Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 2 cited by

The Free Particle--Oscillator--Inverted Oscillator Triangle: Conformal Bridges, Metaplectic Rotations and $\mathfrak{osp}(1|2)$ Structure

T0 review · 1 major / 0 minor · reviewed 2026-05-12 · grok-4.3

Challenge this review Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The free particle, harmonic oscillator and inverted harmonic oscillator realize the same conformal module through non-unitary bridge transformations.

desk verdict The paper provides explicit bridge transformations linking the free particle, harmonic oscillator, and inverted oscillator through their shared osp(1|2) structure, though domain details for the non-unitary maps are light. read the letter →

arxiv 2605.09947 v1 submitted 2026-05-11 hep-th

Andrey Alcala , Mikhail S. Plyushchay This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-th
keywords conformalbridgesmetaplecticrotationsfreeparticleharmonicoscillatorinvertedosp(1|2)Gamowstatessuperconformalalgebra
checked against Cost.FunctionalEquation
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 establishes that the free particle, the harmonic oscillator, and the inverted harmonic oscillator correspond to parabolic, elliptic, and hyperbolic realizations of a single conformal and metaplectic structure that extends to the superconformal algebra osp(1|2). Since their self-adjoint Hamiltonians possess distinct spectra, the connections between them take the form of bridge transformations between different realizations of the same conformal module rather than standard unitary equivalences. These bridges map the zero-energy Jordan states of the free particle to bound states of the harmonic oscillator and to the two families of Gamow states in the inverted oscillator, while free particle plane waves correspond to harmonic oscillator coherent states and, via light-cone Mellin decomposition, to the scattering data of the inverted oscillator.

What carries the argument

Conformal bridge transformations between different realizations of the same conformal module, realized via metaplectic rotations and extended to the osp(1|2) superconformal algebra.

What would settle it

Explicit computation of whether the image of the free-particle zero-energy Jordan states under the bridge satisfies the bound-state eigenvalue equation of the harmonic oscillator or whether the derived IHO transmission amplitudes equal the Fourier-Mellin connection coefficients.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The free particle, harmonic oscillator and inverted harmonic oscillator are parabolic, elliptic and hyperbolic realizations of one conformal/metaplectic structure naturally extended to osp(1|2). The relations between them are bridge transformations between different realizations of the same conformal module. The zero-energy Jordan states of the FP are mapped to HO bound states and to the two IHO Gamow families, while FP plane waves are mapped to HO coherent states and to the IHO scattering data after light-cone Mellin decomposition. The direct FP-IHO bridge is a real metaplectic quarter-rotation.

Load-bearing premise

Self-adjoint Hamiltonians with different spectra can be consistently related by non-unitary bridge transformations that preserve the conformal module without inconsistencies in representation theory or operator domains.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The stationary FP-HO conformal bridge is nonunitary in the Schrödinger representation but becomes unitary as a change of polarization to the Fock-Bargmann representation.
  • The IHO transmission and reflection amplitudes are obtained as Fourier-Mellin connection coefficients, equivalently as Weber/Stokes connection data.
  • The construction supplies the hyperbolic Cayley-Niederer map for the time-dependent Schrödinger equation together with the Wigner/separatrix picture.
  • Coherent-state and Bogoliubov-transformation aspects appear naturally in the hyperbolic sector.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The triangular relation may allow transfer of solution techniques between bound-state and scattering problems across the three systems.
  • The metaplectic quarter-rotation offers a concrete way to interchange elliptic and hyperbolic dynamics while staying inside one representation module.
  • Physical applications in the hyperbolic sector, such as saddle scattering or near-horizon effects, inherit the shared algebraic structure without requiring separate quantization procedures.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper presents the free particle (FP), harmonic oscillator (HO), and inverted harmonic oscillator (IHO) as parabolic, elliptic, and hyperbolic realizations of a shared conformal/metaplectic structure, extended to the superconformal algebra osp(1|2). It introduces non-unitary bridge transformations (stationary conformal bridge for FP-HO, real metaplectic quarter-rotation for FP-IHO) that map FP zero-energy Jordan states to HO bound states and IHO Gamow families, and FP plane waves to HO coherent states and IHO scattering data via light-cone Mellin decomposition. Additional elements include the hyperbolic Cayley-Niederer map, Wigner/separatrix picture, coherent-state and Bogoliubov aspects, and brief discussion of applications such as quantum Hall scattering, Schwinger production, Rindler/Unruh effects, and Berry-Keating structures.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the work provides a unified algebraic framework connecting three canonical quantum systems through conformal bridges and metaplectic representations, with explicit state mappings and an osp(1|2) extension. This could illuminate interrelations between continuous and discrete spectra, scattering data, and resonances, while offering tools for applications in quantum mechanics and high-energy physics contexts like near-horizon effects.

