Reply to Comment by Holas and March
R. K. Nesbet
Abstract
The accompanying Comment by A. Holas and N. H. March [Phys. Rev. A 66, 066501 (2002)] is concerned with the issue of whether or not kinetic energy can be represented by an effective local potential, as required for an exact Thomas-Fermi theory equivalent to Kohn-Sham density-functional theory. They dispute [R.K. Nesbet, Phys. Rev. A 65, 010502(R) (2001)], which concludes that for more than two electrons the use by Kohn and Sham of the Schrödinger kinetic energy operator is variationally correct, while the equivalent local potential required for a valid Thomas-Fermi theory, a Fréchet functional derivative of the Kohn-Sham ground-state kinetic energy functional, does not exist. The argument of Holas and March is clearly invalid for the simple example of the lowest triplet state of a two-electron atom with noninteracting electrons. Why this fails, as do earlier arguments in the literature, has been explained in recent publications, summarized here.
Create a lesson
Related papers
Optical atomic clocks on all-optical atom chips
Yuri B. Ovchinnikov
Local polarization control of optical tweezer arrays
Xiangkai Sun, Richard Bing-Shiun Tsai, Andrew Winnicki et al.
Response of the near-threshold resonances of the dtμ molecular ion to an effective atomic 2s--2p splitting
Yi Zhang
Disorder-induced nuclear-transition doublet at nominally cubic 229Th sites
Andrei Derevianko
A scanning cavity for large area coherent coupling in atom interferometry
D. O. Sabulsky, Q. Beaufils, A. Bertoldi et al.
A solid-state nuclear clock based on VUV absorption spectroscopy of 229Th
Pengfei Wang, Xu-Fei Yin, Hanlin Wang et al.