Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: it has been pointed out in previous publications @xcite that various models in quantum field theory ( qft ) , including qed , can be reformulated , using mediating - field green functions , in such a way that exact few - particle eigenstates of the resulting partially truncated hamiltonian can be obtained . this approach was then applied to two - body eigenstates in the scalar yukawa ( wick - cutkosky ) theory @xcite . we implement such an approach to qed in this paper . the lagrangian of two fermion fields , @xmath0 and @xmath1 , interacting electromagnetically , is @xmath2 the corresponding euler - lagrange equations of motion are the coupled dirac - maxwell equations , @xmath3 @xmath4 and @xmath5 where @xmath6 the equations ( [ 1.2 ] ) - ( [ 1.4 ] ) can be decoupled in part by using the well - known @xcite formal solution of the maxwell equation ( [ 1.4 ] ) , namely @xmath7 where @xmath8 is a green function ( or photon propagator in qft terminology ) , defined by @xmath9 and @xmath10 is a solution of the homogeneous ( or `` free field '' ) equation ( [ 1.4 ] ) with @xmath11 . we recall , in passing , that equation ( [ 1.7 ] ) does not define the covariant green function @xmath8 uniquely . for one thing , one can always add a solution of the homogeneous equation ( _ eq . _ ( [ 1.7 ] ) with @xmath12 . this allows for a certain freedom in the choice of @xmath13 , as is discussed in standard texts ( e.g. refs . @xcite ) . in practice , the solution of eq . ( [ 1.7 ] ) , like that of eq . ( [ 1.4 ] ) , requires a choice of gauge . however , we do not need to specify one at this stage . substitution of the formal solution ( [ 1.6 ] ) into equations ( [ 1.2 ] ) and ( [ 1.3 ] ) yields the  partially reduced " equations , @xmath14 and @xmath15 these are nonlinear coupled dirac equations for two different fermion fields . to our knowledge no exact ( analytic or numeric ) solutions of equations ( [ 1.8 ] ) and ( [ 1.9 ] ) for classical fields have been reported in the literature , even for the case of a single fermion field ( say @xmath16 ) , though approximate ( perturbative ) solutions have been discussed by various authors , particularly barut and his co - workers ( see refs . @xcite and citations therein ) . however , our interest here is in the quantized field theory . the partially reduced equations ( [ 1.8])-([1.9 ] ) are derivable from the stationary action principle @xmath17 = \delta \int { \cal l}_{r}\ ; d^4x = 0,\ ] ] with the lagrangian density @xmath18 provided that the green function is symmetric in the sense that @xmath19 one can proceed to do conventional covariant perturbation theory using the reformulated qed lagrangian ( [ 1.11 ] ) . the interaction part of ( [ 1.11 ] ) has a somewhat modified structure from that of the usual formulation of qed . thus , there are two interaction terms . the last term of ( [ 1.11 ] ) is a `` current - current '' interaction which contains the photon propagator sandwiched between the fermionic currents . as such , it corresponds to feynman diagrams without external photon lines . the terms containing @xmath20 corresponds to diagrams that can not be generated by the term containing @xmath21 , particularly diagrams involving external photon lines ( care would have to be taken not to double count physical effects ) . however , we shall not pursue perturbation theory in this work . rather , we shall consider an approach that allows one to write down some unorthodox but exact eigenstates of a truncated model , in which terms involving @xmath22 are ignored . the paper is organized as follows . in section 2 we quantize the system using the canonical equal time formalism in the schrdinger picture . in section 3 an unconventional  empty " vacuum state is used to construct exact one- , two- , and three - fermion eigenstates of the hamiltonian , truncated to exclude states with free ( physical ) photons . in section 4 we show that the resulting two - fermion equation is the breit equation in the coulomb gauge , but that it is the eddington - gaunt equation in the lorentz gauge . in section 5 we demonstrate that the breit equation can be obtained in the lorentz gauge , provided that higher - order retardation effects are taken into account . the reduction of the breit equation to radial form is described briefly in section 6 . for states of zero total angular momentum ( @xmath23 ) , four coupled radial equations are shown to arise . the analytical structure of their solutions is studied in section 7 . perturbative @xmath24 corrections to the rydberg spectrum of @xmath23 states are obtained in section 8 . in the case of equal rest masses the @xmath25 state equations have no unusual singularities and can be solved numerically . some of these results are presented and discussed in section 9 . the remainder of the paper is devoted to the study of @xmath26 states . in the section 10 the set of eight coupled radial first - order differential equations is reduced to four first - order ones and then to two second - order schrdinger - like equations . they are solved perturbatively in section 11 and @xmath24 relativistic corrections to the non - relativistic mass spectrum are obtained . a summary and concluding remarks are given in section 12 . we consider this theory in the canonical , equal - time formalism . to this end we write down the hamiltonian density corresponding to the lagrangian ( [ 1.11 ] ) @xmath27 where we have not written out the hamiltonian density for the free @xmath28 field . equal - time quantization corresponds to the imposition of anticommutation rules for the fermion fields , namely @xmath29 and all others vanish . in addition , if @xmath30 , there are the usual commutation rules for the @xmath20 field , and commutation of the @xmath20 field operators with the @xmath31 and @xmath32 field operators . the hamiltonian ( [ 2.1 ] ) contains an interaction term that is nonlocal in time , which can complicate the transition to a quantized theory . we shall avoid this problem by working in the schrdinger picture with @xmath33 in the expressions for the field operators and currents , that is @xmath34 , @xmath35 , etc . in equation ( [ 2.1 ] ) . this corresponds to neglecting higher order retardation effects . thereupon we obtain the result @xmath36 where @xmath37 for example , in the lorentz gauge ( @xmath38 ) , we have @xmath39 thus , in the schrdinger picture , the third term of the hamiltonian density ( [ 2.1 ] ) takes on the form @xmath40 in the remainder of this paper , we shall consider the simplified model without the interaction terms in ( [ 2.1 ] ) that contains @xmath41 . such a model is suitable for describing few - fermion states interacting via virtual photon exchange , but without decay or annihilation involving free ( physical ) photons . in short , in all that follows we consider the field theory based on the hamiltonian density of ( [ 2.1 ] ) but with @xmath42 . an attractive feature of this model is that exact few - fermion eigenstates of the hamiltonian can be obtained . we consider now the model for which the hamiltonian , in the schrdinger picture with @xmath33 , is given by the expression @xmath43 where @xmath44 @xmath45 and @xmath46 , where @xmath47 is given in equation ( [ 2.6 ] ) . note , again , that the terms in @xmath48 have been suppressed , so that processes in which free ( physical ) photons are emitted or absorbed are not accommodated . the hamiltonian @xmath49 has the same structure as the coulomb - qed ( cqed ) hamiltonian , that is the hamiltonian of qed in the coulomb gauge , but with the `` transverse - photon '' part ( that contains @xmath50 ) turned off . indeed @xmath49 would beidentical to @xmath51 if the indeces @xmath52 and @xmath53 took on only the value @xmath54 in equation ( [ 2.6 ] ) ( as it is , @xmath55 in eq.([2.6 ] ) ) . it has been shown earlier @xcite that exact two - fermion eigenstates of @xmath51 can be written down if we use an unconventional ( or `` empty '' ) vacuum state , @xmath56 , defined by @xmath57 the same is true of the present more realistic model , as we point out below .    