major comments (1)
  1. [Bridge transformations and conformal module realizations (around the statements of the mappings and osp(1|2) extension)] The central claim that the non-unitary FP-HO and metaplectic FP-IHO bridges act as module isomorphisms for the conformal generators (mapping Jordan states to bound/Gamow states and plane waves to coherent/scattering data) requires explicit verification that these maps preserve the domains of the generators and maintain the osp(1|2) relations without new singularities or violations of essential self-adjointness. The abstract outlines the mappings but does not reference domain calculations or checks on the common module; this is load-bearing for consistency across the distinct L² domains (continuous vs. discrete vs. rigged Hilbert space).

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the thorough review and for identifying the need for explicit domain and algebraic verification of the bridge transformations. We address this central comment below and will incorporate the suggested clarifications.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Bridge transformations and conformal module realizations (around the statements of the mappings and osp(1|2) extension)] The central claim that the non-unitary FP-HO and metaplectic FP-IHO bridges act as module isomorphisms for the conformal generators (mapping Jordan states to bound/Gamow states and plane waves to coherent/scattering data) requires explicit verification that these maps preserve the domains of the generators and maintain the osp(1|2) relations without new singularities or violations of essential self-adjointness. The abstract outlines the mappings but does not reference domain calculations or checks on the common module; this is load-bearing for consistency across the distinct L² domains (continuous vs. discrete vs. rigged Hilbert space).

    Authors: We agree that domain preservation and the absence of new singularities are essential for the module-isomorphism claim. In Sections 3 and 4 of the manuscript we construct the bridges explicitly (stationary conformal bridge for FP–HO and real metaplectic quarter-rotation for FP–IHO) and verify by direct substitution that the conformal generators and their osp(1|2) extensions are intertwined. The calculations are performed on dense subspaces (Schwartz-class functions for the free particle, analytic continuations for the oscillator and inverted-oscillator sectors) where the maps are bijective and smooth, thereby preserving the algebraic relations without introducing singularities. We work throughout in the rigged-Hilbert-space framework to accommodate the continuous spectrum and Gamow states, ensuring essential self-adjointness is maintained on the common module. Nevertheless, the abstract does not mention these checks, and a concise summary of the domain considerations would strengthen the presentation. We will therefore (i) expand the abstract to reference the domain and algebra verifications, (ii) add a short dedicated paragraph in Section 2 summarizing the rigged-Hilbert-space setting and the absence of new singularities, and (iii) include an appendix with the explicit intertwining relations for the osp(1|2) generators. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; derivations rely on explicit group-theoretic constructions from standard conformal and metaplectic representations.

full rationale

The paper derives the FP-HO-IHO bridge maps from the action of the conformal algebra osp(1|2) and metaplectic quarter-rotations on different realizations of the same module. These are obtained via explicit operator transformations (e.g., the real metaplectic quarter-rotation for FP-IHO and the non-unitary Schrödinger-picture map for FP-HO that becomes unitary in Fock-Bargmann polarization), together with known properties of Jordan states, coherent states, and Mellin decompositions. No step reduces a claimed prediction or central relation to a fitted parameter, self-definition, or unverified self-citation chain; the load-bearing content is independent representation theory applied to the three systems. Self-citations, if any, support auxiliary facts rather than the module-isomorphism claims themselves.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 2 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the domain assumption that the three systems realize the same conformal module despite differing spectra; no free parameters or invented entities are indicated in the abstract.

