Reply to Comment by Holas and March
| dc.creator | Nesbet, R. K. | |
| dc.date | 2003-09-29 | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2026-07-07T05:50:06Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2026-07-07T05:50:06Z | |
| dc.description | The accompanying Comment by A. Holas and N. H. March [Phys. Rev. A {\bf 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 {\bf 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. | |
| dc.description | 2pp resub to include title and author | |
| dc.identifier | https://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0309120 | |
| dc.identifier | http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0309120 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://salesiana.dossiersoluciones.com/handle/123456789/85612 | |
| dc.subject | Atomic Physics | |
| dc.subject | Condensed Matter | |
| dc.subject | Chemical Physics | |
| dc.subject | Computational Physics | |
| dc.title | Reply to Comment by Holas and March | |
| dc.type | text |