the unconventional empty vacuum definition ( [ 3.4 ] ) means that @xmath58 is interpreted as a ( free ) dirac - particle annihilation operator , while @xmath59 is , correspondingly , a dirac - particle creation operator . by `` dirac - particle '' we mean one described by the full dirac spinor , including positive and negative frequency components . ( recall that in the conventional approach , _ i.e. _ using a dirac `` filled negative energy sea '' vacuum which is annihilated by the positive frequency component of @xmath31 , it is only the negative - frequency component of @xmath31 that is an antiparticle creation operator , and the positive - frequency component of @xmath60 that is the particle creation operator ) .    with these conventions , we write the normal - ordered hamiltonian @xmath61,\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath62 and @xmath63 , etc . the normal ordering is achieved by using the anticommutation rules ( [ 2.2 ] ) as usual ; but note that it is not identical to the conventional normal ordering because of the unconventional empty vacuum that is being used , and the unconventional definition of @xmath31 and @xmath32 as annihilation operators and of @xmath64 as creation operators . to underscore this unconventional procedure we use the notation @xmath65 rather than @xmath66 in equation ( [ 3.5 ] ) . we note that the state defined by @xmath67 is a @xmath68 c - number coefficient vector , is an eigenstate of @xmath65 ( eq . ( [ 3.5 ] ) ) provided that @xmath69 satisfies the equation @xmath70 which is the usual time - independent one - particle dirac equation ( with positive and negative energy solutions ) , so that @xmath69 is a dirac spinor . therefore , we refer to @xmath71 as a one - dirac - fermion state .    similarly , the two - dirac - fermion state , @xmath72 ( summation on @xmath73 implied ) is an eigenstate of @xmath65 ( equation ( [ 3.5 ] ) ) provided that the @xmath74 eigenmatrix @xmath75 satisfies the equation @xmath76^t + q_1 q_2 g_{\mu \nu}({\bx } - { { \mbox{\boldmath$y$ } } } ) { \tilde \gamma}^\mu f({\bx},{{\mbox{\boldmath$y$ } } } ) ( { \tilde \gamma}^\nu)^t = e\ , f({\bx},{{\mbox{\boldmath$y$}}}),\ ] ] where @xmath77 , @xmath78 , and the superscript @xmath79 indicates the transpose of the matrix in question . the detailed form of the interaction matrix @xmath80 depends on the choice of gauge . this equation ( [ 3.9 ] ) is a two - fermion dirac - like , or breit - like , equation with positive and negative energy solutions , and is , in this respect , different from those obtained in the conventional approach @xcite-@xcite in which the negative - energy solutions do not arise . we note , in passing , that if the interaction is turned off in eq . ( [ 3.9 ] ) ( _ i.e. _ @xmath81 ) , then the solution can be written as @xmath82 where @xmath83 and @xmath84 are solutions of the one - body dirac eigenvalue equation ( [ 3.7 ] ) . this indicates that in @xmath85 $ ] , the index @xmath86 corresponds to particle 1 ( with coordinates @xmath87 ) while @xmath88 corresponds to particle 2 ( with coordinates @xmath89 ) .    in the rest frame of the two - fermion system ( _ i.e. _ when @xmath90 is taken to be an eigenstate of the momentum operator for this qft , with eigenvalue 0 ) , equation ( [ 3.9 ] ) reduces to an analogous equation in the single relative co - ordinate @xmath91 : @xmath92^t + q_1 q_2 g_{\mu \nu}({\br } ) { \tilde \gamma}^\mu f({\br } ) ( { \tilde \gamma}^\nu)^t = e \ , f({\br}).\ ] ] it can , therefore , be reduced to a set of ordinary , coupled , first - order differential equations for states of given @xmath93 . such equations can , at the very least , be solved numerically . this is a straightforward , though somewhat tedious , problem @xcite which we address below . the structure of the hamiltonian @xmath65 ( eq . ( [ 3.5 ] ) ) is such that generalizations to systems of more than two fermions are readily obtained . thus , the three fermion state , corresponding to a system like @xmath94 , defined by @xmath95 is an exact eigenstate of @xmath65 with eigenvalue @xmath96 , provided that the @xmath97 coefficient functions @xmath98 satisfy the three - body dirac - like equation , @xmath99_{\alpha_1 \alpha}\ ; f_{\alpha \alpha_2 \alpha_3}({\bx}_1,{\bx}_2,{\bx}_3 ) + \left[h_{m_1}({\bx}_2)\right]_{\alpha_2 \alpha}\;f_{\alpha_1 \alpha \alpha_3}({\bx}_1,{\bx}_2,{\bx}_3 )   \nn   \\ { } + \left[h_{m_2}({\bx}_3 ) \right]_{\alpha_3 \alpha}\ ; f_{\alpha_1 \alpha_2 \alpha}({\bx}_1,{\bx}_2,{\bx}_3 ) + q_1 q_2 g_{\mu \nu } ( { \bx}_3 - { \bx}_1)\ ; ( { \tilde   \gamma}^\mu)_{\alpha_1 \alpha}\;({\tilde \gamma}^\nu)_{\alpha_3 \beta}\ ; f_{\alpha \alpha_2    \beta}({\bx}_1,{\bx}_2,{\bx}_3 )      \nn   \\ \label{3.12 } { } + q_1 q_2 g_{\mu \nu } ( { \bx}_3 - { \bx}_2 ) \ ; ( { \tilde \gamma}^\mu)_{\alpha_2 \alpha } \ ; ( { \tilde \gamma}^\nu)_{\alpha_3 \beta } \ ; f_{\alpha_1 \alpha \beta}({\bx}_1,{\bx}_2,{\bx}_3 )   \\ { } +   q_1 ^ 2 g_{\mu \nu } ( { \bx}_1 - { \bx}_2 ) \ ; ( { \tilde \gamma}^\mu)_{\alpha_1 \alpha } \ ; ( { \tilde \gamma}^\nu)_{\alpha_2 \beta } \ ; f_{\alpha \beta \alpha_3   } ( { \bx}_1,{\bx}_2,{\bx}_3 ) \nn \\ { } = e \ ; f_{\alpha_1 \alpha_2 \alpha_3}({\bx}_1,{\bx}_2,{\bx}_3 ) ,    \nn\end{aligned}\ ] ] where summation on repeated spinor indices is implied . in the rest frame of the three - body system equation ( [ 3.12 ] ) reduces to one in two independent vectors only . nevertheless , the reduction of the equation for states of given @xmath93 is more formidable than in the two - body case . even then one is left with the full complexity of a relativistic three - body system . we shall not consider solutions of the three - body equation ( [ 3.12 ] ) in this paper . at this stage we must specify the choice of green s function , that is a choice of gauge . we could use any gauge , in principle , but we shall use the coulomb gauge , as this avoids nonphysical degrees of freedom and the need to take account of auxiliary conditions ( such as @xmath100 in the lorentz gauge ) . we use the relation @xmath101 and note that @xmath102 in the coulomb gauge @xcite . therefore , if we use eq . ( [ 2.3 ] ) and the identity ( @xcite , eq . 39.8 ) @xmath103 we obtain the coordinate - space representation of the coulomb - gauge green function @xmath104 where @xmath105 and @xmath106 . consequently , in the coulomb gauge , equation ( [ 3.10 ] ) becomes @xmath107^t +   v(r ) \left [ f(\br ) - { 1 \over 2 } \left ( \arrowal f(\br ) \ , \cdot \arrowal^t + { 1 \over r^2 } \br \ , \cdot \arrowal f(\br ) \ ,   \br \ , \cdot \arrowal^t \right ) \right ] = e\ , f(\br ) , \ ] ] where @xmath108 .    keeping in mind the notation , as explained below eq . ( [ 3.9a ] ) , we see that equation ( [ 4.5 ] ) is nothing other than the breit equation @xcite , written in the rest frame of the two - fermion system . if we had used the lorentz - gauge form of the green function ( [ 2.5 ] ) , equation ( [ 3.10 ] ) would take on the form @xmath109^t + v(r ) \left [ f(\br ) - \arrowal f(\br ) \ , \cdot \arrowal^t \right ] = e\ , f(\br ) , \ ] ] which is recognized to be the eddington - gaunt equation @xcite . the gaunt equation , unlike the breit equation , does not contain even lowest - order retardation effects ( see , also , section 5 , following ) . therefore , it will yield energy eigenvalues that will differ from those of the breit equation already at @xmath24 .    note , also , that equations ( [ 4.5 ] ) and ( [ 4.6 ] ) , with the terms involving @xmath110 left out , become identical to the coulomb - qed model discussed earlier @xcite . although we shall use the coulomb gauge in this paper , it is instructive to see how , in the lorentz gauge , one needs to keep retardation effects at least to lowest non - vanishing order in order to achieve the same results . the green function of the dalembert equation in the lorentz gauge has the form : @xmath111 the reduced lagrangian @xmath112 in this case reads ( with @xmath113 ) : @xmath114 where the potential of electromagnetic interparticle interaction is @xmath115 j^\mu(\tp,\bxp ) .\ ] ] thus , the lagrangian ( [ 2 ] ) is nonlocal in time . because of this the standard hamiltonization procedure is not applicable .    