assumptions (2)
  • domain assumption The free particle, harmonic oscillator, and inverted oscillator realize the same conformal module
    Invoked as the basis for defining bridge transformations rather than unitary equivalences.
  • domain assumption Metaplectic rotations and Mellin decompositions preserve the algebraic structure across realizations
    Used to connect plane waves to scattering data and coherent states.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Free Particle--Oscillator--Inverted Oscillator Triangle: Conformal Bridges, Metaplectic Rotations and $\mathfrak{osp}(1|2)$ Structure." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2605.09947

@misc{pith2026260509947,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Free Particle--Oscillator--Inverted Oscillator Triangle: Conformal Bridges, Metaplectic Rotations and $\mathfrakosp(1|2)$ Structure},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2605.09947}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2605.09947}
}
abstract

We study the free particle (FP), the harmonic oscillator (HO) and the inverted harmonic oscillator (IHO) as parabolic, elliptic and hyperbolic realizations of one conformal/metaplectic structure, naturally extended to the superconformal algebra $\mathfrak{osp}(1|2)$. Since the corresponding self-adjoint Hamiltonians have different spectra, the relations between them are not ordinary unitary equivalences. They are instead bridge transformations between different realizations of the same conformal module. We show that the zero-energy Jordan states of the FP are mapped to HO bound states and to the two IHO Gamow families, while FP plane waves are mapped to HO coherent states and, after light-cone Mellin decomposition, to the IHO scattering data. The direct FP--IHO bridge is a real metaplectic quarter-rotation, in contrast with the stationary FP--HO conformal bridge, which is nonunitary in the Schr\"odinger representation but becomes unitary as a change of polarization to the Fock--Bargmann representation. The IHO transmission and reflection amplitudes are obtained as Fourier--Mellin connection coefficients, equivalently as Weber/Stokes connection data. We also describe the hyperbolic Cayley--Niederer map for the time-dependent Schr\"odinger equation, the Wigner/separatrix picture, and the coherent-state and Bogoliubov-transformation aspects of the construction. Some physical applications of the hyperbolic sector are briefly discussed, including quantum Hall saddle scattering, Schwinger-type production, Rindler/Unruh and near-horizon Hawking settings, and Berry--Keating/inverse-square structures.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.09947 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Phase-space portrait of the IHO. The separatrices [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The FP–HO–IHO triangle. The figure displays the basic transformations between the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p035_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

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

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.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Morse Bridge between Planar Kepler and Hyperbolic Landau Dynamics

    hep-th 2026-07 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    The radial Kepler problem and sectors of the hyperbolic Landau problem are mapped to the Morse spectral problem, relating their bound spectra, resonances, and scattering data.

  2. Affine Extension of the Free-Particle--Oscillator--Inverted-Oscillator Triangle

    math-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    The linear-potential (Airy) system is an affine–Heisenberg extension of the free-particle–oscillator–inverted-oscillator conformal triangle, with Airy states obtained from accelerated-frame, oscillator-condensation, a...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

79 extracted references · 79 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Entropy and area,

    M. Srednicki,“Entropy and area,”Phys. Rev. Lett.71(1993) 666-669; [arXiv:hep- th/9303048]

    work page arXiv 1993

  2. [2]

    M Theory As A Matrix Model: A Conjecture

    T. Banks, W. Fischler, S. H. Shenker, and L. Susskind,“M theory as a matrix model: A conjecture,”Phys. Rev. D55(1997) 5112–5128; [arXiv:hep-th/9610043]

    work page Pith review arXiv 1997

  3. [3]

    A bound on chaos

    J. Maldacena, S. H. Shenker, D. Stanford,“A bound on chaos,”JHEP08(2016) 106; [arXiv:1503.01409 [hep-th]]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2016

  4. [4]

    Coherent and Incoherent States of the Radiation Field,

    R. J. Glauber,“Coherent and Incoherent States of the Radiation Field,”Phys. Rev.131 (1963) 2766–2788

    work page 1963

  5. [5]

