The Stability of Matter: From Atoms to Stars pp 100-102 | Cite as

# Asymptotic Neutrality of Large-*Z* Ions

Chapter

## Abstract

Let *N ( Z)* denote the number of electrons that a nucleus of charge *Z* binds in nonrelativis-tic quantum theory. It is proved that *N(Z)/Z* → 1 as *Z* → ∞. The Pauli principle plays a critical role.

## Keywords

Physical Review Letter Weizmann Institute Pauli Principle Nuclear Mass Nonrelativistic Quantum
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## References

- 1.
^{1}E. H. Lieb, I. Sigal, B. Simon, and W. Thirring, to be published.Google Scholar - 2.w
_{e}choose units of length and energy so that fi^{2}/ 2m =*e*^{2}*=*1. In (1), we have taken infinite nuclear mass; our proof of Eq. (3) below extends to finite nuclear mass and to the allowance of arbitrary magnetic fields. See Ref. I.Google Scholar - 3.
^{3}We have in mind the Pauli principle with two spin states. The number of spin states (so long as it is a*fixed*finite number) does not affect the truth of Eq. (3).Google Scholar - 4.
^{4}The minimum without any symmetry restriction oc-curs on a totally symmetric state, so that we could just as well view*Eb( N, Z)*as a Bose energy.Google Scholar - 5.The result for E
_{b}is due to M. B. Ruskai, Commun. Math. Phys. 82, 457 (1982). The fermion result was ob- tained by I. Sigal, Commun. Math. Phys. 85, 309 (1982). M. B. Ruskai, Commun. Math. Phys. 85, 325 (1982), then used her methods to obtain the fermion result.Google Scholar - 6.N(Z denotes the smallest number obeying this condition.Google Scholar
- 7.Sigal, to be published.Google Scholar
- 8.E. Lieb, Phys. Rev. A (to be published). A summary appears in E. H. Lieb, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 315 (1984).Google Scholar
- 9.R. Benguria and E. Lieb, Phys. Rev. Lett. 50, 50 (1983). loSee R. Benguria, H. Brezis, and E. Lieb, Commun. Math. Phys. 79, 167 (1981); Google Scholar
- 10.E. Lieb, Rev. Mod. Phys. 53,603 (1981), and 54, 311(E) (1982).Google Scholar
- 11.B. Baumgartner, “On the Thomas-Fermi--von Weizsacker and Hartree energies as functions of the degree of ionization” (to be published).Google Scholar
- 12.He also needs a method to control quantum correc-tions. This method is discussed later.Google Scholar
- 13.The support of
*p*denoted by suppp, is just those points x where an arbitrarily small ball about x has some charge.Google Scholar - 14.To be sure the limit exists and is not a delta function or zero, one may have to scale the xa in an N-dependent way.Google Scholar
- 15.G. Choquet, C. R. Acad. Sci. 244, 1606–1609 (1957).Google Scholar
- 16.Since lxai< XI&o for all
*a*we can replace the righthand side of (6) by CA/^{1/2}R^{-1}. Since the gradients are all zero if I X„„: < (1 -*€) R*we can replace the right-hand side of (6) also by C(1-*E) N*^{112}*R*.Google Scholar - 17.This formula is easy to prove by expanding LIja, Lia,H]1. Versions of it were found in successively more general situations by R. Ismagilov, Soy. Math. Dokl. 2, 1137 (1961); J. Morgan, J. Operator Theory 1, 109 (1979), and J. Morgan and B. Simon, Int. J. Quantum Chem. 17, 1143 (1980). It was I. Sigal in Ref. 5 whorealized its significance for bound-state questions.Google Scholar
- 18.This is precisely the scaling for Thomas-Fermi and for the real atomic system; see E. Lieb and B. Simon, Adv. Math. 23, 22 (1977).Google Scholar
- 19.

## Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1991