Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 minor 42 references

A Time-Dependent Canonical Transformation between Bateman and Doubled Caldirola--Kanai Systems for a Homogeneous Massive Scalar Field on a Prescribed FLRW Background

T0 review · 0 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper constructs an explicit time-dependent canonical transformation that maps the doubled Caldirola-Kanai scalar-field system to the Bateman scalar-field system on any prescribed smooth FLRW background, establishing Hamiltonian equival

desk verdict A clean, internally consistent extension of the Bateman–CK correspondence to a homogeneous scalar field on a prescribed FLRW background; the explicit map checks out and the paper is honest about its scope. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.01894 v1 pith:A56AW567 submitted 2026-08-03 gr-qc physics.class-ph

Narakorn Kaewkhao , Chaiyaphat Phantusen This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qcphysics.class-ph PACS 04.62.+v98.80.-k
keywords BatemandualsystemCaldirola-KanaicanonicaltransformationFLRWhomogeneousscalarfieldHubbledampingdissipativesystemsadjointequation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper extends the classical correspondence between Bateman's dual-system and Caldirola-Kanai (CK) descriptions of damped oscillators to a homogeneous massive scalar field in a spatially flat FLRW universe, where expansion supplies the time-dependent damping 3H(t). It constructs a multiplier action whose auxiliary partner obeys the anti-damped adjoint equation with the term −3H-dot(t)χ, then specializes to a free massive potential to build the Bateman and doubled CK Lagrangians and Hamiltonians. The central result is an explicit, invertible time-dependent canonical transformation—generated by a type-2 function linear in the Bateman momenta—that maps the complete doubled CK system to the Bateman system, with the Hamiltonian identity holding for any three-times-differentiable prescribed scale factor. If correct, the two formulations are exact Hamiltonian-equivalent descriptions of the same doubled dynamics, and the H-dot(t) terms are not optional extras but required for the equivalence. The same analysis shows the Bateman Hamiltonian takes the difference form E_u − E_v, is conserved for constant H, and for power-law a(t) ∝ t^p is conserved along a correlated family at p = 2/3 even though H(t) varies.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the type-2 generating function F_{2,SF}, restricted by the linear point-transformation ansatz: it is linear in the Bateman momenta with coefficients A = α_1ϕ′ + β_1χ′, B = α_2ϕ′ + β_2χ′ and a homogeneous quadratic G. Coefficient matching across the ten monomials p_ϕ^2, p_χ^2, p_ϕp_χ, (ϕ′)^2, (χ′)^2, ϕ′χ′, p_ϕϕ′, p_ϕχ′, p_χϕ′, p_χχ′ fixes α_1 = 1/√2, α_2 = a^3/√2, β_1 = a^{-3}/√2, β_2 = −1/√2, g_{11} = −3H a^3/2, g_{22} = −3H a^{-3}/2, and g_{12} = 0. The explicit time derivative of the generating function contributes the H-dot(t) and H^2(t) terms that combine with the auxiliary CK Hamiltonian to produce the identity H_{CK,SF} + ∂F_{2,SF}/∂t = H_{B,SF}. The rotated

What would settle it

The decisive check is algebraic: substitute the phase-space map (161)–(164) into the relation H_{CK,SF} + ∂F_{2,SF}/∂t = H_{B,SF} and verify that the coefficient of ϕχ cancels only when the auxiliary CK Hamiltonian includes −3H-dot(t). A reader can repeat the ten-coefficient matching with a more general ansatz (for example, allowing quadratic momentum terms in F_{2,SF}); if a broader transformation changed the required H-dot dependence, the paper's necessity claim would be limited to its linear class. Dropping the auxiliary −3H-dot term makes the identity fail at the ϕχ monomial.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that the doubled Caldirola-Kanai system for a homogeneous free massive scalar field on a prescribed spatially flat FLRW background is canonically equivalent to the Bateman dual system through an invertible time-dependent point transformation. The generating function is F_{2,SF} = (1/√2)(ϕ′ + a^{-3}χ′)p_ϕ + (1/√2)(a^3ϕ′ − χ′)p_χ − (3H/4)(a^3(ϕ′)^2 + a^{-3}(χ′)^2), and the induced phase-space map is given by ϕ = (ϕ′ + a^{-3}χ′)/√2, χ = (a^3ϕ′ − χ′)/√2, with corresponding momentum relations (Eqs. 161–164). Substituting this map into the Hamiltonian relation H_{CK,SF} + ∂F_{2,SF}/∂t reproduces H_{B,SF} identically, provided the auxiliary CK sector contains the term −3H-dot(t); w

