I ~~O C . PHYS. SOC., 1966, VOL.

88
~uantum defect theory
[ : General formulation
M. J. SEATON
Department of Physics, Umversity College London
MS. received 16th March 1966
Abstract. Quantum defects provide a measure of the differences between energy
levels of many-electron atoms and energy levels of hydrogenic systems. The
theory for central potentials has been developed by Hartree in 1927 and 1929,
Ham in 1955, and Seaton in 1955 and 1958.
The present paper is the first in a series concemed with a many-channel
generalization of quantum defect theory. Wave functions Y(N+l) for an atomic
system containing N+l electrons ar e expanded in terms of products Y&V)F,
where t h e Y,(N) ar e functions for the corresponding N-electron system and the
F, are functions for the added electron. The Fa satisfy coupled differential
equations with potentials
2 being the nuclear charge. If Yu(N) or Y&V) is a bound state, U,@ goes to zero
faster than l/r as r +- a. The present discussion is restricted to systems for
which 2- N > 0 and the simplifying assumption is made that Uu5 = 0, for
7 > 7 0 where r0 is &&e.
For al l values of the total energy E the asymptotic forms of the functions F a
can be expressed in terms of a scattenng matrk S. I t is shown that S can be
expressed in terms of known functions and of a matrix 11-1 where the matrices
I and J are analytic functions of E. Once the matnx IJ-l is known one may
calculate the bound-state energy eigenvalues, allowing for configuration interaction
and series perturbations, the asymptotic forms of the normalized bound-state
eigenfunctions, elastic and inelastic collision cross sections, and the positions and
shapes of resonances in cross sections.
1. Introduction
dues are
For an electron moving in an attractive Coulomb potential - 4 7 the energy eigen-
inatomic units, n being an integer. For a modified potential V(r), which tends to the
coulomb form - z/ r i n the limit of 7 large, the energy eigenvalues E, may be expressed
terms of effective quantum numbers v,,
Thequantum defect
1 z2
E, = - --.
0 _. 2
.& vn-
pn = n- v,
Provides a measure of the difference between the potential V(7) and the Coulomb
Potential -,z/r. It has long been known empirically that quantum defects are slowly
801
802 M. J. Seaton
varying functions of energy for simple systems and therefore provide a convenient means
of summarizing information on energy levels obtained from spectral series.
An early theoretical discussion was given by Hartree (1927, 1929) and further
developments in the theory have been made by Ham (1955) and by Seaton (1955,
1958 a). The work of Hamwas concerned with the use of quantum defect data to obtain
information about asymptotic forms of wave functions at negative energies other than
the eigenvalues, and with applications to solid state problems. I n the work of Seaton
(1955, 1958 a) it was shown that quantum defect data could be extrapolated and used to
obtain phases of wave functions for positive energies. These phases are of interest for
collision problems (Seaton 1958 b), and for the calculation of photoionization cross
sections (Burgess and Seaton 1960) and free-free transition probabilities (Peach 1965).
The work referred to so far has been concerned with the theory for a single electron
moving in a central potential. I n a more complete treatment of the many-electron
problem it should be possible to account for configuration interaction and series per-
turbations, resonances and autoionization, and inelastic collisions. A many-channel
theory for potentials which go to zero faster than r- l in the asymptotic region has been
developed by Ross and Shaw (1961) and applied to problems of e-Hscattering by
Damburg and Peterkop (1962). A similar theory for potentials behaving asymptotically
as - z/ r has been given by Gailitis (1963), who considers only positive energies, and an
outline of the theory for both positive and negative energies has been given by Bely et al.
(1963). I n the present paper we give a more complete account of the general theory.
Further papers in the present series will be concerned with applications of the theory.
I n the paper by Seaton (1966, to be referred to as 11) a number of illustrative applications
are discussed, the paper by Bely (1966, to be referred to as 111) deals with +He+
collisions and the paper by Moores (1966, to be referred to as IV) with series perturba-
tions and autoionization in calcium.
