
and the limit is approached from below. Unfortunately, it is not true, as

one might have hoped, that L^ o(^\) is monotone increasing in \ .
(D) Bounds on One-Dimensional Scattering Cross-Sections

In their study of the KdV equation, (4.11), Zakharov and Fadeev [17]
showed how to relate the solution W(x, t) to the scattering reflection
coefficient R(k) and the bound s t a t e eigenvalues lejl of the initial
potential V(x). There are infinitely many invariants of (4.11) besides
JW"^ and t h e s e have simple expressions in terms of R(k), i e | ! .
Thus, for any potential V,
I V2 = (16/3) 2 l^jl^^^ ~ 4 j k2 T(k)dk (4.27)
JV^ + 5" V2 = -(32/5) ] |ej|5/2_ 8 J ^4 T(k)dk (4.28)
J vn2VV|+l-V2^= (256/35)^|e.r/2_(54/5) J k^T(k)dk (4.29)
where
T(k) = 77-1 l n ( l - | R ( k ) | 2 ) < 0 . (4.30)
228
T h e s e are only the first three invariants; a recursion relation for the others
can be found in [17].
Notice that 3/16, 5 / 3 2 , 35/256 are, respectively 1-3/2,1. ^f/2,1'
L^/2,1- Since / V ^ > / | V j 2 , (4.27) e s t a b l i s h e s that L^^^.^ = Lf^2^^,
as mentioned earlier. For the higher invariants, the signs in (4.28) and
(4.29) are not a s fortunately disposed and we cannot u s e t h e s e equations
to prove Theorem 7. But, given that Theorem 7 has already been proved,
we can conclude that
T H E O R E M 8. For any nonpositive potential V(x),
Iî'-'^L k^ T(k)dk . (4.31)
For any potential V(x),
2 f v V ^ + (1/5) fvl^ < -(64/5) j k^ T(k)dk . (4.32)
The first inequality, (4.31), is especially transparent: If V(x) is very

smooth, it cannot scatter very much.
5. Note Added in Proof

After this paper was written, M. Cwikel and Lieb, simultaneously and
by completely different methods, showed that the number of bound s t a t e s ,
N Q ( V ) for a potential, V, can be bounded (when n > 3) by
N o ( V ) < A^ f \W(x)\'^^^ d^'x . (5.1)
Cwikel exploits the weak trace ideal method of Simon [22]; his method is
more general than L i e b ' s , but for the particular problem at hand, (5.1), his
229
A^ does not seem to be as good. L i e b ' s method u s e s Wiener integrals

and the general result is the following:
N_aW< I d"x I dtt-ê-^(477tr^/2(t|y(x)|j (5 2)
for any non-negative, convex function f: [0, 00) -^ [0, <x>) satisfying
= I t-^f(t)e"^dt (5.3)
For a = 0, one can choose f(t) = c ( t - b ) , t > b, f(t) = 0 , t < b. This

leads to (5.1), and optimizing with respect to b, one finds that
A3 = 0.116, A^ = 0.0191 (5.4)
and, as n -> o,
V L o , n = (n77)^/2^0(n-l/2) . (5.5)
Note that A 3 / L J 3 = 1.49, i.e. A3 exceeds L Q 3 by at most 49%.

Since N_^(V) < NQ(~|V + a L ) , one can use (5.1) and (2.1) to deduce
that for y > 0 and n > 3,
Ly,n < L^,n(A/L?,n) (5.6)
This is better than (2.11), (2.18). In particular, for n = 3, y = 1, the im-

provement of (5.6) over (2.11) with m = 2 is a factor of 1.83. The factor
1.31 in Equation (1.4) can therefore be replaced by 1.31 ( 1 . 8 3 ) " ^ / ^ = 0.87.
230
APPENDIX A. NUMERICAL STUDIES
John F . Barnes
Theoretical Division
Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory
Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545
I. Evaluation of ^y ^, n = 1, 2, 3
1 C^
The figure shows the numerical evaluation of L as well as Lr"

The latter is given in ( L l l )
L y , = 2 - % - " / 2 r ( y + l ) / r X y + l + n/2) .
The former is obtained by solving the differential equation (4.8) in polar

coordinates and choosing a such that i//(x) -^ 0 as |x| ^ oo. Note that
by scaling, one can take e^^ = 1, whence
( L 1 ^ ) - 1 = a^y+n/2) j | ^ ( x ) | ( 2 y + n ) / ( y - l + n / 2 ) d n ^ ^
In one dimension, L^ . is known analytically and is given in (4.20).