in order to employ the canonical hamiltonian formalism it is necessary to convert this lagrangian to single - time form . we shall do so by employing a procedure which takes into account the retardation effects approximately .    using the substitution @xmath116 in ( [ 3 ] ) and expanding the current @xmath88 in a taylor series in @xmath117 , we obtain the result @xmath118 which reduces the potential ( [ 3 ] ) to the form : @xmath119 where @xmath120 . the functions @xmath121 and @xmath122 satisfy the relation @xmath123 the terms of odd power in @xmath117 in the expansion ( [ 4 ] ) vanish , because @xmath124 is an even function of @xmath117 ( _ c.f . _ ( [ 6 ] ) , ( [ 7 ] ) ) . as a result , the interaction lagrangian @xmath125 ( up to surface terms ) takes the following single - time form : @xmath126 where @xmath127 ( hereafter we omit the common time argument @xmath128 ) .    the quantized theory based on the lagrangian @xmath129 ( the coulomb qed mentioned in section 3 ) was discussed in @xcite . it takes into account the relativistic kinematics of the fermion fields exactly , but describes their electromagnetic interaction with the  transverse - photon " part turned off . the terms @xmath130 and @xmath131 can be treated as first - order corrections to @xmath132 , thus providing the approximate single - time form @xmath133 for the reduced nonlocal lagrangian @xmath112 ( _ c.f . _ eq . ( [ 1.11 ] ) ) . other terms following from the expansion are corrections of higher order . they will not be considered in the present paper . the lagrangian @xmath134 leads to euler - lagrange equations which are second - order in time derivatives , because of the term @xmath131 . thus , it describes the system with twice as many degrees of freedom as @xmath132 does , because @xmath60 are no longer the conjugate momenta of @xmath31 . this changes completely the dynamical content of the fields @xmath31 and @xmath32 . since the second - order time derivatives occur in small terms only , they should be eliminated by means of the euler - lagrange equations of a lower - order approximation . but the resulting field equations are then not necessarily the euler - lagrange equations of a known lagrangian . thus the transition to the hamiltonian and to a canonical quantum description becomes unclear .    to avoid this difficulty it is tempting to eliminate the time derivative of the charge density @xmath135 directly in @xmath131 by taking into account the conservation law @xmath136 this conservation law is a consequence of the euler - lagrange equations , which follow from the reduced lagrangian @xmath112 as well as from the truncated one @xmath132 . however , the direct use of the equations of motion ( or their consequences ) in the lagrangian is not a correct procedure : it changes the equations of motion themselves . this fact was first emphasized in the case of the golubenkov - smorodinskii lagrangian @xcite and then subsequently discussed in the literature @xcite-@xcite . instead , one can use the method of  double zero " , used in refs . @xcite . in our case this consists of the following modification of the lagrangian : @xmath137 where @xmath138 it is easy to see that the term @xmath139 possesses the property : @xmath140 so that it does not change the variational problem to the accuracy required . on the other hand , it cancels those terms of @xmath134 which are quadratic in time derivatives of the fields . thus the modified lagrangian @xmath141 yields equations of motion , which are first order in the time derivatives of the particle fields @xmath142 .    next , we perform the following transformation of the field variables : @xmath143 where @xmath144 the transformation ( [ 17 ] ) can be regarded as an approximate @xmath145 gauge transformation , which however is not canonical due to the dependence of @xmath146 on the fields . this transformation removes time derivatives from the interaction part of @xmath147 . to the accuracy required , and up to surface terms , lagrangian @xmath141 can be written in the form @xmath148 where the notations @xmath149 , @xmath150 , _ etc . _ mean that the fields @xmath31 , @xmath32 are replaced by @xmath151 , @xmath152 . integrating the last term of @xmath141 by parts , omitting surface terms , and using equations ( [ 6 ] ) and ( [ 8 ] ) , we reduce the lagrangian @xmath141 to the form @xmath153 where @xmath154 this formulation allows us to treat the variables @xmath155 and @xmath156as the canonical conjugates of @xmath151 and @xmath152 , respectively . that is , we impose the anticommutation relations ( [ 2.2 ] ) on the underscored fields , and not on the original ones , when performing the quantization . thereafter , since the hamiltonian @xmath157 is formally identical with the coulomb gauge hamiltonian ( _ c.f . _ ( [ 2.1 ] ) with ( [ 4.4 ] ) ) , calculations like those of section 4 lead to the breit equation ( [ 4.5 ] ) . although two fermion equations have been around since the 1920s , their full reduction to radial form is of more recent vintage ( see , for example @xcite , @xcite ) . the reduction of equation ( [ 4.5 ] ) to radial form is essentially the same as presented in ref . @xcite , hence all the details shall not be repeated here . as shown in @xcite , we note that eq.([4.5 ] ) has the schrdinger equation as a non - relativistic limit , and the dirac equation as a one - body limit if one of @xmath158 .    for the two - fermion state @xmath159 , eq . ( [ 3.8 ] ) , to be simultaneously an eigenstate of @xmath160 , @xmath161 , and parity , the  bispinor " @xmath162 $ ] must be of the form @xmath163,\ ] ] for @xmath164 parity eigenstates , and @xmath165,\ ] ] for @xmath166 parity eigenstates . the @xmath167 angular `` bispinor harmonics '' @xmath168 , @xmath169 , @xmath170 , @xmath171 , for given total angular momentum quantum numbers @xmath172 and @xmath173 , are @xmath174,\ ] ] @xmath175,\ ] ] @xmath176,\ ] ] and @xmath177 . \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] we note that @xmath178 is antisymmetric and @xmath179 are symmetric matrices . furthermore @xmath180 , @xmath181 and @xmath182 correspond to opposite parity because @xmath183 and @xmath184 , @xmath178 have @xmath185 whereas @xmath182 have @xmath186 . these four bispinor harmonics form an orthonormal set , in the sense that @xmath187 , where @xmath188 and the integrations are taken over the entire solid angle . the eight radial functions in the bispinors ( [ 6 - 1 ] ) and ( [ 6 - 2 ] ) are solutions of the coupled radial equations that are obtained by substituting ( [ 6 - 1 ] ) , ( [ 6 - 2 ] ) into equation ( [ 4.5 ] ) and equating the coefficients of the four independent bispinor harmonics .    we make use of the following identities in carrying out the radial reduction : @xmath189 where @xmath190 is any @xmath167 bispinor harmonic , @xmath191 a radial function , and @xmath192 , and @xmath193 . in addition , we note the following useful properties of the above bispinors harmonics : @xmath194 where @xmath195 it is evident from equations ( [ 6 - 1 ] ) and ( [ 6 - 2 ] ) that , in general , eight coupled radial equations are obtained , for arbitrary @xmath26 . for the @xmath196 states , namely the @xmath197 and @xmath198 states , only two linearly independent bispinor harmonics arise , namely @xmath178 and @xmath199 ( equations ( [ 6 - 3 ] ) and ( [ 6 - 6 ] ) ) , and so @xmath200 in equations ( [ 6 - 1 ] ) and ( [ 6 - 2 ] ) . ( here , as elsewhere , we give in brackets the nonrelativistic limit designation , @xmath201 , corresponding to the @xmath93 state in question . ) thus there is only one set of four coupled radial equations for each of @xmath202 and @xmath203 states : @xmath204 @xmath205 @xmath206 @xmath207 where @xmath208 , @xmath209 , the potential @xmath210 ( @xmath211 ) , and @xmath212 is the eigenenergy ( two - particle bound - state mass ) to be determined , while @xmath213 ( @xmath214 ) for the @xmath197 states and @xmath215 ( @xmath216 ) for the @xmath198 states . as shown in ref . @xcite , eqs . ( [ 7 - 1 ] ) - ( [ 7 - 4 ] ) have the expected schrdinger nonrelativistic limit , and the