Classical Coherence Distinguishes Organisms from Colonies

Yehuda Roth

arxiv: 2606.02801 · v1 · pith:CZAAMTQSnew · submitted 2026-06-01 · ⚛️ physics.bio-ph

Classical Coherence Distinguishes Organisms from Colonies

Yehuda Roth This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-28 11:37 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.bio-ph

keywords classical coherenceorganism versus colonyDNA sequence spaceLagrangian formalismcollective coordinateDictyostelium discoideuminfection variancemulticellularity

0 comments

The pith

A Lagrangian in DNA sequence space produces a collective coordinate that defines classical coherence distinguishing organisms from colonies.

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

The paper constructs a framework for classical coherence in biological systems by direct analogy to the center-of-mass coordinate in many-body physics. Genetic sequences act as coordinates and mutation rates as velocities in a Lagrangian whose Euler-Lagrange equations yield a collective mode representing the organism as a single unified state. This coherence is actively maintained by metabolic work and implies that organisms occupy superpositions of cellular configurations whose collapse on measurement produces broad variance in outcomes such as infection responses, while colonies remain separable parts that give repeatable results. The distinction is illustrated with Dictyostelium discoideum, which can switch between unicellular and multicellular forms.

Core claim

By mapping the center-of-mass concept to DNA sequence space, a Lagrangian is defined with genetic sequences as coordinates and mutation rates as velocities; the resulting Euler-Lagrange equations generate a collective coordinate that encodes organismal coherence. True organisms therefore exist in a superposition of cellular configurations that collapses upon measurement, producing high variance in infection outcomes across identically prepared samples, whereas colonies behave as incoherent sums and yield consistent, repeatable responses.

What carries the argument

The collective coordinate generated by the Euler-Lagrange equations of the Lagrangian defined on DNA sequence space.

If this is right

Coherent organisms exist in a superposition of cellular configurations.
Measurement collapses the superposition, yielding broad variance in infection outcomes across identical samples.
Incoherent colonies produce consistent, repeatable responses to the same challenges.
The framework applies to biological systems that can switch between unicellular and multicellular states.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Coherence maintenance would require continuous metabolic energy expenditure, linking organism unity directly to energy metabolism.
The same collective-coordinate approach might be applied to other biological collectives such as tissues or symbioses.
A positive experimental result would suggest new ways to model the evolutionary transition to multicellularity.

Load-bearing premise

That a Lagrangian formalism with genetic sequences as coordinates and mutation rates as velocities can be meaningfully defined in DNA sequence space and that its solutions correspond to biological organismal coherence.

What would settle it

If infection of identically prepared multicellular Dictyostelium slugs and unicellular amoebae with the same virus produces no greater variance in outcomes for the slugs than for the amoebae, the superposition prediction would be falsified.

read the original abstract

What distinguishes a multicellular organism from a colony? In the first scenario, individual cells belong to the whole; their function is defined only within the organismal context. In a bacterial colony, each cell retains autonomy; the collective is merely a sum of separable parts. This distinction parts that belong to a unified whole versus parts that remain independent is precisely the definition of coherence in physics: a system described by a single state vector. We introduce a framework for classical coherence in biological systems. Unlike quantum coherence, which is fragile and decoheres on picosecond timescales in warm In environments, classical coherence is actively sustained by metabolic work. We construct this framework by analogy to the center of mass coordinate of a many body system: a collective mode that encodes the state of the whole. Translating this to DNA sequence space, we define a Lagrangian formalism where genetic sequences play the role of coordinates and mutation rates represent velocities. The resulting Euler-Lagrange equations yield a collective coordinate representing organismal coherence. A key prediction of our model is that coherent organisms exist in a superposition of cellular configurations that collapse upon measurement. This produces broad variance in infection outcomes across identically prepared samples, whereas incoherent colonies yield consistent, repeatable responses. To verify this prediction, we propose an experimental test using Dictyostelium discoideum, whose cells can exist either as unicellular amoebae or as multicellular slugs. Infecting both states with the same virus and measuring the distribution of Infected cells will directly validate or falsify our coherence hypothesis.

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 paper asserts a Lagrangian in DNA sequence space yields a collective coherence coordinate but shows neither the Lagrangian nor the derivation, so the organism-colony distinction stays stipulated rather than derived.

read the letter

The punchline is that the work maps genetic sequences to coordinates and mutation rates to velocities, then claims the Euler-Lagrange equations produce a single state vector for coherent organisms. That mapping and the resulting prediction of high variance in infection outcomes for Dictyostelium slugs versus colonies are the only concrete pieces on offer.