Load-bearing premise

The construction assumes the generating function is a linear point transformation—linear in the Bateman momenta with coefficients depending only on the CK coordinates and time—so the established equivalence, and the necessity of the H-dot terms, is proven within that restricted class rather than for all possible canonical transformations.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • On any prescribed scale factor that is three times continuously differentiable, every Hamiltonian-level statement in the Bateman scalar-field system has an exact counterpart in the doubled CK system, and vice versa.
  • The −3H-dot(t) term in the auxiliary equation is required, within the point-transformation class, for the two Hamiltonians to be equal; dropping it breaks the identity at the ϕχ coefficient.
  • The Bateman scalar-field Hamiltonian is conserved when H is constant; for nonconstant H it is conserved exactly on trajectories satisfying H-dot(t)(χϕ-dot − ϕχ-dot) − H-double-dot(t) ϕχ = 0.
  • For the power-law background a(t) ∝ t^p, the correlated family χ = Kt^2ϕ with p = 2/3 gives a conserved H_{B,SF} despite time-dependent H(t); p = 2/3 coincides with the matter-dominated exponent but is derived here purely as a compatibility condition on a prescribed background.
  • The equivalence applies only to the complete doubled systems; it does not identify the physical one-field sectors, and it cannot be extended to dynamical gravity without including the gravitational phase space and Friedmann constraint.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The result suggests that the H-dot(t) term is not an artifact of a particular gauge or normalization but a consistency requirement of the canonical correspondence; analogous terms should appear in any point-transformation equivalence between Bateman-type and CK-type descriptions with time-dependent damping.
  • Because the map is canonical and invertible, it provides a bridge for quantization: a quantum treatment of either the doubled CK or Bateman scalar-field Hamiltonian can be pulled back to the other, so quantization choices, inner products, and time-evolution operators would be transported by the same generating function.
  • The p = 2/3 conservation could be tested as a selection principle: demanding that H_{B,SF} be conserved on a correlated trajectory imposes a differential constraint on a(t), and it is an open question which other prescribed backgrounds (beyond power law) admit such families.
  • The linear point-transformation restriction leaves room for more general phase-space maps; if a momentum-quadratic generating function were needed for a nonlinear potential or for a self-consistent scale factor, the necessity of the specific H-dot term would have to be re-derived.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

0 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper constructs an explicit time-dependent canonical transformation between a doubled Caldirola--Kanai (CK) system and a Bateman system for a homogeneous massive scalar field on a prescribed spatially flat FLRW background. It first reviews the classical damped-oscillator correspondence, then builds the scalar-field analogue from a multiplier action: the auxiliary field obeys the formal-adjoint equation with a -3Hdot chi term. After specializing to a free massive potential, the authors define the Bateman Hamiltonian and the doubled CK Lagrangian/Hamiltonian (with a^3 and a^-3 factors), and solve the coefficient-matching equations for a type-2 generating function linear in the Bateman momenta. The central result is the Hamiltonian identity Eq. (174) for any sufficiently differentiable prescribed background, together with the claim that the -3Hdot term in the auxiliary CK sector is necessary within this linear point-transformation ansatz. In rotated variables the Bateman Hamiltonian takes the difference form E_u - E_v; it is conserved for constant H and, for the power-law background a(t) proportional to t^p, along a correlated family at p=2/3 even though H(t) is time dependent. The paper explicitly excludes the gravitational phase space and restricts to classical homogeneous fields.