dirac one - body limit . we note that the case with @xmath217 corresponds to the simplified model without transverse - photon interactions , that is the ` coulomb qed ' model of ref . similarly for @xmath217 , if the potential is @xmath218 , and the sign of the potential is reversed in ( [ 7 - 2 ] ) and ( [ 7 - 3 ] ) we recover the @xmath219 radial equation of the yukawa model discussed in ref . @xcite , for which the inter fermion interaction is via a ( massive or massless ) scalar mediating field . we should point out that equations ( [ 7 - 1 ] ) - ( [ 7 - 4 ] ) , like the dirac equations , have both positive and negative energy solutions . indeed , in this two - body case , there are solutions of four types : @xmath220 , @xmath221 , @xmath222 and @xmath223 , as can be seen most easily from the @xmath224 case . of these , two are positive energy and two are negative energy solutions . since we do not have analytic solutions for the eigenenergies of the present qed case , it is useful to illustrate this phenomenon on the scalar yukawa ( or  wick - cutkosky " ) model , in which scalar particles interact via a massive or massless mediating field . for such a scalar model , analytic expressions for the two - body bound state energy eigenvalues are available in the massless - exchange case @xcite : @xmath225 where @xmath226 is the effective dimensionless coupling constant , analogous to the fine structure constant of qed , and @xmath227 is the principal quantum number . the @xmath228 in eq . ( [ 7 - 4a ] ) correspond to two segments of a distorted semicircle . the upper branch of this distorted semicircle corresponds to the upper ( positive ) sign in ( [ 7 - 4a ] ) . it begins from @xmath229 at @xmath224 ( indeed , @xmath230 for @xmath231 ) , and decreases to a @xmath232 at the critical value of @xmath233 , beyond which @xmath96 ceases to be real , and the wave functions cease to be normalizable . the lower branch , by contrast , begins from @xmath234 at @xmath235 and rises monotonically to meet the upper branch at the same critical point @xmath236 . these @xmath237 type bound state eigenenergies do not have the correct balmer limit , since for this branch @xmath238 for @xmath239 , but @xmath240 for @xmath241 . thus , this  mixed energy " @xmath242 bound - state spectrum must be regarded as unphysical . there are also negative - energy solutions of the @xmath243 and @xmath244 type , but they are not bound - states , since the potential effectively reverses sign for the negative - energy solutions ( as happens also in the dirac - coulomb case ) . the same type of behaviour of the energy spectrum is observed in another analytically solvable case , namely a fermion and a scalar particle interacting via massless scalar quantum exchange @xcite thus , we expect that the energy eigenvalue spectrum of ( [ 7 - 1 ] ) - ( [ 7 - 4 ] ) will be qualitatively similar to that of the scalar exchange models just described . we have not been able to determine solutions to the coupled radial equations ( [ 7 - 1])-([7 - 4 ] ) in terms of common analytic functions . it is of interest , therefore , to consider the properties and general behaviour of the solutions before commencing with numerical solutions .    in analogy with the scalar model just described , and with the coulomb qed case @xcite we expect that , as @xmath226 increases , the eigenenergy spectrum @xmath245 of equations ( [ 7 - 1])-([7 - 4 ] ) will have a qualitative behaviour similar to that of the dirac spectrum , namely that @xmath245 decreases monotonically from @xmath246 until @xmath226 hits a critical value @xmath247 , beyond which @xmath245 ceases to be real . it is possible to infer the value of @xmath247 by considering the ultra - relativistic limit , @xmath248 , in which case we can neglect the masses @xmath249 and @xmath250 , and seek solutions of ( [ 7 - 1])-([7 - 4 ] ) with @xmath251 . ( this approach , when applied to the one - body dirac - coulomb case , yields the correct critical values @xmath252 . ) in this ultra - relativistic approximation , equations ( [ 7 - 1])-([7 - 4 ] ) have the solutions @xmath253 , @xmath254 , @xmath255 ( i.e. @xmath256 ) with @xmath257 , which gives @xmath258 for all @xmath219 states . note however , that this result does not mean that the value of the two - fermion rest mass @xmath96 at @xmath247 is necessarily the same for the @xmath259 and @xmath260 states ( certainly , such is not the case in the one - body limit ) . note , also that the result , @xmath261 for @xmath262 states is independent of the masses , that is we expect it to be the same for all finite @xmath263 . the value @xmath261 is different , and somewhat larger , than the known one - body limit ( dirac - coulomb ) value of @xmath264 for @xmath265 states . also , this value is much smaller that the value @xmath266 , which is obtained for the two - fermion coulomb qed case ( where @xmath217 ) for @xmath262 states .    for the coulomb potential @xmath267 , where @xmath268 , it is often convenient to rescale the radial variable , that is to let @xmath269 , where @xmath270 is a suitable scale parameter . for example , the radial functions @xmath271 , @xmath128 , @xmath272 , @xmath273 have the large @xmath274 ( negligible @xmath275 and @xmath276 ) behaviour @xmath277 , etc . , for positive energy @xmath23 bound states , where @xmath270 is given by @xmath278[e^2 - m_-^2]}\over { 4e^2 } } \qquad { \rm or } \qquad { 1\over { a^2 } } =   m^2 - \left({e\over 2}\right)^2 \quad { \rm if } \quad m_1=m_2 .\ ] ] eq . ( [ 7 - 5 ] ) implies that @xmath270 is positive only for @xmath279 , which means that the bound state spectrum must lie in this domain ( _ c.f . _ ( [ 7 - 4a ] ) ) . from this , and in analogy with the scalar model results , we can infer that the critical value @xmath280 lies between @xmath281 and @xmath282 , and likely closer to the former rather than the latter .    with the rescaling @xmath269 , equations ( [ 7 - 1])-([7 - 4 ] ) become modified slightly , in that @xmath274 is replaced by @xmath283 in all of them . for purposes of numerical integration of the radial equations the scale parameter @xmath270 can be chosen to be anything that is convenient , be it that given in eq . ( [ 7 - 5 ] ) , or @xmath284 or @xmath285 , or whatever .    for a power series analysis of the radial equations it is useful to make the replacement @xmath286 , etc . assuming solutions of the form @xmath287,\ ] ] @xmath288,\ ] ] @xmath289,\ ] ] @xmath290,\ ] ] we find , upon substitution into the radial equations for @xmath291 , @xmath292 , @xmath293 , @xmath294 and equating coefficients of powers of @xmath295 , that the coefficients @xmath296 must satisfy the following recursion relations : @xmath297 @xmath298 @xmath299 @xmath300 where @xmath301 . if @xmath302 then ( [ 7 - 10])-([7 - 13 ] ) are the recursion relations for the power series representations of the functions @xmath303 , etc . , rather than for @xmath304 , etc .    for @xmath305 , and bearing in mind that @xmath306 , ( [ 7 - 10])-([7 - 13 ] ) yield four coupled homogeneous equations for the parameters @xmath307 , @xmath308 , @xmath309 , @xmath310 , which have non - trivial ( and non - singular ) solutions only if @xmath311 for the @xmath23 states , for any values of @xmath249 , @xmath250 , whereupon @xmath312 the condition ( [ 7 - 14 ] ) implies that the radial equations have real bound state solutions of the form ( [ 7 - 6])-([7 - 9 ] ) only for @xmath313 , for any values of @xmath249 and @xmath250 . this , in turn , implies that @xmath314 for the @xmath315 states for any ( finite ) values of @xmath249 and @xmath250 , in agreement with the ultra relativistic limit discussed above . this condition for bound states , @xmath316 , is additional to the one that follows from eq . ( [ 7 - 5 ] ) , namely that @xmath317 . the recursion relations ( [ 7 - 10])-([7 - 13 ] ) , with ( [ 7 - 14 ] ) and ( [ 7 - 15 ] ) , can be used to generate the power series form of the solutions of eqs . ( [ 7 - 6])-([7 - 9 ] ) . these series converge in the domain @xmath318 , as discussed below and in @xcite . such a series can be used , for example , as a starting procedure for the numerical integration of the radial equations ( [ 7 - 1])-([7 - 4 ] ) .    