What is new is the specific choice to treat mutation rates as velocities inside a Lagrangian formalism and the suggestion that classical coherence could be sustained by metabolism. The proposed test—infecting unicellular amoebae and multicellular slugs with the same virus and comparing outcome distributions—is straightforward and falsifiable on its face.

The soft spots are central. No explicit form for the Lagrangian appears, no Euler-Lagrange steps are written out, and nothing shows why the resulting coordinate is invariant or tied to observable biology instead of an arbitrary linear combination chosen to match the desired distinction. The language of superposition and collapse is imported without explaining how it applies to a classical system. The circularity the reader flagged is real: coherence is defined into the setup rather than extracted from it.

This is for people who enjoy loose physics-biology analogies and might want to play with the idea further. It does not contain enough formal or empirical content to justify referee time. I would not bring it to a reading group and would not cite it. It should be desk-rejected until the equations and at least a toy calculation are supplied.

Referee Report

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper claims that multicellular organisms are distinguished from colonies by classical coherence, defined via a collective coordinate analogous to the center-of-mass in physics. It constructs a Lagrangian formalism in DNA sequence space (genetic sequences as coordinates q, mutation rates as velocities ˙q) whose Euler-Lagrange equations are asserted to yield this coordinate. A central prediction is that coherent organisms exist in superposition of cellular configurations, producing high variance in infection outcomes upon measurement, while colonies yield repeatable responses; this is proposed to be tested with Dictyostelium discoideum infected in unicellular vs. multicellular states.

Significance. If the explicit Lagrangian, its derivation, and a non-circular link to observable biology can be established, the framework would introduce a physics-based distinction between unified organisms and separable colonies, potentially inspiring new experiments on variance in developmental or infection outcomes in model systems.

major comments (3)

[Abstract] Abstract (framework construction paragraph): No explicit form of the Lagrangian L(q, ˙q) is supplied, nor is any derivation of the Euler-Lagrange equations shown that produces the collective coordinate. This is load-bearing, as the distinction between coherent organisms and incoherent colonies, as well as the superposition prediction, is asserted to follow directly from these equations.
[Abstract] Abstract (framework construction paragraph): The collective coordinate is obtained from a Lagrangian posited specifically to represent coherence; by the paper's own construction the organism/colony distinction is therefore stipulated rather than derived from independent biological or physical principles.
[Abstract] Abstract (prediction paragraph): The mapping from the collective coordinate to a superposition of cellular configurations (and consequent broad variance in infection outcomes) is stated without an argument showing why this follows from the EL equations, why the coordinate is invariant under reparameterization of sequence space, or why it corresponds to a measurable biological property rather than an arbitrary linear combination.

minor comments (1)

Typos and phrasing: 'warm In environments' appears to be 'warm environments'; 'distribution of Infected cells' should read 'infected cells'; the sentence beginning 'This distinction parts that belong...' is grammatically incomplete.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed and constructive report. The comments correctly identify that the abstract presents the framework at a high level without explicit equations or derivations. We will revise the manuscript to include these elements, clarify the mapping to observables, and strengthen the justification for the Lagrangian construction while preserving the core analogy to collective coordinates in physics.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (framework construction paragraph): No explicit form of the Lagrangian L(q, ˙q) is supplied, nor is any derivation of the Euler-Lagrange equations shown that produces the collective coordinate. This is load-bearing, as the distinction between coherent organisms and incoherent colonies, as well as the superposition prediction, is asserted to follow directly from these equations.

Authors: The referee is correct that neither the explicit Lagrangian nor the derivation of the Euler-Lagrange equations appears in the abstract (or, upon re-examination, in sufficient detail in the main text). The manuscript relies on the center-of-mass analogy without writing L(q, ˙q) or showing the steps. In the revised version we will add an explicit Lagrangian motivated by the many-body analogy, followed by the explicit Euler-Lagrange derivation that isolates the collective coordinate, placed in a new theory subsection. revision: yes
Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (framework construction paragraph): The collective coordinate is obtained from a Lagrangian posited specifically to represent coherence; by the paper's own construction the organism/colony distinction is therefore stipulated rather than derived from independent biological or physical principles.

Authors: The Lagrangian is introduced by direct analogy to the center-of-mass coordinate, which is an independent physical construction for identifying collective modes in any many-body system. The biological distinction then follows from whether a sustained collective coordinate exists for the cellular ensemble. We acknowledge that the abstract does not spell out this separation of principles. The revision will expand the introduction to state the physical motivation first, then map it to the organism/colony question without circularity. revision: partial
Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (prediction paragraph): The mapping from the collective coordinate to a superposition of cellular configurations (and consequent broad variance in infection outcomes) is stated without an argument showing why this follows from the EL equations, why the coordinate is invariant under reparameterization of sequence space, or why it corresponds to a measurable biological property rather than an arbitrary linear combination.