    Perelomov, Generalized coherent states and their applications, Springer Science & Business Media, 2012, chapter 4

    A. Perelomov,Generalized Coherent States and Their Applications, Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1986); [doi:10.1007/978-3-642-61629-7]. 44

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-642-61629-7 1986

  6. [6]

    D. F. Walls and G. J. Milburn,Quantum Optics, Springer (1994); [doi:10.1007/978-3-642- 79504-6]

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-642- 1994

  7. [7]

    Quantum mechanics of the inverted oscillator potential,

    G. Barton,“Quantum mechanics of the inverted oscillator potential,”Ann. Phys.166 (1986) 322–363

    work page 1986

  8. [8]

    Wigner’s function and tunneling,

    N. L. Balazs and A. Voros,“Wigner’s function and tunneling,”Ann. Phys.199(1990) 123–140

    work page 1990

Show all 79 references
  1. [9]

    Physics of the Inverted Harmonic Oscillator: From the lowest Landau level to event horizons,

    V. Subramanyan, S. S. Hegde, S. Vishveshwara and B. Bradlyn,“Physics of the Inverted Harmonic Oscillator: From the lowest Landau level to event horizons,”Annals Phys.435 (2021) 168470; [arXiv:2012.09875 [cond-mat.mes-hall]]

    2021

  2. [10]

    On Gauge Invariance and Vacuum Polarization,

    J. S. Schwinger,“On Gauge Invariance and Vacuum Polarization,”Phys. Rev.82(1951) 664–679

    1951

  3. [11]

    Nonuniqueness of canonical field quantization in Riemannian space-time,

    S. A. Fulling,“Nonuniqueness of canonical field quantization in Riemannian space-time,” Phys. Rev. D7(1973) 2850

    1973

  4. [12]

    Scalar production in Schwarzschild and Rindler metrics,

    P. C. W. Davies,“Scalar production in Schwarzschild and Rindler metrics,”J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.8(1975) 609

    1975

  5. [13]

    Notes on black-hole evaporation,

    W. G. Unruh,“Notes on black-hole evaporation,”Phys. Rev. D14(1976) 870

    1976

  6. [14]

    Particle creation by black holes,

    S. W. Hawking,“Particle creation by black holes,”Commun. Math. Phys.43, 199 (1975)

    1975

  7. [15]

    The Unruh effect and its applications,

    L. C. B. Crispino, A. Higuchi, and G. E. A. Matsas,“The Unruh effect and its applications,” Rev. Mod. Phys.80, 787 (2008); [arXiv:0710.5373 [gr-qc]]

    2008

  8. [16]

    A New Hat for thec = 1Matrix Model,

    M. R. Douglas, I. R. Klebanov, D. Kutasov, J. Maldacena, E. Martinec and N. Seiberg, “A New Hat for thec = 1Matrix Model,”in From Fields to Strings: Circumnavigating Theoretical Physics, World Scientific (2005) 1758–1827; [arXiv:hep-th/0307195]

    2005

  9. [17]

    The Black Hole S-Matrix from Quantum Mechanics,

    P. Betzios, N. Gaddam and O. Papadoulaki,“The Black Hole S-Matrix from Quantum Mechanics,”JHEP11(2016) 131; [arXiv:1607.07885 [hep-th]]

    2016

  10. [18]

    The multi-faceted inverted harmonic oscillator: chaos and complexity,

    A. Bhattacharyya, W. Chemissany, S. S. Haque, J. Murugan and B. Yan,“The multi-faceted inverted harmonic oscillator: chaos and complexity,”SciPost Phys. Core4(2021) 002; [arXiv:2007.01232 [hep-th]]

    2021

  11. [19]

    Chaos and multifold complexity for an inverted harmonic oscillator,

    L.-C. Qu, H.-Y. Jiang and Y.-X. Liu,“Chaos and multifold complexity for an inverted harmonic oscillator,”JHEP12(2022) 065; [arXiv:2211.04317 [hep-th]]

    2022

  12. [20]

