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.
 Ayaz Bakasov.