Authors: The collective coordinate is constructed to be invariant under reparameterization by definition (as a weighted sum, analogous to center-of-mass). The link to superposition follows because a single coherent state vector in configuration space implies that an external probe (infection) samples from the full distribution rather than a fixed configuration. We agree the abstract states this without derivation. The revision will add a paragraph deriving the invariance, showing how the EL equations enforce the single-state description, and explicitly connecting the predicted variance to the Dictyostelium infection assay as a concrete, measurable outcome. revision: yes

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Lagrangian formalism in DNA sequence space produces coherence coordinate by construction

specific steps

self definitional [Abstract]
"We construct this framework by analogy to the center of mass coordinate of a many body system: a collective mode that encodes the state of the whole. Translating this to DNA sequence space, we define a Lagrangian formalism where genetic sequences play the role of coordinates and mutation rates represent velocities. The resulting Euler-Lagrange equations yield a collective coordinate representing organismal coherence."

The Lagrangian is posited expressly to yield a collective coordinate that 'represents organismal coherence'; the coherence distinction is therefore stipulated by the choice of coordinates and Lagrangian rather than obtained from any independent biological input or observable. The key prediction (superposition collapse producing variance) follows directly from this constructed coordinate.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation introduces a Lagrangian in DNA sequence space specifically so that its Euler-Lagrange equations produce a collective coordinate defined to represent organismal coherence. This makes the organism/colony distinction and the subsequent prediction of superposition-induced variance tautological with the modeling choice rather than independently derived. No explicit Lagrangian, invariance proof, or mapping to biological observables is supplied. The step matches the self-definitional pattern exactly.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on an unverified analogy between physical center-of-mass coordinates and a custom Lagrangian in DNA space, plus the postulate that metabolic work sustains classical coherence; no independent evidence or external benchmark is supplied for these elements.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Biological multicellularity can be captured by a single collective coordinate analogous to the center of mass of a many-body system
Invoked when the paper states it constructs the framework by translating the center-of-mass analogy to DNA sequence space.
ad hoc to paper A Lagrangian exists in DNA sequence space with genetic sequences as coordinates and mutation rates as velocities whose Euler-Lagrange equations yield organismal coherence
Introduced without derivation to produce the collective coordinate.

invented entities (1)

classical coherence in biological systems no independent evidence
purpose: To distinguish organisms (unified whole) from colonies (sum of autonomous parts) and to sustain a superposition of cellular configurations
Defined entirely by the proposed analogy to physical coherence and the center-of-mass coordinate; no independent falsifiable handle is provided.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5795 in / 1790 out tokens · 38605 ms · 2026-06-28T11:37:34.872899+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

Classical Coherence and Biological Aging
physics.bio-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 3.0

A classical formalism encodes multicellular identity as a global DNA code state whose stability declines with aging via increasing code-breaking dynamics.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

21 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

PLOS Biology14(8), 1002533 (2016) https://doi.org/ 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002533

Sender, R., Fuchs, S., Milo, R.: Revised estimates for the number of human and bacteria cells in the body. PLOS Biology14(8), 1002533 (2016) https://doi.org/ 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002533

work page doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002533 2016
[2]

Nature Reviews Microbiology 14(9), 563–575 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro.2016.94

Flemming, H., Wingender, J., Szewzyk, U., Steinberg, P., Rice, S.A., Kjelleberg, S.: Biofilms: an emergent form of bacterial life. Nature Reviews Microbiology 14(9), 563–575 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro.2016.94

work page doi:10.1038/nrmicro.2016.94 2016
[3]

Nature Reviews Microbiology14(9), 589–600 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro.2016.84

Nadell, C.D., Drescher, K., Foster, K.R.: Spatial structure, cooperation and competition in biofilms. Nature Reviews Microbiology14(9), 589–600 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro.2016.84

work page doi:10.1038/nrmicro.2016.84 2016
[4]

https://www.quantiki.org/wiki/ separable-and-entangled-states

Separable and Entangled States. https://www.quantiki.org/wiki/ separable-and-entangled-states. Accessed: 2026-05-31

2026
[5]

Proceedings of the Royal Society A382, 20230342 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2023.0342

Hansenne, K.,et al.: An operational distinction between quantum entanglement and classical non-separability. Proceedings of the Royal Society A382, 20230342 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2023.0342

work page doi:10.1098/rsta.2023.0342 2024
[6]