unlike in the dirac case , the recursion relations ( [ 7 - 10])-([7 - 13 ] ) do not admit power series solutions of the form ( [ 7 - 6])-([7 - 9 ] ) , which terminate at the same power , say @xmath319 , so that @xmath320 . in particular , the ground state solution is not of the simple form @xmath321 as it is for the two radial dirac equations . this is perhaps to be expected , since in the dirac case there are only two functions , say @xmath291 and @xmath292 , and four unknowns to be determined , namely @xmath322 , @xmath323 , @xmath270 and @xmath96 . since the two coupled radial dirac equations yield four equations ( the coefficients of @xmath324 and of @xmath325 ) , it is not surprising that a solution is obtained . in the present case , we have four coupled radial equations ( [ 7 - 1])-([7 - 4 ] ) , which yield eight equations ( the coefficients of @xmath324 and of @xmath325 ) to be satisfied by the six unknowns of the proposed solutions ( [ 7 - 16 ] ) , namely @xmath308 , @xmath309 , @xmath310 , @xmath323 , @xmath270 and @xmath96 . thus the system is overdetermined and no solution of the form ( [ 7 - 16 ] ) is possible . this situation persists for any solution of the form ( [ 7 - 6])-([7 - 9 ] ) where the polynomials all terminate at the same degree . therefore , we shall solve the radial equations ( [ 7 - 1])-([7 - 4 ] ) numerically . equations ( [ 7 - 1 ] ) - ( [ 7 - 4 ] ) are not independent . indeed , elementary manipulations of these equations , namely subtracting eq . ( [ 7 - 4 ] ) from eq . ( [ 7 - 1 ] ) and similarly eq . ( [ 7 - 3 ] ) from eq . ( [ 7 - 2 ] ) show that [ 7 - 6a ] v(r ) = e - m_+ - ( 1- ) v(r ) s(r ) , u(r ) = e - m_- - ( 1-)v(r ) t(r ) . thus , the number of equations can be reduced from four to two . we introduce the auxiliary functions @xmath326 and @xmath327 . then , adding eqs . ( [ 7 - 1 ] ) to eq . ( [ 7 - 4 ] ) and eq . ( [ 7 - 2 ] ) to eq . ( [ 7 - 3 ] ) , and using eq . ( [ 7 - 6a ] ) yields the equations [ 7 - 7a ] f^ ( r ) = k r f(r ) + w_g ( r ) g(r ) , -g^ ( r ) = k r g(r ) + w_f ( r ) f(r ) , where [ 7 - 8a ] w_g ( r ) = 1 2 , [ 7 - 9a ] w_f ( r ) = 1 2 , and where @xmath328 for the present qed case in the coulomb gauge , for the @xmath259 states ( for which @xmath214 ) , @xmath329 while @xmath330 and @xmath331 . in this case we see that @xmath332 is singular at @xmath333 , where @xmath334 is the reduced mass and @xmath335 is the reduced bohr radius . this singular point is quite close to the origin ( in units of the reduced bohr radius ) for small @xmath226 . the appearance of this singularity may signal difficulties in the numerical determination of eigensolutions of the equations ( [ 7 - 7a ] ) by standard  shooting " methods . for the @xmath198 states ( for which @xmath216 ) , the singularity at @xmath336 occurs in @xmath337 , but only if @xmath338 . thus for the equal - mass @xmath260 states , equations ( [ 7 - 7a ] ) have only the usual @xmath339 singularities at the origin , and are amenable to solution by standard methods , as discussed below . equations ( [ 7 - 7a ] ) can be written in the matrix form [ 8 - 1 ] h |= | h = , = , and where @xmath340 . if @xmath341 is replaced by @xmath342 and @xmath337 by @xmath343 , where @xmath344 , then eq . ( [ 7 - 7a ] ) , or ( [ 8 - 1 ] ) , is equivalent to the radial schrdinger equation . the first - order correction to the non relativistic energy @xmath345 is then given by [ 8 - 2 ] = _ nr | h- h_nr| _ nr = f _ nr | - _ nr + w_f ^nr - w_f | f_nr + g _ nr | - _ nr + w_g ^nr - w_g | g_nr if we expand the coefficients @xmath346 and @xmath337 ( eqs . ( [ 7 - 8 ] ) and ( [ 7 - 9 ] ) ) in powers of @xmath347 , and keep only the lowest - order terms , we obtain [ 8 - 2a ] - _ nr + w_f ^nr - w_f ( _ nr - v_)^2 [ 8 - 2b ] - _ nr + w_g ^nr - w_g - ( 1 - 2 ) _ nr + 1 2 v_+ ^2 v _ , where @xmath348 . this leads to the following @xmath24 correction to the non - relativistic energy for the @xmath23 states : @xmath349   \nonumber    \\ - \left ( 1 - 2 { \mu \over { m_+ } } \right ) \epsilon _ { \rm nr } \ , \langle \langle 1 \rangle \rangle   + { 1 \over    2}\left ( ( 1 + \eta ) + ( 1 - \eta ) \delta^2 \right )   \langle \langle v    \rangle \rangle . \label{8 - 3}\end{aligned}\ ] ] we use the notation @xmath350 but @xmath351 .    for the @xmath352 states ( for which @xmath213 and @xmath353 ) this formula gives for the lowest order relativistic correction the result [ 8 - 4 ] ( 0 ^ - ( n ^1s_0 ) ) = ^4 \ { 1 n^4 ( 3 8 - 1 8 m_+ ) + 1 n^3 ( -1 2 + 2 m_+ ) } which becomes @xmath354 in the equal mass @xmath241 case . this does not agree with the known positronium value of @xmath355 @xcite . this is not surprising , since the breit equation , without modification , is known to give the incorrect fine structure for hydrogen and positronium . brown and ravenhall @xcite argue that the reason for this , is the mixing of positive and negative energy one - particle states ( which arises , in our formalism , because of our use of the `` empty '' vacuum ( [ 3.4 ] ) ) . this difficulty of the unmodified breit equation is discussed in various works ( _ e.g. _ refs . the modification that is needed to bring the result into agreement with the observed fine structure of h or ps is to subtract off the expectation value of the operator @xcite [ 8 - 7 ] h^= ^2 ( 3 - 2 _ 1 _ 2 + _ 2r ) _ ir = _ i / r , where , in this equation , we use the notation of @xcite . the expectation value of ( [ 8 - 7 ] ) ( with respect to the non - relativistic eigenfunctions ) is [ 8 - 8 ] h^_nr = ^4 1 -^2 f_s = ^4 4 f_s m_+ , where @xmath356 for the singlet @xmath357 states , while @xmath358 for the triplet @xmath359 states with @xmath360 , but @xmath361 for the triplet states with @xmath23 ( see , also , section 10 below ) . the expression ( [ 8 - 8 ] ) gives the value @xmath362 for the equal - mass ground state , which , when subtracted from the ` breit ' value of @xmath363 gives the expected positronium result @xmath364 . more generally for arbitrary masses , if we subtract ( [ 8 - 8 ] ) from the expression ( [ 8 - 3 ] ) , we obtain the  corrected " result [ 8 - 9 ] _ c ( n 0 ^ - ( ^1s_0 ) ) = ^4 \ { 1 n^4 ( 3 8 - 1 8 m_+ ) + 1 n^3 ( -1 2 - 2 m_+ ) } . this same result ( [ 8 - 9 ] ) was obtained previously for the @xmath365 state by darewych and horbatsch @xciteb , who used a perturbative approximation on variationally derived equations .    somewhat surprisingly , the unequal - mass @xmath24 corrections for arbitrary states seem to have been worked out fully only relatively recently . we refer to the work of connell @xcite , who used a quasipotential formalism based on the work of todorov @xcite , and of hersbach @xcite , who used a formalism based on a relativistic generalization of the lippmann - schwinger equation due to de groot and ruijgrok @xcite . our corrected expression ( [ 8 - 9 ] ) agrees with the results of these authors . ( the @xmath24 corrections for hydrogen and muonium quoted in standard references are expansions in @xmath263 ( _ e.g. _ @xcite , @xcite . ) )    for the @xmath366 states ( for which @xmath215 and @xmath367 ) equation ( [ 8 - 3 ] ) gives [ 8 - 5 ] ( n 0^+ ( ^3p_0 ) ) = ^4 \ { 1 n^4 ( 3 8 - 1 8 m_+ ) + 1 n^3 ( - 1 2 - 2 3 m_+ ) } , which _ does _ agree , in the equal mass case , with the ps values for all the @xmath368 states , as well as with the unequal - mass expressions of connell @xcite and hersbach @xcite for these states . this agreement implies that the  correction " @xmath369 vanishes for the @xmath370 states , as indeed it does . we might note , in passing , that formula ( [ 8 - 3 ] ) gives the correct @xmath24 results for the coulomb qed ( @xmath371 ) case @xcite , for which the @xmath146 coefficients are non - singular for @xmath372 . in the case of equal masses @xmath373 the radial equations ( [ 7 - 7a ] ) for @xmath374 states are free of singularities . thus the boundary value problem is well posed , and it can be solved by means of a standard numerical ode - solving procedure . we solved it by the  shooting " method using the maple runge - kutta programme .    