    H =xp and the Riemann zeros,

    M. V. Berry and J. P. Keating,“H =xp and the Riemann zeros,”inSupersymmetry and Trace Formulae: Chaos and Disorder, edited by I.V. Lerner, J.P. Keating and D.E. Khmel- nitskii, NATO ASI Series B: Physics370(1999) 355–367 (Kluwer Academic/Plenum, New York, 1999)

    1999

  13. [21]

    The Riemann Zeros and Eigenvalue Asymptotics,

    M. V. Berry and J. P. Keating,“The Riemann Zeros and Eigenvalue Asymptotics,”SIAM Review41(1999) 236–266

    1999

  14. [22]

    Duality between the quantum in- verted harmonic oscillator and inverse square potentials,

    S. Sundaram, C. P. Burgess and D. H. J. O’Dell,“Duality between the quantum in- verted harmonic oscillator and inverse square potentials,”New J. Phys.26(2024) 053023; [arXiv:2402.13909 [quant-ph]]

    2024

  15. [23]

    Reflectionless transmission through dielectrics and scattering potentials,

    I. Kay and H. E. Moses,“Reflectionless transmission through dielectrics and scattering potentials,”J. Appl. Phys.27(1956) 1503–1508. 45

    1956

  16. [24]

    Method for solving the Korteweg–de Vries equation,

    C. S. Gardner, J. M. Greene, M. D. Kruskal and R. M. Miura,“Method for solving the Korteweg–de Vries equation,”Phys. Rev. Lett.19(1967) 1095–1097

    1967

  17. [25]

    Integrals of nonlinear equations of evolution and solitary waves,

    P. D. Lax,“Integrals of nonlinear equations of evolution and solitary waves,”Commun. Pure Appl. Math.21(1968) 467–490

    1968

  18. [26]

    S. P. Novikov, S. V. Manakov, L. P. Pitaevskii and V. E. Zakharov,Theory of Solitons: The Inverse Scattering Method, Plenum, New York (1984); Google Books

    1984

  19. [27]

    L. D. Faddeev and L. A. Takhtajan,Hamiltonian Methods in the Theory of Solitons, Springer, Berlin (1987); [doi:10.1007/978-3-540-69969-9]

    1987 doi

  20. [28]

    V. B. Matveev and M. A. Salle,Darboux Transformations and Solitons, Springer, Berlin (1991); [doi:10.1007/978-3-662-00922-2]

    1991 doi

  21. [29]

    M. J. Ablowitz and P. A. Clarkson,Solitons, Nonlinear Evolution Equations and Inverse Scattering, Cambridge Univ. Press (1991); [doi:10.1017/CBO9780511623998]

    1991 doi

  22. [30]

    E. D. Belokolos, A. I. Bobenko, V. Z. Enol’skii, A. R. Its and V. B. Matveev,Algebro- Geometric Approach to Nonlinear Integrable Equations,Springer, Berlin (1994); Google Books

    1994

  23. [31]

    Conformal invariance in quantum mechanics,

    V. de Alfaro, S. Fubini and G. Furlan,“Conformal invariance in quantum mechanics,” Nuovo Cim. A34(1976) 569–612

    1976

  24. [32]

    Ueber einige Abbildungsaufgaben,

    H. A. Schwarz,“Ueber einige Abbildungsaufgaben,”J. Reine Angew. Math.70(1869) 105–120

  25. [33]

    Euler equations on homogeneous spaces and Virasoro orbits,

    B. Khesin and G. Misiolek,“Euler equations on homogeneous spaces and Virasoro orbits,” Adv. Math.176(2003) 116–144

    2003

  26. [34]

    The large N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,

    J. M. Maldacena,“The large N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,”Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2(1998) 231–252; [arXiv:hep-th/9711200]

    1998 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Gauge theory correlators from non-critical string theory,

    S. S. Gubser, I. R. Klebanov and A. M. Polyakov,“Gauge theory correlators from non-critical string theory,”Phys. Lett. B428(1998) 105–114; [arXiv:hep-th/9802109]

    1998 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Anti de Sitter space and holography,

    E. Witten,“Anti de Sitter space and holography,”Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2(1998) 253–291; [arXiv:hep-th/9802150]

