arxiv: 2604.03319 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-01 · 🌀 gr-qc

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Comment on "Quantum phase transitions of Dirac particles in a magnetized rotating curved background: Interplay of geometry, magnetization, and thermodynamics"

R. R. S. Oliveira

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-13 21:28 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc

keywords Dirac equationcurved spacetimeenergy spectraquantum numbersrotating backgroundgamma matricesmagnetized spacetime

0 comments

The pith

Correcting minor errors yields complete Dirac energy spectra depending on both radial n and angular m quantum numbers.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This comment paper shows that the original calculation of Dirac particles in a magnetized rotating curved background produced an incomplete energy spectrum depending on only one quantum number. Using the standard definition of gamma matrices in 2+1 dimensions and fixing small setup errors produces the true second-order differential equation whose solutions depend explicitly on both the radial quantum number n and the angular quantum number m. A reader would care because wave equations in polar coordinates normally yield spectra labeled by two independent quantum numbers, so the single-number result appeared inconsistent with the coordinate choice. The corrected spectra match the original result for negative m and the lower spinor component except for one sign difference in a single term.

Core claim

After deriving the corrected second-order differential equation for the Dirac equation in the given spacetime, the energy eigenvalues are obtained as a function of both the radial quantum number n ≥ 0 and the angular quantum number m ≠ 0. For the specific case of m < 0 with the lower component s = -1, the result reproduces the original spectra except for one term carrying the incorrect sign.

What carries the argument

The corrected second-order differential equation obtained from the Dirac equation by using the standard (2+1)-dimensional gamma-matrix representation and fixing minor errors in the original derivation.

If this is right

Energy levels now carry the expected dependence on both n and m as required by polar coordinates.
Thermodynamic quantities and phase-transition boundaries must be recomputed with the full m dependence.
Magnetization effects will differ once the angular quantum number enters the spectrum explicitly.
Geometry and field interplay becomes fully consistent with the coordinate symmetry of the background.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Similar calculations in other rotating or curved backgrounds may contain analogous setup errors that hide the second quantum number.
The remaining sign discrepancy could be resolved by a consistent choice of spinor component or boundary condition at the origin.
Exact solutions for related problems could be checked against the corrected formula to test whether the gamma-matrix convention is universal in such spacetimes.

Load-bearing premise

The most commonly used definition of the Dirac gamma matrices in 2+1 dimensions is the appropriate choice for this curved spacetime, and the original paper contained minor errors that alter the second-order equation.

What would settle it

Numerical integration of the Dirac equation in the rotating magnetized background should produce energy eigenvalues that match the two-quantum-number formula, or else fail to match if the original one-number spectra are correct.

read the original abstract

In this comment, we obtain the complete energy spectra for the paper by Sahan et al. [1], that is, the energy spectra dependent on two quantum numbers, namely, the radial quantum number (given by $n\geq 0$) and the angular quantum number (given by $m\neq 0$). In particular, what motivated us to carry out such a study was the fact that the quantized energy spectra for Dirac particles in a curved or flat spacetime in polar coordinates explicitly depend on two quantum numbers. From this, the following question arose: Why do the energy spectra in the paper by Sahan et al. [1] depends on only one quantum number and not two, given that they worked with the Dirac equation in polar coordinates? So, using several important papers in the literature on the Dirac equation in curved spacetimes, as well as the most commonly used definition for Dirac gamma matrices in (2+1)-dimensions, we corrected some minor errors in the paper by Sahan et al. [1]. Consequently, we obtain the true second-order differential equation for their problem, as well as the complete energy spectra, which explicitly depend on both $n$ and $m$. Finally, we note that for $m<0$ (negative angular momentum) with $s=-1$ (lower component of the Dirac spinor), we obtain (except for one term with the incorrect sign) the particular energy spectra of Sahan et al. [1].