Significance. The paper's central claim is an existence result, and the proof is executed with unusual explicitness: the coefficient-matching system (144)-(153), the generating function (160), the forward/inverse maps (161)-(168), and the Poisson-bracket check (169)-(170) are all displayed. I re-derived the representative coefficients and found the Hamiltonian identity (174) to be correct; the necessity of the -3Hdot term within the stated ansatz is also supported by the structure of Eq. (148). The power-law p=2/3 example is a clean, falsifiable consequence of the formalism. The main limitations -- classical mechanics, prescribed background, free massive potential for the CK sector, and the linear point-transformation ansatz -- are stated openly; the ansatz is a scope restriction on the class of maps, not a gap in the existence proof. The novelty is modest (a generalization of a known classical correspondence), but the paper is self-contained and the results are checkable.

minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 3.3, Eq. (110)] The division leading to Eq. (110) requires Hdot and phi*chi to be nonzero, and the logarithmic integration assumes fixed sign on the interval. Please state this explicitly; as written, the step from |phi/chi| to phi/chi = C Hdot absorbs a sign that is only constant if Hdot does not change sign.
  2. [Sec. 3.3.1, Eq. (114)] The assertion that phi + 2 t phidot = 0 is incompatible with Eq. (91) for m>0 is correct but terse. A one-line substitution of phi = C t^{-1/2} into Eq. (91) would make the argument self-contained.
  3. [Sec. 5, Eqs. (138)-(139)] The linear point-transformation ansatz is stated clearly, but the abstract could emphasize once more that the map is one explicit member of a class and that no uniqueness is claimed. This would prevent over-reading of 'the complete doubled CK system'.
  4. [Title and abstract] Unify the typography of FLRW: instances such as 'FLR W' (title and some section headings) contain a spurious space. The corresponding author email also appears to contain a typo ('naragorn' for 'narakorn').
  5. [Sec. 5, Eq. (174)] The central identity would be easier to follow with a short expansion of Eq. (174) for one or two monomial coefficients (e.g., p_phi p_chi and phi chi); the coefficient equations already contain this information, so this is a readability suggestion rather than a technical gap.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the canonical map is solved from coefficient matching and the conservation claim is derived from the equations of motion.

full rationale

The derivation is self-contained. The Bateman pair (Eqs. 80 and 85) is obtained from a multiplier action and the formal adjoint; the CK Lagrangians (Eqs. 119 and 124) are constructed to reproduce the same equations, not to force the canonical result. The canonical transformation is not assumed: F2,SF is solved by imposing Eq. (137) and matching the ten monomial coefficients in Eqs. (144)-(153). Equation (174) is then a verification of the solved map, not an input. The statement that the ˙H(t) terms are required for Hamiltonian equivalence is a counterfactual claim within the linear point-transformation ansatz: if the −3˙H term in the auxiliary CK Hamiltonian is omitted, Eq. (148) cannot be satisfied by the already-determined coefficients. The p=2/3 conservation is also derived: Eq. (109) gives the necessary and sufficient condition, the power-law background leads to χ=Kt^2 φ and Eq. (114), which forces p=2/3 for nontrivial massive solutions; then q=t φ satisfies the free oscillator and H_B,SF=K(q˙^2+m^2 q^2) is conserved. The linear ansatz in Eqs. (138)-(139) is explicitly labeled a restriction, and no uniqueness claim is made, so it does not act as a smuggled premise. There is no load-bearing self-citation; the cited classical correspondence in Ref. [9] is independent prior work and the present construction explicitly differs from it. The paper is self-contained against its stated assumptions, and no step reduces by definition to its inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The construction has no fitted free parameters; it is a pure algebraic derivation from the given equations of motion. The main assumptions are the prescribed FLRW background and the linear point-transformation ansatz for the canonical map. The auxiliary scalar field chi is a standard Bateman device, not a new physical entity.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The scale factor a(t) is a prescribed C^3 function on the time interval, not a dynamical variable.
    The entire construction treats the FLRW background as fixed; the gravitational phase space is excluded (abstract, Sec. 3.1, Sec. 6).
  • domain assumption The scalar field is homogeneous: phi = phi(t), with vanishing spatial gradients.
    Used in Sec. 3.1 to reduce the covariant Klein-Gordon equation to Eq. (80).
  • domain assumption The potential V(phi) is twice continuously differentiable on the relevant field interval.
    Needed for the multiplier construction and the formal adjoint in Sec. 3.2.
  • ad hoc to paper The canonical transformation is restricted to a linear point transformation generated by F2 linear in the Bateman momenta (Eqs. 138-139).
    This ansatz is imposed to make the coefficient matching tractable; it is not derived from the physics. It is the main restriction of the construction.
invented entities (1)
  • Auxiliary scalar field chi(t)
    purpose: Serves as the Bateman dual variable to construct a variational description of the damped Klein-Gordon equation; it obeys the amplified/anti-damped adjoint equation.
    Standard Bateman device, introduced here for the cosmological scalar field. It is an auxiliary variable, not a new physical field; the paper explicitly states no reservoir interpretation is assigned (Sec. 2.1, Sec. 3.2).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Time-Dependent Canonical Transformation between Bateman and Doubled Caldirola--Kanai Systems for a Homogeneous Massive Scalar Field on a Prescribed FLRW Background." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/A56AW567