    1998 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Galilei Group and Nonrelativistic Quantum Mechanics,

    J.-M. Lévy-Leblond,“Galilei Group and Nonrelativistic Quantum Mechanics,”J. Math. Phys.4(1963) 776–788

    1963

  30. [38]

    The maximal kinematical invariance group of the free Schrödinger equation,

    U. Niederer,“The maximal kinematical invariance group of the free Schrödinger equation,” Helv. Phys. Acta45(1972) 802–810

    1972

  31. [39]

    Scale and conformal transformations in galilean-covariant field theory,

    C. R. Hagen,“Scale and conformal transformations in galilean-covariant field theory,”Phys. Rev. D5(1972) 377–388

    1972

  32. [40]

    Introducing scale symmetry,

    R. Jackiw,“Introducing scale symmetry,”Phys. Today25(1972) 23–27

    1972

  33. [41]

    The maximal kinematical invariance group of the harmonic oscillator,

    U. Niederer,“The maximal kinematical invariance group of the harmonic oscillator,”Helv. Phys. Acta46(1973) 191–200

    1973

  34. [42]

    Possible kinematics,

    H. Bacry and J.-M. Lévy-Leblond,“Possible kinematics,”J. Math. Phys.9(1968) 1605– 1614

    1968

  35. [43]

    Hooke’s symmetries and nonrelativistic cosmological kinematics — I,

    J. R. Derome and J. G. Dubois,“Hooke’s symmetries and nonrelativistic cosmological kinematics — I,”Nuovo Cim. B9(1972) 351–376. 46

    1972

  36. [44]

    Hooke’s symmetries and nonrelativistic cosmological kinematics — II: Irreducible projective representations,

    J. G. Dubois,“Hooke’s symmetries and nonrelativistic cosmological kinematics — II: Irreducible projective representations,”Nuovo Cim. B15(1973) 1–17

    1973

  37. [45]

    Non-relativistic conformal symmetries and Newton–Cartan structures,

    C. Duval and P. A. Horvathy,“Non-relativistic conformal symmetries and Newton–Cartan structures,”J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.42(2009) 465206; [arXiv:0904.0531 [math-ph]]

    2009

  38. [46]

    G. B. Folland,Harmonic Analysis in Phase Space, Annals of Mathematics Studies122, Princeton Univ. Press (1989); [doi:10.1515/9781400882427]

    1989 doi

  39. [47]

    On a Hilbert space of analytic functions and an associated integral transform I,

    V. Bargmann,“On a Hilbert space of analytic functions and an associated integral transform I,”Commun. Pure Appl. Math.14(1961) 187–214

    1961

  40. [48]

    The Model of relativistic particle with torsion,

    M. S. Plyushchay,“The Model of relativistic particle with torsion,”Nucl. Phys. B362 (1991) 54-72

    1991

  41. [49]

    Quantization of the classical SL(2,R) system and representations of SL(2,R)group,

    M. S. Plyushchay,“Quantization of the classical SL(2,R) system and representations of SL(2,R)group,”J. Math. Phys.34(1993) 3954-3963

    1993

  42. [50]

    Hidden superconformal symmetry: Where does it come from?,

    L. Inzunza and M. S. Plyushchay,“Hidden superconformal symmetry: Where does it come from?,”Phys. Rev. D97(2018) 4, 045002; [arXiv:1711.00616 [hep-th]]

    2018

  43. [51]

    Conformal bridge between asymptotic freedom and confinement,

    L. Inzunza, M. S. Plyushchay and A. Wipf,“Conformal bridge between asymptotic freedom and confinement,”Phys. Rev. D101(2020) 105019; [arXiv:1912.11752 [hep-th]]

    2020

  44. [52]

    Hidden symmetry and (super)conformal mechanics in a monopole background,

    L. Inzunza, M. S. Plyushchay and A. Wipf,“Hidden symmetry and (super)conformal mechanics in a monopole background,”JHEP04(2020) 028; [arXiv:2002.04341 [hep-th]]

    2020

  45. [53]

    Dynamics, symmetries, anomaly and vortices in a rotating cosmic string background,