Another exact result, (4.24), is
^ 0 , 3 = 477-23-3/2 ^ 0.077997 .
The critical values of y, at which L = L^^ ^ are:
X c l = 3/2
yc.2 = 1-165
yc.3 = 0-8627 .
231
1.0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -1
hi
L'r.. J
rv --J^r/V.^ H
\ " '
0.1
LA ^^<Nv H
[- ^ ^-......^^^^^^ A
V.3
0.01hh H
i-
0.001 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0 .2 .4 .6 .8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2B
r
232
II. The Exponential Potential

To test the conjecture that L^ ^ = L^ ^, the eigenvalues of the
potential V\ = A. exp(|x|) in three dimensions were evaluated for
A = 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, and 100. T h e s e are listed in the table according
to angular momentum and radial nodes. T h e s e numbers have been corrobo-
rated by H. Grosse, and they can be used to calculate L ^0^\) for any
y. The final column gives L j 3 ( V ^ ) , s i n c e f\W^\^^^ = X^^^(647T)/12S.
It is to be noted that the c l a s s i c a l value L ^ 3 = 0.006755, is approached
from below, in agreement with the conjecture, but not monotonically.
\ = -^^-'
nodes states x 5 / 2 6477

125
\=S 0.55032
r slui '-''''''
A = 10 0.06963 1
2.18241 0 2.2520
0 1.0022 0.006398
0.33405
3.2542
\ = 20 0.00869 2
1.42562 1
6.62410 0 8.0584
0.16327 1
2.71482 0 6 8.6342
0.43136 0 5 2.1568 0.006551

14 18.8494
233
V\ = Ae ^ (continued)
x5/2 64/7
|el nodes states Si-i ^ 175
\ = 30 0.58894 2
3.83072 1
11.84999 0 3 16.270
1.39458 1
6.12302 0 6 22.553
0.00593 1
2.36912 0 10 11.875
0.07595 0 _7 0.532 0.006461

26 51.230
\ = 40 0.07676 3
1.86961 2
6.88198 1
17.53345 0 26.362
0.41991 2
3.35027 1
10.13596 0 41.718
0.93459 1
5.03378 0 10 29.842
1.54738 0 _7 10.832 0.006682

30 108.754
234
V\ = Xe ^ (continued)
x5/2 6477
lei nodes states 2|e| ^ 125
A = 50 0.60190 3
3.66447 2
10.39110 1
23.53215 0 4 38.190
1.43321 2
5.81695 1
14.56904 0 9 65.458
0.07675 2
2.45887 1
8.19840 0 15 53.670
0.26483 1
3.61626 0 14 27.168
0.49009 0 _9 4.411 0.006643

51 188.897
A= 100 0.39275 5
2.91408 4
8.29231 3
17.44909 2
32.07168 1
235
300 E. H. LIEB AND W. E.. THIRRING
V^ = \ e ^ (continued)
x5/2 64/7
|e| nodes states
21^1 125
56.28824 0 6 117.41
1.10170 4
4.76748 3
11.62740 2
22.79910 1
40.45495 0 15 242.25
0.02748 4
2.04022 3
6.85633 2
15.22147 1
28.46495 0 25 263.05
0.22692 3
3.14743 2
9.13429 1
19.04073 0 28 220.85
0.52962 2
4.37856 1
11.56470 0 27 148.26
236
V;^ = Ae"~^ (continued)
21^1
x 5 / 2 6477
i |e| nodes states Si-i 125
5 0.88997 1
5.69707 0 22 72.46
6 1.26789 0 13 16.48 0.006719
APPENDIX B: PROOF OF (2.3)
T H E O R E M 9. Let }{ he a separable Hilbert space and let A, B be

positive operators on K. Then, for m > 1,
T r ( B ^ / 2 A B ^ / 2 ) m < j^5111/2 ^ m g m / 2 ^ (g i)
REMARK. When K = L^(R") and A is a kernel a ( x - y ) and B is a

multiplication operator b(x) (as in our usage (2.2)), Seller and Simon [19]
have given a proof of ( B . l ) using interpolation techniques. Simon (private
communication) has extended this method to the general c a s e . Our proof
is different and shows a little more than just ( B . l ) .
PROOF. For simplicity, we shall only give the proof when A and B are
matrices; for the general c a s e , one can appeal to a'limiting argument. For
m = 1, the theorem is trivial, so assume m > 1. Let C = A"^ and f(C) =
g ( C ) - h ( C ) , where g(C) = T r ( B l / 2 c l / m B l / 2 ) m ^^^ h(C) = TrB"^/2cB"^/2
Let M"^ be the positive matrices. Clearly M"^ ^ C ^ h(C) is linear.