2. Coulomb functions
For an electron in a potential - z/r the Schrodinger equation in atomic units is
Putting
1
w = Y4 +);Y(r)
-I.--- wIIc.Ic Yl m is a spherical harmonic, we obtain the rdi ai equation
a 2 Z(Z+l) 22
We put
(2.4)
1
p = zr, 2E = z2, E = - -
K2
and replace 1 by A, where h is not necessarily an integer, to obtain
(2.5)
Quantum defect theory: I 803
webintroduce seven functions which are solutions of this equation, Y* ( K, A; p), i = 1 to 7.
nefist five of these have been discussed by Seaton (1958 a) and the functions y s and y ,
$e required in 111. Our seven functions are
K - 1
Y2 = - Mr, - A - t t )
r(-2A)
y6 = got1 +Y2)
1
Yl = z(Y1-Y2)-
The functions
and W,,,+ a are defined by Whittaker and Watson (1946),
r(.+A + 1)
' ( ~9 A) = K2 1 +2 r ( K- A)
(2.10)
(2.11)
(2.12)
(2.13)
and
i a
2v ah
G(K, A) = --.A(K, A)
whichis absolutely and uniformly convergent.
The definition of y1 may be written
(2.15)
(2.16)
wherethe series converges absolutely and uniformly. Since r( h+ 1 - K + O)/F(A+ 1 - K )
is a polynomial i n K of order CJ, y1 may be expressed as a power series i n 1/~. By
hmner's transfomation yl( - K, A ; p) = Y ~ ( K , A; p) and therefore only even powers
Of will occur. It follows that y1 is an analytic function of E. Furthemore, since
y2( 4A; p) =Yl(K, - A- I ; p ) (2.17)
it follows that y2 is an analytic function of E.
804 M. J. Seaton
2.2. Functions f or h not an integer
For h #i where 1 = 0, 1,2, ... the functions y1 and y2 are hearly independent and
are real so long as h is real. I n I1 it will be necessary to consider values of h which are
complex and such that the real part of h is equal to - 4. In thi s case the functions y6
and y, are analytic functions of E and are real and linearly independent.
2.3. Functions f or h equal to an integer
Letting h + 1 we obtain
so that y1 and y2 are no longer linearly independent. The function y 3 is introduced by
analogy with the Weber function as a second solution of Bessel's equation of integer
order. I n the limit of h + 1,
From (2.13) we obtain
I
A ( K , 1) = K-21-2 n (K2-p)
p = o
which is a polynomial in E = - I / K ~ of order 1. The function
(2.19)
(2.20)
(2.21)
is not an analytic function of E . The analytic function y4( ~, I ; p) is obtained from3'3
on subtracting the term involving 2Aj2h.
For h = I the two linearly independent analytic functions of E are yl and 1'4. In
the remahder of &e presect ppe: we shd! consider ody &e case of r, = 1. We shd
find it convenient to use the notation
g(., I ; P) = YdK, i ; P)
S i . , i ; pj = Y ~ ( K , i; pj l
2.4. Asymptotic forms
We express asymptotic forms in terms of functions #* defined by
(2.22)
When E is positive we put
K = iy, E = +- 1 ( E > 0) (2.24)
Y2
Quantum defect theory: I 805
,&re y is real and positive, and when E is negative we put
&rev is real and positive. We obtain
+*(iy, I; p) = y'J2 exp
T U
and
+*(Y, I ; p) = v1/2exp[ - i y{k( Z- v) +$}]( ; ) 9T exp( T :). (2.27)
In the limit of p + CO, f and g cease to be single-valued functions of K. We find it
K =v +i y (Y > 0, y > 0) (2.28)
andto take K = Y and K = ;y as the limits y - t O and v +O. Forf and g weobtain
(Bateman Manuscript Project 1953, p. 278)
convenient to obtain asymptotic forms for
(2.29)
}. (2.30)
(G+A cotm)C- (G+iA)++
+
r(lS1-K) r ( i + i + K )
The asymptotic form of ys = 8 is
8 0- m e)'e-p/K.
This function will be required only for K = Y. For this case wehave
(2.31)
2.5. Properties of the function G
Putting
G = 9+iX
xhere $9and X are real, it is shown by Seaton (1958 a) that
0 for K = v
for K = iy.
(2.33)
(2.34)
The function %( K, I) is not an analytic function of E = - 1/2 but may be represented
an asymptotic expansion. Using (2.14) and an asymptotic expansion for +(x) (Bate-
Manuscript Project 1953, p. 47) we obtain
where the BZp are Bernoulli numbers:
(2.35)
1
30'
B - -- ... . (2.36)
1 1
8 -
B - - _
1
30' =z'
4 -
806 M. J. Seaton
using (2.33) and (2.34) we obtain, for the functions occurring in (2.30),
where
and
cotm for K = v
{-i for K = iy.