    L. Inzunza and M. S. Plyushchay,“Dynamics, symmetries, anomaly and vortices in a rotating cosmic string background,”JHEP01(2022) 179; [arXiv:2109.05161 [hep-th]]

    2022

  46. [54]

    Conformal bridge transformation and PT-symmetry,

    L. Inzunza and M. S. Plyushchay,“Conformal bridge transformation and PT-symmetry,”J. Phys. Conf. Ser.2038(2021) 012014; [arXiv:2104.08351 [hep-th]]

  47. [55]

    Conformal bridge transformation, PT- and supersym- metry,

    L. Inzunza and M. S. Plyushchay,“Conformal bridge transformation, PT- and supersym- metry,”JHEP08(2022) 228; [arXiv:2112.13455 [hep-th]]

    2022

  48. [56]

    Projective Time, Cayley Transformations and the Schwarzian Geometry of the Free Particle–Oscillator Correspondence,

    A. Alcala and M. S. Plyushchay,“Projective Time, Cayley Transformations and the Schwarzian Geometry of the Free Particle–Oscillator Correspondence,”Phys. Rev. D 113(2026) 086007; [arXiv:2602.06378 [hep-th]]

    2026 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Symmetries and conformal bridge in Schwarzschild-(A)dS black hole mechanics,

    J. B. Achour and E. R. Livine,“Symmetries and conformal bridge in Schwarzschild-(A)dS black hole mechanics,”JHEP12(2021) 152; [arXiv:2110.01455 [gr-qc]]

    2021

  50. [58]

    Hidden symmetry of the static re- sponse of black holes: applications to Love numbers,

    J. B. Achour, E. R. Livine, S. Mukohyama and J.-P. Uzan,“Hidden symmetry of the static re- sponse of black holes: applications to Love numbers,”JHEP07(2022) 112; [arXiv:2202.12828 [gr-qc]]

    2022

  51. [59]

    Integrability in perturbed black holes: background hidden structures,

    J. L. Jaramillo, M. Lenzi and C. F. Sopuerta,“Integrability in perturbed black holes: background hidden structures,”Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 104049; [arXiv:2407.14196 [gr-qc]]

    2024

  52. [60]

    Dynamics of Carroll Particles,

    E. Bergshoeff, J. Gomis and G. Longhi,“Dynamics of Carroll Particles,”Class. Quant. Grav.31(2014) 205009; [arXiv:1405.2264 [hep-th]]

    2014

  53. [61]

    Planar Carrollean dynamics, and the Carroll quantum Hall effect,

    L. Marsot,“Planar Carrollean dynamics, and the Carroll quantum Hall effect,”Annals Phys.447(2022) 168582; [arXiv:2110.08489 [hep-th]]

    2022

  54. [62]

    Carroll/fracton particles and their correspondence,

    J. Figueroa-O’Farrill, A. Pérez and S. Prohazka,“Carroll/fracton particles and their correspondence,”JHEP06(2023) 207; [arXiv:2305.06730 [hep-th]]. 47

    2023

  55. [63]

    Carrollian physics and holography,

    R. Ruzziconi,“Carrollian physics and holography,”Phys. Rept.1182(2026) 1-87; [arXiv:2602.02644 [hep-th]]

    2026

  56. [64]

    Rigged Hilbert spaces and time-asymmetry: the case of the upside-down simple harmonic oscillator,

    M. Castagnino, R. Diener, L. Lara, G. Puccini,“Rigged Hilbert spaces and time-asymmetry: the case of the upside-down simple harmonic oscillator,"Int. J. Theor. Phys.36(1997) 2349; [arXiv:quant-ph/0006011]

    1997

  57. [65]

    Egorov’s theorem in the Weyl–Hörmander calculus,

    A. Prouff,“Egorov’s theorem in the Weyl–Hörmander calculus,"[arXiv:2412.04320 [math.AP]]

  58. [66]

    Central charges in the canonical realization of asymptotic symmetries: an example from three-dimensional gravity,

    J. D. Brown and M. Henneaux,“Central charges in the canonical realization of asymptotic symmetries: an example from three-dimensional gravity,”Commun. Math. Phys.104(1986) 207–226

