Reply to T. Daniel Crawford
Dear Daniel Crawford,
> I have also derived this expression,
> but obtained the same answer as S&O.
Yes, their expression is the correct one.
Who said it is incorrect ?
What I was posting was absolutely
about my own failure,
and all wanted was to make sure
that the expression in the book is correct
and free from misprints for example.
> I believe that if you derive the equation
> using second-quantization that
> you will obtain the correct result.
That's exactly what I have done
and got exactly their result.
I have already responded to some
people that I had got the S&O result
using second quantization.
The latter is a tool I am really used to,
for I am a pure theoretical physicist
and am in the quantum chemistry business
for a year may be for two --
what an accident of life! :-)
My problem was that I was failing
to get their result, using
that clumsy determinantal technique.
Which merely means that I am still missing
some point in the book.
It is a purely working situation
and those who wished to help me
(without any other prejudice intended)
directed their mails to me.
Science must be free
from destructive emotions.