C(K, I ) =
2.6. Bound states
The function f vanishes at
limit of p + CO. The equation
1 d2
(2.37)
(2.38)
(2.39)
(2.40)
the origin and the function O(v, I ; p ) vanishes in the
I(Z+l) 2 1
P 3
id,. -pz+-- -}y = 0 (2.41)
has solutions which are everywhere bounded only if v = n where n = I t 1,l t2, ... .
We take P = y(n, I ; p ) to be a bound-state solution which is real and which satisfies
the normalization condition
S;P2(P)dp = 1. (2.42)
This function is
P = e(%, I; p)K(n, I )
(2.43)
where
3. Description of atomic systems
We consider an atomic system consisting of a nucleus of charge 2 together uith
N+1 elections. Our present interest is in bound states and in states for which one
electron is in the continuum. We take the complete wave function to be
where P, is a wave function for the N-electron system, coordinates 1,2, ..., N, multi-
plied by a spin function X ~ ( O " + ~ ) and a spherical harmonic Yl,,cr(BN+l, &+I), for the
electron N+ 1.
Substituting Y in the Schrodinger equation we obtain for the functions F, equations
of the form
d2 IU(ZU+l) 22
(3.2)
where z = 2- N. I n the present paper it is assumed that z > 0. The tod energ is
E = . 9gU + &&U
(3.3)
z2gU being the energy for state Q. in the N-electron system.
Quantum defect theory : I
807
If GI, or s, is not a continuum state of the N-electron system it may be shown that
(3.4)
&re m Z 3 for a = /3 and m Z 2 for c( #/? (Castillejo et al. 1960). We do not con-
ider the more complicated case for which a and s are both continuum states (see Rudge
adSeaton 1965). For electron collisions with neutral atoms we have z = 0 and the
long-rangeparts of the potentials U,, may be of importance. It is shown by Gailitis
adDamburg (1963) that potentials behaving asymptotically as l/rz, connecting degener-
ate states in hydrogen, produce a modification in threshold laws for electron-hydrogen
mllisions. In the presence of long-range Coulomb potentials, z > 0, the asymptotic
formsof the potentials Ua, are of less importance. It is shown by Gailitis (1963) that
for this case no modification of threshold laws results from putting
UaB = 0 for r > ro
(3.5)
wherero has some large but finite value. Equation (3.5) will be assumed in the present
paper. The effect of long-range interactions between degenerate states of hydrogenic
ions will be discussed further in I11 (Bely 1966) where it will be shown that better
results are obtained in practice if these interactions are taken explicitly into account.
Further discussion of long-range interactions will be given in a later paper in the present
series.
4. Solutions of the coupled equations
the equations (3.2) may be written
(D2+W+e)F = 0.
Our convention is that quantities in italic type without subscripts represent diagonal
matrices; thus E stands for the diagonal matrix with elements easa,+ For matrices which
are not necessarily diagonal weuse bold-face type.
Putting
fa = f ( K a , l a; PI, ga = g ( Ka , 4; p) (4.3)
(4.4)
and assuming (3.5) we have
? - I \ A - / \ @ I n f \ n /
ran\ f ) = Jr r \P)-" anT6a\PJV an for r^ > 90
where po = mo and where Sen, %Yan are independent of p. In (4.4), n is used to indicate
the particular solution being considered. In matrix form (4.4) is
F = f$+@. (4.5)
Let F(E; 9) be a solution which is zero at the origin, F(E; 0) = 0, and which is an
ayti c functlon of E in the neighbourhood of the origin. The potential U is such
that p2U + 0 as p + 0 and from this it follows that the functions Fa go to zero at least
asfast p l a + l at the origin. In order to f i x ideas, we could take Fan(E; p) to be such
that
2
808 M. J. Seaton
or, in matrix notation,
(4.7)
( 4 4
lim (p-'-IF(E; p)) = 1.
P -0
We suppose that F(E; p) is a continuous function of p and that
F(E; p) = fI +gJ for p > po.
Assuming U to satisfy certain continuity conditions, Ham (1955) shows that F(E; , , )
will be an analytic function of E for all finite values of p, and hence that IQ and J ( E)
will be analytic functions of E. The proof given by Ham is for the one-channel problem
but is readily generalized.
The matrix U is Hermitian and, with the usual conventions for the choice of
phases of atomic wave functions, U will be real. We may then take F(E; p) to bered
and I and J to be red. Evaluating
1: [F(D2 + W + E) F - {(D2 + W + E ) FITF]dp
where p1 > po and where F is the transpose of F, we find that
ITJ = JTI
and from t hi s it follows that IJ-1 is symmetric.
