...NAME=548> 

I need to find the original reference for Prof. Pople's description of the criteria.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...NAME=558> 

According to Dr. John Stanton, Mayer introduced this term, but perhaps only in Statistical Mechanics; we need to find the reference.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...energy.

This is only true if the 46#46 operator is truncated to a particular excitation level. In the case of the full 46#46 operator, the calculated energy will be an upper bound to the exact energy, and will be, in fact, identical to the full CI  energy. (See appendix B.) However, regardless of the truncation of 46#46, the product of the Hamiltonian and the wave operator is non-Hermitian.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...commutator

Note that this is only true if the 46#46 operators are defined in terms of spin-orbital annihilation and creation operators and if the annihilation and creation spaces are disjoint. Otherwise, higher-order terms may still survive[13].

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...41#41.

Note, however, that the reference wavefunction, which is sometimes referred to as the Fermi vacuum, may be written as a string of creation operators acting on the true vacuum.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...operators.

Authors sometimes refer to a normal-ordered string of annihilation and creation operators without indicating whether this is defined with respect to the vacuum or the reference wavefunction. Readers should therefore be cautious when they encounter this phrase in the literature.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...HREF="node21.html#twoelechamil">A.23)

The 96#96 notation has been reduced to only the orbital index here.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...equations

I believe there is a problem with the factors on the 166#166 terms in the doubles equation. Specifically, I seem to have an extra factor of 167#167 that I can't account for.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.