@misc{pith2026260801894,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Time-Dependent Canonical Transformation between Bateman and Doubled Caldirola--Kanai Systems for a Homogeneous Massive Scalar Field on a Prescribed FLRW Background},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/A56AW567}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.01894}
}
abstract

Dissipative equations admit distinct variational descriptions in the Bateman and Caldirola--Kanai (CK) formalisms. The classical correspondence between them is extended to a homogeneous canonical scalar field on a prescribed spatially flat Friedmann--Lema\^itre--Robertson--Walker (FLRW) background, where the expansion produces the time-dependent damping coefficient $3H(t)$. A multiplier action yields the Klein--Gordon equation and a complementary anti-damped equation containing the term $-3\dot{H}(t)\chi$. A first-order Bateman Lagrangian derived from the same multiplier action reproduces this physical--auxiliary pair for a general potential. Specializing to a free massive field gives the Bateman and doubled CK Lagrangians and Hamiltonians used in the canonical comparison. The factors $a^{3}(t)$ and $a^{-3}(t)$ generate the damped and anti-damped CK sectors, respectively. An explicit time-dependent canonical transformation, generated by a function linear in the Bateman momenta, maps the complete doubled CK system to the Bateman system. For this point transformation, the terms proportional to $\dot{H}(t)$ are required for Hamiltonian equivalence. In rotated variables, the Bateman scalar-field Hamiltonian takes the difference form $H_{B,\mathrm{SF}} = E_{u} - E_{v}$. It is conserved for constant $H$ and generally varies with time otherwise. For the power-law background $a(t) \propto t^{p}$, however, a correlated family at $p = 2/3$ has conserved $H_{B,\mathrm{SF}}$ despite the time dependence of $H(t)$. These results concern classical homogeneous fields on a prescribed FLRW background and exclude the gravitational phase space.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Dissipative dynamical systems: I

    Paul S. Bauer. “Dissipative dynamical systems: I”. In:Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America17.5 (1931), pp. 311–314.doi:10.1073/pnas. 17.5.311

    doi:10.1073/pnas 1931

  2. [2]

    Classical mechanics of nonconservative systems

    Chad R. Galley. “Classical mechanics of nonconservative systems”. In:Physical Review Let- ters110.17 (2013), p. 174301.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.174301

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.110.174301 2013

  3. [3]

    Variational principles for dissipative (sub)systems, with applications to the theory of linear dispersion and geometrical optics

    I. Y. Dodin, A. I. Zhmoginov, and D. E. Ruiz. “Variational principles for dissipative (sub)systems, with applications to the theory of linear dispersion and geometrical optics”. In:Physics Let- ters A381.16 (2017), pp. 1411–1430.doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2017.02.023

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2017.02.023 2017

  4. [4]

    On dissipative systems and related variational principles

    Harry Bateman. “On dissipative systems and related variational principles”. In:Physical Review38 (1931), pp. 815–819.doi:10.1103/PhysRev.38.815

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.38.815 1931

  5. [5]