Using (2.29), (2.30) and (2.37), (2.38)
(4.9)
K-')'{I-(9+iB)J). (4.10)
K~ +* exp{ - i&( Z-
-++ r(z+i+K)
We now introduce a second function matrix F( S ; p) such that F( S ; 0) = 0 and
F ( S ; d p : : , 4 - - 4 + S . (4.11)
Comparing (4.10) and (4.11) we see that
(4.12)
This expression, which gives the scattering matrix S in terms of the analytical matrices
I and J, is the key result of the theory. The matrices I and J correspond to a function
F(E; p) with some arbitrary choice of normalization, such as (4.7). The essential
quantity is IJ-I. This may be represented as a power series in E together with simple
poles at the zeros of the determinant IJI.
For practical calculations it is convenient to introduce
Y = (B-IJ -')-'. (4.13)
Since 1J-l is real and symmetric and 59 is real and diagonal, Y is real and symnteuic*
The matrix Y can be represented by asymptotic energy expansions together with sWl e
poles.
w Ozccmtum &fed theary: I 809
It is also convenient to introduce
R = g1/2yB1/2 (4.14)
&re B is defined by (2.39). This matrix is symmetric and can be represented by
,pptotic expansions together with simple poles. From (2.20) t o (2.39) we see that B,
positive so long as E , > - l/Z2 but that B, may be negative if, < - l/Za2. It follows
that R is real for energies such that E, > - l/Za2 for all CI, but that the off-diagonal ele-
ments, R,B for GI #p, may be complex if E , < - l/Z2 or eB < - l/ZB2. Also RaB = 0
for Ea = - l/Z2 or EB = - I/ZBz.
Expressing S in terms of R we obtain
S = a(l + i R) ( l + CR) - l b (4.15)
There the definitions of B, C, a and b may be summarized as follows:
K, = v, Kcc = '&a
B, =
A,
1 - exp( - 2n y,)
c, = --2 cot rrv,
a, = eXP (4) (27~/i )~'~ exp(ih(v, - ZJv,K,
(2n/i)lI2 exp{ib(v, - Z,)}v,K,
1 - exp(2rriva)
b, = exP(iaa)
andwhere
G, = argI'(Z+l-iy,) (4.16)
K, = {va2r(z,+v,+ i)qv,-z,)}-1/z. (4.17)
For most practical applications we shall use expansions containing only a few terms ;
tpically we might fit to three or four terms. I n some cases it is permissible to use
expansions of R but this is unsatisfactory if any E , is close to - 1/Z$, or less than - 1/12.
Also expansions of R cannot be used for large positive energies since the factor
(l-e-2ny)-1 in (2.39) cannot be represented by expansions in powers of the energy;
for small positive energies this factor is close to unity and can be neglected.
It is generally better to use expansions of Y or, in the vicinity of a pole in Y, expan-
sions of Y-l. Expansions involving poles may be avoided by ihtroducing a matrix q
defined by
Y = tan-. (4.18)
'his, ~II &e Q X - C ~ Z & me , I pole i~ Y corresponds to a half-integer value of n. To
calculate q in the many-channel case one diagonalizes Y,
Y = vYv-1
q = vsjv-1
where Y is diagonal, and obtains
(4.19)
(4.20)
\ h e 4, = arc tan Fa. The quantity r] was introduced by Ham (1955) for the one-
c ~ e l problem and referred to as the 7 defect.
In the one-channel problem the quantum defect is defined at the eigenvalues by
(1.2)md(1.3). A definition ofp for aIl finite energies in the one-channel problem was given
Seaton (1958 a). Generalizing to the many-channel problem wehave
tanzy = A1''YA1I2. (4.21)
810 M. J. Seat on
When all channels are closed we have B = A and tan ~p = R.
5. AU channels open
When all channels are open ( ~ = = i y = for all a),
S = eZu(l + i R ) ( l - i R) - l efu.
(5.1)
Let us introduce functions
and let the function matrix F(W) have asymptotic form
F(W) N s + c W. (5.4)
D 4 C
Comparison of (5.4) with (4.11) shows that the relation between the scattering matrix
S and the reactance mat ri x W is
S = eZu(l + iB)(l - i W) - l etU
(5.5)
and comparison with (5.1) shows that W = R for the case in which all channels are
open.
A phase matrix 6 may be defined by
R = tans. (5.6)
(5.7)
I n terms of the matrix defined by (4.21) we have, for all channels open,
tannp = (1 -e-2ny)1'2 tanS(1 -e-Zny)1'2.
This is the matrix generalization of the relation between quantum defects and phases
obtained by Seaton (1958 a).