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This comment supplies the missing angular quantum number m in the Dirac spectra but rests on a gamma-matrix convention that may be one choice among equivalents.

read the letter

The main takeaway is that this comment derives the full energy spectra for Dirac particles in the magnetized rotating curved background, making them depend on both the radial quantum number n and the angular quantum number m. The original Sahan et al. paper apparently gave results with only one quantum number, which the authors here correct by fixing minor errors in the second-order equation using standard references on the Dirac equation in curved space and the common gamma matrices in (2+1) dimensions. They recover the prior spectra for m negative and the lower spinor component except for one sign term, which suggests the adjustment is small but material. This is a concrete extension rather than a restatement. The work follows established methods already in the cited literature, so the novelty is limited to completing the spectra for this specific setup. The soft spot is the gamma-matrix convention. Curved spacetime requires a spin connection and local tetrads, and different but equivalent representations can shift the radial equation and final spectrum. The comment does not display the explicit matrices or a direct comparison with the original derivation, so it remains possible that the difference is a valid frame choice rather than an identifiable error. The abstract also skips the full steps, though the manuscript likely includes them. This paper is for specialists already working on exact Dirac solutions in rotating or magnetized GR backgrounds. A reader focused on that narrow class of problems would find the corrected expressions useful for checking their own calculations. I would bring it to a reading group as a maybe to go over the derivation details. I would not cite it in my own work unless directly addressing this model. It deserves peer review because the claim is checkable with standard tools and the engagement with the literature is straightforward.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript is a comment claiming to correct minor errors in Sahan et al. on the Dirac equation for particles in a magnetized rotating curved background. Using the most common (2+1)D gamma-matrix definition, the authors derive a corrected second-order differential equation and obtain the complete energy spectra explicitly depending on both the radial quantum number n ≥ 0 and angular quantum number m ≠ 0. They report that for m < 0 and s = -1 the spectra match those of the original paper except for one term with an incorrect sign.

Significance. If the corrections are valid and the spectra derivation holds, the work would establish the expected two-quantum-number dependence for the Dirac problem in polar coordinates and identify specific issues in the original analysis. This could refine understanding of the interplay between geometry, magnetization, and thermodynamics. However, the significance is reduced because the manuscript does not demonstrate that the chosen gamma-matrix representation is required rather than one of several equivalent choices in curved spacetime, limiting the claim that the original spectra were definitively erroneous.

major comments (2)

[Derivation of the second-order equation] The central assertion that the original second-order equation contained identifiable minor errors (rather than a consistent but different frame choice) rests on inserting the standard flat-space gamma matrices directly into the curved Dirac operator. No explicit vielbein or spin-connection terms are derived for the given metric, nor is a side-by-side comparison with the original setup provided; this leaves open the possibility that the reported corrections are convention-dependent.
[Energy spectra section] The complete energy spectra are stated to depend on both n and m, yet the manuscript does not display the explicit algebraic steps from the corrected differential equation to the final quantized energies (including the handling of the angular-momentum term). Without these steps, independent verification of the two-quantum-number dependence and the partial agreement with Sahan et al. is not possible.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] The abstract refers to 'the most commonly used definition for Dirac gamma matrices in (2+1)-dimensions' without citing the specific reference or displaying the matrices themselves.
[Final note on agreement with Sahan et al.] The statement that the spectra match 'except for one term with the incorrect sign' should identify the precise term and the equation number in which it appears.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their insightful comments on our comment paper. We provide point-by-point responses to the major comments and indicate the revisions we will make to address them.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Derivation of the second-order equation] The central assertion that the original second-order equation contained identifiable minor errors (rather than a consistent but different frame choice) rests on inserting the standard flat-space gamma matrices directly into the curved Dirac operator. No explicit vielbein or spin-connection terms are derived for the given metric, nor is a side-by-side comparison with the original setup provided; this leaves open the possibility that the reported corrections are convention-dependent.

Authors: We used the standard (2+1)D gamma matrices as is common in the literature for such problems. However, to strengthen the manuscript, we will add the explicit calculation of the vielbein and spin connection terms for the metric in question. This will clarify that our corrections are based on the standard tetrad choice and not merely a convention difference. We will also include a brief comparison highlighting where the original derivation diverged. revision: yes
Referee: [Energy spectra section] The complete energy spectra are stated to depend on both n and m, yet the manuscript does not display the explicit algebraic steps from the corrected differential equation to the final quantized energies (including the handling of the angular-momentum term). Without these steps, independent verification of the two-quantum-number dependence and the partial agreement with Sahan et al. is not possible.