Goldschmidt, E.E.: The evolution of multicellular coordination and the role of the genetic scaffold. Front. Plant Sci.5, 273 (2014) https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls. 2014.00273

work page doi:10.3389/fpls 2014
[7]

Springer, Berlin (1983)

Haken, H.: Synergetics: An Introduction, 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin (1983)

1983
[8]

PLoS Pathogens16(7), 1008671 (2020) https://doi.org/10

Sun, J., Vera, J.C., Drnevich, J., Lin, Y.T., Ke, R., Brooke, C.B.: Single cell heterogeneity in influenza a virus gene expression shapes the innate antiviral response to infection. PLoS Pathogens16(7), 1008671 (2020) https://doi.org/10. 1371/journal.ppat.1008671

2020
[9]

medRxiv (2021) https://doi

Cheemarla, N.R., Watkins, T.A., Mihaylova, V.T., Wang, B., Zhao, D., Wang, G., Landry, M.L., Foxman, E.F.: Magnitude and timing of the antiviral response determine sars-cov-2 replication early in infection. medRxiv (2021) https://doi. org/10.1101/2021.01.22.21249812 . Preprint

work page doi:10.1101/2021.01.22.21249812 2021
[10]

A., Someya, T

Gregor, T., Fujimoto, K., Masaki, N., Sawai, S.: The onset of collective behavior in social amoebae. Science328, 1021–1025 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1126/science. 1183415

work page doi:10.1126/science 2010
[11]

Fr¨ ohlich, H.: Long-range coherence and energy storage in biological systems. Int. J. Quantum Chem.2, 641–649 (1968) https://doi.org/10.1002/qua.560020505

work page doi:10.1002/qua.560020505 1968
[12]

Marais, A.,et al.: The future of quantum biology. J. R. Soc. Interface15, 20180640 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2018.0640

work page doi:10.1098/rsif.2018.0640 2018
[13]

Davies, P.C.W., Walker, S.I., Kempes, C.P.: The physics of biological organisms. 9 Nat. Rev. Phys.3, 711–726 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1038/s42254-021-00366-y

work page doi:10.1038/s42254-021-00366-y 2021
[14]

Development138(3), 387–396 (2011) https://doi.org/10.1242/ dev.048223

Kessin, R.H.:Dictyostelium– evolution, cell biology, and the development of multicellularity. Development138(3), 387–396 (2011) https://doi.org/10.1242/ dev.048223

2011
[15]

Nature435, 43–57 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03481

Schaap, P.,et al.: TheDictyosteliumgenome and the evolution of multicellularity. Nature435, 43–57 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03481

work page doi:10.1038/nature03481 2005
[16]

Addison-Wesley, San Francisco (2002)

Goldstein, H., Poole, C., Safko, J.: Classical Mechanics, 3rd edn. Addison-Wesley, San Francisco (2002)

2002
[17]

Results Phys.14, 102387 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.2019.102387

Roth, Y.: Superposition of classical states and the emergence of coherence. Results Phys.14, 102387 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.2019.102387

work page doi:10.1016/j.rinp.2019.102387 2019
[18]

Pergamon Press, Oxford (1980)

Landau, L.D., Lifshitz, E.M.: Statistical Physics, Part 1, 3rd edn. Pergamon Press, Oxford (1980)

1980
[19]

Langevin, P.: Sur la th´ eorie du mouvement brownien [on the theory of brownian motion]. C. R. Acad. Sci.146, 530–533 (1908)

1908
[20]

Macmillan, London (1903)

Rayleigh, J.W.S.: The Theory of Sound, 2nd edn. Macmillan, London (1903)

1903
[21]

Koopman, B.O.: Hamiltonian systems and transformation in hilbert space. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.17, 315–318 (1931) https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.17.5. 315 10

work page doi:10.1073/pnas.17.5 1931

[1] [1]

PLOS Biology14(8), 1002533 (2016) https://doi.org/ 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002533

Sender, R., Fuchs, S., Milo, R.: Revised estimates for the number of human and bacteria cells in the body. PLOS Biology14(8), 1002533 (2016) https://doi.org/ 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002533

work page doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002533 2016

[2] [2]

Nature Reviews Microbiology 14(9), 563–575 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro.2016.94

Flemming, H., Wingender, J., Szewzyk, U., Steinberg, P., Rice, S.A., Kjelleberg, S.: Biofilms: an emergent form of bacterial life. Nature Reviews Microbiology 14(9), 563–575 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro.2016.94

work page doi:10.1038/nrmicro.2016.94 2016

[3] [3]

Nature Reviews Microbiology14(9), 589–600 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro.2016.84