Epstein [18] has shown that M"^ 9 C -> g(C) is concave (actually, he showed
this for m integral, but his proof is valid generally for m > 1). Write
C = C^ + C^ where C^ is the diagonal part of C in a b a s i s in which B
is diagonal. C^ ^ C^ -h X C^ = A C + ( 1 - A ) C ^ is in M^ for A e [ 0 , 1 ] ,
237
because C^ M"^. Then A -. i(C^) = R(A) is concave on [0, 1]. Our goal
is to show that R(l) < 0. Since [ C ^ , B] = 0, R(0) = 0 and, by concavity,

it is sufficient to show that R(A) < 0 for A > 0 and A small. h(C;^) =
h(C^) for A [0, 1]. Since f(C) is continuous in C, we can assume
that C^ is nondegenerate and strictly positive, and that C^ is positive
when A > 6 for some e > 0. Then R(A) is defined and concave on
[6, 1]. A ^ C\ is differentiable at A = 0 and its derivative at A = 0
has zero diagonal elements. (To s e e t h i s , use the representation C '^"^ =
K /'^dxx-^+^/"^-C(C + x i r ^ ) Likewise, the derivative of ( B 1 / 2 ( D ^
A 0 ) B l / 2 ) m at A = 0 has zero diagonal elements when O has and when
D is diagonal. Thus
dR(A)/dA|;^ô = 0
Acknowledgment
One of the authors (Walter Thirring) would like to thank the Department
of P h y s i c s of the University of Princeton for its hospitality.
ELLIOTT H. LIEB
DEPARTMENTS OF MATHEMATICS AND PHYSICS
PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY
WALTER E. THIRRING
INSTITUT FUR THEORETISCHE PHYSIK
DER UNIVERSITAT WIEN, AUSTRIA
REFERENCES
[1] E. H. Lieb and W. E. Thirring, P h y s . Rev. Lett. 35, 687(1975). See
P h y s . Rev. Lett. 55,1116(1975) for errata.
[2] M. S. Birman, Mat. Sb. 55(97), 125(1961); Amer. Math. Soc. Transla-
tions Ser. 2, 53, 23(1966).
[3] J. Schwinger, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 47, 122(1961).
[4] B. Simon, '^Quantum Mechanics for Hamiltonians Defined as Quadratic

F o r m s , " Princeton University P r e s s , 1971.
238
[5] B, Simon, ''On the Number of Bound States of the Two Body
Schrodinger Equation A R e v i e w / ' in this volume.
[6] A. Martin; Helv. P h y s . Acta 45, 140(1972).
[7] H. Tamura, Proc. Japan Acad. 50, 19(1974).
[8] V. Glaser, A. Martin, H. Grosse and W. Thirring, ''A Family of

Optimal Conditions for the Absence of Bound States in a Potential,'^
in this volume.
[9] S. L. Sobolev, Mat. Sb. 46, 471(1938), in Russian.
[10] , Applications of Functional Analysis in Mathematical

P h y s i c s , Leningrad (1950), Amer. Math. Soc. Transl. of Monographs,
7(1963).
[11] G. Talenti, Best Constant in Sobolev's Inequality, Istituto Matematico,

Universita Degli Studi Di Firenze, preprint (1975).
[12] G. Rosen, SIAM Jour. Appl. Math. 21, 30(1971).
[13] H. J. Brascamp, E. H. Lieb and J. M. Luttinger, Jour. Funct. Anal.

17, 227(1974).
[14] C. S. Gardner, J. M. Greene, M. D. Kruskal and R. M. Miura, Commun.

Pure and Appl. Math. 27, 97 (1974).
[15] S. A. Moszkowski, P h y s . Rev. 89, 474(1953).
[16] A. E. Green and K. L e e , P h y s . Rev. 99, 772(1955).
[17] V. E. Zakharov and L. D. Fadeev, Funkts. Anal, i Ego Pril. 5,

18(1971). English translation: Funct. Anal, and its Appl. 5,
280(1971).
[18] H. Epstein, Commun. Math. P h y s . 31, 317(1973).
[19] E. Seiler and B. Simon, ''Bounds in the Yukawa Quantum Field T h e o r y , "
Princeton preprint (1975).
[20] W. Thirring, T7 Quantenmechanik, Lecture Notes, Institut fiir

Theoretische Physik, University of Vienna.
[21] T. Aubin, C. R. Acad. Sc. Paris 280, 279(1975). The results are
stated here without proof; there appears to be a misprint in the
expression for C^1 , 1.
1
[22] B. Simon, "Weak Trace Ideals and the Bound States of Schrodinger
O p e r a t o r s , " Princeton preprint (1975).
239

Lieb Thirring

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Lieb Thirring

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

With W.

Thirring in Studies in Mathematical Physics, Princeton University Press, 269-303 (1976)

INEQUALITIES FOR THE MOMENTS OF THE EIGENVALUES

5^|ej|>^<L^^^ rd^xlV(x)|>:-^^/^ y>max(0,l-n/2). (LI)

Here, |V(x)|_ = - V(x) if V(x) < 0 and is zero otherwise.

where i// is an antisymmetric, normalized function of the N variables

Work supported by U. S. National Science Foundation Grant MPS 71-03375-A03.