    Forze non conservative nella meccanica quantistica

    Piero Caldirola. “Forze non conservative nella meccanica quantistica”. In:Il Nuovo Cimento 18.9 (1941), pp. 393–400.doi:10.1007/BF02960144

    work page doi:10.1007/bf02960144 1941

  6. [6]

    On the quantization of the dissipative systems

    Eizo Kanai. “On the quantization of the dissipative systems”. In:Progress of Theoretical Physics3.4 (1948), pp. 440–442.doi:10.1143/ptp/3.4.440

    work page doi:10.1143/ptp/3.4.440 1948

  7. [7]

    Classical and quantum mechanics of the damped harmonic oscillator

    Hans Dekker. “Classical and quantum mechanics of the damped harmonic oscillator”. In: Physics Reports80.1 (1981), pp. 1–110.doi:10.1016/0370-1573(81)90033-8

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-1573(81)90033-8 1981

  8. [8]

    On the Lagrangian and Hamil- tonian description of the damped linear harmonic oscillator

    V. K. Chandrasekar, M. Senthilvelan, and M. Lakshmanan. “On the Lagrangian and Hamil- tonian description of the damped linear harmonic oscillator”. In:Journal of Mathematical Physics48.3 (2007), p. 032701.doi:10.1063/1.2711375

    work page doi:10.1063/1.2711375 2007

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    Eisenhart lifts and symmetries of time-dependent systems

    Marco Cariglia et al. “Eisenhart lifts and symmetries of time-dependent systems”. In:Annals of Physics373 (2016), pp. 631–654.doi:10.1016/j.aop.2016.07.033

    2016 doi

  2. [10]

    A round trip from Caldirola to Bateman systems

    J. Guerrero et al. “A round trip from Caldirola to Bateman systems”. In:Journal of Physics: Conference Series284.1 (2011), p. 012062.doi:10.1088/1742-6596/284/1/012062. 28

    2011 doi

  3. [11]

    Interrelations between different canonical descriptions of dissipative systems

    Dieter Schuch et al. “Interrelations between different canonical descriptions of dissipative systems”. In:Physica Scripta90.4 (2015), p. 045209.doi:10 . 1088 / 0031 - 8949 / 90 / 4 / 045209

    2015

  4. [12]

    Time-dependent diffeomorphisms as quantum canonical transformations and the time-dependent harmonic oscillator

    Ali Mostafazadeh. “Time-dependent diffeomorphisms as quantum canonical transformations and the time-dependent harmonic oscillator”. In:Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General31.30 (1998), pp. 6495–6503.doi:10.1088/0305-4470/31/30/014

    1998 doi

  5. [13]

    Dynamics of dark energy

    Edmund J. Copeland, M. Sami, and Shinji Tsujikawa. “Dynamics of dark energy”. In: International Journal of Modern Physics D15.11 (2006), pp. 1753–1935.doi:10 . 1142 / S021827180600942X

    2006

  6. [14]

    Time-Dependent Dissipative Massive Scalar Field

    Marjan Jafari. “Time-Dependent Dissipative Massive Scalar Field”. In:International Journal of Optics and Photonics15.1 (2021), pp. 49–54.doi:10.52547/ijop.15.1.49

    2021 doi

  7. [15]

    Alternative Frenkel liquid Lagrangian

    F. A. P. Alves-J´ unior et al. “Alternative Frenkel liquid Lagrangian”. In:Annals of Physics 481 (2025), p. 170140.doi:10.1016/j.aop.2025.170140

    2025

  8. [16]

    Quantum dissipation in a scalar field theory with gapped momentum states

    Kostya Trachenko. “Quantum dissipation in a scalar field theory with gapped momentum states”. In:Scientific Reports9 (2019), p. 6766.doi:10.1038/s41598-019-43273-9

    2019 doi

  9. [17]

    Field theory of dissipative systems with gapped momentum states

    Matteo Baggioli et al. “Field theory of dissipative systems with gapped momentum states”. In:Physical Review D102.2 (2020), p. 025012.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.025012

    2020 doi

  10. [18]

    First principles quantization of a non-conservative scalar field

    Kauship Saha and Sandeep Aashish. “First principles quantization of a non-conservative scalar field”. In:The European Physical Journal C86 (2026), p. 43.doi:10.1140/epjc/ s10052-026-15282-2