6. All channels closed
We put
P(p) = F( S ; p ) S - l N (6.1)
N + - S - ' N - + + N (6.2)
where N is a column vector. For closed channels 4- increases exponentially in the
asymptotic region. For P to represent a bound state we must therefore have
S - ' N = 0. (6.3)
(6.4)
X = ( l + i R ) - l a - I N (6.5)
Using (4.14) with C = cot m, (6.3) may be written
Putting
(6.4) will be satisfied if
b-l cotm(tanm+ R)(1 + i R ) - l a - l N = 0.
(tanm+ R) X = 0 (6.6)
lihich requires that
jtannv-i- R I = U.
(6.7)
For the one-channel case we have R = tanrp and the solution of (6.7) is I' = tz-p
uhere n is an integer, in agreement with (1.3).
From (6.5),
and using (6.6)
The bound-state functions have asymptotic form
N = ~ ( l +iR)X (6. 3)
N = u(l -i tan7i l ')X. (6.9)
P - -4-N. (6.10)
It is convenient to express P in terms of the real functions 8. I3y analogy with (1. 43)
P = 6KZ ( p > po) . (6.11)
let us put
I'sing (2.32) and (6.9) we obtain
where
z = 2i q - l X
1,'2
q = (-I)'(-$) COS" .
For bound states R = iZ1 2YA1' 2. Let us define a diagonal inatris
7 = -4-l tannv.
Using (6.6) we obtain
and hence
The condition (6.7) is equivalent to
( T + y)A1" X = 0
( T+Y) AA1' 2qZ = 0.
j TfY ! = 0.
(6.12)
(6.13)
(6.14j
(6.15)
(6.16)
(6.17)
7. Normalization
We take F to be an eigenfunctian for total energy E and F' for energy E' :
(D2+W+e)F = 0 (7.1)
(D2+W+e')F' = 0 ( 7. 1J)
e@' -cc -(E' - E) (7.2)
where, by (3.3),
2
22
is independent of 51. Writing Ft far the Hermitian conjugate of F,
Di
0
1 [ Ft (D2+W+~' )F' -((D2+W+~)F)+F' ] dp = 0. (7.3)
Integrating by parts, assuming F and F' both to be zera at the origin and using the
Hermitian property of W, we obtain
(E-E') r1 FtF'dp = (Ft(oF')-(DF)tF'~:,,,;.
(7.4)
0
812 M. J. Seaton
We now take F = F(S), F = F(S). Using (2.23),
1
D+* N T+*
K
and therefore
1
(4)
FtFdp Dym (4- -+i)t7(+- +++S)
K
0
1
-(+- +++S)t-(+- -++S).
K t
(7.5
(7.6)
Consider first the case in which all channels are open. Putting e = -E in (7.6)
obtain
For E #E weconsider J, FtFdp as a factor occurring in the integrand of an integral
over 4. After some reduction we obtain
StS = 1. (7.7)
[ IFt F dp = ~&(E--E ).
If some channels are open and some closed, (7.8) remains valid for matrii elements
connecting open channels.
When al l channels are closed we put
P = FS- I N with S- I N = 0
(7.9)
SO that P is an eigenfunction. We put
P = (FS-I N)
where, in accordance with (6.9),
N = a(1-itanm)X.
(7.10)
(7.11)
Apart from a factor of normalization, the vectors N and X are defined at the eigenvalues.
The functions P are solutions of (7.1) for energies which are not eigenvalues and t he
vectors N and X are therefore not yet defined. As a matter of convenience we take
X = x.
From (7.6) we obtain
1
PtPdp N (++ N)t --(+-S- ++ ) N
V
and, since ++ + O for p +- CO,
11Pt Pdp = lim lim Nt(++)*( 1 /v + 1 / v)(+-) (S N)
(7.13)
D 4 0 & +& E -
Since (S-IN) +- 0 for E - + 0, in (7.13) we may replace V by v and (4-) by #-.
(7.14)
(++)*+- = vexp{(in(Z-v)}
and hence
BY (2.27))
2 exp{in(l-v))
PtPdp = lim Nt (S-I N)
s: E +E E --E
(7.15)
Quantum defect theory: I 813
uiig (4.14) and (7.11) with X = X, we have
(S-lN) = {b-lcotm(tanm+R))X (7.16)
adsiice (tan m+ R) X =:O we obtain, to first order in E-,
(S-lN) = (b-l Cotm)(E-E)
SnceE = - l/. we have
a
-tan 7 v = q-2
ae
(7.17)
(7.18)
where q is defined by (6.13), and hence
a
aE
-(tanm+ R) = q-lt;q-l (7.19)
where
aR
r = +P(-&.