270 E. H. LIEB AND W. E. THIRRING

T-2 1 |Vi^(xi-Xj,)|2d% ..(!%

when max{n/2, l ! < p < 1 + n / 2 .

H > -1.31q2/^N 1 + ( i zj/3/Ny / 2 (1.4)

In particular, if q = 2 (spin 1/2 electrons), we have a bound ^ N, and

I 2 i-A. + 0)2 5?) > <o N4/3 3 ^ (1 + 0(N-l/3)) . (1.5)

THE EIGENVALUES OF THE SCHRODINGER HAMILTON 271

and use the virial theorem

Thus we have proved that

<x?>l/2 > c N l / ^ .75 (1.9)

Therefore, if the system is not compressed by other forces, so that the

That i s , the mean atomic radius is predicted to be > Z~^^^. A better

272 E. H. LIEB AND W. E. THIRRING

Y > Yen ' (1-10)

and where L~^ ^, given by the above integral, is

Ly,n = 2 - " 7 7 - " / 2 r ( y + l ) / r ( y + l + n / 2 ) . (1.11)

We conjecture y^i = 3 / 2 , y^ ^ -^^^ and Y^ ^= ^f all n > 8. If

2. Bounds for Moments of the Eigenvalues

;2|ej|y by (2,7)-" r d " x d " p | p 2 + V(x)|>l .

THE EIGENVALUES OF THE SCHRODINGER HAMILTON 273

Our inequalities are based on the Birman-Schwinger [2, 3] method for

2|ej|y=y r daay-lN,^ . (2.1)

REMARKS ABOUT (2.2):

To evaluate the trace in (2.2), we use the inequality

when A, B are positive operators and m > 1. When m is integral and

274 E. H. LIEB AND W. E. THIRRING

we shall use an x-representation where (A + ta)"""^ is the kernel

G ( ^ ) ( x - y ) = (277)-" I d"p(p2 + t a ) " ^ e i p ( ^ - y ) (2.5)

d"P = k ^ dp P " - ' . (2.6)

N_ < (4r7)-"/2 r ( n i i W 2 ) ( t ^ ) - m + n / 2 f d^x | V ( x ) + ( l - t ) a | ! ^ . (2.8)

Next, we substitute (2.8) into (2.1). If we impose the condition that

V le.iy < y(4;7)-"/2 t - m + n / 2 ( i ^ t ) m - y - n / 2 r ( y ~ m + n / 2 ) r ( m ~ n / 2 ) ^ T ^ n ^

provided n / 2 < m < n / 2 + y, m > l and 0 < t < 1. The optimal t is

THE EIGENVALUES OF THE SCHRODINGER HAMILTON 275

T H E O R E M 1. Let V_ e LX+"/2(Rn)^ y > max(0, 1 - n / 2 ) . Let H = -A

2lejl>'< Lyn r|V(x)|>:+n/2 (2.10)

Ly,n < ^y,n = "^^^

and where F(x) = r ( x ) x ~ ^ , m a x U , n / 2 ! < m < n / 2 + y.

1. When y = 0, 2 | e J ^ means the number of bound s t a t e s , including

Optimization with respect to m in (2.11) can be done either numeri-

F(x) - e-^VW5 (2-13)

can be applied. In [1], for n = 3, y = 1, we used the value 2 for m. A

276 E. H. LIEB AND W. E. THIRRING

y-" ^ ^ r(y+n/2)LFrS72J " ^^ ^

THEOREM 2. // V(x) < 0 and V C^(R"), then

lim 2 | e j ( ^ V ) | y / flAViy-^^/^ = L^^^ . (2.16)

Ly,n > L^,n (2.17)

Our L s a t i s f i e s (2.17), in particular in the asymptotic region

We conjecture in Section 4 that for y sufficiently large, the best

T H E O R E M 3. Let y > 1 + max(0, l - n / 2 ) . Then

L y , n < Vl,nt>^/(>^-^"/2)] . (2.19)

PROOF. Choose e > 0. We can find a V e C ^ ( R " ) , with V < 0, such

THE EIGENVALUES OF THE SCHRODINGER HAMILTON 277

by the Feynman-Hellman theorem. It is easy to prove that if f, geL^CR^),

Thus L ^{V^) is piecewise C^ on A and its derivative, L^ j^, is

By the stated properties of L y ^ , there e x i s t s a X e ( X j , 0 ] such that

0< ySl^J^^x)!"-' - Ly^(V;,)(y+n/2) JlV;,|n/2-^ . (2.20)