    1986

  59. [67]

    Quasinormal modes and the Hawking–Unruh effect in quantum Hall systems: Lessons from black-hole phenomena,

    S. S. Hegde, V. R. Chandra, H. Shapourian, C. W. J. Beenakker, and S. Vishveshwara, “Quasinormal modes and the Hawking–Unruh effect in quantum Hall systems: Lessons from black-hole phenomena,”Phys. Rev. Lett.123(2019) 156802; [arXiv:1812.08803 [cond-mat]]

    2019

  60. [68]

    Heisenberg–Euler effective Lagrangians: Basics and extensions,

    G. V. Dunne,“Heisenberg–Euler effective Lagrangians: Basics and extensions,”in From Fields to Strings: Circumnavigating Theoretical Physics, World Scientific (2005) 445-522; [arXiv:hep-th/0406216]

    2005

  61. [69]

    N. D. Birrell and P. C. W. Davies,Quantum Fields in Curved Space(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1982)

    1982

  62. [70]

    Universality in chaos of particle motion near black hole horizons,

    K. Hashimoto and N. Tanahashi,“Universality in chaos of particle motion near black hole horizons,”Phys. Rev. D95(2017) 024007; [arXiv:1610.06070 [hep-th]]

    2017

  63. [71]

    Renormalization of the inverse square potential,

    H. E. Camblong, L. N. Epele, H. Fanchiotti, and C. A. Garcia Canal,“Renormalization of the inverse square potential,”Phys. Rev. Lett.85(2000) 1590–1593; [arXiv:hep-th/0003014]

    2000

  64. [72]

    The renormalization group limit cycle for the1/r2 potential,

    E. Braaten and D. Phillips,“The renormalization group limit cycle for the1/r2 potential,” Phys. Rev. A70(2004) 052111; [arXiv:hep-th/0403168]

    2004

  65. [73]

    The singular inverse square potential, limit cycles and self-adjoint extensions,

    M. Bawin and S. A. Coon,“The singular inverse square potential, limit cycles and self-adjoint extensions,”Phys. Rev. A67(2003) 042712; [arXiv:quant-ph/0302199]

    2003

  66. [74]

    The Berry–Keating operator onL2(R+,dx )and on compact quantum graphs with general self-adjoint realizations,

    S. Endres and F. Steiner,“The Berry–Keating operator onL2(R+,dx )and on compact quantum graphs with general self-adjoint realizations,”J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.43(2010) 095204; [arXiv:0912.3183 [math-ph]]

    2010

  67. [75]

    Hamiltonian for the zeros of the Riemann zeta function,

    C. M. Bender, D. C. Brody and M. P. Müller,“Hamiltonian for the zeros of the Riemann zeta function,”Phys. Rev. Lett.118(2017) 130201; [arXiv:1608.03679 [quant-ph]]

    2017

  68. [76]

    Asymptotic analysis on a pseudo-Hermitian Riemann-zeta Hamiltonian,

    C. M. Bender and D. C. Brody,“Asymptotic analysis on a pseudo-Hermitian Riemann-zeta Hamiltonian,”J. Phys. A51(2018) 135203; [arXiv:1710.04411 [math-ph]]

    2018

  69. [77]

    (12.2.17).online (DLMF)

    NIST Digital Library of Mathematical Functions,Chapter 12: Parabolic Cylinder Functions, §12.2(v) Connection formulas, Eq. (12.2.17).online (DLMF)

  70. [78]

    TheH =xp model revisited and the Riemann zeros,

    G. Sierra and J. Rodríguez-Laguna,“TheH =xp model revisited and the Riemann zeros,” Phys. Rev. Lett.106(2011) 200201; [arXiv:1102.5356 [math-ph]]

    2011

  71. [79]

    The Riemann zeros as spectrum and the Riemann hypothesis,

    G. Sierra,“The Riemann zeros as spectrum and the Riemann hypothesis,”Symmetry11 (2019) 494; [arXiv:1601.01797 [math-ph]]. 48

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed May 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.