For the normalization integral (7.15) we obtain, using (7.17) and (7.20),
(7.20)
(7.21)
Uhg (6.9) and (6.12) to express Nt and X in terms of Z we find, after some straight-
forward reductions, that the function P = OK2 will be normalized to
s, PtPdp = 1
provided that
K*
K
zt+z = 1.
(7.22)
(7.23)
-
Ihe functions p may always be taken 10 be red. For v c 1, K ay be h-eghary but
KZ will be red. Introducing the transpose of Z, ZT = (Zt)*, we have ZT = Z+K*/K
for KZ real. The normalization condition (7.24) may therefore be written
Z T Z = 1. (7.24)
It is convenient to express <in terms of Y. Using R = A 2YrZ we ~ b t k i
and using (6.16) it is seen that, in (7.24), we may take
(7.26)
For highly excited states v will be large and q, defined by (7.19), will be small. I n
case we may take 6 = 1 and the normalization condition becomes zTz = 1.
Whenever this approximation is valid, Z will be real.
814 M. J. Seaton
It is sometimes found that, for the lowest energy level of a system, one has a COm-
ponent for which vu -N 1,. It is readily shown that
(7.27)
and from this it follows that tU8 = 0 for v u = 1,. I n the limit of vu +I,, k, and 5,
behave as v,-Z,, K, behaves as ( v , - & ) ~ ~ and 2, behaves as ( ~ , - l ~ ) - ~ ~ . The produa
K,Z, occurring in (6.11) therefore remains real and finite.
8. Discussion
We have given an exact theory of the analytical properties of the solutions of equt-
ion (3.2)) it being assumed that U = 0 for r > ro where ro is finite. Although an ema
theory of the many-electron problem would be more complicated, in consequence of
the long range of the potential matrix U, it is believed that the present theory is adequate
for most practical purposes of interpolation and extrapolation.
I n I1 (Seaton 1966) we shall give some illustrative applications of the theory for the
interpretation of perturbed series, resonances and collision cross sections.
Acknowledgments
about this work.
I should like to thank Dr. 0. Bely and Dr. D. Moores for many valuable discussions
References
BATEMAN MANUSCRIPT PROJECT, 1953, Hzghm Transcendental Functions, Vol. 1 (New York:
BELY, O., 1966, Proc. Phys. Soc., 88, 833-42.
BELY, O., MOORES, D., and SEATON, M. J., 1963, Atomic Collision Processes, Ed. M. R. c.
BURGESS, A., and SEATON, M. J., 1960, Mon. Not. R. Astr. Soc., 120, 121-51.
CASTIL~JO, L., ?EFFC:VAL, I. C., and SEATON, M. j., 1960, ?roc. Roy. Soc. A, 254, 259-72.
DAMBURG, R. Y., and FETERXOP, R. K., 1962, Proc. Phys. Soc., 80, 1073-7.
GAILITIS, IM., 1963, Soviet Physics-JETP, 17,1328-32.
GAILITIS, M., and DAMBURG, R., 1963, Proc. Phys. Soc., 82,192-200.
HAM, F. S., 1955, Solid State Physics, E& F. Seitz and D. Turnbull, 1, 127-92 (New YOrk:
Academic Press).
HAR-, D. E., 1927, ,%c. Canb. Phi. Soc., %,W-iiG, 111-32, 426-37.
- 1929, Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc., 25, 310-22.
MOORES, D., 1966, Proc. Phys. Soc., 88, 843-60
PEACH, G., 1965, Mon. Not. R. Astr. Soc., 130, 361-77.
Ross, M. H., and SHAW, G. L., 1961, Ann. Phys., N.Y., 13,147-86.
RUDGE, M. R. H. and SEATON, M. J., 1965, Proc. Roy. Soc. A, 283,262-90.
SEATON, M. J., 1955, C.R. Acad. Sei., Paris, 240, 1317-8.
- 1958 a, Mon. Not. R. Astr. Soc., 118, 504-18.
-
- 1966, Proc. Phys. Soc., 88, 815-32.
WHITTAIIER, E. T., and WATSON, G. N., 1946, A Course of Modern AnalyGs, 4th
Cambridge University Press), chap. XVI.
McGraw-Hill).
McDowell (Amsterdam: North-Holland), p. 304-11.
1958 b, Rw. Mod. Phys., 30,979-91.
(London