the corresponding perturbative spectrum ( _ c.f . _ ( [ 8 - 5 ] ) ) , @xmath375 agrees with the orthopositronium spectrum since the contribution of the extra terms ( _ c.f . _ ( [ 8 - 7 ] ) ) ( caused by positive - negative energy mixing ) vanishes in this case .    in the table 1 the numeric and perturbative results are presented for the lowest - energy @xmath260 state ( _ i.e. _ , @xmath23 , @xmath376 , @xmath365 ) for different values of @xmath377 .    . values of @xmath378 for the @xmath365 , @xmath203 state ( @xmath379 ) . [ cols= " < , < , < " , ]     note that the critical value of the two - body mass , @xmath380 , increases with @xmath227 , in contrast to the scalar model , for which @xmath381 for all @xmath227 . figure 1 is a plot of the unnormalized reduced radial wave functions @xmath303 , @xmath382 and @xmath383 ( see eqns . ( [ 7 - 1])-([7 - 4 ] ) ) in the case of equal massless , @xmath379 , for the lowest - energy @xmath384 states , when @xmath385 . these wave functions are qualitatively similar to those obtained for these states in the coulomb qed case @xcite . the `` large '' component @xmath303 is nodeless while the `` small '' components @xmath382 and the `` doubly small '' one @xmath383 have one node . the node at the origin , @xmath386 , is a consequence of our use of reduced radial wave functions @xmath303 , etc . , rather than the actual @xmath387 , etc . indeed , the wave functions behave at small @xmath274 as follows : @xmath388 where @xmath389 ( see eq . ( [ 7 - 16 ] ) ) . thus the matrix wave function @xmath390 is singular , @xmath391 , as happens also in the one - body dirac equation with a coulomb potential . nevertheless , @xmath390 is normalizable for all @xmath226 up to and including @xmath392 , at which point @xmath393 , as can be seen in figures 2 and 3 . figure 3 represents the excited @xmath394 state for the critical coupling strength @xmath261 . in this case , the wavefunction @xmath303 has one node while @xmath395 and @xmath383 have two nodes . this behaviour differs from that found in cqed @xcite for the same case ( where the number of nodes was two , one and three , respectively ) . in the @xmath396 case ( figure 4 ) each of the functions @xmath303 , @xmath395 and @xmath383 gets one more node . this tendency likely continues for higher values of the quantum number @xmath227 . for states with @xmath397 , the eigenstate problem reduces to a set of eight first - order differential equations for the functions @xmath398 and the energy @xmath96 ( _ c.f . _ eqns . ( [ 6 - 1 ] ) and ( [ 6 - 2 ] ) ) . it is convenient to present this set in the following matrix form . let us introduce the 8-dimensional vector - function : @xmath399.\ ] ] then the set of radial equations reads : @xmath400 where the 8@xmath4018 matrix @xmath402 has the following structure : @xmath403/r.\ ] ] here @xmath404 is the unit matrix , @xmath405 is diagonal , @xmath406,\ ] ] @xmath208 , and the form of 8@xmath4018 matrices @xmath407 , @xmath408 , and @xmath409 depends on the parity @xmath410 : @xmath411,{\label{r7}}\\ { \mbox{\ssb g } } & = & \left[\mbox{\scriptsize$ \begin{array}{cccccccc }   0 &   0 &   -(j{+}1)a &   -jb &   -(j{+}1)a &   -jb &   0 &   0\\   0 &   0 & ( j{+}1)b &   -ja &   -(j{+}1)b & ja &   0 &   0\\ -(j{+}1)a & ( j{+}1)b &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 & -(j{+}1)a & -(j{+}1)b\\ -jb & -ja &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 & -jb &   ja\\ -(j{+}1)a & -(j{+}1)b &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 & -(j{+}1)a & ( j{+}1)b\\ -jb &   ja &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 & -jb & -ja\\   0 &   0 &   -(j{+}1)a &   -jb &   -(j{+}1)a &   -jb &   0 &   0\\   0 &   0 &   -(j{+}1)b & ja & ( j{+}1)b &   -ja &   0 &   0 \end{array}$ } \right],{\label{r8}}\\ { \mbox{\ssb s } } & = & \left[\mbox{\scriptsize$ \begin{array}{cccccccc }   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 & 2 &    0 \\   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 & -1 \\   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 & -b^2&-ab &   0 &   0\\   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 & -ab   & -a^2 &   0 &   0\\   0 &   0 & -b^2   & -ab   &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0\\   0 &   0 &   -ab & -a^2 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0\\ 2 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0\\   0 &   -1 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 \end{array}$ } \right]{\label{r9}}\end{aligned}\ ] ] for @xmath412 , and @xmath413,{\label{r10}}\\ { \mbox{\ssb g } } & = & \left[\mbox{\scriptsize$ \begin{array}{cccccccc }   0 &   0 & ( j{+}1)a &   -(j{+}1)b & ( j{+}1)a & ( j{+}1)b &   0 &   0\\   0 &   0 & jb & ja & jb &   -ja &   0 &   0\\   ( j{+}1)a &   jb &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   ( j{+}1)a &   jb\\ -(j{+}1)b &   ja &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   ( j{+}1)b & -ja\\   ( j{+}1)a &   jb &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   ( j{+}1)a &   jb\\   ( j{+}1)b & -ja &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 & -(j{+}1)b &   ja\\   0 &   0 &   ( j{+}1)a & ( j{+}1)b & ( j{+}1)a &   -(j{+}1)b &   0 &   0\\   0 &   0 & jb &   -ja & jb & ja &   0 &   0 \end{array}$ } \right],{\label{r11}}\\ { \mbox{\ssb s } } & = & \left[\mbox{\scriptsize$ \begin{array}{cccccccc }   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 & -b^2 & -ab\\   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   -ab & -a^2\\   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   2 &   0 &   0 &   0\\   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 & -1 &   0 &   0\\   0 &   0 &   2 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0\\   0 &   0 &   0 & -1 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0\\ -b^2 & -ab &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0\\ -ab & -a^2 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 \end{array}$ } \right]{\label{r12}}\end{aligned}\ ] ] for @xmath414 , where @xmath415 , @xmath416 and @xmath417 are defined in eq . ( [ 6.14 ] ) . due to the properties @xmath418 the `` radial '' hamiltonian @xmath419 is a hermitian operator with respect to the inner product @xmath420 where the subscript  8 " denotes the dimensions of the vector - functions @xmath421 .    in the subsequent reduction of the set ( [ r4 ] ) one can use the fact that @xmath422 ( for either parity ) . thus one can reduce the number of differential equations from 8 to 4 . we perform this reduction in a way that ensures , as far as possible , the hamiltonian structure of the equations . first of all we perform the orthogonal transformation : @xmath423 where @xmath424,\quad p=(-)^{j\pm1},{\label{r17}}\\ { \mbox{\ssb e } } & = & \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left[\mbox{\scriptsize$ \begin{array}{cccccccc }   0 &   0 &   1 &   0 &   1 &   0 & 0 & 0\\   -a & b &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 & -a & b\\   0 &   0 &   0 & -1 &   0 &   1 &   0 &   0\\ -b & -a & 0 &   0 & 0 &   0 &   b & a\\   b &   a &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 &   b &   a\\   a & -b &   0 &   0 &   0 &   0 & -a &    b\\   0 &   0 & -1 &   0 &   1 &   0 &   0 &   0\\   0 &   0 &   0 &   1 &   0 &   1 &   0 &   0 \end{array}$ } \right],\quad p=(-)^{j}{\label{r18}}\end{aligned}\ ] ] it preserves the inner product ( [ r15 ] ) and reduces the equations ( [ r4 ] ) to the form : @xmath425 it is convenient at this stage to express the 8-dimensional vectors and matrices in terms of 4-dimensional blocks : @xmath426 , \qquad \tilde{{\mbox{\ssb v}}}(r ) \equiv \tilde{{\mbox{\ssb u}}}(r ) - e{{\mbox{\ssb i}}}= \left [ \begin{array}{cc } \tilde{{\mbox{\ssb v}}}_{11}(r)&\tilde{{\mbox{\ssb v}}}_{12}(r)\\ \tilde{{\mbox{\ssb v}}}_{21}(r)&\tilde{{\mbox{\ssb v}}}_{22}(r ) \end{array } \right ] , \qquad { \it etc.