Authors: We will include the detailed algebraic steps in the revised manuscript. Starting from the corrected second-order equation, we will show the ansatz for the spinor components, the resulting radial equation, the quantization of the radial part leading to n, and how the angular part introduces m. The final energy formula will be derived explicitly, demonstrating the dependence on both quantum numbers and the agreement (with sign correction) for the specified case. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation uses external standard definitions and cited literature

full rationale

The comment paper derives the corrected second-order differential equation and complete energy spectra (depending on both n and m) by invoking the most commonly used (2+1)D gamma-matrix representation from external literature together with standard curved-spacetime Dirac techniques. No parameter is fitted to data and then re-labeled as a prediction, no self-citation supplies a load-bearing uniqueness theorem, and the recovered special case for m<0, s=-1 is presented as the result of error correction rather than a definitional identity. The central claim therefore rests on independent external conventions and does not reduce to its own inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the choice of gamma-matrix representation in 2+1 dimensions and the identification of minor errors in the original setup; no new free parameters or invented entities are introduced.

axioms (1)

standard math Standard definition of Dirac gamma matrices in (2+1) dimensions
Invoked to set up the Dirac equation in polar coordinates for the curved background.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5577 in / 1207 out tokens · 36737 ms · 2026-05-13T21:28:30.922444+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/RealityFromDistinction.lean reality_from_one_distinction unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

we corrected some minor errors in the paper by Sahan et al. [1]. Consequently, we obtain the true second-order differential equation ... energy spectra, which explicitly depend on both n and m
IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

using the most commonly used definition for Dirac gamma matrices in (2+1)-dimensions

What do these tags mean?

matches: The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports: The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends: The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses: The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts: The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear: Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages · 4 internal anchors

[1]

Sahan, E

N. Sahan, E. Sucu, Y. Sucu, Phys. Dark Univ.49, 102005 (2025).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dark.2025.102005. arXiv:2409.18535

work page doi:10.1016/j.dark.2025.102005 2025
[2]

P. M. Alsing, J. C. Evans, and K. K. Nandi, Gen. Relativ. Gravit.33, 1459–1487 (2001).https://doi.org/10.1023/A: 1012284625541. arXiv:gr-qc/0010065

work page doi:10.1023/a: 2001
[3]

Panahi, and L

H. Panahi, and L. Jahangiri, Ann. Phys.354, 306-315 (2015).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aop.2014.12.025

work page doi:10.1016/j.aop.2014.12.025 2015
[4]

M. H. Kiessling, and A. S. Tahvildar-Zadeh, J. Math. Phys.56, 042303 (2015).https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4918361. arXiv:1410.0419

work page doi:10.1063/1.4918361 2015
[5]

H. L. Chen, K. Fukushima, X. G. Huang, and K. Mameda, Phys. Rev. D93, 104052 (2016).https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevD.93.104052. arXiv:1512.08974

work page Pith review arXiv 2016
[6]

Ebihara, K

S. Ebihara, K. Fukushima, and K. Mameda, Phys. Lett. B764, 94-99 (2017).https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1608. 00336. arXiv:1608.00336

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.1608 2017
[7]

M. N. Chernodub, and S. Gongyo, JHEP2017, 1-32 (2017).https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2017)136. arXiv:1611.02598

work page doi:10.1007/jhep01(2017)136 2017
[8]

Sadooghi, S

N. Sadooghi, S. M. A. T. Mehr, and F. Taghinavaz, Phys. Rev. D104, 116022 (2021).https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevD.104.116022. arXiv:2108.12760

work page arXiv 2021
[9]

Bakke, Gen

K. Bakke, Gen. Relativ. Gravit.45, 1847–1859 (2013).https://doi.org/10.1007/s10714-013-1561-6. arXiv:1307.2847

work page doi:10.1007/s10714-013-1561-6 2013
[10]

Bakke, and C

K. Bakke, and C. Furtado, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.)336, 489-504 (2013).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aop.2013.06.007. arXiv:1307.2888

work page doi:10.1016/j.aop.2013.06.007 2013
[11]

E. A. F. Bragan¸ ca, R. L. L. Vit´ oria, H. Belich, and E. B. de Mello, Eur. Phys. J. C80, 1-11 (2020).https://doi.org/ 10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-7774-4. arXiv:1909.00037

work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-7774-4 2020
[12]

F. M. Andrade, and E. O. Silva, Eur. Phys. J. C74, 3187 (2014).https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-3187-6. arXiv:1403.4113

work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-3187-6 2014
[13]

Hammad, A

F. Hammad, A. Landry, and P. Sadeghi, Universe7, 467 (2021).https://doi.org/10.3390/universe7120467. arXiv:2111.15448

work page doi:10.3390/universe7120467 2021
[14]