    2026 doi

  11. [19]

    Construction of a robust warm inflation mechanism

    Arjun Berera and Rudnei O. Ramos. “Construction of a robust warm inflation mechanism”. In:Physics Letters B567.3–4 (2003), pp. 294–304.doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2003.06.028

    2003 doi

  12. [20]

    Dissipative quintessence, and its cosmological implications

    Tiberiu Harko. “Dissipative quintessence, and its cosmological implications”. In:Physical Review D107.12 (2023), p. 123507.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.123507

    2023 doi

  13. [21]

    Bateman dual fields and cosmological dissipation: tachyons, Born–Infeld dynamics, and Hubble-scale stabilization

    Rami Ahmad El-Nabulsi and Waranont Anukool. “Bateman dual fields and cosmological dissipation: tachyons, Born–Infeld dynamics, and Hubble-scale stabilization”. In:Modern Physics Letters A41.14 (2026), p. 2650072.doi:10.1142/S0217732326500720

    2026 doi

  14. [22]

    On the analytic representation of Newtonian systems

    Benoy Talukdar, Supriya Chatterjee, and Sekh Golam Ali. “On the analytic representation of Newtonian systems”. In:Pramana94 (2020), p. 141.doi:10.1007/s12043-020-02010-y

    2020 doi

  15. [23]

    A no-go result for the quantum damped harmonic oscillator

    Fabio Bagarello, Francesco Gargano, and Federico Roccati. “A no-go result for the quantum damped harmonic oscillator”. In:Physics Letters A383.24 (2019), pp. 2836–2838.doi:10. 1016/j.physleta.2019.06.022

    2019

  16. [24]

    Bateman oscillators: Caldirola–Kanai and null Lagrangians and gauge functions

    Lesley C. Vestal and Zdzis law E. Musielak. “Bateman oscillators: Caldirola–Kanai and null Lagrangians and gauge functions”. In:Physics3.2 (2021), pp. 449–458.doi:10 . 3390 / physics3020030

    2021

  17. [25]

    Quantization of the damped harmonic oscillator based on a modified Bateman Lagrangian

    Shinichi Deguchi and Yuki Fujiwara. “Quantization of the damped harmonic oscillator based on a modified Bateman Lagrangian”. In:Physical Review A101.2 (2020), p. 022105.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.101.022105

    2020 doi

  18. [26]

    Two quantization approaches to the Bateman oscillator model

    Shinichi Deguchi, Yuki Fujiwara, and Kunihiko Nakano. “Two quantization approaches to the Bateman oscillator model”. In:Annals of Physics403 (2019), pp. 34–46.doi:10.1016/ j.aop.2019.02.004. 29

    2019

  19. [27]

    Bateman’s dual system revisited: quantization, geometric phase and relation with the ground-state energy of the linear harmonic oscillator

    Massimo Blasone and Petr Jizba. “Bateman’s dual system revisited: quantization, geometric phase and relation with the ground-state energy of the linear harmonic oscillator”. In:Annals of Physics312.2 (2004), pp. 354–397.doi:10.1016/j.aop.2004.01.008

    2004 doi

  20. [28]

    Quantum damped oscillator II: Bateman’s Hamiltonian vs. 2D parabolic potential barrier

    Dariusz Chru´ sci´ nski. “Quantum damped oscillator II: Bateman’s Hamiltonian vs. 2D parabolic potential barrier”. In:Annals of Physics321.4 (2006), pp. 840–853.doi:10.1016/j.aop. 2005.11.005

    2006 doi

  21. [29]

    Effective description of the quantum damped harmonic oscillator: revisiting the Bateman dual system

    Carlos Raul Javier Valdez, Hector Hugo Hernandez-Hernandez, and Guillermo Chac´ on- Acosta. “Effective description of the quantum damped harmonic oscillator: revisiting the Bateman dual system”. In:Physica Scripta100.3 (2025), p. 035115.doi:10.1088/1402- 4896/adb469

    2025 doi

  22. [30]