Nadell, C.D., Drescher, K., Foster, K.R.: Spatial structure, cooperation and competition in biofilms. Nature Reviews Microbiology14(9), 589–600 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro.2016.84

work page doi:10.1038/nrmicro.2016.84 2016

[4] [4]

https://www.quantiki.org/wiki/ separable-and-entangled-states

Separable and Entangled States. https://www.quantiki.org/wiki/ separable-and-entangled-states. Accessed: 2026-05-31

2026

[5] [5]

Proceedings of the Royal Society A382, 20230342 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2023.0342

Hansenne, K.,et al.: An operational distinction between quantum entanglement and classical non-separability. Proceedings of the Royal Society A382, 20230342 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2023.0342

work page doi:10.1098/rsta.2023.0342 2024

[6] [6]

Goldschmidt, E.E.: The evolution of multicellular coordination and the role of the genetic scaffold. Front. Plant Sci.5, 273 (2014) https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls. 2014.00273

work page doi:10.3389/fpls 2014

[7] [7]

Springer, Berlin (1983)

Haken, H.: Synergetics: An Introduction, 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin (1983)

1983

[8] [8]

PLoS Pathogens16(7), 1008671 (2020) https://doi.org/10

Sun, J., Vera, J.C., Drnevich, J., Lin, Y.T., Ke, R., Brooke, C.B.: Single cell heterogeneity in influenza a virus gene expression shapes the innate antiviral response to infection. PLoS Pathogens16(7), 1008671 (2020) https://doi.org/10. 1371/journal.ppat.1008671

2020

[9] [9]

medRxiv (2021) https://doi

Cheemarla, N.R., Watkins, T.A., Mihaylova, V.T., Wang, B., Zhao, D., Wang, G., Landry, M.L., Foxman, E.F.: Magnitude and timing of the antiviral response determine sars-cov-2 replication early in infection. medRxiv (2021) https://doi. org/10.1101/2021.01.22.21249812 . Preprint

work page doi:10.1101/2021.01.22.21249812 2021

[10] [10]

A., Someya, T

Gregor, T., Fujimoto, K., Masaki, N., Sawai, S.: The onset of collective behavior in social amoebae. Science328, 1021–1025 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1126/science. 1183415

work page doi:10.1126/science 2010

[11] [11]

Fr¨ ohlich, H.: Long-range coherence and energy storage in biological systems. Int. J. Quantum Chem.2, 641–649 (1968) https://doi.org/10.1002/qua.560020505

work page doi:10.1002/qua.560020505 1968

[12] [12]

Marais, A.,et al.: The future of quantum biology. J. R. Soc. Interface15, 20180640 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2018.0640

work page doi:10.1098/rsif.2018.0640 2018

[13] [13]

Davies, P.C.W., Walker, S.I., Kempes, C.P.: The physics of biological organisms. 9 Nat. Rev. Phys.3, 711–726 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1038/s42254-021-00366-y

work page doi:10.1038/s42254-021-00366-y 2021

[14] [14]

Development138(3), 387–396 (2011) https://doi.org/10.1242/ dev.048223

Kessin, R.H.:Dictyostelium– evolution, cell biology, and the development of multicellularity. Development138(3), 387–396 (2011) https://doi.org/10.1242/ dev.048223

2011

[15] [15]

Nature435, 43–57 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03481

Schaap, P.,et al.: TheDictyosteliumgenome and the evolution of multicellularity. Nature435, 43–57 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03481

work page doi:10.1038/nature03481 2005

[16] [16]

Addison-Wesley, San Francisco (2002)

Goldstein, H., Poole, C., Safko, J.: Classical Mechanics, 3rd edn. Addison-Wesley, San Francisco (2002)

2002

[17] [17]

Results Phys.14, 102387 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.2019.102387

Roth, Y.: Superposition of classical states and the emergence of coherence. Results Phys.14, 102387 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.2019.102387

work page doi:10.1016/j.rinp.2019.102387 2019

[18] [18]

Pergamon Press, Oxford (1980)

Landau, L.D., Lifshitz, E.M.: Statistical Physics, Part 1, 3rd edn. Pergamon Press, Oxford (1980)

1980

[19] [19]

Langevin, P.: Sur la th´ eorie du mouvement brownien [on the theory of brownian motion]. C. R. Acad. Sci.146, 530–533 (1908)

1908

[20] [20]

Macmillan, London (1903)

Rayleigh, J.W.S.: The Theory of Sound, 2nd edn. Macmillan, London (1903)

1903

[21] [21]

Koopman, B.O.: Hamiltonian systems and transformation in hilbert space. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.17, 315–318 (1931) https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.17.5. 315 10

work page doi:10.1073/pnas.17.5 1931