M. J. Bueno, J. L. Melo, C. Furtado, and A. M. M. Carvalho, Eur. Phys. J. Plus129, 201 (2014).https://doi.org/10. 1140/epjp/i2014-14201-5

work page 2014
[15]

J. A. Neto, C. Furtado, J. F. O. de Souza, and A. M. M. Carvalho, Eur. Phys. J. Plus139, 1027 (2024).https://doi. org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-024-05835-3

work page doi:10.1140/epjp/s13360-024-05835-3 2024
[16]

R. R. S. Oliveira, Eur. Phys. J. C79, 725 (2019).https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7237-y

work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7237-y 2019
[17]

R. R. S. Oliveira, Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 52,88(2020).https://doi.org/10.1007/s10714-020-02743-6. arXiv:1906.07369

work page doi:10.1007/s10714-020-02743-6 2020
[18]

R. R. S. Oliveira, G. Alencar, and R. R. Landim, Gen. Relativ. Gravit.55, 15 (2023).https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10714-022-03057-5. arXiv:2204.06057

work page arXiv 2023
[19]

R. R. S. Oliveira, Gen. Relativ. Gravit.56, 30 (2024).https://doi.org/10.1007/s10714-024-03209-9. arXiv:2402.15720

work page doi:10.1007/s10714-024-03209-9 2024
[20]

R. R. S. Oliveira, Class. Quantum Grav.41, 175017 (2024).https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6382/ad69f5. arXiv:2405.11334

work page doi:10.1088/1361-6382/ad69f5 2024
[21]

R. R. S. Oliveira, Gen. Relativ. Gravit.57, 111 (2025).https://doi.org/10.1007/s10714-025-03447-5. arXiv:2410.17535

work page doi:10.1007/s10714-025-03447-5 2025
[22]

R. R. S. Oliveira, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D34, 2450065 (2025).https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218271824500652. arXiv:2403.01366

work page doi:10.1142/s0218271824500652 2025
[23]

R. R. S. Oliveira, JHEP2025, 85 (2025).https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2025)085. arXiv:2411.04338

work page doi:10.1007/jhep01(2025)085 2025
[24]

R. R. S. Oliveira, JCAP09, 070 (2025).https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2025/09/070. arXiv:2502.05977

work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/09/070 2025
[25]

R. R. S. Oliveira, R.V. Maluf, and C. A. S. Almeida, Ann. Phys.400, 1-8 (2019).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aop.2018. 11.005. arXiv:1809.03801

work page doi:10.1016/j.aop.2018 2019
[26]

F. M. Andrade, and E. O. Silva, EPL108, 30003 (2014).10.1209/0295-5075/108/30003. arXiv:1406.3249

work page doi:10.1209/0295-5075/108/30003 2014
[27]

V. M. Villalba, Phys. Rev. A49, 586 (1994).https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.49.586. arXiv:hep-th/9310010

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physreva.49.586 1994
[28]

V. M. Villalba, and A. R. Maggiolo, Eur. Phys. J. B22, 31–35 (2001).https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01325457. arXiv:cond- mat/0107529

work page doi:10.1007/bf01325457 2001
[29]

Energy Spectrum of a 2D Dirac Oscillator in the Presence of the Aharonov-Bohm Effect

N. Ferkous, and A. Bounames, Phys. Lett. A325, 21-29 (2004).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2004.03.033. arXiv:0801.4663

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2004.03.033 2004
[30]

Ghosh, and B

A. Ghosh, and B. P. Mandal, Phys. Lett. A545, 130488 (2025).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2025.130488. arXiv:2502.16165

work page doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2025.130488 2025
[31]

M. H. Pacheco, R. V. Maluf, C. A. S. Almeida, and R. R. Landim, EPL108, 10005 (2014).https://doi.org/10.1209/ 0295-5075/108/10005. arXiv:1406.5114 9

work page arXiv 2014
[32]

A. Arda, C. Tezcan, and R. Sever, Eur. Phys. J. Plus131, 323 (2016).https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/i2016-16323-0. arXiv:1608.06186

work page doi:10.1140/epjp/i2016-16323-0 2016
[33]

R. R. S. Oliveira, and A. A. A. Filho, Eur. Phys. J. Plus135, 99 (2020).https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/ s13360-020-00146-9. arXiv:1908.10513

work page doi:10.1140/epjp/ 2020
[34]