}\ ] ] then the matrix @xmath427 takes the form @xmath428 , \qquad \tilde{{\mbox{\ssb h}}}_{11 } = 2\left [ \begin{array}{cc } { \mbox{\ssb j } } & { \mbox{\ssb 0}}\\ { \mbox{\ssb 0 } } & { \mbox{\ssb j } } \end{array}\right ] , \qquad { \mbox{\ssb j } } = \left [ \begin{array}{cc } 0 & -1\\ 1 & 0 \end{array}\right],\ ] ] and the set of eqs . ( [ r19 ] ) becomes @xmath429 the set ( [ r23 ] ) is purely algebraic . it permits us to express @xmath430 in the terms of @xmath431 : @xmath432 substitution of ( [ r24 ] ) into ( [ r22 ] ) yields the closed set of four first - order differential equations : @xmath433 where @xmath434.\end{aligned}\ ] ] here the upper sign corresponds to @xmath435 , and the lower sign corresponds to @xmath414 . the operator @xmath436 in eq . ( [ r25 ] ) is formally hermitian , _ i.e. _ , given @xmath96 , it is hermitian with respect to the inner product @xmath437 . but any two solutions of ( [ r25 ] ) , @xmath438 and @xmath439 , corresponding to different values of the energy , @xmath96 and @xmath440 , are not orthogonal . this is due to the nonlinear dependence of @xmath436 on @xmath96 . orthogonality can be instated by using the following definition of inner product : @xmath441 this inner product follows directly by substitution of eq . ( [ r24 ] ) into eq . ( [ r15 ] ) . the set of first order equations ( [ r25 ] ) can also be expressed as a second order equation . for this purposeit is convenient to permute the elements of @xmath438 by means of the matrix @xmath442 , where @xmath443 \quad { \rm for } \quad p=(-)^{j\pm1},{\label{r27}}\ ] ] and @xmath444 \quad { \rm for } \quad p=(-)^{j } . { \label{r28}}\ ] ] then , in terms of the two - dimensional blocks @xmath445 , \ ] ] the equations take the form @xmath446 where @xmath447 . elimination of @xmath448 leads to the following equation for the @xmath449 vector - function @xmath450 : @xmath451\psi_1(r ) = 0.\ ] ] eigenstates @xmath450 , @xmath452 corresponding to different values of the energy are orthogonal with respect to the inner product : @xmath453 which also follows from the reduction procedure . the form of equations ( [ r32 ] ) is convenient for examining the energy spectrum of @xmath26 bound states perturbatively to @xmath24 . for this purpose we introduce the dimensionless quantities , @xmath454 where @xmath455 is the reduced mass . we now perform a perturbative expansion in @xmath226 of equation ( [ r32 ] ) . to order @xmath456 equation ( [ r32 ] ) takes the hamiltonian form ( hereafter we omit the subscript  1 " of the wave function @xmath450 ) : @xmath457 where @xmath458\ ] ] is a two - component wave function , @xmath419 is the hamiltonian divided by @xmath459 and expressed in terms of dimensionless quantities ( [ p1 ] ) , @xmath460 is the unperturbed ( i.e. , @xmath54th - order ) hamiltonian , and @xmath461 is the perturbative correction to ( [ p4 ] ) . the form of the symmetric @xmath462 matrices @xmath463 , @xmath464 , @xmath465 depends on the parity . in order to obtain the energy spectrum to @xmath24 , it is sufficient to calculate the eigenvalues of @xmath117 to @xmath466 , _ i.e. _ , @xmath467 , where @xmath468 will be calculated exactly , while for @xmath469 first order perturbation theory in @xmath456 is sufficient . hence , the dependence of @xmath470 on @xmath117 is not crucial : to the accuracy required , it can be replaced by@xmath468 . in addition , the kernel of the inner product ( [ r32a ] ) can be set to unity .    in the case @xmath412 we have @xmath471 , so that @xmath472 is the ( dimensionless ) radial coulomb hamiltonian @xmath473 with the angular momentum @xmath474 , repeated twice : @xmath475 , \qquad h_j = -{1 \over 2 } \left\{\frac{d}{d\rho^2 } - \frac{j(j+1)}{\rho^2}\right\ } - \frac{1}{\rho } .\ ] ] the matrices @xmath464 and @xmath476 are @xmath477,{\label{p7}}\\ { \cal m}(\rho,\lambda)&= & \frac18\left[\mbox{\scriptsize$ \begin{array}{cc } ( 1-\delta^2)\lambda(\lambda-\frac2{\rho } ) + \frac{1-\delta^2 - c^2\lambda ( 1+\delta^2)}{\rho^2}+\frac{1+\delta^2(1 -2c^2)}{\rho^3 } & \frac{2c\delta}{\rho^3}\\ \frac{2c\delta}{\rho^3 } & ( 1-\delta^2)\lambda^2 - \frac{c^2(1+\delta^2)}{\rho^2}(\lambda+\frac1{\rho } ) \end{array}$ } \ ! \right ] { \label{p8}}\end{aligned}\ ] ] the eigenvalues of the @xmath54th - order hamiltonian ( [ p6 ] ) , namely @xmath478 are two - fold degenerate , each with the two eigenstates @xmath479 \qquad { \rm and } \qquad \psi_{(2)}^{(0 ) } = \left[\begin{array}{c } 0\\    \end{array } \right],\ ] ] where @xmath480 is a solution of the coulomb problem @xmath481 . thus , the correction @xmath469 must be calculated appropriately for the degenerate situation : @xmath482,\ ] ] where the matrix @xmath483 is defined as follows : @xmath484.{\label{p12}}\end{aligned}\ ] ] the mass spectrum @xmath485 obtained with the use of ( [ p9 ] ) , ( [ p11 ] ) and ( [ p12 ] ) coincides neither with the muonium spectrum found in @xcite nor ( if @xmath486 ) with the spectrum of parapositronium ( see @xcite and refs . therein ) . the reason , like for the @xmath23 states , lies in the use of the empty vacuum ( [ 3.4 ] ) , which leads to single - particle states of positive and negative energy , and subsequently to the breit equation with its spurious term @xmath487 ( [ 8 - 7 ] ) in the hamiltonian @xcite , as discussed in connection with the @xmath23 states . we are going to show that the elimination of the contribution of @xmath487 from the spectrum leads to the correct result . first of all we transform @xmath487 into a radial representation . for this purpose we note that @xmath488 ( @xmath489 in the nonrelativistic limit ) , i.e. , @xmath490 contains only those components of @xmath390 ( [ 6 - 1 ] ) which are coefficients of  bispinor harmonics " @xmath491 . similarly , @xmath492 ( @xmath493 in the nonrelativistic limit ) , i.e. , @xmath490 contains only coefficients of the  bispinor harmonics " @xmath494 . thus , for @xmath412 parity states the spurious term ( divided by @xmath495 ) takes the following radial form : @xmath496=\frac{1-\delta^2}{8\rho^2}\left[\mbox{\scriptsize$ \begin{array}{cc } 4 & 0\\ 0 & 1 \end{array}$ } \right ] , \ ] ] where @xmath497 , and the corresponding matrix elements are @xmath498 . { \label{p15}}\end{aligned}\ ] ] if we now use @xmath499 , instead of @xmath483 , in ( [ p11 ] ) and ( [ p13 ] ) , we obtain the spectrum , @xmath500 which coincides with the results of connell @xcite and hersbach @xcite for the parity @xmath501 states . thus , correcting for the spurious terms in the breit hamiltonian , we obtain the expected @xmath24 results .    in the @xmath502 case , the matrix @xmath463 is not diagonal : @xmath503.\ ] ] it can be diagonalized by means of the orthogonal transformation , using the matrix : @xmath504.\ ] ] then @xmath505,\ ] ] so that the @xmath54th - order hamiltonian becomes : @xmath506.\ ] ] it possesses the doubly degenerate eigenvalues ( [ p9 ] ) with eigenstates : @xmath507 \qquad { \rm and } \qquad \psi_{(2)}^{(0 ) } = \left[\begin{array}{c } 0\\    \end{array } \right],\ ] ] the first - order correction @xmath508 ( [ p5 ] ) , with the matrices @xmath509,{\label{p22}}\ ] ] @xmath510/\rho^2 } } & & \\ & & \hspace{-1em } \lefteqn{\scriptstyle { -a^2[7j^2 + 22j+9 - \delta^2(3j^2 + 8j+3)]/\rho^3 } } & \\ & & & \hspace{-1em } \lefteqn{\scriptstyle { + ( 1-\delta^2)j(j+1)^2(j+4)/\rho^4 } } \hspace{13em } \end{array } & \frac{ab(1-\delta^2)}{\rho}\left(2\lambda+\frac{1 + 2\lambda}{\rho } - \frac{c^2}{\rho^2}\right)\\ \frac{ab(1-\delta^2)}{\rho}\left(2\lambda+\frac{1 + 2\lambda}{\rho } - \frac{c^2}{\rho^2}\right ) & \begin{array}{llll } \lefteqn{\scriptstyle { ( 1-\delta^2)\lambda(\lambda + 2b^2/\rho ) } } & & & \\ & \lefteqn{\scriptstyle { -b^2[\{\lambda(6j^2+j-3)-1\ } -   \delta^2\{\lambda(2j^2 + 3j-1)-1\}]/\rho^2 } } & & \\ & & \lefteqn{\scriptstyle { -b^2[7j^2 - 8j-6 - \delta^2(3j^2 - 2j-2)]/\rho^3 } } & \\ & & & \lefteqn{\scriptstyle { + ( 1-\delta^2)j(j+1)^2(j-3)/\rho^4 } } \hspace{16em } \end{array } \end{array}$ } \right ] , { \label{p23}}\ ] ] generates diagonal matrix elements only : @xmath511 \nonumber\\ & = & \left[\mbox{\scriptsize$ \begin{array}{cc } \frac{11+\delta^2}{32n^4 } - \frac{(7+\delta^2)j^2+(17-\delta^2)j+8 - 2\delta^2}{4(2j+1)(j+1)(2j+3)n^3 } & 0\\ 0 & \frac{11+\delta^2}{32n^4 } - \frac{(7+\delta^2)j^2 - 3(1-\delta^2)j-2}{4(2j-1)j(2j+1)n^3 } \end{array}$ } \right].