    Connecting dissipation and noncommutativity: A Bateman system case study

    Sayan Kumar Pal, Partha Nandi, and Biswajit Chakraborty. “Connecting dissipation and noncommutativity: A Bateman system case study”. In:Physical Review A97.6 (2018), p. 062110.doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.97.062110

    2018 doi

  23. [31]

    On the theory of time-dependent linear canonical transformations as applied to Hamiltonians of the harmonic oscillator type

    P. G. L. Leach. “On the theory of time-dependent linear canonical transformations as applied to Hamiltonians of the harmonic oscillator type”. In:Journal of Mathematical Physics18.8 (1977), pp. 1608–1611.doi:10.1063/1.523447

    1977 doi

  24. [32]

    Thermal damping of mass- modulating scalars

    Abhishek Banerjee, Ngan H. Nguyen, and Erwin H. Tanin. “Thermal damping of mass- modulating scalars”. In:Physical Review D114.1 (2026), p. 015032.doi:10.1103/rqq9- 1dc2

    2026 doi

  25. [33]

    Integrating factors, adjoint equations and Lagrangians

    Nail H. Ibragimov. “Integrating factors, adjoint equations and Lagrangians”. In:Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications318.2 (2006), pp. 742–757.doi:10.1016/j.jmaa. 2005.11.012

    2006 doi

  26. [34]

    The cosmological constant problem

    Steven Weinberg. “The cosmological constant problem”. In:Reviews of Modern Physics61.1 (1989), pp. 1–23.doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.61.1

    1989 doi

  27. [35]

    Coherent scalar-field oscillations in an expanding universe

    Michael S. Turner. “Coherent scalar-field oscillations in an expanding universe”. In:Physical Review D28.6 (1983), pp. 1243–1247.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.28.1243

    1983 doi

  28. [36]

    Gravitational EFT for dissipative open systems

    Pak Hang Chris Lau, Kanji Nishii, and Toshifumi Noumi. “Gravitational EFT for dissipative open systems”. In:Journal of High Energy Physics2025.2 (2025), p. 155.doi:10.1007/ JHEP02(2025)155

    2025

  29. [37]

    Standard and non-standard Lagrangians for dissipative dynamical systems with variable coefficients

    Zdzis law E. Musielak. “Standard and non-standard Lagrangians for dissipative dynamical systems with variable coefficients”. In:Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 41.5 (2008), p. 055205.doi:10.1088/1751-8113/41/5/055205

    2008 doi

  30. [38]

    On the exact solutions of the damped harmonic oscillator with a time- dependent damping constant and a time-dependent angular frequency

    Jihun Cha et al. “On the exact solutions of the damped harmonic oscillator with a time- dependent damping constant and a time-dependent angular frequency”. In:Journal of the Korean Physical Society67.2 (2015), pp. 404–408.doi:10.3938/jkps.67.404

    2015 doi

  31. [39]

    A Hamiltonian model for linear friction in a homogeneous medium

    Laurent Bruneau and Stephan De Bi` evre. “A Hamiltonian model for linear friction in a homogeneous medium”. In:Communications in Mathematical Physics229.3 (2002), pp. 511– 542.doi:10.1007/s00220-002-0689-0

    2002 doi

  32. [40]

    Minimal coupling method and the dissipative scalar field theory

    Fardin Kheirandish and Majid Amooshahi. “Minimal coupling method and the dissipative scalar field theory”. In:International Journal of Theoretical Physics45.1 (2006), pp. 30–43. doi:10.1007/s10773-005-9005-z. 30

    2006 doi

  33. [41]

    Dissipative Scalar Field Theory: A Covariant Formula- tion

    A. Refaei and Fardin Kheirandish. “Dissipative Scalar Field Theory: A Covariant Formula- tion”. In:International Journal of Theoretical Physics55.1 (2016), pp. 432–439.doi:10. 1007/s10773-015-2677-0

    2016

  34. [42]

    Dissipative effects in the effective field theory of inflation

    Diana L´ opez Nacir et al. “Dissipative effects in the effective field theory of inflation”. In: Journal of High Energy Physics2012.1 (2012), p. 075.doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2012)075

    2012 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.