R. R. S. Oliveira, and R. R. Landim, Phys. Scr.99, 045917 (2024).https://doi.org/10.1088/1402-4896/ad28a7. arXiv:2302.04371

work page doi:10.1088/1402-4896/ad28a7 2024
[35]

R. R. S. Oliveira, and R. R. Landim, Acta Phys. Pol. B55, 17 (2024).https://doi.org/10.5506/APhysPolB.55.10-A1. arXiv:2212.10339

work page doi:10.5506/aphyspolb.55.10-a1 2024
[36]

I. D. Lawrie, A Unified Grand Tour of Theoretical Physics. Hoboken: CRC Press, 2012. v. 3

work page 2012
[37]

Exact Mapping of the 2+1 Dirac Oscillator onto the Jaynes-Cummings Model: Ion-Trap Experimental Proposal

A. Bermudez, M. A. M. Delgado, and E. Solano, Phys. Rev. A76, 041801 (2007).https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA. 76.041801. arXiv:0704.2315

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physreva 2007
[38]

Non-relativistic limit in the 2+1 Dirac Oscillator: A Ramsey Interferometry Effect

A. Bermudez, M. A. M. Delgado, and A. Luis, Phys. Rev. A77, 033832 (2008).https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.77. 033832. arXiv:0709.2557

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physreva.77 2008
[39]

B. P. Mandal, and S. Verma, Phys. Lett. A374, 1021-1023 (2010).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2009.12.048. arXiv:0907.4544

work page doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2009.12.048 2010
[40]

C. R. Hagen, Phys. Rev. Lett.64, 503 (1990).https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.64.503

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.64.503 1990
[41]

C. R. Hagen, Phys. Rev. Lett.64, 2347 (1990).https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.64.2347

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.64.2347 1990
[42]

Menculini, O

L. Menculini, O. Panella, and P. Roy, Phys. Rev. D87, 065017 (2013).https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.87.065017. arXiv:1302.4614

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.87.065017 2013
[43]

P. S. Gerbert, and R. Jackiw, Commun. Math. Phys.124, 229–260 (1989).https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01219196

work page doi:10.1007/bf01219196 1989
[44]

Y. H. Shi, R. Q. Yang, Z. Xiang, Z. Y. Ge, H. Li, Y. Y. Wang, K. Huang, Y. Tian, X. Song, D. Zheng, K. Xu, R. G. Cai, and H. Fan, Nat. Commun.14, 3263 (2023).https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-39064-6. arXiv:2111.11092

work page doi:10.1038/s41467-023-39064-6 2023
[45]

J. S. Pedernales, M. Beau, S. M. Pittman, I. L. Egusquiza, L. Lamata, E. Solano, and A. del Campo, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 160403 (2018).https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.160403. arXiv:1707.07520

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.120.160403 2018
[46]

Guvendi, and O

A. Guvendi, and O. Mustafa, Eur. Phys. J. C84, 866 (2024).https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13192-9. arXiv:2405.16290

work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13192-9 2024
[47]

Guvendi, Eur

A. Guvendi, Eur. Phys. J. C84, 185 (2024).https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12542-x

work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12542-x 2024
[48]

Mustafa, and A

O. Mustafa, and A. Guvendi, Phys. Lett. B866, 139569 (2025).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2025.139569

work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2025.139569 2025
[49]

Guvendi, and O

A. Guvendi, and O. Mustafa, Adv. Theory Simul.8, e00451 (2025).https://doi.org/10.1002/adts.202500451

work page doi:10.1002/adts.202500451 2025
[50]

Blasone, L

M. Blasone, L. Smaldone, and G. Vitiello, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.1275, 012023 (2016).https://doi.org/10.1088/ 1742-6596/1275/1/012023. arXiv:1903.01401

work page arXiv 2016
[51]

Greiner, Relativistic Quantum Mechanics

W. Greiner, Relativistic Quantum Mechanics. Wave Equations, Springer Berlin Heidelberg (2000)https://doi.org/10. 1007/978-3-662-04275-5

work page 2000
[52]

Leo, and P

S. Leo, and P. Rotelli, Eur. Phys. J. C51, 241–247 (2007).https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-007-0297-4. arXiv:0706.0230

work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-007-0297-4 2007
[53]

S. Leo, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.46, 155306 (2013).https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/46/15/155306. arXiv:1304.1561

work page doi:10.1088/1751-8113/46/15/155306 2013