{\label{p24}}\end{aligned}\ ] ] the energy spectrum ( [ p13 ] ) with @xmath512 , @xmath513 contains the contribution of the spurious term ( [ 8 - 7 ] ) . again , we present this term in radial form : @xmath514 \nonumber\\ = \frac{1-\delta^2}{8\rho^2 } \left[\mbox{\scriptsize$ \begin{array}{cc } b^2 & ab\\ ab & a^2 \end{array}$ } \right ] , \ ] ] where , for the present @xmath412 parity case , @xmath515 . the corresponding matrix elements are : @xmath516 . { \label{p26}}\end{aligned}\ ] ] the substitution of @xmath517 and @xmath518 into ( [ p13 ] ) yields the spectrum : @xmath519 which coincides with the results of connell @xcite and hersbach @xcite for the parity @xmath520 states . we have studied a reformulation of qed , in which the coupled dirac - maxwell field equations are partially decoupled by expressing the mediating photon field in terms of the dirac particle field , using covariant green s functions . this allows us to reformulate the hamiltonian of the theory so that the photon propagator appears directly in a quartic , nonlocal interaction term . we then consider a truncated model , in which there are no free ( physical ) photons . for such a model , each @xmath521-particle segment of the fock space of the quantized , equal - time hamiltonian is an invariant space , that is , there is no coupling among the various @xmath521-fermion segments . this is achieved by introducing an unconventional `` empty '' vacuum state . as a consequence , there exist exact few - particle eigenstates of the truncated hamiltonian , which lead to dirac - like two- and three - fermion wave equations . we show , in particular , that the two - fermion wave equation , in the coulomb gauge , is just the breit equation .    for specific @xmath93 states , the breit equation reduces to radial form , and then to dirac - like equations for @xmath23 states , and to a coupled pair of schrdinger - like equations for @xmath26 states . perturbative solution of these equations yields @xmath522-corrections to the nonrelativistic rydberg spectrum , which do not reproduce the muonium spectrum as calculated by connell @xcite and hersbach @xcite ( nor the positronium spectrum in the @xmath486 case ) . the apparent reason for this disagreement is the mixing of positive- and negative - energy states , which is characteristic of the breit equation @xcite . however , agreement is achieved if we subtract the contribution of spurious operator ( [ 8 - 7 ] ) , which appears in the breit equation ( _ c.f . ( [ 8 - 9 ] ) , ( [ 8 - 5 ] ) , ( [ p16 ] ) , ( [ p27 ] ) ) . we have not been able to obtain analytic solutions of the radial equations . these radial wave equations have , in general , a singular point at @xmath523 , where @xmath96 is the two - fermion bound state energy ( rest mass ) . the existence of such an `` interior '' singularity makes it difficult to obtain numerical solutions of the radial boundary value problem by standard methods . the only exception is the case @xmath25 , @xmath486 , for which the radial equations are regular , and which we have therefore studied numerically . ( it is noteworthy that this is the case where the contribution of the operator ( [ 8 - 7 ] ) is zero . ) our numerical results for the equal - mass @xmath25 states , show that the dependence of the energy @xmath96 on the coupling constant @xmath226 is qualitatively similar to that obtained earlier for the coulomb qed model ( for which transverse - photon interactions are ignored ) @xcite . for low @xmath226 , the numerically obtained eigenenergies are in agreement with the result derived perturbatively . thereafter , @xmath245 decreases monotonically to @xmath524 as @xmath226 approaches a critical value @xmath247 . we find that @xmath261 ( in contrast to cqed value of @xmath525 ) . 99 j. w. darewych , annales fond . l. de broglie ( paris ) * 23 * , 15 ( 1998 ) , and `` interparticle interactions and nonlocality in quantum field theory '' in _ causality and locality in modern physics _ , g. hunter et al . ( eds . ) , kluwer academic publishers , dordrecht , 1998 , 333 - 344 . j. w. darewych , can . j. phys . * 76 * , 523 ( 1998 ) . m. barham and j. darewych , j. phys . a * 31 * , 3481 ( 1998 ) . wiley , new york , 1975 ) . j. d. jackson , _ classical electrodynamics _ ( john wiley , new york , 1975 ) . a. o. barut , _ electrodynamics and classical theory of fields and particles _ ( dover , new york , 1980 ) . w. t. grandy , jr . , _ relativistic quantum mechanics of leptons and fields _ ( kluwer , dordrecht , 1991 ) . a. o. barut , `` the schrdinger and dirac equation - linear , nonlinear and integrodifferential '' in _ geometrical and algebraic aspects of nonlinear field theory_. s. de filippo , m. marinaro , g. marmo and g. vilasi , eds . elsevier ( north holland ) , 1989 , pp . darewych and l. di leo , j. phys . a : math . gen . * 29 * , 6817 ( 1996 ) . g. hardekopf and j. sucher , phys . a * 30 * , 703 ( 1984 ) ; * 31 * , 2020 ( 1985 ) . p. m. stevenson and i. roditi , phys . d * 33 * , 2305 ( 1986 ) . r. koniuk and j. w. darewych , phys . b*176 * , 195 ( 1986 ) . w. dykshoorn and r. koniuk , phys . rev . a * 41 * , 64 ( 1990 ) . darewych and m. horbatsch , j. phys . b : at . mol . opt . * 22 * , 973 ( 1989 ) ; * 23 * , 337 ( 1990 ) . j. w. darewych , m. horbatsch and r. koniuk , phys . d * 45 * , 675 ( 1992 ) . b. ding and j. darewych , j. phys . g * 26 * , 907 ( 2000 ) . t. c. scott , j. shertzer and r. a. moore , phys . a * 45 * , 4393 ( 1992 ) . e. e. salpeter , phys . rev . * 87 * , 328 ( 1952 ) . h. a. bethe and e. e. salpeter , _ quantum mechanics of one- and two - electron atoms _ ( springer , berlin , 1957 ) . g. breit , phys . rev . * 34 * , 553 ( 1929 ) . a. eddington , proc . a * 122 * , 358 ( 1929 ) . j. a. gaunt , phil . trans . * 228 * , 151 ( 1929 ) ; proc . roy . soc . a * 122 * , 153 ( 1929 ) . v. n. golubenkov and ia . a. smorodinskii , zh . * 31 * , 40 , ( 1956 ) . jetp * 4 * , 55 ( 1957 ) ] . l. d. landau and e. m. lifshitz , _ the classical theory of fields _ ( pergamon , new york , 1975 ) , 4th revised english edition . b. m. barker and r. f. oconnell , phys . 78a * , 231 ( 1980 ) . b. m. barker and r. f. oconnell , ann . ( n. y. ) * 129 * , 358 ( 1980 ) . g. schfer , phys . lett . * 100a * , 128 ( 1984 ) . b. m. barker and r. f. oconnell , can . j. phys . * 58 * , 1659 ( 1980 ) . r. p. gaida , yu . b. kluchkovsky and v. i. tretyak , in _ constraint s theory and relativistic dynamics . proc . workshop _ , firenze , 1986 , g. longhi and l. lusanna , eds . ( world scientific , singapore , 1987 ) , pp . 210 - 241 . j. malenfent , phys . d * 38 * , 3292 ( 1998 ) ; phys . a * 43 * , 1233 ( 1991 ) . j. darewych , condensed matt . phys . * 1 * , 593 ( 1998 ) . v. shpytko and j. darewych , phys . d * 64 * , 045012 , 2001 . g. e. brown and d. g. ravenhall , proc . ( london ) * a208 * , 552 ( 1951 ) . z. v. chraplyvy , phys . rev . * 91 * , 388 ( 1953 ) . w. a. barker and f. n. glover , phys . * 99 * , 317 ( 1955 ) . j. h. connell , phys . d * 43 * , 1393 ( 1991 ) . i. t. todorov , phys . d * 3 * , 2351 ( 1971 ) . h. hersbach , phys . a * 46 * , 3657 ( 1992 ) . e. h. de groot and th . w. ruijgok , nucl . phys . * 101b * , 95 ( 1975 ) . j. r. sapirstein and d. r. yennie ,  theory of hydrogenic bound states " , eq . ( 2.3 ) p. 568 , in _ quantum electrodynamics _ , t. kinoshita , ed . , world scientific , singapore , 1990 . p. j. mohr ,  tests of fundamental physics " , eq . ( 28.39 ) p. 344 , in _ atomic , molecular and optical physics handbook _ , g. w. f. drake , ed . , american institute of physics , woodbury , n. y. , 1996 .
Abstract:

Answer: we consider a reformulation of qed in which covariant green functions are used to solve for the electromagnetic field in terms of the fermion fields . it is shown that exact few - fermion eigenstates of the resulting hamiltonian can be obtained in the canonical equal - time formalism for the case where there are no free photons . these eigenstates lead to two- and three - body dirac - like equations with electromagnetic interactions . perturbative and some numerical solutions of the two - body equations are presented for positronium and muonium - like systems , for various strengths of the coupling . 16.5 cm = -15 mm = 2 mm = 2 mm